General News and Notes

[.Buzz]

8 minutes ago, Tugboat said:

Ehhh...i don't think that's really true.  Even when Baltimore aren't at the top...certain organizations just have an entrenched "way of doing things" that everyone around the league kinda acknowledges.  It's like...the Steelers last year for example.  That team was a wreck at QB and lost a lot accordingly...but you still have people looking at them as a team with a strong competitive culture that does things "the right way".

Obviously takes a lot of years of winning and strong leadership from the top down to impose that sort of "winning culture".  A lot of focus on that sort of stuff in who they bring in and who they don't.  But once it's established, it's more resilient than i think you're giving credence to.

 

Just like the perpetual "losing culture" in Jacksonville is so pervasive and difficult to break out of.  Even when you bring in great leaders like Calais.

I mean sure, but there's a small handful of teams like that. You think if the Steelers have a year where they finish 6-10 this year that "culture" will still hold up? If it does, another losing season next year? I don't think so personally, but that's just me.

[Tugboat]

Just now, .Buzz said:

I mean sure, but there's a small handful of teams like that. You think if the Steelers have a year where they finish 6-10 this year that "culture" will still hold up? If it does, another losing season next year? I don't think so personally, but that's just me.

Idk.  I think it might.  But it's hard to say, because part of that "winning culture"...is that they don't tend to let themselves backslide like that.  I don't think they'll have another brutal season back-to-back.  I mean...last year, even while they were doing more losing than usual...it had a very different feel to it to me.  They still looked like they were playing hard, and still believed they can find a way to win - even if they couldn't.  I don't know that i'd expect that to just evaporate...even if they have another rough year with QB issues.

Whereas the Jaguars...we see it year after year.  When things start going a bit less that optimally...they fold and pretty much seem to pack it in for the season.

[.Buzz]

Just now, Tugboat said:

Idk.  I think it might.  But it's hard to say, because part of that "winning culture"...is that they don't tend to let themselves backslide like that.  I don't think they'll have another brutal season back-to-back.  I mean...last year, even while they were doing more losing than usual...it had a very different feel to it to me.  They still looked like they were playing hard, and still believed they can find a way to win - even if they couldn't.  I don't know that i'd expect that to just evaporate...even if they have another rough year with QB issues.

Whereas the Jaguars...we see it year after year.  When things start going a bit less that optimally...they fold and pretty much seem to pack it in for the season.

Organizations that are highly viewed do eventually fall on hard times. SF was the cream of the crop for a long period of time and did so. They had a rough go of it in multiple periods of times. Seattle, who now has that culture, was the same way. NE back before Bledsoe/Brady, etc.

Ultimately though, most teams who haven't been around for a century has more issues with these types of things than Chicago, GB, PIT, etc. But even then Chicago has had these issues too.

Idk, just my personal opinion but unless you had a long string of success, those "culture" comments will always pop up. After a dark few years, they'll likely pop up for even those bigger/established organizations.

[.Buzz]

Anyone listen to ESPN 690 with Martineau and Lane?

They just had Mark Long on and woo. Went in on Lenny as far as how the team/his teammates feel. He thinks there's no way he plays another down.

[Tugboat]

13 hours ago, .Buzz said:

Anyone listen to ESPN 690 with Martineau and Lane?

They just had Mark Long on and woo. Went in on Lenny as far as how the team/his teammates feel. He thinks there's no way he plays another down.

I try to make a point of not listening to idiots who annoy me, generally.  But yeah.  Probably.  He's a good player, so it'd make sense to get him out of here before he does anything positive.  It's more fun when you just keep making new holes to fill and you can never fill them...like reverse whack a mole.

[.Buzz]

3 hours ago, Tugboat said:

I try to make a point of not listening to idiots who annoy me, generally.  But yeah.  Probably.  He's a good player, so it'd make sense to get him out of here before he does anything positive.  It's more fun when you just keep making new holes to fill and you can never fill them...like reverse whack a mole.

Not a Mark Long fan or the other two?

I just don't have that fascination with Fournette personally.

He went in detail about how he is in that locker room and how a lot of the players feel about him and it's generally not good. I think the staff/FO is trying to jettison guys like that after all that's happened.

 

[Tugboat]

6 hours ago, .Buzz said:

Not a Mark Long fan or the other two?

I just don't have that fascination with Fournette personally.

He went in detail about how he is in that locker room and how a lot of the players feel about him and it's generally not good. I think the staff/FO is trying to jettison guys like that after all that's happened.

 

The other two.  Martineau specifically is just...blurghhh.  But whatever.

 

I find Fournette is one of those tricky cases where he definitely has a big personality and is outspoken.  Which seems like a bit of a double-edged sword.  Obviously when things aren't going well, that can be a destructive force in the room, and a distraction.  But it can also be a real spark and it feels like there are times when things have really got rolling, Fournette seems to be right in the middle of firing it up.  It's part of where he can be a real tone-setter.  Just that the maturity isn't always there, which i'm sure has rubbed some of the older vets the wrong way.  Being a clear part of that significant clique of talented players that obviously butted heads with Coughlin hasn't really helped either.

