ThatJerkDave Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 You also have to take into account what type of school he was coaching at. If you aren't at an SEC or Big 10 school, you are at a significant disadvantage, with a few exceptions, in the current college football landscape. BC would be working with 2 and 3 star recruits, and if they developed into better players, here come Michigan State, Ole Miss, and Indiana offering more money to come over to their program. Guy has to coach them up, then re-recruit any player that shows promise, every season. It would be like Jacksonville just offering Dontayvion Wicks a contract right now. There has to be a way to fix it so that it is a more level playing field. At the same time, I see that it is also stupid to not allow players to transfer. If I am at Illinois studying Econ, and I decide that I want to go to Kentucky instead, all I have to do is apply and enroll at Kentucky the next semester, I don't have to sit out a year. But the current college system for athletics is leading to an MLB style haves and have-nots monetarily, and an NBA style stacking of teams, both of which make for less compelling leagues as a whole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 3 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said: Just gotta stop pretending this **** is amateur athletics anymore. Let the kids collectively bargain and sign contracts. Yep, that's the gist of where this needs to go. The current NCAA is more or less what the NFL would be if players could only sign 1-year deals, with no RFA or tags. It's pretty wild. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted June 24 Author Share Posted June 24 Just now, Mazrimiv said: Yep, that's the gist of where this needs to go. The current NCAA is more or less what the NFL would be if players could only sign 1-year deals, with no RFA or tags. It's pretty wild. And no caps 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 The news out of summer camps is that Eric Stokes looks like he's back and healthy. If this kid lives up to his potential, he showed as a rookie, this defense has no weakness. This team really could shape up like the '96 team. They were dominant on both sides of the ball. The caveat, they were also very good on special teams under Nolan Cromwell. So far, Rich has not proven to be that guy to get our specials to that level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted June 25 Author Share Posted June 25 26 minutes ago, Old Guy said: The news out of summer camps is that Eric Stokes looks like he's back and healthy. If this kid lives up to his potential, he showed as a rookie, this defense has no weakness. This team really could shape up like the '96 team. They were dominant on both sides of the ball. The caveat, they were also very good on special teams under Nolan Cromwell. So far, Rich has not proven to be that guy to get our specials to that level. This team is not the 96 team. The biggest weakness this team has right now is a lack of star power. The roster is filled with a bunch of B+ players, but nobody that we're 100% confident in being a top 5 guy at his position. Can you win a Superbowl with a team of 10+ guys in that 8-15 range? I'm not sure. Do any of Love, Tom, Jenkins, Clark, Alexander, or X have a leap in then whether due to to health, natural development, or a change in system? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 57 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: This team is not the 96 team. The biggest weakness this team has right now is a lack of star power. The roster is filled with a bunch of B+ players, but nobody that we're 100% confident in being a top 5 guy at his position. Can you win a Superbowl with a team of 10+ guys in that 8-15 range? I'm not sure. Do any of Love, Tom, Jenkins, Clark, Alexander, or X have a leap in then whether due to to health, natural development, or a change in system? I would submit Jacobs is top 5 at his position already. I bolded the ones I think WILL. The other three could. In addition, here are guys more that are capable of major leaps into elite: Q. Walker, Watson, Musgrave, Wicks and Reed. These guys could make a significant leap into ++ starters: Stokes, Van Ness, Wyatt and Cooper. Just my opinion on this cast of characters and my glasses might have a slight tint of green and gold in them. Also, IMO, if your QB is elite, you can win with 10+ guys in the 8-15 range. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 96 Packers were so dominant. Great offense, led the league in scoring by 38 points, 58 ahead of the #3 team and the next-highest scoring team in NFC. Great defense, fewest points, fewest yards, lowest yards-per-play, fewest 1st downs, fewest yard per pass attempt, 3rd in turnovers. Comprehensively great and dominant, complete team. During many of the Rodgers years, the expectation was that the offense should be good and carry the team. But there's such a difference between being pretty good, top 10 or maybe top 5, versus being way ahead of the rest of the league. Would be fun to somehow have an unstoppable premier elite offense. Or a premier elite can-stop-anybody defense. But to have both at the same time, how was that even possible? