AU-panther

Problem with traditional points allowed rankings is it doesn't factor in your opponents. For example, holding Green Bay last year to 17 points is impressive, around 14 points below their average. Holding Jets to 14 points isn't as impressive, 1 points below than their average. Here again, I'm going off memory and wish I could find the graph, but I want to say we were 15th or 16th in the league in defense when you factored in your opponents average. Honestly as young as our defense was last year I was actually pleased with how well they did. If we were 16th last year and you think we can be better than 10th is possible this year, might not be likely but possible, and at the very least not ridiculous.

Do you feel like the defense will be better or worse?

I can't find the chart right now but I want to say we were around 16th in the league last year based on expected points allowed, which basically takes into account your opponent. Most players make their biggest jump in development from 1st to 2nd year, Brown, Chinn, YGM. Second to third year is often an improvement also, Burns. Who all did we lose? gain? Lost: Obada, Kerr, Douglas, Elder, and Weatherly Gained: Perryman, Bouye, Reddick, Jones Do you really think the players we lost are that much worse than we gained? Also added a top-10 pick CB. Easy schedule: Jets were 32 in scoring last year, Giants 31st, Houston 19th (who knows if Watson will be playing), Philly 26th, NE 27th, Washington 25th. We are playing some really bad non division offenses. Also Saints have a new QB and we play them early. Basically the schedule sets up well for our defense. We could end up with a top-10 defense based on points allowed. Not saying it will happen but to call it ridiculous is a bit of an overstatement.

really? I'm guessing their tweet was somewhat in jest, they pretty much have Donald at the top of their rankings year in and year out.

People always say that but it’s really not true. The 6th WR probably won’t be active on game day, a ST aces needs to be active.

I wouldn’t count on it. Defense could be too-10. Easy schedule. He could be average and we win 10 games.

I get what you are saying about proving himself again but the idea that the price wouldn’t go up might not be true. Both Lamar and Baker have deals yet to sign. Not to mention any increase in the cap in future years.

Any QB in the league can make that throw in stride. The greats one just do it a higher percentage of times whereas historically Sam has done it relatively a low percentage.

Bell was undrafted, one had expectations, one did not

Very good chance the article is just based on speculation but also very good chance it could be true, "kind of". Here again everyone is getting caught up with the sources and thinking in terms of absolutes. Any team that doesn't have an established franchise QB will be "monitoring" the situation. duh That doesn't mean there is a high probability of anything coming out of it.

Not worse case, if we know he isn’t the answer then maybe the purgatory isn’t long term. Maybe we aren’t in the position to draft a top 10 guy but at least we know we need to and might the following year. Worst case is actually us thinking he is the answer when he isn’t. What if plays just good enough to warrant a big contract but then never lives up to it.

Top 3 picks: CB, WR, OT OT and CB both seem to struggle often their first years in the pros.

Might be disappointing but not surprising. I think a lot of people around here severely underestimate how much rookie lineman struggle, even 1st round ones, let alone where we drafted guys. I’ll be disappointed if one of the 3 rookies doesn’t start next year, anything this year will be a pleasant and welcome surprise.

You can assume the same about any player. I can hope Little or Daley plays well at LT, that would also solve it.

I’ve been saying this since free agency, the contracts tell you this. This gives you an idea of what the coaches think going into camp, a starting point so to speak. Now it’s up to the players to see who moves in and out of the starting lineup.

It doesn’t solve anything If they aren’t good at it. As good as Moton is at RT we want to believe he will be that great at LT but that isn’t always true, and to be honest his sample size over there is rather limited. Speaking of sample size, thinking BC solves anything at RT is nothing more than wishful thinking at this point. He is a rookie who never played in an NFL game and only has a few snaps in practice under his belt. History tells us most OTs struggle their first year in the NFL, for him to be anything better than average would be an exception. Pretty much the only player we know for sure can play above average at their position based on recent history is Moton at RT, anything list that is hoping.

You make a great point that a lot of people don’t understand. People like to talk about importance but they forget about availability, you have to factor that together. Maybe a WR factors into winning just as much as an OT, there are actually atlytics out there that supports that, but which is easier to find? The college game is opening up and because of such WRs seem to easier to find in the draft in recent history. Not only that WRs seem to be contributing earlier in their career than other positions. If anything OTs seem to be one of the slowest positions to develop once in the league.

Let Cam walk and got nothing in return, who went on to play with another team for peanuts. If you don't sign Teddy you can slow play the Cam situation, let him look for a trade which is more likely if we don't' have Teddy, if he doesn't find one he would probably play on his last year which would have been cheaper than what you paid Teddy. Then when he signs with someone the following year you could potentially get a comp pick. Paid $30m for Teddy to win 5 games and then released. Who btw cost us a 3rd pick because of the comp formula. In regards to Darnold, he is risky decision also, and I'm not talking from an ability standpoint, that has been covered at length around here, but more from a cap perspective. If he plays bad you are on the hook for his 5th year you guaranteed. If we plays decent you are looking at an extension very soon and QB extensions aren't cheap. With a rookie QB you would have had 4 cheaper years to decide. He might work out, he might not, my only point is its a very risky play that actually has a pretty short time table. Hindsight is always 20/20, but going with Grier or letting Cam play on his last year of his deal was the right move at the time, and a lot of people around here were right about that, where as the people "who really understand football who get paid millions to decide" were wrong.

There is a chance that the structure has somewhat changed since Tepper first got here. Maybe at the beginning Hurney did have some leeway to made decisions. Maybe Hurney was driving the idea of TB, and the others decided to go with it. People need to remember a lot of these decisions tend to be somewhat groupthink. At this point though common sense tells you Tepper is in charge, he writes the checks, then Rhule, then Fitterer. With that being said I’m sure Fitterer has considerable input but if they don’t agree Rhule has final say.

Constantly signing guys to become better players than they have shown in recent history is more times than not a losing proposition. At least it didn't cost us $30m in cap.

If Moton ends up on the left I think there is a better chance that Christenson might end up as the RT. Too me best chance for Christenson to play LG if for Moton to play RT and Cam play LT.

Tell me exactly what I said was wrong

When we first signed TB i really thought it was a coaching decision. Felt like a we can win now move, coaches tend to have that kind of ego, also the fact Brady had worked with him. Since though, I really think it was mostly Hurney, and the reason is how quickly Rhule sent Teddy packing. Usually if a coach is for a major decision like that he might try to make it work to make him self look good. This is almost more of a "told you it was a bad decision by Hurney" type of move." You see it all the time with new GMs and coaches they are quick to throw the other guys under the bus so to speak.

Of course they told the world it wouldn't preclude them from taking a QB. Increases their chance of trading down or someone trading up ahead of them to take a QB and increasing the number of non-QBs to be available to them at 8, specifically Sewell. In regards to Fields I don't think we passed on the basis of embarrassment, more so just the simple fact that we had already invested assets into addressing the QB position with Darnold. LOL, its not about me being important, its their job. They get told bist of information and then they pass that information on to the public, here again that is their job. Doesn't mean they are always getting the correct information, doesn't mean they are getting the complete information. There is nothing wrong with fans trying to fill in the blanks.

I agree. Whether you agree with Darnold or not the fact they cut bait with TB so quick and traded assets for Darnold does mean he places huge value in having a franchise QB. The team was so focused on making sure they made a change at QB they traded for Darnold because they new at 8 there was a very good chance no QB would be there. Same with not trading up for Herbert, we spent a good amount of cap to get TB. Not doing something well isn't the same as not doing anything at all. The team has tried to find a QB, just didn't' work the first time. We will find out about the second one here soon.