Log in:  

Register

National Football League

Grab a short black and come join in the non-cycling discussion. Favourite books, movies, holiday destinations, other sports - chat about it all in the cafe.

Moderators: Eshnar, Irondan, King Boonen, Red Rick, Pricey_sky

Re:

01 Apr 2017 18:22

on3m@n@rmy wrote:Holy mackerel! A firestorm of moves are keeping the Raiders in Oakland!
Seattle releases Marshawn Lynch, Raiders sign Lynch, in overwhelming city and community support the City proposes a $1.8 billion stadium and convention center plan that, in a late behind closed doors NFL owners meeting, the owners vote 31-1 to keep the Raiders in Oakland! Only Jerry Jones voted against the city's plan. The speculation is that the loss of game sales revenue in the Vegas stadium, and loss of unspecified gratuities from Vegas area businesses were the primary reasons for Jones' Nay vote. Wow!? WTF?
LYNCH SAVES THE DAY!

April fools! :lol:
Darryl Webster wrote:
"Nothing seems to blind peeps as much as patriotism does it!"
User avatar Irondan
Administrator
 
Posts: 7,540
Joined: 30 Apr 2014 02:13
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: Re:

01 Apr 2017 18:34

Irondan wrote:
on3m@n@rmy wrote:Holy mackerel! A firestorm of moves are keeping the Raiders in Oakland!
Seattle releases Marshawn Lynch, Raiders sign Lynch, in overwhelming city and community support the City proposes a $1.8 billion stadium and convention center plan that, in a late behind closed doors NFL owners meeting, the owners vote 31-1 to keep the Raiders in Oakland! Only Jerry Jones voted against the city's plan. The speculation is that the loss of game sales revenue in the Vegas stadium, and loss of unspecified gratuities from Vegas area businesses were the primary reasons for Jones' Nay vote. Wow!? WTF?
LYNCH SAVES THE DAY!

April fools! :lol:

Yep. You got it.
User avatar on3m@n@rmy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,910
Joined: 17 Jun 2010 12:25
Location: PNW

Re: Re:

01 Apr 2017 18:42

on3m@n@rmy wrote:
Irondan wrote:
on3m@n@rmy wrote:Holy mackerel! A firestorm of moves are keeping the Raiders in Oakland!
Seattle releases Marshawn Lynch, Raiders sign Lynch, in overwhelming city and community support the City proposes a $1.8 billion stadium and convention center plan that, in a late behind closed doors NFL owners meeting, the owners vote 31-1 to keep the Raiders in Oakland! Only Jerry Jones voted against the city's plan. The speculation is that the loss of game sales revenue in the Vegas stadium, and loss of unspecified gratuities from Vegas area businesses were the primary reasons for Jones' Nay vote. Wow!? WTF?
LYNCH SAVES THE DAY!

April fools! :lol:

Yep. You got it.

I'll admit, you had me going for a second.

When I read that only Jerry Jones was against the city's plan I knew something was up and looked around the interwebtubes for confirmation. :D
Darryl Webster wrote:
"Nothing seems to blind peeps as much as patriotism does it!"
User avatar Irondan
Administrator
 
Posts: 7,540
Joined: 30 Apr 2014 02:13
Location: Seattle, WA

02 Apr 2017 02:43

Have to admit I probably would have bought that April Fool if I hadn't read further !
movingtarget
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,380
Joined: 05 Aug 2009 08:54

Re: National Football League

02 Apr 2017 04:04

Yeah, i got a little carried away starting at Jerry Jones.

You all probably have one, maybe more, favorite teams you follow. I mean, follow enough to know something about that team's player personnel and team needs. So, with the draft coming up, what do you think would be your team's draft Day-1 shocking move or selection?

I'll have a go. Seattle. Everyone says OL is their biggest need, and if possible should draft an OL at #26 in the first round. There are 3 or 4 OLmen Seattle might take (Bolles, Ramczyk, Robinson, Lamp). Seattle does have other needs (CB, LB). I'm going to predict Seattle goes for best player available that still meets one of the other needs by taking a CB as their 1st round pick, even if one of those OLmen are still available when their #1 selection comes up. They might even go LB, but the better value will be at CB. That is not a really big shocker because the first 3 of those OLmen may already have been selected and Lamp would be a bit of a reach.
User avatar on3m@n@rmy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,910
Joined: 17 Jun 2010 12:25
Location: PNW

Re: National Football League

02 Apr 2017 06:53

on3m@n@rmy wrote:Yeah, i got a little carried away starting at Jerry Jones.

