Leader Posted September 3, 2018 Share Posted September 3, 2018 5 hours ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said: So the Raiders have no faith in Chicago. The plot thickens As a Packer fan I can understand their thinking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonMcC2018 Posted September 3, 2018 Share Posted September 3, 2018 Is there any notion here that elite Non-QB players are simply not worth the type of contracts they are not getting? That the impact one single player has on a team's success isn't anywhere near the $$$s they are making to the detriment of the rest of the roster? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rivers Posted September 3, 2018 Share Posted September 3, 2018 44 minutes ago, JonMcC2018 said: Is there any notion here that elite Non-QB players are simply not worth the type of contracts they are not getting? That the impact one single player has on a team's success isn't anywhere near the $$$s they are making to the detriment of the rest of the roster? I am not sure about here but it's natural for fans aware of the cap to question such deals. Time will tell if these teams win the SB and because of these players. It was nice to see a DE make the game changing play in the SB last year, so I still think there is value in good defenders . Only will this season actually decide if Donald and Mack are worth it. I understand your train of thought because I find the price steep but wait and see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pool Posted September 3, 2018 Share Posted September 3, 2018 7 hours ago, CWood21 said: At this point, I'd take Kareem Hunt, Todd Gurley, Le'Veon Bell, Ezekiel Elliott, David Johnson, and Alvin Kamara pretty easily over Jordan Howard. Then you get into that Fournette/Barkley tier, and I'd probably be inclined to take them over Howard. Howard is pretty clearly towards the backend of that top 10 than he is being top 5. Don't get it twisted. You said he was nothing more than a solid starter along with Adrian Amos in an attempt to downplay their talents. Appreciate you admitting that Howard is clearly more than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TecmoSuperJoe Posted September 3, 2018 Share Posted September 3, 2018 Mack presser with the Bears. Sounds like he's ready to hit the field. I can't wait to see what he can do, except he goes up against Jimmy G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broncofan Posted September 3, 2018 Share Posted September 3, 2018 13 minutes ago, PapaShogun said: Mack presser with the Bears. Sounds like he's ready to hit the field. I can't wait to see what he can do, except he goes up against Jimmy G. Doesn't CHI play GB on SNF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TecmoSuperJoe Posted September 3, 2018 Share Posted September 3, 2018 1 minute ago, Broncofan said: Doesn't CHI play GB on SNF? Yes, week 1. At Lambeau. I expect Mack to be out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broncofan Posted September 3, 2018 Share Posted September 3, 2018 Just now, PapaShogun said: Yes, week 1. At Lambeau. I expect Mack to be out there. The JimmyG reference confuzzled me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 3, 2018 Share Posted September 3, 2018 2 hours ago, Pool said: Don't get it twisted. You said he was nothing more than a solid starter along with Adrian Amos in an attempt to downplay their talents. Appreciate you admitting that Howard is clearly more than that. I said that because Jordan Howard offers very little in terms of 3rd down value, particularly as a pass catcher. That to me is a valuable skillset to have. I don't think he's particularly strong in pass protection, but I could be wrong in that. He's one fo those backs that's good enough, but you're never going to be a huge fan of his. As for Amos, I think he's in a similar boat. You're not actively looking to replace him. Although, I think this speaks volume to the level of S play in the league if you're saying he's a top 5 safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malfatron Posted September 3, 2018 Share Posted September 3, 2018 1 hour ago, Broncofan said: The JimmyG reference confuzzled me. jimmy graham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broncofan Posted September 3, 2018 Share Posted September 3, 2018 7 minutes ago, Malfatron said: jimmy graham Gotcha. Hate to say it SF10 has appropriated that nick for most non-GB/SEA/NO fans/JG fantasy owners I'd imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heinz D. Posted September 3, 2018 Share Posted September 3, 2018 10 hours ago, CWood21 said: No. You continue to fail to read my posts, and continue to twist my words. I've argued that every team should look to acquire Khalil Mack. Every team would be dumb not to. He's clearly a top 5 defensive player in the NFL. My argument was that I thought it wasn't the greatest move given the uncertainty surrounding their QB situation. Let me ask you this, do you feel more comfortable giving up multiple first round picks when you have Aaron Rodgers as your starting QB or Mitchell Trubisky? The answer is pretty clear. I don't mind if you're willing to gamble, but don't get offended when someone disagrees. I'm pretty sure I've seen enough Bears' fans argue that they're a sure-fire playoff team. Nor have I said that they were a Super Bowl-bound team. Again, read my posts a little more closely. "Every team should look to acquire Mack", and "Every team would be dumb not to", yet for the Bears "it wasn't the greatest move"--and you previously stated the move was even worse than that? Yikes. I don't care at all if you disagree with the move, merely when you state with certainty that it's doomed to fail, as that seems to me to be an incredibly ridiculous position to have. I've even acknowledged the move the is a gamble myself. Whether in this thread, or not, I don't recall. You may have seen Bears fans say that this makes them a sure-fire playoff team, but there hasn't been much, if any, of that in this thread. I think you're lashing out at us here for things you've seen or heard elsewhere. 