Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

O-line not addressed in the offseason


Fan4life

Recommended Posts

The cap fairy does not grant you a parlay because you had a former GM that sucked. That thing people were talking about 3 years ago when we were retaining all the players, well that cap hell his right now.

Huh?

We have to keep and play the players Hurney signed bc if we don't, we have less money. Right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much better could the o-line be next year potentially? If we end up with a high enough pick for a top-2 LT in the draft and maybe in round 2 or 3 find another guard or RT. What about any pending FAs at RT or LT? If we did nothing but address o-line this off-season, how good could we build it up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We had money, we just decided to use it on a luxury at DE.

 

Even that money would not have got us two tackles. Or a tackle and a Guard, or really anything last year other than better WRs and Safety. Sorry we could not pay 10 mill a year nor anywhere close or trust me we would have. Hell Collins was paid 30 mill and has sucked for the Bucs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even that money would not have got us two tackles. Or a tackle and a Guard, or really anything last year other than better WRs and Safety. Sorry we could not pay 10 mill a year nor anywhere close or trust me we would have. Hell Collins was paid 30 mill and has sucked for the Bucs.

Name me another team in NFL history that has ever went into a season with no OT drafted on the roster..

Then you can have your excuse. .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol this thread

Yea it's Gettleman's fault he can't sign anybody with our not-money

When all these shitty Hurney contracts are off the books and the team still sucks, then you have my permission to hate on Gettleman all you want. Until then, this is all sour grapes and pitchforking

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even that money would not have got us two tackles. Or a tackle and a Guard, or really anything last year other than better WRs and Safety. Sorry we could not pay 10 mill a year nor anywhere close or trust me we would have. Hell Collins was paid 30 mill and has sucked for the Bucs.

We could've gotten 2 solid linemen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Even limited as he was I still don't think they have replaced his production, and not just the sack stats. The games Clowney missed it was very obvious what his value still was. Risky move but whatever. They only had 32 sacks last year and if that drops then it's going to get ugly. I see the improvement in run stopping but not in pass protect in any way.  
    • I have zero issues with this.  
    • Sorta related.  I just looked up a stat:  Success rates for NFL draft's second rounders.  I was surprised that it is 49%.  The success rate for first rounders is 58%.   Here success does not mean those that did not bust, it means that roughly half of the players selected in the second round become full-time starters at some point in their careers.  Busts do that too.  However, considering the fact that a first round talent is worth up to 1800 points (first overall pick) more than the first pick of the second round and as low as 350 points (last pick in first round) higher than the last pick in round 2, it seems there could be cases in which it would be to your advantage to trade out of round 1 and draft two or three second rounders for the value.  Of course, the elite players are likely to be gone, and some positions overwhelmingly suck after round 1 (traditionally, like QB or LT, for example), but if you need to find starters at positions like DT, G, LB, S, C, TE, RB, etc, there could be a time when you trade back for more starters.  I was surprised that the margin between rounds 1 and 2 was only 9%.    While I realize that some of you sofa scholars are thinking, "Well duh?  Trading back gives you more players." as you wipe the Cheetos off your shirt.  Not the point.  The point is you have to consider the draft,the needs (and the number of them), and you need to scout the second and third rounds like you do the first, the cap, and the long-term impact.  If you can find 2 players with a 49% chance of becoming a starter, are you better off than drafting one player who has a 58% chance in the long term? So if I traded away my first rounder for two second rounders (a trade most teams would make) regularly, when I got 10 second rounders (by trading 5 first rounders), 5 would be starters.  If I did not trade and kept my 5 first rounders, 3 would be starters.  Furthermore, their rookie contracts would be much cheaper than the 5 first rounders. 
×
×
  • Create New...