Jump to content

Mr Raider

Veteran Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Mr Raider

  1. UDFA also have a choice to sign too. And while we may not be the most talented team in terms of top tier talent, I do believe we are a pretty deep team, especially at OL, TE, QB with proven talent that UDFA just aren't beating out realistically. And then we have LB that we had just invested heavy resources in 2 free agents with all the guys that started for us there last year coming back, that may have been the best spot for an undrafted guy to compete for, but that's also the spot where only 5 guys make the roster. At DL we have a top 5 pick, a second year guy coming off a 10+ sack season, a highly paid among NT vet, a DE we invested heavy money in for a non starter, and a third year guy that has shown some flashes. That's a tough group to think you're cracking. RB we have a rookie that looked to have all pro potential, a third RB that we had just locked up on a new contract, had just drafted Bowden and told the world he was playing RB, and I can't remember if we had already signed Booker. DB we had 1 rookie we just drafted in the first round, a 2nd year guy that started down the stretch that was a 2nd round pick a year ago, a first round pick at safety, a third round pick at corner. A highly paid CB/S in Joyner that we didn't save anything by cutting, a 5th round pick in Johnson that didn't play his rookie year but the staff talked up. Agents know all this stuff too. And they know that between the established players we have, the investments made in first or second year guys in terms of draft picks, the money spent in free agency, etc means we didn't have many open spots on the roster in general. But undrafted guys would also face an uphill battle finding a spot in position groups that have young guys that maybe aren't proven but will be given the benefit of the doubt over undrafted rookies because of where they were picked and their perceived higher upside. If I was an agent for an undrafted guy I would have told any player playing QB, RB, TE, OL, DL, WR, CB that we either need more money than another team with a more glaring need and open potential roster spots at those positions, or straight up avoid the Raiders because you have a much smaller chance at making the team in Vegas simply because they have deep units with guys that already look great and/or a heavy amount of first or second year guys that were highly drafred. I would have only recommended an undrafted player to look at the Raiders if they played S or LB. That plays a part, how much is tough to say exactly. But it probably plays a bigger part than it would even most years in a year without presason and stuff. And it's hard to blame Mayock for that because it's a problem tied to fixing holes with free agents or acquiring and using a bunch of high draft capitol all throughout the roster.
  2. I don't love any of them to do it. I'd have them ranked 1. Dolphins - Mostly because I'm really high on Tua and they finished the season really strong. I am easily picking the Bills to win the division, but if Tua starts early and hits the ground running being the type of QB I expect him to be they could win it. It's essentially a mix of being highest on their young QB, a division that doesn't have a single team you look at and say they are a lock to win 12ish games, and a HC I like that showed he could even keep a roster without a ton of talent competitive and fighting even after a god awful start to the season. 2. Washington - This one is more having a ton of respect for their coach and a defense I think can be top 10 caliber in the NFL on the strength of good coaching and a front that has the potential to be downright dominant (was very high on Young like most, but also really loved Sweat last season and think he breaks out this season), mix that with a division that had the top 2 teams competing to win it at 8-9 wins last season and I see some potential. I like Burrow for the Bengals and just comparing talent (because I see a decent sized gap in the young QB department and overall offensive talent) I would have the Bengals ahead but their division has 2 teams I think are competing for 11+ wins and another team in the Browns I think win 8 or 9. That's just a rough division to try and win, especially when you were picking first overall the year before. 3. Lions - I guess? This would mostly be banking on Rodgers getting hurt, Minnesota struggling with youth and injuries in a mini rebuild year, and the Bears defense to totally fall off because of bad QB play. I had the Lions as a sleeper last season, and the first few weeks I liked that pick because regardless of record I saw some flashes, but their defense is just bad... I'm not super confident in Patricia, but I have always loved Stafford, their WR core, and I think Swift is a homerun for them to give them their first consistent backfield in a long time... I think ultimately they win 7ish games. I ultimately think they take a step, but their division is just rock solid in my eyes with 2 teams that I predict to make the playoffs in Green Bay and Minnesota. 4. Bengals - Mainly for the reasons I mentioned with liking Burrow, and I think they have a good chance of having a very productive offense next season if Green can stay healthy. I like their overall talent more than Detroit and Washington, but I think their division is much tougher and thus can't predict them to win the division (I have Baltimore in the super bowl and Pittsburgh winning 10 games and making the playoffs).
  3. Nnamdi was great for more than one season. And it's not like he benefited from great defensive scheme from a great coach or a ton of top tier around him. It's more like he didn't fit at all on the Eagles more zone heavy scheme. I do think Asomugha benefited from playing on a terrible team and defense and thus faced less passes in general with teams often building big leads and being able to pick on literally anyone else with great success, but I wouldn't consider Asomugha or his best season overrated necessarily. He was a phenomenal man corner, but he wasn't a super well rounded corner capable of dominating in any scheme. Most players benefit from scheme, coaching and talent around them. It always seemed obvious to me that Aso wasn't going to succeed if he left somewhere and teams expected him to be a zone corner.
