Which Team(s) Got Worse This Offseason?

[jetskid007]

Patriots, Bills, Raiders got noticeably worse in my opinion.

A lot of teams remain nearly as good/bad as they were last year, relying on development of young players. 

Teams that got noticeably better? Green Bay, Cleveland, Chicago.  

[DannyB]

I love this topic because by and large nobody likes thinking that their team might have gotten better, even though given the law of averages and a shred of common sense, in comparison to the rest of the league half of the teams got worse. Everybody grasps at anything they can to argue that THEIR team isn't one of those teams.

Of the two teams I know the most about...

The Patriots DEFINITELY got worse and this one I'd say is almost inarguable. Only the most head-in-the-sand homers can't see it. Malcolm Butler, Danny Amendola, Dion Lewis, and Nate Solder were all significant/impact players in either the regular season, postseason, or both, and they are gone. Their spots have been filled with either definitive downgrades or question marks. Patriots might be the most glaring case in the entire league of a team going into this season noticeably worse than they were last year. That said, their division blows and they'll probably be in the AFCCG at least.

Also, lest you think I'm just...*ugh*..."hating", or being a homer, I think my beloved Green Bay Packers may have gotten worse. At the very least, they haven't gotten noticeably better from what I can tell. Unless you think 2018 Jimmy Graham is going to turn into prime Jimmy Graham. And then also turn into mid-90's Reggie White.

A broader point to the whole debate of what teams got worse: Shut up about your team's stupid draft picks. Every team got draft picks, and most fans think most of their draft picks will be Pro Bowlers. I think a very, VERY narrow selection of individual draft picks each year can be used to make a cogent argument that your team got better, or at least didn't get worse. The majority of teams do not have a single one of these, and no teams have more than one. So again, until the players actually prove anything on the field, shut up about your dumb draft picks.

[DannyB]

22 hours ago, Bolts223 said:

Considering Terrell Davis got in for 3 good seasons, it's really not that far fetched that Mack could get in if he retired today.

With that being said, I think he will be in the HOF when it is all said and done.

It is far fetched to think that Mack would get in the HoF if he retired today. Actually, it's insane.

First of all, Terrell Davis had 4 "good" seasons. 3 of those seasons were spectacular, not just good. 2nd in rushing in two of them (2nd to, oh, just some jabroni named Barry Sanders, at that), while the third he led the league in both yards and TDs. And that's just regular season. His postseason numbers are MIND BOGGLING, and it makes it easy to see that he literally and metaphorically carried that team, and overrated John Elway to those wins. Seriously, go look at those postseason runs.

So he had 3 seasons that were fantastic and stood out among his contemporaries, and multiple phenomenal -- potentially historically great -- postseason runs ending in back to back Super Bowl victories that he played a heavy role in earning.

Even though it's an entirely different position, Khalil Mack's résumé just does not hold up in comparison.

He's a very good young pass rusher. Great, actually. But he when you look at his sack and tfl numbers, he doesn't exactly standout among his peers. Not to mention no postseason to go on. He might get the the Hall eventually, but yes, it is far fetched to say he would get in now.