tukafan21

I don't disagree, but you're not giving our offense enough credit, and I'm not saying we would win the SB, just that we would be contenders, which we would have been. The Bengals had a horrible start to the season last year and it caused them to just miss the playoffs by one game, but had they made it, they absolutely would have been contenders in the AFC. They had a bad defense, probably worse than ours will be this year, and you can't convince me that we don't have a better offensive roster than they had last year. We have a Top 10 OL, two 1k rushers from last year, two 1st round WRs, one of the best slot WRs in the league, and then Coker. Like I said, their Top 2 WRs are better than ours will be this year, but we take them in every other spot, OL, RBx2, and our 3rd/4th WRs. If Burrow was able to turn that team into a contender last year, no reason he couldn't do the same with our roster this year. And hell, I think our offensive roster is better than KC's last year too, and while I know their defense did a lot of the heavy lifting last year, if you give Mahomes an improved offensive roster around him, he's going to be THAT much better himself. A Mahomes, Burrow, or Allen would be able to win the South by outscoring teams. And yes, come playoff time against an Eagles or Lions juggernaut, our defense probably costs us the game, but that doesn't mean we wouldn't at least be contenders. If Bryce can prove me wrong and his supporters here right, and be THAT guy for us this year, I genuinely think we can be a real playoff threat in 2026 once we add a few more pieces to the defense and then be a genuine SB contender in 2027 if the team keeps improving. We're the 2022 Detroit Lions right now. Great offensive pieces, tons of holes on defense, but if things go right we'll just miss the playoffs (like they did) and then be right in the playoff hunt the next year (like they did) and then be contenders the following season (like they did when they were the #1 seed).

Yep, I'm starting Ransom unless he struggles in camp. We're not contending this year, don't spend any more cap space at this point unless we have to, roll the extra space over into next offseason at this point. If he proves he can be a starter next to Moehrig, great, we just got a cheap starter for a few more seasons and can use the cap space at more impactful positions. If he struggles, then we have our backup SS and we sign a new FS or use a earlier pick on one next summer.

This is the answer if you can't go with a QB. But I think Mahomes, Allen, or Burrow could make the offense good enough to have a SB caliber team in spite of the defense. Great OL with a ton of weapons, even if they're young outside of Thielen, I think those 3 could have us contending this year. We'd basically be very similar to the Bengals last year, who just missed the playoffs because of their terrible start to the season, but if they snuck in, they'd have been as dangerous as any team in the AFC last year. They gave up the 7th most points in the league last year but still had a positive points differential. Chase/Higgins is better than T-Mac/XL of course, but Thielen is a crazy upgrade over Iosivas in the slot, Coker is far better than 4th WR who had 107 yards in 14 games, we have a significantly better OL, and Chuba/Rico is better than Brown/Moss last year. So combine our offense with an improved if not yet great defense, and yea, one of those 3 QB's would win the South with us and be a contender. Now we may not actually win a SB because of the defense come playoff time, but we'd be contenders. So actually, maybe we'd be last year's Lions just without the injuries being why the defense wasn't good enough?

Horn and T-Mac will get matched up a lot, but it won't be 100% of the time, nor should it be anything close to that. Yes, it would benefit T-Mac's ability to get better at beating the press, but it would also be a detriment both of them for them to be matched up too much more than 50% of their reps. Neither is likely to end up going up against similar players in games, not many teams have WRs the size of T-Mac and not many teams have CB's with the physicality of Horn. Horn needs to work on covering smaller shiftier WRs as well, just as T-Mac needs plenty of reps against smaller CBs so he can work on using his frame to body them out of position.

It's literally plain and simple that T-Mac has a higher ceiling, nobody who knows anything about football and has a sane mind would say otherwise.

If you legitimately think XL has a higher ceiling than T-Mac, then you're out of your mind delusional. Sorry, but that's just nonsense.