  4. Right now today 1. Chiefs - I mean not much needs to be said... It's Mahomes. He's perhaps the best QB in all of football, clear cream of the crop in the AFC West. 2. Raiders - I think hating on Carr has become the trendy thing to do. Does he have holes in his game? For sure. But we're still talking about a guy that completed 70% of his passes, threw for over 400 yards, 21 TDs, and 8 picks. Plus a 100.8 QB rating. He was top 5 in completion percentage, top 10 in yards, top 10 in INT percentage, top 10 in QB rating. The guy can play. And in comparison to all the other guys near the top of those stats his top WR was Tyrell Williams with a busted foot after week 4 or 5. He lost the WR he spent the entire off season expecting to be his top guy and the dude the entire passing game was supposed to revolve around and in a way that most guys don't deal with. His top target was really Waller but it's not exactly like he was a known commodity coming into last season. Carr isn't an elite QB, he's a good one though. He's better than Tyrod Taylor IMO, and he's shown more than Drew Lock (who I actually like a lot and compared to Carr coming out). I was one of Carr's biggest supporters in 2016, and I gsve him a pass for 2017 coming off the injury. 2018 was bad, but it was a terrible team overall. Last season though when I look at everything as a whole I thought Carr was super impressive. He needs to push the ball down the field more but it's hard to expect him to do that with garbage at WR. And the fact he produced like he did with significantly less talent than the top tier QBs shows to me just how talented Carr is. I think he has played on a unstable franchise and has been held back by constant turnover coaching wise from the HC to coordinators. With the loss of AB and the lack of overall pass catching talent last season it speaks to how good he is to play as well as he did. He didn't get any help from a terrible defense either. I think last year shows Carr is the future of the Raiders, I think we have had a franchise with 5 first round picks in the past 2 seasons. If they didn't believe in Carr long term that is the time to make a move to move on. They made it a point to add weapons this off season so they obviously want to see Carr take another step in his third year in the same offense (he's NEVER in his career had more than 2 years under the same coordinator prior to Gruden), but I think it's possible he does and people start to see him in a better light. Not to mention he's still not even 30 years old and locked up on a contract that is reasonable right now with all the contracts given out recently. And as much talk there is about Gruden loving QBs his history actually says he prefers veterans. I think he took the job in large part because he believes in Carr and there has been enough production last year in a limited offesne and enough improvement from year one to year two to believe Gruden thinks he can win with Carr. Time will tell. 3. Broncos - I liked Lock a lot more than most before the draft. I had him as my clear cut #2 QB in the class. He has tremendous arm strength and athleticism, but he needed to work on his lower body mechanics and he's not good under pressure (not my biggest concern with a prospect because most QBs are bad under pressure). He showed a lot to be excited about last season, but he's still very young and will be playing with a lot of young (but talented) pass catchers. That means IMO there will be some very high highs and some low lows. I do think Denver has found their QB of the future. But I'm not sold Drew Lock next season will be better than Carr next season. 4. Chargers - Tyrod Taylor is a decent stop gap, decent QB that's capable of holding the fort for a season if need be, but he's on the bottom tier of NFL starting QBs. I feel confident in saying he will be the worst starter in the division next season (though still serviceable) I just don't see the AFC West as a whole having bad QB play. I didn't think a ton of Herbert and I certainly think he needs to sit for a year. Some will really like his long term potential and he has a lot from the athletic standpoint, but I just think his accuracy and touch is spacey, and I think he will have some trouble adjusting to making more NFL throws instead of the ridiculously screen heavy system he played in. I don't see a future franchise QB when I watch him, but some will. Long term I think it's the same too, but I'll admit I can certainly see Lock becoming the second best QB in the division and Herbert has potential to challenge for that too, I just don't love him as a prospect. So Mahomes will be entrenched as the top guy because it's just hard to see someone being better than top 2 QB in the NFL. Outside of him it could go a million different ways. I wouldn't argue with anyone that wanted to roll the dice and bet on the youth/upside/and rookie deal on Lock or Herbert over Carr long term though. I just think if we're talkinf 2020 and who plays their position the best, Carr will be the second best QB in the division.
  5. I go back and forth. In the recent past I kind of preferred the 1-16 format because you'd see the 9 and 10 seed from the West getting left out when they would be like the 7 seed in the East. This year though the 16 teams would still be 8 from the East and 8 from the West. If for whatever reason this would be the easiest way to make some form of the playoffs happen I would definitely take it. And it could make for some interesting match ups.
  6. There's been talk of the playoffs this year being a 1-16 seed tournament regardless of conference due to Covid-19. If that were to happen how do you guys think the playoffs would play out? Any teams get a benefit from that with the current standings? Any team at a disadvantage? Overall feelings with the idea. And finally, predictions for the playoffs if it were to go down like this. As of today it would look like this
  7. For the Raiders... Trent Brown got a lot of money, highest paid OT type money, which is hard to live up to, but he played at a pro bowl level on the right side. He was downright dominant at times. But he was banged up for a small stretch of the season. Still having him is a big boost to an OL that was very good last year and should continue to be very good for the next couple. Lamarcus Joyner on the other hand was terrible. He's among the top 5-10 paid safeties and I would assume among the highest paid nickel corners in the entire NFL and he was garbage. I'm truly not sure how much that falls on him and how much falls at playing him in the slot when most Rams fans said he was a good safety that could play the slot sometimes. The staff seems to want to keep him there this season and a lot of people think there's a decent chance he gets beat out by Amik Robertson at some point during the season. That could be because Robertson was a guy a lot of people liked as a nickel corner this year, but also because we just don't have any faith in Joyner. I'll be shocked if he isn't cut after this upcoming season when it's easy to do so.
