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!

     

Remember the 05-06 season?


philw5289

Recommended Posts

that '05 team was super deep on defense which allowed us to survive the usual handful of jake games and the fact that our offensive playbook was "jumpball to steve" scribbled on a taco bell napkin.

still though opening weekend always has been and always will be super unpredictable. both participants in the 2005 NFC title game actually lost on opening weekend. seattle lost by double digits to byron leftwich's jaguars in week 1 that year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Schedule was a lot easier that year and the team was full of veterans two years removed from the super bowl. No comparison.

With all due respect to that team featuring talented leadership like Jake Delhomme, Deshaun Foster, Kris Mangum, and Brenston Buckner, this team is better. As for the schedule, the nfl is a week to week propsition. The schedule doesn't worry me if we start playing well.

This game sucked, but despite the fact we had a punt blocked, multiple other turnovers, and tied for the worst rushing performance in team history, we were in a one possesion game.

It sucked, but it doesn't mean the season is over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Young Peppers, an older but still effective mike Rucker and a savvy vet in Buckner. Gamble was very effective at corner and steve smith had an amazing year (remember the pirate ship and row boat celebrations) with 103 catches and 12 TDs. For reference, last year he had 79 catches and 7 TDs. 2005 was easily his best season.

Can't believe the poster above is dismissing the talent on that team. They were an above average to very good squad who unfortunately got sidetracked by injuries in the NFC championship game. If Foster didn't break his ankle in the chicago game it's very possible they are playing the steelers in the super bowl.

really to give an example of how far off we are from that team we lost jenkins in week one and replaced him with jordan carstens. we still had one of the best lines in the league and finished the season 5th in scoring and 3rd in yards with the 7th most sacks in the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Young Peppers, an older but still effective mike Rucker and a savvy vet in Buckner. Gamble was very effective at corner and steve smith had an amazing year (remember the pirate ship and row boat celebrations) with 103 catches and 12 TDs. For reference, last year he had 79 catches and 7 TDs. 2005 was easily his best season.

Can't believe the poster above is dismissing the talent on that team. They were an above average to very good squad who unfortunately got sidetracked by injuries in the NFC championship game. If Foster didn't break his ankle in the chicago game it's very possible they are playing the steelers in the super bowl.

yeah if anything i'm praising the depth and talent of the 2005 team to point out that what we have now is a far, far cry from that.

unless you're not referring to my post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we had even had average line play we would have won this game. We were simply flying blind on their defensive scheme and our O-line was not only unprepared but played like poo on top of that. If anyone can point out more than three plays were Cam had a full three seconds of clean pocket, I'll be supremely surprised. The run blocking was even worse. Every play was a clusterfug. Especially our screens and options. It was like a smear-the-***** game, just a huge group of players with no direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...