You all probably have one, maybe more, favorite teams you follow. I mean, follow enough to know something about that team's player personnel and team needs. So, with the draft coming up, what do you think would be your team's draft Day-1 shocking move or selection?

I'll have a go. Seattle. Everyone says OL is their biggest need, and if possible should draft an OL at #26 in the first round. There are 3 or 4 OLmen Seattle might take (Bolles, Ramczyk, Robinson, Lamp). Seattle does have other needs (CB, LB). I'm going to predict Seattle goes for best player available that still meets one of the other needs by taking a CB as their 1st round pick, even if one of those OLmen are still available when their #1 selection comes up. They might even go LB, but the better value will be at CB. That is not a really big shocker because the first 3 of those OLmen may already have been selected and Lamp would be a bit of a reach.


i will be interested to see what the Browns and 49ers do with the the QBs in the draft. There have already been rumors doing the rounds that the Panthers want to trade for the 49ers second pick. Kansas were supposedly very interested in Watson at least their coach was. It looks like a good draft for running backs and defense, not so good for QBs. Mixon wasn't even invited to the Combine but some people think he will go in the second round. I think that is very optimistic and several teams won't be interested in him at all for obvious reasons. I think he will probably go in the fourth round as some teams do need a good RB and he is one of the best in the draft if they want to take a calculated risk on his character that is.

I think the obvious pick for Seattle is O Line. Rams will probably go RB or WR because of their poor offense. Falcons will go defense I assume after that SB result ! I wonder if the Cardinals or Steelers will look at the QBs with two aging QBs not far from retirement. Panthers will go defense I'm pretty sure. Cowboys and Texans will probably both go offense although the Cowboys secondary needs an upgrade. Green Bay will go RB or O Line. The Jets will be tempted to go for a QB not that it will matter much ! Washington should go defense I think. Romo, RGIII, Kaep and Cutler still waiting. Gabbert and Ponder now applying the second coat of paint to Ponder's house ! Chip playing Madden with Baalke and thinking of college jobs maybe ?
movingtarget
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,380
Joined: 05 Aug 2009 08:54

04 Apr 2017 13:35

Romo retiring and will look for broadcast offers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jmv0aMFTuUA&t=16s

The wise decision I think at age 37 with physical issues. Ben R I think will probably only last one more season as well maybe Palmer also and I can't see Brady lasting the reported five more seasons he hopes for either.
movingtarget
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,380
Joined: 05 Aug 2009 08:54

04 Apr 2017 13:56

Thoughts on some 2017 Draft picks

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kap8ATLcId4
movingtarget
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,380
Joined: 05 Aug 2009 08:54

Re:

04 Apr 2017 15:39

movingtarget wrote:Romo retiring and will look for broadcast offers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jmv0aMFTuUA&t=16s

The wise decision I think at age 37 with physical issues. Ben R I think will probably only last one more season as well maybe Palmer also and I can't see Brady lasting the reported five more seasons he hopes for either.

No time to say much but he will be replacing Phil Sims & paired with Nantz
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2701751-tony-romo-reportedly-joining-cbs-to-be-paired-with-jim-nantz-after-retirement
Good for Romo.
User avatar on3m@n@rmy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,910
Joined: 17 Jun 2010 12:25
Location: PNW

Re:

04 Apr 2017 15:59

movingtarget wrote:Thoughts on some 2017 Draft picks

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kap8ATLcId4

Didn't get to watch the whole video. Just the QBs. Have to agree with everything Merril Hoge said about the QBs. Few key points he said:
- none of the QB are first-round quality
- all could use an extra year or two in school
- the huge learning curve they all have coming from spread schemes trying to learn Pro schemes
- Trubisky's lack of accuracy
- Deshone Kizer the best passer
But here is the worst slam. Kizer's Notre Dame coach says Deshone is not ready ON or OFF the field.
OUCH!
User avatar on3m@n@rmy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,910
Joined: 17 Jun 2010 12:25
Location: PNW

Re: National Football League

06 Apr 2017 10:50

movingtarget wrote:
on3m@n@rmy wrote:Yeah, i got a little carried away starting at Jerry Jones.

You all probably have one, maybe more, favorite teams you follow. I mean, follow enough to know something about that team's player personnel and team needs. So, with the draft coming up, what do you think would be your team's draft Day-1 shocking move or selection?