  8. Yeah it makes no sense. The value of possibly getting the ball back to go up 14-0 just isn't anywhere near worth the risk of giving the ball to a clearly inferior team already in range to get points. The Chiefs offense is downright ridiculous, but even as good as they are they are going to have a tough time converting 4th and 15. Picking up 15 yards on one play when the other team knows that you need 15 yards in one play is very very difficult. Even if you're playing a bad team. It's one play. There's just no reason you would take the risk to POSSIBLY go up 2 scores early in the game immediately, and it's not like the conversion ends in points so you would still have to have a successful, long drive. You kick the ball and force that clearly inferior team to sustain a drive to get points. Not gift wrap them some if you fail so you can maybe go up 2 scores if you can convert a low percentage play. The better your team is, and the worse the team you're playing it incentives you less to try something like that. And even a bad team playing a team better than them where the idea of jumping out to an early two score lead sounds enticing and is more important, you still just simply can't risk attempting something like that and shooting yourself in the foot if you fail on a play that probably fails 80+% of the time. I just can't see any scenario where teams would try and use the 4th and 15 unless they're in desperation mode. Yeah the idea of getting the ball back and possibly scoring without the opponent touching the ball sounds fantastic, but you still have to weigh that benefit against the likelihood you fail, and unless you're trailing late in the game that risk/reward just doesn't match up to jump out to a bigger lead. Particularly if you're a good team with confidence in your ability to score consistently. No reason not to trust your defense to get the ball back, and even if they can't if you have an elite offense no reason to not trust you'll continue to score without having to open up the door for quick, easy points to the opposition based on your ability to execute one long play.
  9. It's also easy to see why Adams would feel like he deserves considerably more than someone like Collins though. Yeah they are both safeties and both best skill is probably their ability to dominate in the box. But Adams brings considerably more to the table in coverage IMO. He isn't a turnover machine but Collins really only had that one year where he had a handful of picks. If Collins is worth 14 and has a similar skill set but not quite as elite in the box, and a step or two below in coverage as well I can see why someone of Adams skill set would want more than a million or two more, but the problem is, he isn't on the free agent market. He wants a new deal while still having years left, even if he gets it in that case you are usually going to be sacrificing a few million bucks of what you could get on the market for the immediate long term security. And the NFL hasn't totally set separate markets for more pure FS ball hawks and guys who play their best in the box but aren't a liability in coverage. It helps the more you can cover, but unless you are downright elite at it in addition to what you can do in the box it's hard to argue just where the value is to either of those situations. Just the nature of having so few safeties that can cover and play like a LB in the box.
  10. I definitely agree. Like I said I personally believe that safety is a very underrated, key piece to any good to great defense, but I don't value pure in the box more traditional strong safeties that much. A guy can be at his best playing in the box and functioning as a small LB, but they still need to be at least solid at covering backs and tight ends for me to consider giving them a huge deal. It's just too easy to exploit a guy who's only real value is playing safety with the coverage of a traditional LB. Obviously it's rare to find any guy that can play as a total stud in the box and have unlimited range and play at a high level as a single high safety, so you don't need to be that, even some of the elite guys can't do both of those things at the same, elite level. But you can't be a total liability in coverage to deserve to be paid like the top safety in the game. I tend to value coverage and range in my safeties in todays game most, but I'll definitely take a guy that can dominate in the box and can get me tackles in the backfield and sacks if he's at least solid in coverage. Particularly if he's a total tone setter, vocal guy capable of being the leader of my defense. Adams to me is at his best playing in the box, downhill, and attacking... He's an elite safety at that IMO, but I haven't watched him and felt like he was a liability or easily picked on if asked to cover backs and tight ends and cover ground over the top. Collins is a good comparison in terms of ability in the box but not nearly as fluid in coverage, and that's a huge difference in value and what they should be paid. Even if Adams isn't as elite in coverage, he's still very good, and finding that is super rare and why I would be willing to pay him the money of top safety in the NFL and why it would be hard for me to pull the trigger on trading him for less than a fantastic offer. A good NFL defensive coordinator shouldn't have a hard time putting out a defense capable of getting the most out of a guy like Adam's skill set. Assuming the talent on the rest of the defense isn't totally bare, but that's every position in football.
  11. I just posted the PFF video on my Facebook saying how underrated JJ is and that he should have won ROTY. I hope he can stay healthy and we can keep him fresh with a consistent secondary rusher capable of being productive for a handful of snaps each week. If we can I truly believe Jacobs will insert himself into the elite RB's in the NFL conversation. When you watch him play its so easy to see just how naturally talented he is. Big, strong, super powerful, great wiggle for a guy that isn't scat back size, fantastic vision, always falls forward, capable of winning on inside gives and getting to the outside and gashing teams. And although he was under used in this area and had a couple concentration drops he has nice, soft hands. I expect us to make it a real effort to get the ball in his hands more in the passing game this season. Overall I just expect a fantastic, highly productive year. I see the vision for this offense and it seems obvious they want to build it around Jacobs (a great idea to try and slow down the Chiefs high powered offense and a weakness to the running game), with explosive big play wideouts that can score fast, with Waller being the reliable, consistent force over the middle. I can see Jacobs having 1300ish yards, 10 TD'S, and average around 4.7 a carry. Plus I think his biggest improvement will be in the passing game where I can see him catch 40-50 balls. Jacobs is probably who I am most excited to see this year and in recent memory in general, and one of the few I have/had the most confidence in playing at a super high level over the past 10-15 years.