LOL, being faster and stronger doesn't mean he will be a better player "if everything clicks" (and you say bigger, but that's just in bulk, which is strength said another way, he measured 6'1" at the combine vs 6'4 1/8" for T-Mac) It's just a beyond absurdly simplistic view of things. To begin with, no matter how much things click for XL, he will never have the catch radius that T-Mac has and he will never have the hands that T-Mac has. Period. That alone will always have him as a better red zone threat than XL could ever be, I don't care how much he improves, T-Mac will always be Bryce's top option there. He also will likely never have the innate WR ability that T-Mac has, which is something that you can't put a statistic or clear cut attribute to, but you don't play 5 years in college and a rookie season still looking this raw and then develop that type of feel for the game, even if you improve your issues. It's a reason T-Mac and Bryce actually made a good pairing, because they're going to be able to share a mind out there at times, it's what made T-Mac and Fifita so dangerous together too. T-Mac came into college with an advanced feel for the game and position, something he keeps getting better at and XL still doesn't show. It's like you're then saying T-Mac has no ability to improve on his weaknesses, as you can't say he's better than XL right now, but if things click for XL, T-Mac can't stay better by also getting better himself. T-Mac's ceiling is as a Top 5 WR, XL is never going to be that, and I say that as a fan of his. His ceiling is as a Top 20, borderline Top 15 type of guy, and there isn't anything wrong with that.

And as I asked this again before, what goes into PFF's man open %, as I know you've brought that stat up before. Is that just the number of routes he gets open at any point during the route, or is it calculated on targets and if he was open when the ball got to him. Because like I pointed out so many times in the lead up to the draft, a big reason it was harder for him to get separation against man was because he not only had his man on him, but he was double or triple teamed on the majority of his routes this past year. Just because of that alone, it was easier for him to get open against zone coverage where he could find holes and sit in them. Also, again, as been discussed so many times, his QB's play this year was awful, and lots of times his contested catches were due to him not delivering the ball on time when T-Mac got open. Or just times he got open but wasn't targeted for whatever reason. So just using that stat as a way to say he struggles to get open against man is more likely than not, disingenuous. Hell, it's a PFF stat that you're using against him, yet at the same time, PFF absolutely loves him, he was their 4th overall player. I posted this clip on here a week or so ago of the T-Mac vs Hunter game in 2023, where the anti T-Mac guys like to say Hunter shut him down. But numerous times in this video you see T-Mac create tons of separation from Hunter but the ball wasn't thrown his way, plus a clear PI that wasn't called (and the one that was). https://x.com/4MR_Fetti/status/1918262063660454227 The "he can't separate" narrative is way overblown and become something more myth than reality. No, he's not an elite separator like some of the quick twitch WRs, but he's so much better than the haters here like to say.

I never said he was perfect, but his floor is still as a low end #1, I honestly think his floor in this league is around the 25th best WR in the league, and that's if he doesn't improve on anything but just continues to be the player he is right now. So I really hope you just mean XL's ceiling is higher than T-Mac's floor since I was saying it wasn't. Because there literally just isn't any world where XL's ceiling is higher than T-Mac's ceiling, it would be one of the more asinine statements to say XL's was higher.

I mean this as no slight to XL, as I personally do still love his potential as a high end #2 if he can cut back on the drops and crisp up his routes a bit, as he has some elite physical traits for sure. But XL's ceiling is probably lower than T-Mac's floor, so you just can't say we didn't need T-Mac because we have XL, that's just crazy talk.

So dumb I get it, they want to expand the reach of the NFL, but it's not the right sport to be playing games halfway around the world for a variety of reasons. But one of the main ones is what happens if a player has an injury in that game? A lot of times, you're not supposed to fly right after some injuries, so when they happen here it's not a big deal, the player stays in that town for a few days and then flys home separately. But that opens a whole bag of worms if the game is played all the way out in Australia. Plus just needing that long of a flight to get out there and back, even if they get a bye week after, it means a ton of travel and needing to adjust to a new time zone directly after another game.