I'll have a go. Seattle. Everyone says OL is their biggest need, and if possible should draft an OL at #26 in the first round. There are 3 or 4 OLmen Seattle might take (Bolles, Ramczyk, Robinson, Lamp). Seattle does have other needs (CB, LB). I'm going to predict Seattle goes for best player available that still meets one of the other needs by taking a CB as their 1st round pick, even if one of those OLmen are still available when their #1 selection comes up. They might even go LB, but the better value will be at CB. That is not a really big shocker because the first 3 of those OLmen may already have been selected and Lamp would be a bit of a reach.


i will be interested to see what the Browns and 49ers do with the the QBs in the draft. There have already been rumors doing the rounds that the Panthers want to trade for the 49ers second pick. Kansas were supposedly very interested in Watson at least their coach was. It looks like a good draft for running backs and defense, not so good for QBs. Mixon wasn't even invited to the Combine but some people think he will go in the second round. I think that is very optimistic and several teams won't be interested in him at all for obvious reasons. I think he will probably go in the fourth round as some teams do need a good RB and he is one of the best in the draft if they want to take a calculated risk on his character that is.

I think the obvious pick for Seattle is O Line. Rams will probably go RB or WR because of their poor offense. Falcons will go defense I assume after that SB result ! I wonder if the Cardinals or Steelers will look at the QBs with two aging QBs not far from retirement. Panthers will go defense I'm pretty sure. Cowboys and Texans will probably both go offense although the Cowboys secondary needs an upgrade. Green Bay will go RB or O Line. The Jets will be tempted to go for a QB not that it will matter much ! Washington should go defense I think. Romo, RGIII, Kaep and Cutler still waiting. Gabbert and Ponder now applying the second coat of paint to Ponder's house ! Chip playing Madden with Baalke and thinking of college jobs maybe ?

NFL Network's "Path to the Draft" program has been presenting their version of teams draft boards for certain positions. The one I saw tonight on the QBs, they had SF sticking with their existing QBs (now Hoyer and Barkley) for 2017 and not drafting a QB with their 1st round pick, instead waiting until 2018 to consider using their 2018 1st rounder to address the QB position. That makes good sense to me as this year's crop of QBs isn't good enough to spend a high 1st round pick on. I actually thought a while ago that SF should do that, and maybe even trade down if possible. But they also could try to pick a QB in later rounds this year (maybe Mahomes). Yeah, so I have been interested in that as well.

As for Seattle, I think they may draft a CB in round one instead of an OLman. And not because of Sherman trade media speculations, which is all that is. The value at CB is superior to the value of offensive lineman this year, and the depth of talent at CB is also far superior. After the top 2 or 3 linemen, the next guys in line have 2nd round grades or lower. But who knows, Seattle may reach a bit to take a lineman with a 2nd round grade in the lower 1st round, just to give OL coach Tom Cable more to work with than crappy talent.

As for Steelers & Cards for QBs, those teams would be ideal situations for any QB drafted this year. Because the QB drafted will not be expected to start and will have a couple years to learn.
User avatar on3m@n@rmy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,910
Joined: 17 Jun 2010 12:25
Location: PNW

Re: National Football League

06 Apr 2017 14:43

on3m@n@rmy wrote:
movingtarget wrote:
on3m@n@rmy wrote:Yeah, i got a little carried away starting at Jerry Jones.

You all probably have one, maybe more, favorite teams you follow. I mean, follow enough to know something about that team's player personnel and team needs. So, with the draft coming up, what do you think would be your team's draft Day-1 shocking move or selection?

I'll have a go. Seattle. Everyone says OL is their biggest need, and if possible should draft an OL at #26 in the first round. There are 3 or 4 OLmen Seattle might take (Bolles, Ramczyk, Robinson, Lamp). Seattle does have other needs (CB, LB). I'm going to predict Seattle goes for best player available that still meets one of the other needs by taking a CB as their 1st round pick, even if one of those OLmen are still available when their #1 selection comes up. They might even go LB, but the better value will be at CB. That is not a really big shocker because the first 3 of those OLmen may already have been selected and Lamp would be a bit of a reach.


i will be interested to see what the Browns and 49ers do with the the QBs in the draft. There have already been rumors doing the rounds that the Panthers want to trade for the 49ers second pick. Kansas were supposedly very interested in Watson at least their coach was. It looks like a good draft for running backs and defense, not so good for QBs. Mixon wasn't even invited to the Combine but some people think he will go in the second round. I think that is very optimistic and several teams won't be interested in him at all for obvious reasons. I think he will probably go in the fourth round as some teams do need a good RB and he is one of the best in the draft if they want to take a calculated risk on his character that is.

