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!

     

Team rebuild formula ver. Who got it right?


CAVSS

Recommended Posts

I would prefer to follow Tampa's formula of rebuild. They were also in an extremely similar situation to ours.

Get your QB; His first year will be a down year/ learning year = high pick next year

Get the best DT available. Since DT isn't a huge impact position you can have success the following year while your DT develops into a monster.

Who do you think did it right in a similar situation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You'll all think I'm crazy, but the Lions.

Yes, the Lions... the Detroit Lions, yes.

Their problem has been that the QB they picked hasn't been healthy, but when he has played Stafford has looked very impressive. They've been aggressive in free agency & trades and have hit on a number of really good young players via the draft in Suh, Pettigrew, Louis Delmas, etc.

I see them making a playoff run this year if Stafford is healthy. Considering the extreme lack of talent on that 0-16 team when Jim Schwartz took over he's done a really impressive job overall. We're not nearly as bad off as they were, so I feel like if we take the same approach we could be contenders in 2 years if Cam works out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would prefer to follow Tampa's formula of rebuild. They were also in an extremely similar situation to ours.

Get your QB; His first year will be a down year/ learning year = high pick next year

Get the best DT available. Since DT isn't a huge impact position you can have success the following year while your DT develops into a monster.

Who do you think did it right in a similar situation?

I think dt is a pretty big impact position, the ONLY reason the defense was bad is because of DT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Falcons went QB, OL the following year, and DT the year after.

The Falcons went QB, OL, RB and TE in their first year. 3 years later, and their defense is still a work in progress but, I don't think anyone would call their rebuilding anything less than a success.

The Bucs are still very much a work in progress across the board. About the only positions they are settled at are QB, DT and maybe WR. Still to early to judge their model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO you have to go after the QB, but there has to be one there worth it. (there are none this year)

Take a look at the:

Lions: Stafford

Rams: Bradford

Colts: Manning

Chargers: Rivers/Manning trade

Falcons: Ryan

I think this is the way to go about rebuilding, but only if the right guy is there, i.e. Luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Would Morgan or Beason have been HOFers' if injuries hadn't derailed their careers?  I was not a close watcher of the game when Morgan was in his prime but I thought Beason had a few seasons at close to Lukes' level of play.
    • Franchise QBs feast when things are rolling and the tide that raises boats when things are going sideways.  Bryce isn't that. He's a complimentary player, that's it.  When the defense and STs are on point, he plays loose and it shows.  When we are in a dog fight and things haven't gone our way, he struggles.  It's that simple. He's not a horrible QB, but he's not top tier either.  So the question begs, is this worthy of a second contract?  The answer should be no.  It definitely is my answer. Bryce will never be a QB that can produce wins largely on his arm.  That's a FRANCHISE QB, any other QB is simply a placeholder at the starter's position until that guy can be found.   At some point the excuses of lack of weapons will be a straw man.  Heck, it's nearly there now.  I mean if he doesn't look even better than last year will we blame it on the TE position?  'Well if Bryce only had a player like Kelce, Kittle or Gronk on this team...'  Are we really going to do that?  
    • When I arrived at college, I was 18, not too much younger than some of these draft picks.  It was not a huge school, but there were guys on the team who were 21, 22, 23....playing ahead of me.  I was seventh on the depth chart.  Those guys have been through a few seasons, were stronger, more knowledgeable.  I was a better raw player than some of them, but those other factors matter.  As I grew stronger, more familiar with the playbook, and learned what it was like to play in college, I gradually improved and with that, I rose up the depth chart.  It took most of my freshman year for the light to come on.  Had the coach thrown me into the starting lineup day 1, I would have probably failed.    And that was college.  So I agree with you based on my experience on a much lower level.  Frankly, I think that is why so many kids drafted to fill huge gaps bust.  The teams are desperate.  Anyone who looks to fill vacancies in the starting lineup through the draft is desperate.  You draft depth to develop.  For this reason, I say, "Let Walker start for a while."  Maybe Brazzell can be our WR 4.  Throw Hunter into a rotation and ask him to do one or two things.  Freeling needs some strength and he needs to work on run blocking.
×
×
  • Create New...