  12. It's hard to say with Tua and Stidham... They just haven't played so you have to base it on how you viewed them as prospects and how much you trust the coaching staff and supporting talent. So based off talent and my belief of the guys that haven't started I would have them listed by most talented as such Dolphins - I absolutely love Tua as a prospect. The injury history is worrisome, and would have gave me some pause drafting him in the top 5, but I'm not a doctor, nor do I have access to any of the inside information on his current health. So strictly speaking on talent I believe Tua is the cream of the crop in the AFC East at the moment, and believe there's a very good chance that he's the Dolphins new franchise QB for the next decade and will keep them competing for the division with regularity. The OL still has some question marks so I would likely want to give them some time to gel and some time to develop before throwing Tua out there, but Fitzpatrick is a great option for something like that. I also really like Flores and thought he did a good job last season all things considered with what he had to work with. He kept the team fighting. I think the Dolphins take a step forward behind a defense that won't be elite but good, and an offense that relies on the run game and a nice stable of backs and let Tua be eased in and only asked to make a few big plays. Parker was solid last year, but I can't say I trust him or any of the wideouts on the roster, but there is upside. Jets - I'm a big believer in Sam Darnold. I think he has immense talent and some things you just can't teach from a intangible aspect. He has great size, a good arm, he's athletic enough to buy time and move the pocket, and he has shown real accuracy at all stages of the field, but hasn't put together enough accuracy and the total package consistently yet. Which isn't a HUGE concern for me from a young player going into his third year, especially when he missed time with something so random as mono and was playing behind 5 blocking dummies essentially. My problem though is I don't love his supporting cast. And I mainly mean the coaching staff, I am just not a believer in Gase. I believe there's a real possibility that he holds Darnold back. He also doesn't have a ton to work with at WR though I was very high on Mims and believe he can become a low end one or high end two and could be Sam's favorite target, I don't think it will be enough of an immediate impact. I do think the OL will be improved and that will help Darnold and help Bell get back on track, but I'm not ready to say they will be a good OL. Bills - I honestly have no idea what to make of Josh Allen. Sometimes I watch him and I think that guy is clearly destined to be a franchise QB long term, and sometimes I watch him and think there's no way the inaccuracy and questionable decision making doesn't grow thin at some point, especially on a team I think is super talented and well rounded. He still has yet to throw for even 275 yards in a game if I remember right. Obviously stats aren't everything but in this era you have to be able to win with your arm from the QB position. His athleticism is a great plus though and can be a real asset to a team set up to have a good running game, solid OL, some explosive big play WR and a smothering defense. I think Allen is my 3rd on the list of who I believe is the most talented QBs in the division, but I believe he is in the best situation conducive to success. Diggs is a fantastic fit for him as a guy that can make explosive, game changing plays, and pushes all the other wideouts down to a more natural fit on the depth chart. I also believe that Singletary and Moss will form a fantastic duo at RB with young, fresh legs that can take over games by themselves. Patriots - I just never thought much of Stidham in college. I watched him a decent amount in college being a fan of an SEC team, and he was a fine, solid, college QB. But I never looked at him and thought there's a guy I am sure will become a high level starter in the NFL. I trust Belichick as a coach so that is a big boost in his favor, but overall I just don't think he's super talented. He's an ok athlete, decent enough arm, has some solid short accuracy but isn't anywhere near consistent with it. I do think he'll be playing for a coaching staff that can scheme him some success, so he likely won't be a total train wreck, but I don't see the Patriots winning many games because of Stidham. He'll likely just be asked not to lose them and make the occasional play and hope the defense can be close to what they were last year. The problem is they have lost some key contributors and haven't added much in the way of guys I expect to make an immediate impact and nobody on their offense really strikes fear in me. I liked Harry coming out and there's reason to be hopeful for a nice second year jump after missing a lot of time last season, but only so much can be expected. James White is a consistently good pass catching back I like. And I believe Sony can still be a very very good NFL RB, but he seemed to enter Bill's dog house last season so he really needs to step up. I just don't see an overall situation that lends itself to a ton of high level production from the QB position. Although he did look good in the preseason last year that just isn't enough for me to be considered sold. That's how I would list it on talent. My list for which guy/team do I think will have the most success from the QB position for the upcoming season would be 1. Bills 2. Jets 3. Dolphins 4. Patriots And if I believed Tua was going to start from day one I would probably put the Dolphins ahead of the Jets only because of their lack of weapons and my lack of belief in the coaching staff to adequately adjust and scheme up some success at a high level from the talent they do have. The only guy I would be totally shocked if they had a breakout year relative to their expectations (IE Tua being ROTY and Darnold/Allen becoming pro bowl caliber players) would be Stidham. I can invasion the Patriots as a team being successful but I can't convince myself that would be because of high level QB play. And I also wouldn't be shocked if Tua doesn't play as much as fans hope, and Allen and Darnold fail to take a step forward and leave the Bills really questioning their QB position long term on a team I think is good, consistent QB play away from making some real noise, and the Jets having to decide just how much fault was Gase's and who is the right man to come in and get the most out of Darnold. Though I predicted the Bills to win 11 games so obviously I am currently leaning more towards Allen taking the next step. I just really like that team and coaching staff top to bottom.