I think the obvious pick for Seattle is O Line. Rams will probably go RB or WR because of their poor offense. Falcons will go defense I assume after that SB result ! I wonder if the Cardinals or Steelers will look at the QBs with two aging QBs not far from retirement. Panthers will go defense I'm pretty sure. Cowboys and Texans will probably both go offense although the Cowboys secondary needs an upgrade. Green Bay will go RB or O Line. The Jets will be tempted to go for a QB not that it will matter much ! Washington should go defense I think. Romo, RGIII, Kaep and Cutler still waiting. Gabbert and Ponder now applying the second coat of paint to Ponder's house ! Chip playing Madden with Baalke and thinking of college jobs maybe ?

NFL Network's "Path to the Draft" program has been presenting their version of teams draft boards for certain positions. The one I saw tonight on the QBs, they had SF sticking with their existing QBs (now Hoyer and Barkley) for 2017 and not drafting a QB with their 1st round pick, instead waiting until 2018 to consider using their 2018 1st rounder to address the QB position. That makes good sense to me as this year's crop of QBs isn't good enough to spend a high 1st round pick on. I actually thought a while ago that SF should do that, and maybe even trade down if possible. But they also could try to pick a QB in later rounds this year (maybe Mahomes). Yeah, so I have been interested in that as well.

As for Seattle, I think they may draft a CB in round one instead of an OLman. And not because of Sherman trade media speculations, which is all that is. The value at CB is superior to the value of offensive lineman this year, and the depth of talent at CB is also far superior. After the top 2 or 3 linemen, the next guys in line have 2nd round grades or lower. But who knows, Seattle may reach a bit to take a lineman with a 2nd round grade in the lower 1st round, just to give OL coach Tom Cable more to work with than crappy talent.

As for Steelers & Cards for QBs, those teams would be ideal situations for any QB drafted this year. Because the QB drafted will not be expected to start and will have a couple years to learn.


I'm more and more convinced that the Browns will take Garrett. From what I have heard, Washington have made the same long term offer to Cousins that they made before and he isn't biting so the 49ers might still think they can get him next year. A lot of so called draft experts think Kizer is the best QB in the draft and Shanahan is supposed to be a fan but with so many bases to cover for the lowly teams I agree that they might be tempted to wait another year for a QB. Of course some will and others won't ! But many NFL pundits seem to think that there is not one solid first round QB in this year's draft which could be good news for Kaep, Cutler and RGIII now with Romo also gone. 49ers have still only signed two QBs so they may take a gamble on a QB in later rounds and see if he can be developed and if it doesn't work out they will probably pick up another journeyman QB as the third on the roster before the season starts. Even Ponder could possibly be re-signed as the number three. It won't cost them much. There are some good running backs in the draft this year and even though the 49ers signed Hightower and also have Hyde, I think there's a chance they could go for a RB in the early rounds. They should still be able to get a good one in the second round. It's also supposed to be the best draft for 10 years or so for CBs. So Seattle should be able to pick up a good one if that's who they take in the first few rounds.
movingtarget
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,380
Joined: 05 Aug 2009 08:54

Re: National Football League

06 Apr 2017 16:16

movingtarget wrote:
on3m@n@rmy wrote:
movingtarget wrote:
on3m@n@rmy wrote:Yeah, i got a little carried away starting at Jerry Jones.

You all probably have one, maybe more, favorite teams you follow. I mean, follow enough to know something about that team's player personnel and team needs. So, with the draft coming up, what do you think would be your team's draft Day-1 shocking move or selection?

I'll have a go. Seattle. Everyone says OL is their biggest need, and if possible should draft an OL at #26 in the first round. There are 3 or 4 OLmen Seattle might take (Bolles, Ramczyk, Robinson, Lamp). Seattle does have other needs (CB, LB). I'm going to predict Seattle goes for best player available that still meets one of the other needs by taking a CB as their 1st round pick, even if one of those OLmen are still available when their #1 selection comes up. They might even go LB, but the better value will be at CB. That is not a really big shocker because the first 3 of those OLmen may already have been selected and Lamp would be a bit of a reach.


i will be interested to see what the Browns and 49ers do with the the QBs in the draft. There have already been rumors doing the rounds that the Panthers want to trade for the 49ers second pick. Kansas were supposedly very interested in Watson at least their coach was. It looks like a good draft for running backs and defense, not so good for QBs. Mixon wasn't even invited to the Combine but some people think he will go in the second round. I think that is very optimistic and several teams won't be interested in him at all for obvious reasons. I think he will probably go in the fourth round as some teams do need a good RB and he is one of the best in the draft if they want to take a calculated risk on his character that is.