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 3 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said: .... The roster is filled with a bunch of B+ players, but nobody that we're 100% confident in being a top 5 guy at his position. ... 2 hours ago, Old Guy said: ...Also, IMO, if your QB is elite, you can win with 10+ guys in the 8-15 range. The "QB elite" part is kinda crucial. We're all enthusiastic about Love. But should anybody really be 100% confident that he's a top-5 guy? Not sure if we go to the Super Bowl against Mahomes or Burrow or Stroud or Allen, that I'm confidently saying "We've got the better QB, advantage GB." How good he will be is so central to how good the Packers might be. Old memory, but my recall from Super Bowl win over Steelers was how superior Rodgers was. Rothlisberger just didn't have the same level of accuracy, and there were some plays where I recall thinking "Man, Rothlisberger just isn't as good, their guy was open but he just missed his spot on his throw." Still something of an open book on how good, or great, or elite, that Love will be. Sure hoping for the best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted June 25 Author Share Posted June 25 3 hours ago, Old Guy said: I would submit Jacobs is top 5 at his position already. I bolded the ones I think WILL. The other three could. In addition, here are guys more that are capable of major leaps into elite: Q. Walker, Watson, Musgrave, Wicks and Reed. These guys could make a significant leap into ++ starters: Stokes, Van Ness, Wyatt and Cooper. Just my opinion on this cast of characters and my glasses might have a slight tint of green and gold in them. Also, IMO, if your QB is elite, you can win with 10+ guys in the 8-15 range. Application denied. Not at 3.5 yards/carry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GHARMON9 Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 1 hour ago, craig said: The "QB elite" part is kinda crucial. We're all enthusiastic about Love. But should anybody really be 100% confident that he's a top-5 guy? Not sure if we go to the Super Bowl against Mahomes or Burrow or Stroud or Allen, that I'm confidently saying "We've got the better QB, advantage GB." How good he will be is so central to how good the Packers might be. Old memory, but my recall from Super Bowl win over Steelers was how superior Rodgers was. Rothlisberger just didn't have the same level of accuracy, and there were some plays where I recall thinking "Man, Rothlisberger just isn't as good, their guy was open but he just missed his spot on his throw." Still something of an open book on how good, or great, or elite, that Love will be. Sure hoping for the best. We obviously need to see it over the entire season, but Love was arguably the best QB in the league from week 10 on. I was a big naysayer of his to start the season and he proved me wrong. I'm actually confused how most people keep him out their top 10 QB rankings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said: Application denied. Not at 3.5 yards/carry One year, with his quarterback situation and overall team a complete ****show. I'm sticking to him being elite among RBs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 7 hours ago, Old Guy said: I would submit Jacobs is top 5 at his position already. I bolded the ones I think WILL. The other three could. In addition, here are guys more that are capable of major leaps into elite: Q. Walker, Watson, Musgrave, Wicks and Reed. These guys could make a significant leap into ++ starters: Stokes, Van Ness, Wyatt and Cooper. Just my opinion on this cast of characters and my glasses might have a slight tint of green and gold in them. Also, IMO, if your QB is elite, you can win with 10+ guys in the 8-15 range. CMC, Hall, Bijan, Barkley, Henry, Taylor, Gibbs are probably ahead of Jacobs. Then toss in the mix with Jacobs....ETN, Montgomery, Jones. Kamara, Pacheco Kyren, Walker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 1 hour ago, squire12 said: CMC, Hall, Bijan, Barkley, Henry, Taylor, Gibbs are probably ahead of Jacobs. Then toss in the mix with Jacobs....ETN, Montgomery, Jones. Kamara, Pacheco Kyren, Walker These two in bold are a no for me. Henry is on the back nine and deep into it. Bijan shows a lot of ability, but Jacobs is top 5 IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 38 minutes ago, Old Guy said: These two in bold are a no for me. Henry is on the back nine and deep into it. Bijan shows a lot of ability, but Jacobs is top 5 IMO. That's some strong green and gold Kool-Aid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 2 minutes ago, squire12 said: That's some strong green and gold Kool-Aid Won't deny that statement. 😂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.