  13. Yeah, I mean reading the case for him in this thread I could see how/why someone thinks he's deserving or how he gets in to the hall. But I don't think he's anywhere close to a lock. And if I'm looking back at lists of guys that should be in the HOF and see Talib listed having still not got in he won't be one of those guys that I think how is he not in there. And I am not a huge fan of Talib, mostly just because of his time playing for a team that is a huge rival to my favorite team. But I am usually pretty good at keeping that bias aside when talking about the HOF. There's plenty of Raider rivals I have argued belong in or thought they were an easy choice. I don't think my feelings towards Talib the person/player have anything to do with it besides the fact that I just don't think he was a good enough player. He's classic hall of very good player IMO. But I'm sure there are guys with comparable stats, length of time played, and accolades that one can say if this guy is in Talib deserves to be in. I just simply think there's quite a few guys that wouldn't be in my version of the HOF. But I would have it a little more exclusive than the current NFL HOF.
  14. This I wouldn't mind, but you don't change the name of the trophy that's synonymous with winning the super bowl for like 50 years. You can consider Bill the greatest coach of all time if you'd like, but his status as the greatest coach at the time (and maybe still today) is not the only reason why Lombardi had the trophy named after him. It's also the impact he had on turning the game into the most popular sport in the world, it's beyond just his skill its his cultural and historical impact on the sport. At best you have this conversation after he's retired and been away for a couple years. Just seems wrong to name the ultimate prize after a guy that still currently coaching lol.
  15. Almost every team in recent memory that has won the super bowl has had pro bowl caliber safety play. Last year the Chiefs have Mathieu. Patriots have had McCourty for all of their recent super bowl wins. The Eagles had Malcolm Jenkins The Broncos had TJ Ward who was a pro bowler around that time I believe. The Seahawks had 2, though obviously different type of players in Earl Thomas and Kam Chancellor. The Ravens had Ed Reed, even at his advanced age was still one of the better safeties in the game. The Giants had Antrel Rolle. The Packers had Nick Collins. The Steelers obviously had Troy P. Some say it's a devalued position, and maybe, but I personally think it's an incredibly underrated position in terms of how important it is. A great safety by its might not be as important as an edge rusher, but a safety that can play over the top, play like a mini LB in run support, cover backs and tight ends, and make some plays in the backfield, makes a WORLD of difference in terms of turning an average defense into a good one and a good defense into an elite one. And obviously those guys vary from just how talented they were, but they range from pro bowl caliber that year or close to it for the most part, to downright elite, all timers. And those teams certainly had other great players and some had positions that were more important or played a bigger part in the team success, but I think great safety play is a key to fielding a defense capable of being great and winning big games in todays era where there's more passing, less base defense, and more and more athletic guys at running back, WR, and TE. Adams to me seems like the easiest selection to the next group of young guys that turn into downright elite safeties. Every time I watch him I come away impressed. And I don't think pure coverage is his strongest attribute, but I haven't seen him and thought he was bad. And he brings so much more to the table, he's still incredibly young, and he seems determined to be great and a hard worker. I wouldn't just give him away. Now if he is asking to be paid in the ball park of elite pass rushers or something, I wouldn't pay that and if he won't budge I would trade him for a first and a day two pick because you would be lucky to get that (if everyone knows he won't budge on his contract demands). But if he just wants a contract making him the highest paid Safety, I'd feel comfortable paying that. I would probably try my best to play some hard ball and get him to play out this upcoming season with all the uncertainty around everything with Covid. Only the team and Adams knows if that's possible or if holding off a year will result in a holdout or a fractured locker room. History says it likely wont though and he would cave sooner than later, and be happy to take the contact next offseason. He just doesn't have a ton of leverage with how many years he has left and the franchise tag being around. But there are exceptions where it's turned ugly. Hard to way the risk/benefits to holding off paying him for another season.
  16. Agree with every word. When reading the first couple paragraphs I was already replying that I agree but my only pause is the idea of a ticky tack penalty like DPI, holding, etc giving teams a first over a close call or bad call and not because they executed properly. But you touched on it. I think there could be a reasonable workaround for that small issue. Either way, possibility for a penalty or not, I still like the idea. The onside kick is just so random and recovering it usually takes luck or a blunder by the other team. And while I am aware it's the team's fault for being in the position to need an onside kick, I like the idea of a team being able to get back in because their offense executed and made a big play over a stroke of pure luck. 4th and 15 isn't some scenario where you have a strong chance of converting. I don't have the numbers but it has to be a very low percentage in terms of being converted. I won't hate it if they don't make the change. But I definitely like the idea. I think it could add some excitement, and I think it could make for some truly wild moments to help comebacks which are always fun (unless you're a fan of the team losing the lead lol).