I think the obvious pick for Seattle is O Line. Rams will probably go RB or WR because of their poor offense. Falcons will go defense I assume after that SB result ! I wonder if the Cardinals or Steelers will look at the QBs with two aging QBs not far from retirement. Panthers will go defense I'm pretty sure. Cowboys and Texans will probably both go offense although the Cowboys secondary needs an upgrade. Green Bay will go RB or O Line. The Jets will be tempted to go for a QB not that it will matter much ! Washington should go defense I think. Romo, RGIII, Kaep and Cutler still waiting. Gabbert and Ponder now applying the second coat of paint to Ponder's house ! Chip playing Madden with Baalke and thinking of college jobs maybe ?

NFL Network's "Path to the Draft" program has been presenting their version of teams draft boards for certain positions. The one I saw tonight on the QBs, they had SF sticking with their existing QBs (now Hoyer and Barkley) for 2017 and not drafting a QB with their 1st round pick, instead waiting until 2018 to consider using their 2018 1st rounder to address the QB position. That makes good sense to me as this year's crop of QBs isn't good enough to spend a high 1st round pick on. I actually thought a while ago that SF should do that, and maybe even trade down if possible. But they also could try to pick a QB in later rounds this year (maybe Mahomes). Yeah, so I have been interested in that as well.

As for Seattle, I think they may draft a CB in round one instead of an OLman. And not because of Sherman trade media speculations, which is all that is. The value at CB is superior to the value of offensive lineman this year, and the depth of talent at CB is also far superior. After the top 2 or 3 linemen, the next guys in line have 2nd round grades or lower. But who knows, Seattle may reach a bit to take a lineman with a 2nd round grade in the lower 1st round, just to give OL coach Tom Cable more to work with than crappy talent.

As for Steelers & Cards for QBs, those teams would be ideal situations for any QB drafted this year. Because the QB drafted will not be expected to start and will have a couple years to learn.


I'm more and more convinced that the Browns will take Garrett. From what I have heard, Washington have made the same long term offer to Cousins that they made before and he isn't biting so the 49ers might still think they can get him next year. A lot of so called draft experts think Kizer is the best QB in the draft and Shanahan is supposed to be a fan but with so many bases to cover for the lowly teams I agree that they might be tempted to wait another year for a QB. Of course some will and others won't ! But many NFL pundits seem to think that there is not one solid first round QB in this year's draft which could be good news for Kaep, Cutler and RGIII now with Romo also gone. 49ers have still only signed two QBs so they may take a gamble on a QB in later rounds and see if he can be developed and if it doesn't work out they will probably pick up another journeyman QB as the third on the roster before the season starts. Even Ponder could possibly be re-signed as the number three. It won't cost them much. There are some good running backs in the draft this year and even though the 49ers signed Hightower and also have Hyde, I think there's a chance they could go for a RB in the early rounds. They should still be able to get a good one in the second round. It's also supposed to be the best draft for 10 years or so for CBs. So Seattle should be able to pick up a good one if that's who they take in the first few rounds.

I agree with you on Browns most likely to draft Myles Garrett @ #1 overall, and on that QB summary. I pity the teams that pick a QB in round 1, especially with a top-15 overall selection. With widespread opinion that none of these QBs are worthy of being taken in round 1, it is as you say, some teams will bite out of desperation.

With regards to Cousins, originally I felt Washington was nuts to not make a harder attempt to extend him. But now I wonder if the impasse is due to Cousins not wanting to be there more than one year (maybe I missed some tidbit on that). That is something I bet Cousins would not discuss with anyone outside the organization, and certainly not something that the organization would talk about (in case the organization is interested in entertaining trade offers).
User avatar on3m@n@rmy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,910
Joined: 17 Jun 2010 12:25
Location: PNW

06 Apr 2017 19:05

As to the Garrett, he quipped to Jerry Jones to please trade for him so he could play in Dallas instead of Cleveland, but the Browns would be a very nice landing spot for him. He'll be part of a young, big DL with potential that is mostly good already at stopping the run, leaving him as the pass-rush guy. And he'll have Jamie Collins backing him up. If games truly are won and lost in the trenches, this could be the start of a serious defensive foundation.