Probably just needs a stronger room to really rein in the energy he brings and direct it more consistently positively.  But that doesn't really seem to be happening here at present.

 

Just think it's dumb to be making so many new holes, when we already have so many.  Like, you deal Fournette and get what?  A late draft pick?  And hope you can somehow turn that into a quality starting RB?  Just running on a treadmill and falling behind at that point.  It's not that Fournette is an irreplaceable "elite" piece or anything...Just that it's one of the only spots where i would say we have a quality starter, and don't really need an upgrade beyond adding depth.  Might as well ship him out and make it a complete set of needs?  

[KhanYouDigIt]

Is he really a quality starter though?

[.Buzz]

1 minute ago, KhanYouDigIt said:

Is he really a quality starter though?

Yeah, I personally think he's fine but easily replaceable and likely other guys that would fit the offense better/allow it to flow better myself. I know he put up some solid bulk numbers last year and is a solid receiving threat, but I'm just not enamored with him.

[KhanYouDigIt]

1 minute ago, .Buzz said:

Yeah, I personally think he's fine but easily replaceable and likely other guys that would fit the offense better/allow it to flow better myself. I know he put up some solid bulk numbers last year and is a solid receiving threat, but I'm just not enamored with him.

For a fraction of the cost too.

3.6 YPC in the final 8 games of 2019.
 

RB’s are a dime a dozen.

 

[Tugboat]

9 hours ago, KhanYouDigIt said:

Is he really a quality starter though?

He absolutely, positively is at least "starter quality".  Other than the tired YPC argument that has far more to do with OLine play than the RB themselves...what exactly isn't starter quality or better about Fournette?

 

9 hours ago, .Buzz said:

Yeah, I personally think he's fine but easily replaceable and likely other guys that would fit the offense better/allow it to flow better myself. I know he put up some solid bulk numbers last year and is a solid receiving threat, but I'm just not enamored with him.

He's put up solid "bulk numbers" a couple times now, in honestly pretty disadvantaged situations with mediocre to poor OLines, and QBs running an air game that isn't a real threat.

Like...when you say he's, "easily replaceable"...do you think he could be replaced easily with whatever late pick he'd garner in trade?

 

8 hours ago, KhanYouDigIt said:

For a fraction of the cost too.

3.6 YPC in the final 8 games of 2019.
 

RB’s are a dime a dozen.

 

If quality bell cow starting RBs are so, "dime a dozen"...why exactly, have we still not managed to find anyone remotely capable of unseating Fournette as the absolutely free and clear lead back here?  Surely we'd have found a random late round RB or UDFA or somebody to just step in and take over, right?  It's easy.  They're dime a dozen.

 

I mean sure...he's not the cheapest RB, because of where he was drafted.  And once that rookie deal is cooked, who knows what will happen.  Hard to imagine he'll absolutely break the bank.  But like others who have pulled the chute on this laughingstock organization already (Jalen, Yan, Calais, Telvin, etc.), he probably won't want to be here anymore at any price.  So that's kind of a moot point.  But in the meantime...why not just run the wheels off him and see what happens?  Already dumped a Top-5 pick into the guy...might as well get your investment's worth as best you can.  You'd be lucky to get a 5th rounder back for him now.  What's the point?

[LinderFournette]

8 hours ago, Tugboat said:

He absolutely, positively is at least "starter quality".  Other than the tired YPC argument that has far more to do with OLine play than the RB themselves...what exactly isn't starter quality or better about Fournette?

 

He's put up solid "bulk numbers" a couple times now, in honestly pretty disadvantaged situations with mediocre to poor OLines, and QBs running an air game that isn't a real threat.

Like...when you say he's, "easily replaceable"...do you think he could be replaced easily with whatever late pick he'd garner in trade?

 

If quality bell cow starting RBs are so, "dime a dozen"...why exactly, have we still not managed to find anyone remotely capable of unseating Fournette as the absolutely free and clear lead back here?  Surely we'd have found a random late round RB or UDFA or somebody to just step in and take over, right?  It's easy.  They're dime a dozen.

 

I mean sure...he's not the cheapest RB, because of where he was drafted.  And once that rookie deal is cooked, who knows what will happen.  Hard to imagine he'll absolutely break the bank.  But like others who have pulled the chute on this laughingstock organization already (Jalen, Yan, Calais, Telvin, etc.), he probably won't want to be here anymore at any price.  So that's kind of a moot point.  But in the meantime...why not just run the wheels off him and see what happens?  Already dumped a Top-5 pick into the guy...might as well get your investment's worth as best you can.  You'd be lucky to get a 5th rounder back for him now.  What's the point?

id burn him right into the ground if we arent gonna keep him and honestly you should never give a rb a 2nd contract. only exceptions are when they still have a lot of mileage on them ie MJD

[.Buzz]

9 hours ago, Tugboat said:

He absolutely, positively is at least "starter quality".  Other than the tired YPC argument that has far more to do with OLine play than the RB themselves...what exactly isn't starter quality or better about Fournette?