  17. I'm not a huge Skip Bayless fan, but his barometer (or at least one of them) for does a guy belong in the HOF is, if he has to think twice about it, you aren't a hall of famer. I don't think that is necessarily a perfect way to determine it, but I like it more than the cliche, of can you tell the story of whatever sport without mentioning them. I have always been one that would prefer the HOF be more exclusive than it is at times. I personally wouldn't have any of Talib, Mathis, Holmes, Rivers, or Eli in the HOF. In that order would also be how I would put them in terms of furthest from the HOF to closest. Talib - I just never saw his talent or game as stand alone, HOF quality. I think he's a hall of very good type. When he was on he could certainly shut down the best of the best, but he also had a specific type of the top tier wideouts that he would dominate and a specific type that would give him trouble. In his best years where he was closest to being dominant he played under terrific coordinators that could scheme up elite defenses, played opposite another very good to borderline elite corner that fit him perfectly keeping him off of the smaller, shifter, quicker precious route runners that could give him trouble, and behind some elite pass rushers and overall dominant front sevens that made his job much easier. He was also a hot head that was prone to the occasional irrational mistake/action/play that hurt the team. Also had some off the field issues if I remember correctly. All of that to me means a guy with some really great seasons and at his best flashed HOF talent, but the total package just isn't there to put him in IMO. Mathis - Mathis was always one of my favorites to watch. He was in a perfect situation for much of his career playing in a dome, opposite Freeny (a sure fire HOFer IMO), on a defense designed to play fast and pin their ears back to take advantage of a Peyton Manning and then Andrew Luck led offense. But he was never the focal point of any defense he was on. Dwight was always the guy teams prioritized over him, and Sanders for a few years on the backend kept coaches up at night over Mathis. He had one year where I would consider him among the top 3-5 elite pass rushers. And that season was great. Plus I love all the forced fumbles. It's an underrated aspect of any defensive player. But he also wasn't a terrific run defender and could be a liability on that end. I grew up watching Mathis, and he was a very very good player. And I think he has a shot at getting in, he just wouldn't be in my HOF. Holmes - Even though he's second on the list, part of me wants to put him in. Because when he was on... I have seen very few better at playing the running back position. But him being on, whether by circumstance or fault of his own, just wasn't often enough to put him in IMO. I think you need more than 3 uber elite years to get in, or if you only have that you need to add some longevity by being a productive player for longer even if at a lower level. I feel like some more post season success would go a long way, and is why I would have TD in the HOF. The playoffs matter, big games matter, and while football is a team sport so it's never on just one guy, getting into the HOF isn't easy and it's not fair because not everyones situation is created equal. That's not to say a guy can't get in without post season success, especially at RB, but it helps your case if you put the team on your back for memorable moments in the biggest games. Whether he won a super bowl doesn't mean much to me because he wasn't much of a contributing factor. Rings themselves don't do it, you have to have played a part in getting there for the bonus to override such a short, but dominant career. Rivers - Another hall of very good IMO. Like all of these guys. Rivers at his peak was a fantastic QB. A few seasons of top 5 play at his position, and more top 10, but at the end of the day when you're a QB being discussed for the HOF I need more overall success. No championships, no super bowl appearances even, and although some seasons his supporting cast could have been better or injuries really hurt the team (and that happened to Rivers more than a lot of QBs I remember) they just never got over the hump, and he had some teams that were certainly super bowl caliber. I don't even have many memories of Rivers having great performances and was just outdone by an elite team (not to say it didn't happen). Teams win championships, not individual players, but the HOF should be reserved for the elite players, and elite, all time QB's just win at least a super bowl. He's got the longevity, the bulk stats, he seemed to be a good leader, but he just falls a little short because of the position he plays and lack of success at the highest level. It doesn't help that in his draft class there are 4 super bowls combined for the 2 other big QBs from his class and every other elite QB in his era got at least one (Brady, Manning, Brees, Rodgers). If he makes a super bowl or two with the Colts or manages to win one? I'd more than likely put him in. Manning - Kind of the opposite of Rivers in that he was never consistently near the top of the league in QB play but he stepped up huge and won when it counted. He has the bulk stats for sure. But he wasn't terribly efficient. He was prone to some jaw dropping bone head plays, he wasn't the most accurate, or have a cannon. And his teams outside of the two super bowl years weren't dominant. Even the super bowl years they weren't seen as a juggernaut behind their elite, franchise QB. The win over the undefeated Patriots is huge. It's a prime example of a guy stepping up in crunch time and making plays when the pressure is highest. I am a sucker for that. But the first super bowl was largely won because of a dominant performance by a defense, slowing down one of the best offenses ever. Regardless how much I love post season success and how heavily I way it, a couple of wins with the pressure being the highest doesn't overweigh your performance on the whole of your career. It makes for a great narrative which helps anyones HOF chance, but it's not enough to fit my personal HOF criteria. He is a Giants ring of honor type, he was a franchise QB, and a good one, sometimes even a little better. But he was never truly great for any length of time. And as much as I factor in post season success (particularly at his position) it can't be the only real HOF argument you hang your hat on. Suggs I would have in the HOF. I think he has enough of the bulk stats, enough of the accolades for the people that value that stuff above all else, he has a lot of post season success, played on some absolutely great defenses, and he had a lot of help around him for sure, but I do feel like there was a stretch of football where I would turn on games and just felt like I was watching one of the best all around edge players in the game. He wasn't among the elite pure pass rushers, but he was a very very good one capable of winning with speed, power, technique, hustle and will. He had a terrific motor. And he was incredibly versatile. And I think run defense is often overlooked by many for edge players and while I do agree its not the most important thing for an end, and the elite of the elite can even be poor at it and could get my HOF vote, I can't overlook that aspect when talking about Suggs. It was one of the great things he brought to the table. He also has the longevity of being a cornerstone piece of a defense capable of playing at the highest level of football in the game for a really long time. Suggs is the only guy on this list that I would personally have in the HOF if it was done my way. I think all but Holmes and Talib will have my stamp of approval as HOFers if we go simply off of what history says is that caliber of player based on who is already in..