I don't think it was fear of the unknown because he tried to hide the extent of the injuries that made him drop. After the drop, the reports I heard were that teams knew what was wrong with his knee and it was something similar to another athlete from a few years ago (honestly don't remember if it was even a football player). That it was basically one of those things where he should be fine for a while, there isn't a huge concern of immediate injury risk. But what he has going on with his knee is something that is degenerative and there's little chance he'll be able to play more than 5 or so years on it before he won't be able to play anymore. So basically it was teams knowing if they draft him, he's probably going to be only a rookie contract player and even if he's great, you might not be able to get use out of him on a second contract. Which in turn makes the drop make sense, but I'm kinda surprised some contending team didn't take him late in the 1st, hoping he'd put them over the top on a SB run but then not even have to worry about giving him a big contract in 4 years too.

I had long said he was one of the main players I wanted at 8 if T-Mac wasn't there or if we just weren't going to take him even if he was. I genuinely wonder if his agent was working to keep the extent of his knee problems quiet, because it's clear the teams all were much more concerned about how long his knee might hold up than any analyst ever talked about, so us fans would never have had any idea of course.

It's not a good look for him, but I don't put much stock in all this. He's a DT who is a gamer and not a workout warrior to begin with, add in that he probably celebrated a bit too much post-draft and wasn't keeping in his best shape, and it makes sense for him to be out of shape right now. If he still looks like this come training camp, then it's a much bigger red flag to keep an eye on

huh? They mostly eliminated position groups needing to pick certain numbers a few years ago. OL and maybe QB's are the only ones who need to have numbers in a certain range now, everyone else can take whatever number they want except I think the 60's and 70's which are only allowed for linemen. Which then certainly makes it easier for teams to have a handful of numbers retired without causing any issues. So still to me... 1, 59, and 89 should never be worn again and then I like the idea someone else had in the thread where 58 is now a LB only number and needs TD's approval for them to wear, but I'd like to see it become a Panthers tradition for great LB's to wear 58 and pass it along.

Leaning towards just ordering this tonight, but now I have no idea on size. Has anyone bought a bunch of jerseys in the last few years and can convey how the Game vs Limited vs Reebok versions all fit? These are both Mediums... The white one here is a Reebok one from 2010, and was when they had the "+2 length" on the tag and it was the version with the stitched numbers instead of iron on... the blue one is from 2022 and is the F.U.S.E Limited version also with stitched stuff, not the "game jersey" with the ironed on numbers/letters that they have the T-Mac jerseys in. The old one fits me fine, the blue one was always a tad snug on me, particularly in the shoulders I'm leaning going with a Large based on the CMC, but for all I know, that is made with a tighter cut due to the higher "limited" level and the "game" ones they have for T-Mac are cut more like a T-Shirt and thus will fit more like the old white one I have here, not sure. (and yes, I already tried going to a sporting goods store here to hopefully try on a Lions jersey to see, but they don't have any right now)

I have less of an issue with 90 being used since Peppers left on his own and spent almost half his career playing for other teams. He "only" had 81 sacks here before he left for Chicago, and yes I know he came back to add 16 more in those final two years, but he's not a HOFer if you remove his Chicago and GB years. Luke played his entire HOF career here and then retired, Cam and Smitty were cut after long HOF caliber careers here despite neither wanting to leave. And while I know you can use my same argument against Peppers against Smitty, as he wouldn't eventually end up in the HOF (and he will) without his stats from his Baltimore years, again, we forced him out when he didn't want to leave and his stats in those years were the icing on the HOF cake he baked while in Carolina.

These players are making millions upon millions of dollars to play a child's game, more money in a year than most regular joes will see in their lifetime, so I don't feel bad when they get cut because they aren't playing up to the value of their contracts, whether they moved their family or not (and fyi, pretty sure most players don't move their families when they change teams late in their career when they're already bouncing around teams every couple years).

