LinvilleGorge

I'm not saying who they should or should not have signed. I'm just saying they shouldn't have overpaid historically mediocre and oft-injured players out of desperation. The fact that we signed them pretty much upon the kickoff of free agency tells me that they were the guys we specifically targeted based on our scouting and that obviously we felt they were worth what we were paying. We knew we were going to be targeting mid-level OL FA and they were the guys we identified out of the bunch to go after. That's concerning.

I'm just saying that's the type of contracts FAs of that caliber are normally looking at. If someone else wanted to overpay in the meantime, fine. Every team has some JAGs, but you gotta pay JAGs like JAGs. I would rather have lost the opportunity to sign a Pat Elflein than give him 3/$13.5M. Just go after the next guy on the list.

I wouldn't have had issues with the signings had we signed them for at or near vet min after the primary wave of FA was over. That's how you sign those caliber of FAs. Reed signed for one year $1.1M with less than $200k guaranteed. We signed Elflein for three years $13.5M with $6M guaranteed. That's a massive difference for similar caliber talents.

We identified guys who we thought would be decent veteran bandaids and we specifically targeted them. They had historically been mediocre and oft-injured. They proved to be mediocre and oft-injured for us. This was entirely predictable. In short, we Hurney's it on the OL this off-season. We made poor evaluations and we spent poorly. Erving and Elflein were vet minimum type of players. Paying them better won't make them better. Classic Hurney type mistake.

Despite gimmicky branding that would usually immediately throw red flags, look into Area 52 for carts.

Not familiar with them. Took a quick look at the website and my concern is that they're only doing potency testing, no pesticide or heavy metal contamination testing. High end industry standard is all three. I'm not familiar with Botanica which is the lab they're using for potency testing. Looking at Botanica's website, I have some concerns. I'm not seeing any mentioning of even offering pesticide and heavy metal testing and they're using some red flag language. Saying things like "effective treatment for *insert ailment here*" regarding cannabis is how you get on the FDA radar and you do not want to be on the FDA's radar. Honestly, I'd shop elsewhere.

LOLOLOL @ the Colts

Yep. I put a serious jinx on them with this thread. LOL!

The Colts absolutely deserve to lose this game. LOL!

Can he play OG or C? Because if not I honestly don't care. Defense isn't the problem.

Ouch.

Remember when the Packers got blown out by the Saints in week one and Aaron Rodgers looked like Jameis Winston and Jameis Winston looked like Aaron Rodgers? Sometimes you just have one of THOSE games. Hopefully that's what happened to us yesterday.

Now try being a UNC fan. I'm honestly not sure which OL has played worse but I'm leaning slightly toward UNC. PFF ranks it #94 among D1 college offensive lines in pass blocking.

Hey, at least when we shat the bed against a 1-3 team we didn't get blown out on primetime national television.

I'm still stunned when I think back that this organization actually full on planned to go into the season with Bell and Chandler starting at OT. Like, professional football evaluators looked at that situation, signed off on it, and decided this was a great plan of action. Oh wee mayne.

With everyone healthy, I still think our best five could end up being Moton at LT, Erving at LG, Elflein at C, Brown at RG, and Christensen at RT. All I know is that if any of our starting interior OL are truly the best options on the roster, there HAVE to be guys on couches who can help this roster.

The Vikings are an overall middle of the pack defense, but they're #2 in the NFL in sacks. Considering the state of our OL, that's not good.

It's weird how some posters think it's utterly impossible to do both. We're gonna make a lot of moves this off-season. Moton and Christensen may prove to be the answers at OT. If we're lucky, Brown will prove to be the answer at RG. If everything goes to plan, we could only be needing a LG and. C. It's a lot easier to fill holes on the interior OL than at OT, though I will admit that our free agent choices this off-season leave me pretty concerned about our ability to evaluate FA OL.

Tepper might run out of patience in the meantime though. He's gonna get real tired of watching us field trash at QB sooner or later. He said when he got here that you need a coach, a GM, and a QB. Tepper knows you need an elite QB in today's NFL to have sustained success. If Fitts and Rhule can't find that QB, then Tepper will ultimately find a new GM and/or HC.

It's why I wanted Fields even though we had already traded for Darnold.

I think we're a little too obsessed with "traits" and "metrics" right now. Wouldn't surprise me a bit if we knocked Slater and had him evaluated as a guard due to his height and arm length. Give me elite feet over Go Go Gadget arm length all day everyday.

I'd rather draft one in the 1st if the right guy is available than trade a boatload for a vet. Plus, Wilson has said there's only a handful of teams he'll play for and we aren't among them. Rodgers is phenomenal still, but I can't get onboard with trading a massive haul for a QB in his late 30s. I just don't see the right situation out there to trade for a vet. I have to think the Watson ship has sailed. A quality starting QB on a rookie contract is the biggest cheat code in the NFL.

I'll say it again, a rookie wouldn't have to start from day one and we'll add more than just one player this coming off-season. There's at least two guys starting on the OL next year who are not currently on the roster.

Deshaun Watson was the 3rd QB off the board.

The rookie doesn't have to start from day one and 1st round picks aren't the only way to address the OL. We'll have a lot of cap space available.