  18. I agree with this sentiment as long as he is on his rookie contract (and perhaps even with an extension depending on just how much it is). I also agree that whatever it would take isn't something another franchise could conceivably justify giving up for him even if his play and value is worth it. However, in a hypothetical situation, I wouldn't trade him while under his rookie contract. If he signs an extension for 40+ million a year and a team wanted to offer me 3 FULL draft classes and the immediate draft class was coming from a team picking in the top 5 I would consider it. I believe you can win with Mahomes even on a huge contract but the margin for error is much slimmer. You're counting on Mahomes being able to mask a lot of problems and overcome a consistent lack of young talent being able to be retained and free agents brought in to help. Even then I would be hesitant to pull the trigger because he's just that good and the cap is rising plus veterans will take a discount to come play with a talent like him to try and win a championship. It's a move that could easily backfire in your face and get you fired if you miss on the next QB you draft badly and/or Mahomes goes on to win and produce at the same level he has to this point. But 3 is what it would take to make me give it real consideration. Anything less and it's no deal, the more added the more likely I would be to pull the trigger. I would also need to trust that Andy was going to be there to help develop the next QB if I'm the Chiefs in this scenario for the next 3-5 years at least, and there would need to be a QB or two that I really loved in the next draft or two that I thought was close to a sure fire franchise guy. If all of those stars aligned I could see myself pulling the trigger and trusting that the next guy I drafted could be a QB capable of winning it all (though you can't go in ever expecting to find Mahomes 2.0), and the advantage to having him for peanuts plus the additional cap space that would offer to resign my young talent and add talent through free agency plus 3 drafts of having multiple first, second, and third round picks that should be able to come in and contribute to a team capable of winning it all. Even with all of that considered it would be so hard to pull the trigger. He's the most talented QB we have seen in a long time, that has come in and played at a level you just never expect to find in their first two years starting and already won a super bowl. It's hard to move on from that for anything. If you do the trade off could be a dynasty if everything is done right and falls into place, but you could just as easily be trading away 10-15 years of consistent winning for lottery tickets that never amount to anything.
  19. The obvious choice for the Raiders is Clelin Ferrell. He was the 4th overall pick last year and though he started off very poor he was dealing with injuries and an illness, plus being played out of position asking to rush from the 3 technique spot a lot early in the year. The final 5ish games he really turned it on and became more of the impact player we expected. With a couple of truly high end games. I think we see far more of that this year. I also think Jonathan Abram was mentioned and agree. He only played one game but in that game his presence was felt. He will have some coverage mishaps especially playing with a secondary full of young players, but I expect him to make a ton of splash plays. My true homer Breakout though is Trayvon Mullen. He was phenomenal for a rookie corner. He didn't start until week 5 or 6, but he hit the ground running. Almost everyone in our backfield got picked on, but Mullen was the exception. He provided sticky coverage, good awareness, and was very physical. A little grabby at times, but I think year 2 is one where he plays like a top 10-15 corner in the league. For my non Raiders I'm very excited to see Hollywood Brown and Jeffrey Simmons like others have mentioned. Montez Sweat and Brian Burns will both have years that put them in the conversation for top end young pass rushers in all the NFL. And I think Hockenson takes a big step for Detroit. Then again I thought Ebron was going to almost every year he was there. TJ just seems like the next guy that vaults himself into the tier just below Kelcie and Kittle as dominant tight ends that have a huge impact on productive offenses.
