Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by JStar221

  1. 1-- No I;m the type of guy that recognizes sometimes experience and some form of logic can be better than listening to a computer data sheet that's possibly best suited for Fantasy Football. . 2-- Explain the individual analysis then? I'm arguing the blind following of a computer data sheet. Why take the risk? 3-- BB's been wrong. But you have too, right? So who am I going to believe? You? Or Him? IMO your argument doesn't make much sense because it just follows one path without considering the opponent and late game imo-- so I'm going with him over you. Quality of an opponent is k
  2. 1-- There's a reason why we call it a chippie, right? Sure there is risk but there is less with a chippie, isn't there? There is no way a 4th and 3 deep in other team's end vs a quality defensive opponent is near as risky as kicking a chippie fg. Okay you aren't changing your mind. Neither am I. 2-- Okay and I'll counter. Say McCarthy decides to kick a fg and ties it up. Why is it a lock to think Goff being aggressive is going to get the Rams a score? So by Goff being "aggressive" vs your defense, why is that so bad in a tie game? You shut them down after the 4th-down-play and you
  3. A-- Analytics in any form is only as good as your data and how you use that data. What if the data doesn't tell the full story? Anyhow, does every team without fail follow "the chart?" If they didn't (which they didn't) why assume the data is telling the full story vs experience? For example-- Bill Belichick has said he uses analytics less--than-one percent of the time to make his decisions. To a degree he is exaggerating but he didn't go for one 2 point conversion in 2019. SO tho greatest coach in NFL History has exceptions when to use Analytics, as well as other coaches yet we'r
  4. 1-- Three yards is NEVER "easy" to get down close in another team's territory vs a QUALITY OPPONENT. 2-- That's the problem with number 2. I don't believe for a second that vs a quality defense that analytics is showing what you're suggesting late in games unless that's "Tom Brady" at the other end or a lousy defense or a significant matchup? IMO there is probably supporting evidence showing that a mediocre QB vs a good defense is probably not going to lead them to victory on the next series. And by taking a bad gamble and going down by 3 vs an equally matched opponent with 4 minut
  5. No it'simply a bad call. How many times do WR's not go far enough during the regular season? It happens often. How many times have you seen it happen in your life watching football? So all of a sudden there is no risk on a 4th down a WR won't go far enough? The reason you give is part of many reasons why the 4th down play had a higher degree of failure vs kicking the chippie FG. We can all offer other excuses next time-- such as "he dropped the ball." "The QB made the wrong read." "The QB made an awful pass." "They missed the one key block." "They fumbled after getting the 1st down." Th
  6. And following this blindly without context is why teams lose. Taking 3 points off the board late in the game when you are down by three - vs a pretty good defensive team without much time left is a bad decision. These should be "guides" and not steadfast "rules." This absolutely was one cause why Cowboys lost the game.
  7. I am not a Cowboy fan at all. But watching the game and the circumstance I thought no way they should've gone for it either. I think analytics is behind some other sports. ANyone cna make an excuse why the play doesn't work such as "If only the receiver went a few yards further." Or "if only the offensive line blocked better." Or "If only they called for a rollout." Or if only "Dak read the play right," etc. You can dream up any excuse but that game showed little indication that Dallas could overwhelm and make the play or the defense was so lousy you can't trust. You don't take that risk.
  8. I just think the offense is going to struggle way too much beucase of a poor OL. And the defense just has too many changes without enough practice. If they go 6-10 or worse; fire Gettleman?
  9. Looking at a 5-11 or 6-10 season. Offensive line is new at the tackle spots. Their choice in rd 1,Thomas, was my 3rd choice. I think their center is bad and their LG is overrated. For receivers SS is one hit from calling it quits. Engram is is one windy day away from watching instead of playing games like he normally does, and Slayton is a huge question. Defensively there are questions across the board other than they should be able to stop the run. And if we do have to endure another terrible season - the good news would be that DG will be gone. I prefer he s
  10. Ohh crap I didn't see it! Damn!!! Damn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  11. Just wondering. I loved loved loved the McKinney pick. I feel he and Peppers is an ok tandem at safety. Frankly, I think McKinney is stud. I feel Bradberry is a good CB. I feel that Baker can be a good #2 corner. Between Beal, Ballentine, Love, and new pick Darnay Holmes-- this might not be too bad of secondary, right? ,
  12. I've made a slight change of my prediction going into this season. We are a 4-7 win team. Won't get to 8. So expect imo 5-6 wins. If the odds were to go to 6.5 I would take the under.