T-Mac is a nickname, Tet is a shortening of Tetairoa. Like you said below... your name is Jonathan, I could see "Jonny" being considered a nickname, but Jon isn't a nickname, it's a shortening of Johnathan, see the difference? And if your mom named you Jonathan for it's biblical significance/meaning, because she was very religious, I think it would be different. T-Mac is Polynesian, so much in their culture has deeper meaning for them, particularly names. So for his mom to feel this way, I highly doubt it's just because she likes the name Tetairoa and not Tet, it's much more likely than not to be because the name itself has a deeper meaning in their culture. Particularly as T-Mac himself has often talked about how much his Polynesian heritage means to himself and his family. And no, I'm not saying all this because of how much he's my guy, if he was just "normal american" and his name was Jonathan and he didn't like fans calling him Jon, I'd probably just say tough poo. It's that he's Polynesian and I know things like names have a much deeper meaning in their culture than they do in ours for the most part. For whatever it's worth, a quick google search.......

Yep It's like when fans complain about needing to pay the rest of a coaches contract when you fire them. That's one I just don't get, if the owner is willing to do it, then who the F cares, as that is his choice and it doesn't affect the team (as long as it's not an owner who will then be a cheapskate on the next coach to save money, which isn't a problem with Tepper). But caring about how we use the limited resources because doing one thing affects the rest of the roster you can build, that's just being a sports fan 101 type of stuff.

Yea, caring about the cap is different than caring about the owner's money. I don't give two shits about Tepper's money and how it's spent. But I do care about our cap space and how we use it because that is directly what affects the team. Those are two very different things, it's not hard to understand that.

You don't think it's disrespectful, but you're also not realizing that his name is not just his name, it has a deeper meaning in their culture, so shortening it to something that doesn't have the same meaning, is disrespectful to them. It's not calling some random white American dude John instead of Jonathan. The name has a deeper meaning in the Polynesian culture, to where if you shorten it, it no longer means the same thing. To him and his family, T-Mac or Nalo is a nickname, "Tet" isn't a nickname, it's changing his name that has a deeper meaning to them. And if that random white dude was named Jonathan for a deeper reason, and him or his family say they feel calling them "John" is disrespectful, then I'd have enough respect of that person to not call them John. Why is that so hard? What is wrong with this country that when someone says, "calling me by X name is disrespectful to me and my family" that our response is, "screw them, I'm going to call you what I want to call you"

Yea, I think the Walker smoke was more because that was the way the "experts" were expecting us to go, so we leaned into it to help hide our interest in not only T-Mac, but whoever or whatever we actually planned to do at #8, because he just never made sense for the scheme we run and what holes we needed to fill in general, let alone with the 8th pick.

That's absolutely true too, but I also don't think they ever truly considered Walker an edge either. Just look at who we took and compare them to Walker from a size standpoint, they couldn't be any more different. If T-Mac was taken before we were on the clock, I still don't think we'd have taken Walker in the end anyways, at least not without a trade back first.

Please, explain it to me then, because nothing I just said is wrong, if you can't see it, that's a you problem. This isn't MLB where teams can spend $50 million or $500 million on their roster. Not having guaranteed contracts doesn't save owners a single penny, it just changes what players would be getting the money as guaranteed contracts would mean it's being paid to cut players or sub-par bench players instead of new ones, but it's still the same amount of money coming out of the owners pockets. The fact that any fan thinks cutting a player saves the owner any money is absurd. Yes, TECHNICALLY a team could only spend the cap floor every year and save maybe $15-20 million a season, but no team does that in the NFL. If they aren't spending their cap in a season, they use it in the next season when they get to roll it over, this isn't baseball where you have cheap owners when it comes to assembling the roster itself. Owners get cheap when it comes to other things, like the coaching or training staff, or amenities provided to the players. And yes, these things can cause better players to not want to sign with that team. But in no world does non guaranteed contracts save the owners money, not even in the slightest.