It's really hard to tell what shape the Browns are in, but they are starting to look young, deep, with a lot of draft picks coming up, and still flush with cash. If this pans out, and I know that's a big if, they could be the next version of Pete Carroll's 2012-14 Seahawks, or what we have just seen the Raiders do. But that's saying a lot. They still don't have a franchise QB, or anything close to it. Still, there's a lot of potential there to give Browns fans hope for the future.

Or they could just botch it, once again, Cleveland style, and fizzle out into another decade of 3-13 seasons and draft pick busts.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000503270/article/pain-rankings-no-1-the-cleveland-browns
User avatar Alpe d'Huez
Veteran
 
Posts: 10,176
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 03:51
Location: New England

Re:

07 Apr 2017 02:47

Alpe d'Huez wrote:As to the Garrett, he quipped to Jerry Jones to please trade for him so he could play in Dallas instead of Cleveland, but the Browns would be a very nice landing spot for him. He'll be part of a young, big DL with potential that is mostly good already at stopping the run, leaving him as the pass-rush guy. And he'll have Jamie Collins backing him up. If games truly are won and lost in the trenches, this could be the start of a serious defensive foundation.

It's really hard to tell what shape the Browns are in, but they are starting to look young, deep, with a lot of draft picks coming up, and still flush with cash. If this pans out, and I know that's a big if, they could be the next version of Pete Carroll's 2012-14 Seahawks, or what we have just seen the Raiders do. But that's saying a lot. They still don't have a franchise QB, or anything close to it. Still, there's a lot of potential there to give Browns fans hope for the future.

Or they could just botch it, once again, Cleveland style, and fizzle out into another decade of 3-13 seasons and draft pick busts.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000503270/article/pain-rankings-no-1-the-cleveland-browns

Like pleading with Jerry to trade up for him was going to get THAT done. Oh I suppose such a trade up could possibly (like 0.01 % chance) happen if one of the two teams involved had completely lost all their marbles.

But yeah, on paper the Browns are getting better and going to get better yet with all those stockpiled picks IF they chose wisely. Eventually the Browns will get another chance to address their QB position, but they are showing patience in building the roster now by taking Garrett instead of reaching.

Pain rankings: OFC the Browns are familiar with that distinction. But how about the Vikes, Lions, and Bengals, which all were on the cusp of emerging as contenders. With the Vikes it seems like mostly bad luck with injuries (Kalil, Bridgewater, AP who is now gone). Other than Megatron retiring, I'm not sure why the Lions fell off. With the Jets and Bills I feel like they have shot themselves in the foot with high round (QB) draft picks that did not work out. With KC, I expected more long-term out of them when Andy Reid showed up. I was a little surprised the Rams did not make the list just because of the recent decline (or implosion) formerly under HC Jeff Fisher (but at least the Rams have the Mike Martz era of victories (1999-2003 or so).
User avatar on3m@n@rmy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,910
Joined: 17 Jun 2010 12:25
Location: PNW

Re:

07 Apr 2017 02:53

Alpe d'Huez wrote:As to the Garrett, he quipped to Jerry Jones to please trade for him so he could play in Dallas instead of Cleveland, but the Browns would be a very nice landing spot for him. He'll be part of a young, big DL with potential that is mostly good already at stopping the run, leaving him as the pass-rush guy. And he'll have Jamie Collins backing him up. If games truly are won and lost in the trenches, this could be the start of a serious defensive foundation.

It's really hard to tell what shape the Browns are in, but they are starting to look young, deep, with a lot of draft picks coming up, and still flush with cash. If this pans out, and I know that's a big if, they could be the next version of Pete Carroll's 2012-14 Seahawks, or what we have just seen the Raiders do. But that's saying a lot. They still don't have a franchise QB, or anything close to it. Still, there's a lot of potential there to give Browns fans hope for the future.

Or they could just botch it, once again, Cleveland style, and fizzle out into another decade of 3-13 seasons and draft pick busts.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000503270/article/pain-rankings-no-1-the-cleveland-browns


Good article on the Pain Rankings...........that's a lot of pain ! I think the Bills multiple Super Bowl loss run would have been awful for their fans not to mention the franchise in general.
movingtarget
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,380
Joined: 05 Aug 2009 08:54

Re: National Football League

07 Apr 2017 15:16

All of the QB talk lately has got me thinking. How can NFL teams who need a QB deal with the apparent lack of QB talent coming into the NFL? I think partly to blame are the college (& high school) spread schemes, which are much easier (due to fewer reads by the QB as the offensive scheme puts a specific defender at risk) to teach and tough to defend if defenses do not have enough athletes to stop the spread attacks. Fueling that, it seems that more and more that young high school athletes with size (6'2" to 6'5") want to and do play either WR or QB, adding to the supply of college teams coveting those kinds of players. I am not absolutely positive that is a legitimate connection. It's just an observation. [Even so there are still high schools running run-based wing-T offenses partly because they don't have anyone who can throw]. In the end, many college QB draftees are just not ready for the NFL offensive schemes.