  13. Okay we're at complete opposite ends here. I hope you are right. I'm rooting for your optimism. The OL is still not good. Therefore you're only going to see a running game vs rotten teams on occasion. IMO you are vastly overrating the OL. I heard it all last year and the year before. We get rid of Flowers and Omameh etc then "ofc" I have been told we'll be better. But getting bad replacement players overall doesn't help. Solder is a bad OT now. Hernandez is overrated. They have no legit center, Thomas is a rookie so he'll have his struggles, and Zeitler is not a run blocker. And Pea
  14. The draft didn't do enough. Not that it had much of a shot to anyways but imo this is around a 6-10 team (4 to 8 wins depending on other moves and opponents quality at game time etc) unless like what happened two years ago - we face opponents that have injuries at key positions. The OL still going to be a problem unless Fleming completely surprises. Thomas will need a year. And they won't be able to run the football inside. DG has made a major blunder in believing because he drafted an extremely talented RB that he thought he'd get a pretty good running game vs most of the league. Jones
  15. Not a bad pick. have Bradberry as the one dependable. Would like to think Baker takes a big leap. The rest are big questions.
  16. I don't share your optimism here. I don't think he stinks but don't think he will become "good" either. Right now imo he is below average and at best will be average,
  17. I think we need a center. Actually we have a lot of needs but our starting center will be Pulley with a poor backup. If Pulley (or the following year Halapio) is the answer then I don''t want to hear the question. So I would want Biadasz. But ofc if teams feel his injury will continually affect him or if he doesn't fit into their scheme. Can also look ot get a LB Curtis Weaver or Gaither. CB Bryce Hall, Troy Pride, Darnay Holmes, Amik Robertson. WR Peoples-Jones
  18. I love love this McKinney pick. Can't believe he fell to us. I am absolutely thrilled with this pick.
  19. What do you think? -- Biadasz in rd 4 if he makes it to us?
  20. We're never going to come to an agreement. The bold comment you made I couldn't disagree with that comment more if it is the context I think you're speaking and even then imo your context of "great tackles" and mine are probably a lot different. Add you would have to be speaking of "Left tackles." Because how many great Left Tackles have the Giants gotten over the past 10 years? The Giants even had to pay more than anyone else in 2018 for an above average LT who turned out to be downright awful in Solder. And as far as your "rare" comment on SImmons I still don't know what it means. In
  21. Thanks Acgott – I love the discussions too. No other sports on to watch- so what else? Rather than re-respond to each point just want to address certain topics. Though the others probably all related. 3—I don’t hate Barkley. If I did I wouldn’t be favoring getting him an OL. I disliked this past year’s version of Barkley. Not the rookie Barkley. But because we are so far behind on defense, I think the only way to win with him is get that initial defensive line off his back. Get him an OL that can get him a bit of a head start without so early having him have to juke the 1st defender.
  22. I don't understand what you mean "on it's surface." I suppose that when you followed it up with the next sentence you meant if we have just one pick to make in the draft? Anyhow you and others have mentioned Simmons is "elite." I am not arguing that. You have just called him "rare." I am not arguing with that. You have called the OT class "deep"-- I am not arguing with that. The words that you say though imo are just generalizations. IMO they don't mean anything. They're just generalizations. A LT that is multiple time pro bowl player is elite. So you're calling Simmons elite - b
  23. I don''t believe though the word "deep" has the meaning you say. It's okay we can agree to disagree. IMO there is a big difference between a multi-year Pro Bowl player vs an average LT at a position of the highest value on the OL. If some don't hold positional value to a high level - okay. But in this case if I do-- then the word "deep" is hollow. I want the multi-year pro bowler. If you don't think he is going to be a multi-year pro bowler at the 4 pick - ok I can see the point too. I just believe there is a big discrepancy between the best LT vs.the 6th or 8th best etc thus it makes
  24. I disagree with a lot of your points except the last couple Acgott but I respect them. The last couple of points below I agree with a lot. But probably for a different reason. 1---- I don't know if there is an accurate way to measure an OL in number terms. For example, I think PFF is a joke. Two years ago they had Vernon rated over Barkley. And before the 2018 draft they had 2 guys on youtube telling everyone that Hernandez was going to be this freak great OL among other things. I just don't know how to trust OL rankings. I do believe in player rankings in draft and team rankings in some
  25. I think these are the only 2 options if they don't trade down. I don't expect Young or Okudah to be available. Full disclosure I want the LT and will identify some reasons. But I know other pov wants Simmons. Just want to know others opinions Simmons over the LT. Is he Ronnie Lott? 1---- The LT is the most important position on the OLINE. It's very hard to find very good ones, isn't it? SO if GMEN draft one at 4-- more than likely they believe he is a Pro Bowl LT for the future. If you don't believe the LT taken at 4 is a future multi-year Pro Bowl caliber player then I can under
  • Create New...