 

He's put up solid "bulk numbers" a couple times now, in honestly pretty disadvantaged situations with mediocre to poor OLines, and QBs running an air game that isn't a real threat.

Like...when you say he's, "easily replaceable"...do you think he could be replaced easily with whatever late pick he'd garner in trade?

 

If quality bell cow starting RBs are so, "dime a dozen"...why exactly, have we still not managed to find anyone remotely capable of unseating Fournette as the absolutely free and clear lead back here?  Surely we'd have found a random late round RB or UDFA or somebody to just step in and take over, right?  It's easy.  They're dime a dozen.

 

I mean sure...he's not the cheapest RB, because of where he was drafted.  And once that rookie deal is cooked, who knows what will happen.  Hard to imagine he'll absolutely break the bank.  But like others who have pulled the chute on this laughingstock organization already (Jalen, Yan, Calais, Telvin, etc.), he probably won't want to be here anymore at any price.  So that's kind of a moot point.  But in the meantime...why not just run the wheels off him and see what happens?  Already dumped a Top-5 pick into the guy...might as well get your investment's worth as best you can.  You'd be lucky to get a 5th rounder back for him now.  What's the point?

Nah, wouldn't be any kind of late round pick (although you could potentially find his replacement there, RBs are found there and as UDFAs all the time). But we also have 12 draft picks, and RB is a place where in the 4th or so round you very well could find a legit starting caliber guy. Ultimately after round 3, maybe 4 you're not likely taking starters. Even in our situation we definitely would start a corner, likely a a WR, probably a RG (but that can also be found in rounds 3-5) and what else? Obviously if Brown, Epenesa, Simmons, top OT get taken they'll start but Woods will likely rotate heavily at nose. Smoot will rotate heavily at 3T/5T, as will Gunter (and all are definitely competent in those roles). We definitely need more top end talent, but I don't think we're pigeon holed into needing starters at many positions, just replacing them with better talent and having the current good depth guys rotating.

It also has to do with where he's drafted. Again, he's been a fine starter. But he's also making 8M+ and among the top 6-7 paid. Ultimately it won't matter much this year but after this year he's gone. I don't think we ultimately need a full time bellcow back and would be fine with more of a committee approach with Armstead, a rookie, and Gio/Thompson if we can land one.

Considering how Long spoke about Fournette and how his teammates feel about him (again, if it's true), I just think it'd be the right move to get him out and really go for a different approach of players (which they've already started to do with the lunch pail vets they've brought in).

 

[Tugboat]

2 hours ago, .Buzz said:

Nah, wouldn't be any kind of late round pick (although you could potentially find his replacement there, RBs are found there and as UDFAs all the time). But we also have 12 draft picks, and RB is a place where in the 4th or so round you very well could find a legit starting caliber guy. Ultimately after round 3, maybe 4 you're not likely taking starters. Even in our situation we definitely would start a corner, likely a a WR, probably a RG (but that can also be found in rounds 3-5) and what else? Obviously if Brown, Epenesa, Simmons, top OT get taken they'll start but Woods will likely rotate heavily at nose. Smoot will rotate heavily at 3T/5T, as will Gunter (and all are definitely competent in those roles). We definitely need more top end talent, but I don't think we're pigeon holed into needing starters at many positions, just replacing them with better talent and having the current good depth guys rotating.

It also has to do with where he's drafted. Again, he's been a fine starter. But he's also making 8M+ and among the top 6-7 paid. Ultimately it won't matter much this year but after this year he's gone. I don't think we ultimately need a full time bellcow back and would be fine with more of a committee approach with Armstead, a rookie, and Gio/Thompson if we can land one.

Considering how Long spoke about Fournette and how his teammates feel about him (again, if it's true), I just think it'd be the right move to get him out and really go for a different approach of players (which they've already started to do with the lunch pail vets they've brought in).

 

I mean yeah, after this year Fournette is pretty much guaranteed gone.  But why not run the wheels off him this year?  Instead of just downgrading to a "committee approach" for like another late round pick or something?  Why not save the legs on whoever we end up drafting to eventually fill out that committee?

[.Buzz]

32 minutes ago, Tugboat said:

I mean yeah, after this year Fournette is pretty much guaranteed gone.  But why not run the wheels off him this year?  Instead of just downgrading to a "committee approach" for like another late round pick or something?  Why not save the legs on whoever we end up drafting to eventually fill out that committee?

That's definitely a possibility.

Think the only reason it's being discussed is the locker room situation and the fact a lot of people seem to not be a fan of his theatrics.

I also think the offense needs to be run through Gardner and not Fournette. Think that'll happen with Gruden in the fold regardless, but not sure if that'll work well with Fournette or not. He's a guy that you need to generally consistently feed to get going.