So if so many NFL teams are starving for QBs, why don't some of those teams try scrapping their pro style schemes and implement spread schemes? In theory, many of the QBs coming out of college would then be more "NFL ready", and it could possibly transform weaker NFL offenses into more formidable ones. Also, many of the college offensive linemen who played in spread or RPO offenses would be more NFL ready as well. [We could even take it further, why doesn't the NFL change offensive rules and officiating to make spread schemes easier to implement? I mean, it could end up creating more parity across the league. But I won't go that far yet.] I have a hunch a typical spread scheme in the NFL would not really work, or work well enough to stick. Why not? It goes back to the concept of the spread offense putting a defender at risk (by play design, the QB knows who that defender is and who to read), and all the QB has to do is read how that defender reacts, thereby cutting the number of QB reads down to one or two. I think that NFL defenses have more athletes to cover that type of offensive attack and would find ways to defeat or stymie the offense. Check and mate. It's a cat and mouse game.

Just tossing out thoughts here. What do you think?

If that is the case, it is a shame in a way that so many college teams are running spread schemes. It dilutes NFL-ready talent!
User avatar on3m@n@rmy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,910
Joined: 17 Jun 2010 12:25
Location: PNW

Re: National Football League

08 Apr 2017 01:29

on3m@n@rmy wrote:All of the QB talk lately has got me thinking. How can NFL teams who need a QB deal with the apparent lack of QB talent coming into the NFL? I think partly to blame are the college (& high school) spread schemes, which are much easier (due to fewer reads by the QB as the offensive scheme puts a specific defender at risk) to teach and tough to defend if defenses do not have enough athletes to stop the spread attacks. Fueling that, it seems that more and more that young high school athletes with size (6'2" to 6'5") want to and do play either WR or QB, adding to the supply of college teams coveting those kinds of players. I am not absolutely positive that is a legitimate connection. It's just an observation. [Even so there are still high schools running run-based wing-T offenses partly because they don't have anyone who can throw]. In the end, many college QB draftees are just not ready for the NFL offensive schemes.

So if so many NFL teams are starving for QBs, why don't some of those teams try scrapping their pro style schemes and implement spread schemes? In theory, many of the QBs coming out of college would then be more "NFL ready", and it could possibly transform weaker NFL offenses into more formidable ones. Also, many of the college offensive linemen who played in spread or RPO offenses would be more NFL ready as well. [We could even take it further, why doesn't the NFL change offensive rules and officiating to make spread schemes easier to implement? I mean, it could end up creating more parity across the league. But I won't go that far yet.] I have a hunch a typical spread scheme in the NFL would not really work, or work well enough to stick. Why not? It goes back to the concept of the spread offense putting a defender at risk (by play design, the QB knows who that defender is and who to read), and all the QB has to do is read how that defender reacts, thereby cutting the number of QB reads down to one or two. I think that NFL defenses have more athletes to cover that type of offensive attack and would find ways to defeat or stymie the offense. Check and mate. It's a cat and mouse game.

Just tossing out thoughts here. What do you think?

If that is the case, it is a shame in a way that so many college teams are running spread schemes. It dilutes NFL-ready talent!


I think it is Trubisky that's only had 13 starts ! But it's interesting that Prescott and Wentz both came out of last year and some people seem to have not given up on Goff yet. So last year wasn't too bad. Who is the best QB under 25 ? See the vid below :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=148kb-nx5TM
movingtarget
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,380
Joined: 05 Aug 2009 08:54

Re: National Football League

08 Apr 2017 05:04

movingtarget wrote:
on3m@n@rmy wrote:All of the QB talk lately has got me thinking. How can NFL teams who need a QB deal with the apparent lack of QB talent coming into the NFL? I think partly to blame are the college (& high school) spread schemes, which are much easier (due to fewer reads by the QB as the offensive scheme puts a specific defender at risk) to teach and tough to defend if defenses do not have enough athletes to stop the spread attacks. Fueling that, it seems that more and more that young high school athletes with size (6'2" to 6'5") want to and do play either WR or QB, adding to the supply of college teams coveting those kinds of players. I am not absolutely positive that is a legitimate connection. It's just an observation. [Even so there are still high schools running run-based wing-T offenses partly because they don't have anyone who can throw]. In the end, many college QB draftees are just not ready for the NFL offensive schemes.

