Jump to content
RaidersAreOne

Everything Free Agency (Rumors, notes and news)

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Kirill said:

That team has a lot of holes and a **** coach. They'd be better off trading down and stockpiling players to help out their program.

Watch Burrow's heisman speech again and ask yourself if you see a leader of men. He's Jared Goff 2.0.

LOL. You're barking up the wrong tree if you think calling him Jared Goff is an insult to me. And using his Heisman speech to claim he's not a leader of men when everybody credible is complimenting his leadership skills is not a great argument. It reminds me of the people who tried to scout QB personalities based on the Gruden QB Camp or whatever his show was called. Those takes were always laughable (in both the moment and retrospect).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

That would be a very smart move. But with Ben sticking around, I'm not sure they can make it work.

Yeah, would need Winston to take a severe discount. In hopes he can rehab his career within one of the most stable organizations. 
Ben is old and seemed like he could've been on the downswing already..if he gets hurt..Winston is there, if he retires or they cut bait next year..Winston has already been in system for a year and fits what they do.

The Steelers are rarely ever bad enough to get a top QB in the draft, so it could be their best option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Kirill said:

That team has a lot of holes and a **** coach. They'd be better off trading down and stockpiling players to help out their program.

Watch Burrow's heisman speech again and ask yourself if you see a leader of men. He's Jared Goff 2.0.

So you're telling me if they take Burrow they'll get to a SuperBowl in the next 4 years?

The travesty. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I got the Rams guys on this one.

If Burrow goes 11-4, 13-3, and 9-7 in years 2-4 with 82 TD passes and 13,000 yards and plays in a Super Bowl the Bengals fans will be thrilled.

  • The 9-7 would likely be another playoff year in the new format

They will hope he plays better in that actual Super Bowl, but just getting there is a very big deal.

  • Goff will never be a bust.
  • Goff will never be a bad pick.
  • Goff will never even be a top 5 pick guy who should have gone after pick 20.

We are just figuring out the specifics of how good he is over the next 10 years, but he is a good NFL QB.

Could Wentz someday be considered the clearly better player? Sure, but its a debate now.

Edited by SkippyX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note: I will rip on Goff in the context of a Wentz, Dak, Goff argument from time to time, but all 3 guys are legit NFL QBs.

I'm not sure any of them are worth 30+ on their 2nd contract but time will tell.

It will also have nothing to do with how they turned out as draft picks.

A+ for all 3 of them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/24/2020 at 8:36 PM, jetskid007 said:

Interesting stat

it's incredibly subjective. PFF is probably more objective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd go as far to say its completely useless. I'd love to see a version of this from last year and how it completely fell apart when tested against reality.

Its the 2011 dream team index. Its the 2019 Browns index.

 

NO WAY did the Colts improve that much. Rivers is 35-45 since 2015. He is 17-15 over the last 2 years. He was 5-11 last year.

He is an old interception machine.

 

Jameis to Brady is a WAR improvement of 6 out of 16 alone.

The 2019 Bucs would have been 13-3 with Brady. Pretending this is not an accurate reading of WAR while also pretending Rivers generates wins is completely asinine.

 

WAR in football is for idiots with too much free time. It means the same as the phrenology of your placekicker.

This chart has the Patriots going 0-16 and the Giants winning 11 or 12 games.

OR the wins in WAR don't actually mean wins in which case the stat is even worse.

 

A baseball player with a WAR of 4 means that your team will win 4 more games than if an average player took their place.

A football player with a WAR of anything means nothing in this endeavor.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, SkippyX said:

WAR in football is for idiots with too much free time. It means the same as the phrenology of your placekicker.

This chart has the Patriots going 0-16 and the Giants winning 11 or 12 games.

 

Yeah that's not how percentages work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, jrry32 said:

LOL. You're barking up the wrong tree if you think calling him Jared Goff is an insult to me. And using his Heisman speech to claim he's not a leader of men when everybody credible is complimenting his leadership skills is not a great argument. It reminds me of the people who tried to scout QB personalities based on the Gruden QB Camp or whatever his show was called. Those takes were always laughable (in both the moment and retrospect).

The only QB that I seriously turned on due to personality/leadership concerns based off of what we can see was Connor Cook.

Image result for connor cook archie griffin gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Danger said:

it's incredibly subjective. PFF is probably more objective.

PFF has gone full Nate Silver recently. They have become much more subjective overall, which not only undermines their whole reason for existing, but the personalities they have are awful.

Skippy is right about one thing- their WAR rankings are garbage because their WAR stat is garbage. No one has been able to get an NFLWAR right yet, and it is probably because it is near impossible. There are way, way too many factors that contribute to the effectiveness of any one play, and nobody doing these breakdowns knows every player's individual responsibility on every play or has enough time to breakdown every game if they did know.

I started a thread a while ago about an NFLWAR stat. Conversation here wasn't very sizable, but I did a bunch of research before making it and no one has figured this out yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, BleedTheClock said:

Disagree. Still think they’d be picking top 10 next year. That defense is atrocious and their offensive weapons are overrated. Plus they’re still the 4th best team in that division. 

maybe.... but the division only has one good team.. the Ravens

Browns are only last years paper champs, who knows if they will ever really be good..probably not

Stealers are depending on Ben coming back as his old self, they will probably be the second-best in the division this year

Bengals have had a good free agency for the defensive side of the ball, but they needed a lot of help.

Hopefully, Burrow comes in and is a baller right away and AJ can play a few games... we'll see 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, johndeere1707 said:

Hearing Bengals are the leading candidate to trade for Trent Williams too.

Rumored to be in on Williams, and I haven’t heard anything on being the clubhouse leader.

16 hours ago, johndeere1707 said:

That would put the Bengals back into at least playoff contention status on paper (see Browns 2019)

Even with Williams on board that would be overzealous. Burrow should be better than Dalton was last year, but I still expect him to take his rookie lumps. 2021 will be our year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Kirill said:

Watch Burrow's heisman speech again and ask yourself if you see a leader of men. He's Jared Goff 2.0.

This is nonsense. And what does that speech have to do with Goff? They're nothing alike personality-wise. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, minutemancl said:

Skippy is right about one thing- their WAR rankings are garbage because their WAR stat is garbage.

Aren't their WAR stats unreleased? At least to the public.

Edited by 11sanchez11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, BleedTheClock said:

Disagree. Still think they’d be picking top 10 next year. 

Likely.

16 hours ago, BleedTheClock said:

That defense is atrocious

That's a bit harsh. I expect it to be much improved given the drastic overhaul and it will be the 2nd year in Anarumo's system. 

16 hours ago, BleedTheClock said:

their offensive weapons are overrated

I don't understand this at all. Green, Boyd, and Mixon overrated? If anything they're underrated. 

16 hours ago, BleedTheClock said:

Plus they’re still the 4th best team in that division. 

We'll see about that come next season. There's nothing about the Browns that makes we think we're predetermined bottom-dwellers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×