  20. https://playoffpredictors.com/Football/CustomLeague/SchedulePicker/842CB5EC-193A-4D6D-8002-801297F04F53?L=IzBMPDJNTy43I6Mlo4sTWov5aPA5KLDM7Qq7KdWWuxitIl9ovUrchHShhR40y8ZtVgAGIA I've got both conferences West division being a bloodbath... I tried to keep it as realistic as possible, it's tough to pick against the Chiefs or Ravens on paper at the moment, but I threw a few wildcards in there. I think the Bills have a terrific season behind a great defense, a leap from Allen with Diggs being a big impact on their offense and a division that is pretty bad outside of them. They end up 11-5 and with how everything shakes out they end up claiming the #1 seed, if I'm honest I would probably go back and flip a game somewhere to make them 10-6 and behind the Ravens and Chiefs but I went with my gut and this is how it played out. They end up with the bye but ultimately fail to really capitalize on a great season losing their first playoff game in the divisional round in what I would predict to be a tough, hard fought defensive struggle in cold weather that the Steelers are able to pull out with the win because of their more experienced QB that's used to winning playoff games and an excellent defense. In the NFC I have the Eagles as the top seed. I didn't realize they were having a 13-3 type season until afterwards, going in I would have guessed 10-11 wins, but I think they're a team that has a real shot to win it all this year. Ultimately in my prediction they fall just shy of reaching the super bowl. I also think the Broncos really surprise some people. They came on strong down the stretch, and I like Lock. He was my second QB in the draft last year. They make it to the post season but don't win a playoff game. Would likely still be considered a successful season with where they are as a franchise. Similar to the Raiders. Another step forward going 9-7 and just sneaking into the playoffs and being thankful for the added 7th playoff spot. Where they play the Ravens and without having to pick an actual score I'll just say I wouldn't predict it to be very close. Still Gruden and company would be thrilled to make it there and see is as a step in the right direction in their rebuild. We'd be looking to be a legitimate contender for a super bowl in another season or two. Overall I have the Ravens taking a step back regular season wise, but they make up for it with a run all the way to the super bowl. Where they beat the Saints and take home the trophy. AFC 1. Bills 2. Ravens 3. Chiefs 4. Texans 5. Steelers 6. Broncos 7. Raiders NFC 1. Eagles 2. Vikings 3. 49ers 4. Saints 5. Packers 6. Seahawks 7. Buccaneers Playoffs Ravens over Raiders Chiefs over Broncos Steelers over Texans Buccaneers over Vikings 49ers over Seahawks Saints over Packers Steelers over Bills Ravens over Chiefs Eagles over Buccaneers Saints over 49ers Conference Championship Ravens over Steelers Saints over Eagles Super Bowl Ravens over Saints
  21. Maybe they're referring to Baker's off the field issues since he was taken with the pick that would have been traded? Only thing I can come up with.
  22. It's so hard to say. A decent portion of his upgraded weapons are rookies. And as much as we may like and believe in them, we all know the history of draft picks panning out. Obviously if Ruggs produces like a top 12 pick should (a legit #1 WR) the weapons overall are upgraded tremendously. But it's just as likely that Ruggs busts, or at least takes a year or two to make the impact you drafted him for (the likelihood goes up even higher if training camp is effected). It gets even trickier banking on 3rd round picks to come in and produce immediately. Plus it goes back to expectations. What do we define has productive for Carr? What type of season is good enough in relation to the improved weapons? I bet a lot have different definitions of that. I will say Carr has upgraded weapons. Even if the guys don't play to their full potential, the weapons are definitely improved on paper. I would have higher expectations for Carr if Lamb was the first pick because I think he fits Carr's game better and his skill set lends itself to a more immediate impact than Ruggs, though Ruggs elite athletic skills may give him the higher ceiling and bigger long term upside. Carr needs to have a better year. So I guess that's my way of saying that he has enough weapons to show improvement. Third year in the system, upgraded weapons that compliment each other and the weapons that are returning, plus hopeful improvement from Jacobs, Waller, and Renfrow who are in their second year of extensive playing time at the NFL level. So an improved season? Yes. Does he need to have an elite season because he's just flooded with proven NFL talent? No. He needs to play as a top 12ish QB to be locked in as the long term QB for the team as we move to Vegas.
  23. Love the pickup. Going with so much youth at the top of the depth chart is a receip for disaster IMO at the NFL level. We were looking at both of our starters and likely another 1 or 2 guys behind them all being in their first or second year of NFL play. There is definitely an advantage in having young legs at CB in the NFL, and I actually think in the right scheme and talent around them it's worth the trade off in inexperience, but only to a point. Prince really helps balance that. He can come in and start right away and let Arnette get his feet wet a little before being thrown into the fire. I expect him to start the first 3-4 games while Arnette sees more and more action. Prince is just a super solid pro that isn't going to get picked on regularly, and that was the problem with Worley. He would be solid for stretches, but his bad would almost lose you a game by itself. Prince can give us the same steady, solid play without the downright awful games sprinkled in. I expect the CB depth chart shakes out with Mullen being our top guy (I think je has a big year, I love what I have seen going back and watching last years games), Prince starts the first few weeks and sees heavy snaps all year, Arnette plays more and more those few weeks before becoming a starter around week 5-6, Joyner plays the nickel for whatever reason and eventually gets replaced by Robinson who as a rookie has his growing pains but is still an improvement over Joyner who goes back to playing more safety, and Johnson plays special teams and continues to try and improve and cash in on his great athletic abilities but lack of consistency and experience at the position. I do really want to see how Johnson looks in camp. He's got it all from a H/W/S perspective.
  24. I see a lot of Desean Jackson when I watch him. But more physical before and after the catch. I don't think Hill is the best comparison and agree he isn't as shifty, but I think he looks incredibly explosive and fast. He so easily pulls away from defenders it's ridiculous. He consistently outruns guys who have the angle on him. That's what reminds me so much of Jackson. Jackson wasn't/isn't the shiftiest guy, but he constantly just outran everyone. One missed tackle or false step and he would take it to the house. It's the same with Ruggs. I just think Ruggs is a little more physical thus making him a little better with contested catch abilities.
  • Create New...