So if so many NFL teams are starving for QBs, why don't some of those teams try scrapping their pro style schemes and implement spread schemes? In theory, many of the QBs coming out of college would then be more "NFL ready", and it could possibly transform weaker NFL offenses into more formidable ones. Also, many of the college offensive linemen who played in spread or RPO offenses would be more NFL ready as well. [We could even take it further, why doesn't the NFL change offensive rules and officiating to make spread schemes easier to implement? I mean, it could end up creating more parity across the league. But I won't go that far yet.] I have a hunch a typical spread scheme in the NFL would not really work, or work well enough to stick. Why not? It goes back to the concept of the spread offense putting a defender at risk (by play design, the QB knows who that defender is and who to read), and all the QB has to do is read how that defender reacts, thereby cutting the number of QB reads down to one or two. I think that NFL defenses have more athletes to cover that type of offensive attack and would find ways to defeat or stymie the offense. Check and mate. It's a cat and mouse game.

Just tossing out thoughts here. What do you think?

If that is the case, it is a shame in a way that so many college teams are running spread schemes. It dilutes NFL-ready talent!


I think it is Trubisky that's only had 13 starts ! But it's interesting that Prescott and Wentz both came out of last year and some people seem to have not given up on Goff yet. So last year wasn't too bad. Who is the best QB under 25 ? See the vid below :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=148kb-nx5TM

Ok so maybe the nfl qb situation is not as sorry as I feel in terms of eventually getting enough new capable players
User avatar on3m@n@rmy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,910
Joined: 17 Jun 2010 12:25
Location: PNW

Re: National Football League

08 Apr 2017 06:10

on3m@n@rmy wrote:
movingtarget wrote:
on3m@n@rmy wrote:All of the QB talk lately has got me thinking. How can NFL teams who need a QB deal with the apparent lack of QB talent coming into the NFL? I think partly to blame are the college (& high school) spread schemes, which are much easier (due to fewer reads by the QB as the offensive scheme puts a specific defender at risk) to teach and tough to defend if defenses do not have enough athletes to stop the spread attacks. Fueling that, it seems that more and more that young high school athletes with size (6'2" to 6'5") want to and do play either WR or QB, adding to the supply of college teams coveting those kinds of players. I am not absolutely positive that is a legitimate connection. It's just an observation. [Even so there are still high schools running run-based wing-T offenses partly because they don't have anyone who can throw]. In the end, many college QB draftees are just not ready for the NFL offensive schemes.

So if so many NFL teams are starving for QBs, why don't some of those teams try scrapping their pro style schemes and implement spread schemes? In theory, many of the QBs coming out of college would then be more "NFL ready", and it could possibly transform weaker NFL offenses into more formidable ones. Also, many of the college offensive linemen who played in spread or RPO offenses would be more NFL ready as well. [We could even take it further, why doesn't the NFL change offensive rules and officiating to make spread schemes easier to implement? I mean, it could end up creating more parity across the league. But I won't go that far yet.] I have a hunch a typical spread scheme in the NFL would not really work, or work well enough to stick. Why not? It goes back to the concept of the spread offense putting a defender at risk (by play design, the QB knows who that defender is and who to read), and all the QB has to do is read how that defender reacts, thereby cutting the number of QB reads down to one or two. I think that NFL defenses have more athletes to cover that type of offensive attack and would find ways to defeat or stymie the offense. Check and mate. It's a cat and mouse game.

Just tossing out thoughts here. What do you think?

If that is the case, it is a shame in a way that so many college teams are running spread schemes. It dilutes NFL-ready talent!


I think it is Trubisky that's only had 13 starts ! But it's interesting that Prescott and Wentz both came out of last year and some people seem to have not given up on Goff yet. So last year wasn't too bad. Who is the best QB under 25 ? See the vid below :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=148kb-nx5TM

Ok so maybe the nfl qb situation is not as sorry as I feel in terms of eventually getting enough new capable players


No I think you are right especially with QBs but I think some years are better than others. This year not so good. Some NFL pundits don't see any of the upcoming draft QBs starting this season. It seems that even the good ones don't seem to be NFL ready yet, not even close.
movingtarget
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,380
Joined: 05 Aug 2009 08:54

PreviousNext

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests

Back to top