9 hours ago, CWood21 said: No. I haven't backtracked. You continue to fail to actually read my posts. You pick and choose what you want to read, and then twist my words. As I've mentioned, I anticipate Drew Brees to retire by the end of this contract, and I've been pretty vocal in the Saints/Bridgwater thread that I don't see him as anything more than a solid starting QB. If that's what you want, go right ahead. But he's always going to be a QB that leaves you wanting more. As for Russell Wilson, I'm still skeptical that Seattle will let him walk, but that's probably the baseline for QB play they need from him. But you're probably at worse getting a franchise tag or two with Wilson if they don't come to an extension. As for Foles, if you can find ANYTHING that would suggest that the 6 game stretch is sustainable, I'd love to know. Because his past says otherwise. In the playoffs, he completed nearly 73% of his passes with a 6/1 TD/INT ratio with nearly 10 AY/A. His career average is a completion percentage of 60%, a TD/INT ratio of 2/1 TD/INT, and a 7.0 AY/A. He won't repeat it, I can pretty much guarantee you that. Yeah, you're right. I'll have to give you this one. If Trubisky fails, there is absolutely no the way the Bears can acquire a competent quarterback in the next three to four years... 9 hours ago, CWood21 said: Says the same guy that David Bakhtiari is injury prone... And no, James Daniels wasn't a 1st round talent. If you're a C prospect and you want to be a 1st round talent, you need to be an Alex Mack or Nick Mangold-level of prospect. Simply put, Daniel wasn't a first round talent. I did admit I did forget about Daniels. A lot of people had Daniels pegged as a first round talent. I'm not going to bother to look that up and present you with proof, as you'd most likely claim you never said all that about him in the first place. Interesting that you focus solely on that, and refer to an earlier disagreement we had, rather than address the entirety of my rebuttal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 3, 2018 Share Posted September 3, 2018 17 minutes ago, Heinz D. said: "Every team should look to acquire Mack", and "Every team would be dumb not to", yet for the Bears "it wasn't the greatest move"--and you previously stated the move was even worse than that? Yikes. I don't care at all if you disagree with the move, merely when you state with certainty that it's doomed to fail, as that seems to me to be an incredibly ridiculous position to have. I've even acknowledged the move the is a gamble myself. Whether in this thread, or not, I don't recall. You may have seen Bears fans say that this makes them a sure-fire playoff team, but there hasn't been much, if any, of that in this thread. I think you're lashing out at us here for things you've seen or heard elsewhere. It's no more or less ridiculous than the Bears fans who refuse to admit the downside of acquiring Mack. I've got serious questions about Trubisky, and if he struggles like I believe they are, they're going to be handing a top 10 pick to the Raiders. I never said it was doomed to fail, which is again either you failing to read what I'm posting or making huge leaps in assumptions. I mean, go read that tweet about the Raiders preferring the Bears' pick because they thought it would be high. They don't believe in Trubisky, and neither do I. And you haven't been reading the thread if you haven't seen that Bears fans think they're a playoff team, probably with some projection from Trubisky. 19 minutes ago, Heinz D. said: A lot of people had Daniels pegged as a first round talent. I'm not going to bother to look that up and present you with proof, as you'd most likely claim you never said all that about him in the first place. Interesting that you focus solely on that, and refer to an earlier disagreement we had, rather than address the entirety of my rebuttal. Cool. I could argue that I thought Kendall Donnerson was a 1st round talent, it just doesn't have any real merit. Hyperbole aside, this is why I hate using the "first round talent" as a supporting argument. It's got no factual basis behind it. I had a 3rd round grade on Daniels. Why should Mel Kiper's 1st round grade have more value than my opinion of him? It shouldn't. And no, I didn't focus on just that. I admitted that I forgot about him, but that doesn't change my opinion of him. I'd easily take the Packers tackles over the Bears, and I think the IOL is a relative wash outside of Kyle Long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pool Posted September 3, 2018 Share Posted September 3, 2018 1 hour ago, CWood21 said: I said that because Jordan Howard offers very little in terms of 3rd down value, particularly as a pass catcher. That to me is a valuable skillset to have. I don't think he's particularly strong in pass protection, but I could be wrong in that. He's one fo those backs that's good enough, but you're never going to be a huge fan of his. As for Amos, I think he's in a similar boat. You're not actively looking to replace him. Although, I think this speaks volume to the level of S play in the league if you're saying he's a top 5 safety. The only knock against Howard is that he isn't a great pass catcher. That's it. You are again downplaying Amos and Howard who are both very good players not simply bubble players you are "not actively looking to replace". That's a pretty silly narrative and discredits everything else you say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 3, 2018 Share Posted September 3, 2018 Just now, Pool said: The only knock against Howard is that he isn't a great pass catcher. That's it. You are again downplaying Amos and Howard who are both very good players not simply bubble players you are "not actively looking to replace". That's a pretty silly narrative and discredits everything else you say. Only knock? That's a pretty damn big knock, especially how we're in a passing-oriented league. That's like saying your OL is a stud even though his pass protection is average at best, but he's a great run blocker. It's illogical. Are you comfortable paying him elite RB money? Because I certainly wouldn't be. I'd rather reinvest my money elsewhere and gamble that I can find a better value back in the draft or in FA. He's not in that elite tier, and I'm not sure he's in that next tier below either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.