NFL 2009

[[PCE]el_Prez]

el_Prez]I don't really buy into that whole "weak confernece" thing. All NFL teams compete with each other very strongly. Especially conference rivals. The Cardinals playing the 49ers isn't the same is the Colts playing the 49ers. There is more on the line in confernece games - and it tends to really bring out the competition from both teams.

That's...pretty irrelevant. When someone says "weak conference", then he hardly means "compared to itself", he means "compared to everyone else". NFC West sucks against other conferences, hence it is weak.

Not really. Every conference has at least one playoff spot. It's not unheard of for low seeded teams to be successful in the playoffs. So in the end - it doesn't matter that Eagles play in a very tough conference and the Cardinals play in a weaker conference. The Cards got their playoff spot and then bested the Eagles in the playoffs. So who gives a fuck if you get to the playoffs by beating less talented opponents. Once your in the playoffs you have the same chance as everybody.

el_Prez]Injury aside, Deon Branch is not very good anymore. He might not be the #2 reciever for the Hawks next year.

He's definitely not. But he doesn't need to be. TJ Houshyodaddy is a better receiver than anyone Hasselbeck ever threw too. Throw in a young, top-10 TE in Carlson, a good supporting cast for TJ in Branch, Burleson and perhaps Butler (good blocker, good route runner), and a RB who can catch passes out of the backfield quite well in JJ, and this is easily a better receiving corps than Hass ever had.

Maybe the best but not by much. TJ is the only one that would be noteworthy. Burleson is garbage, he wouldn't be a #3 on most teams.

el_Prez]When it comes to injuries - I'd say that's even. We can't really predict who is going to get hurt if either of them do at all - but I'd say they both have about equal chances.

That's ridiculous.
Hasselbeck - doesn't have as much wear 'n tear as his career didn't take off too soon (Warner's wear 'n tear is also relatively light since he spent so long in arenafootball and NFLE, but still not as light as Hass'), has 4 full seasons to his name as a starter, is 34, returning from a single, if niggling, injury
Warner - is 38, has never had back-to-back full seasons, is returning from hip injury

Hasselbeck is 33 coming of a back injury. Warner was healthy ALL last season. Hasselbeck is coming of the most injured season of his career.

Hass has a back injury, and those can be hard to peg. The odds of him missing a few games are pretty big, yeah. The odds of Warner missing time is 100%, easily.

hehe - these "odds" of getting injured is pretty ridiculous. I remember a whole bunch of people saying that Adrian Peterson would be injured all the time because he was injured in college and has a "straight-up" running style. What BS. This is a dangerous game played by amazing athletes. Theres no way to accurately predict injuries.

el_Prez]At first glance it would seem that SEA has the advantage because they are above AZ RBs on the rankings.

The Seahawks running game is set to improve, even FO says as much, pegging Julius Jones for a 1000+ yards season.

Meh. I bet JJ doens't break 800 yards. He shares too much time with Morris. BTW, JJ probably has 1 or 2 more years of productivity before he starts to decline. IMO he's at his peak right now.

el_Prez]OL This one is pretty clear cut EDGE AZ.

Ya weren't listening? Historically the most injured offense since 1996. The OL was one of the worst; Locklear went out, Jones went out, Sims went out. The Hawks played the last two games of the season with the ENTIRE starting offensive line on injured reserve.

Exactly. An entire OL that spend last season injured means trouble for SEA. OL injuries tend to be serious and the kind that you never really come back 100 percent. You come back 90 or so. If you have another surgery you might be at 85 percent. And then you get older and decline even more. Only the truely badass motherfuckers can be starters in the NFL at O-Line. Dudes like:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Mawae

Oh, while were on the subject. The Rams are definitely gonna miss:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_Pace

el_Prez]WR. Of coures this is where AZ really pulls away.

Oh indeed, no team in the NFL has a better WR corps than Arizona. Won't make a bit of difference when Leinart is throwing to 'em, tho'. Unless Leinart is not a bust, who knows...

Well, we'll get more of an idea of what Leinart can do this preseason. Don't get me wrong - I really like Kurt Warner, but the way AZ was playing in the playoffs - you throw Leinart in that mix and the Cards would still be a good team. Might not of been as awesome as they were with Warner throwing bombs but still. We all know that Warner's career is almost up. We need to start looking to the future and hopefully Leinart has used his time holding the clipboard to really learn from a great NFL QB. Sure Leinart was shit last time we saw him, but you never know how much difference a year will make. Especially a crazy year like AZ had.

Notice you conveniently skipped the entire D. Short analysis: Seahawks decent, Arizona terrible. As much as I admire quite a few of their players individually, and I think getting McFadden was a coup, I don't see them improving while transitioning, and they weren't that good last year.

Team edge: Seahawks. Hurray!

Actually, FO ranked the Seahawks below the Cards. Not to mention DRC made pretty big strides last year. The Cards also spend 2nd,3rd, and 4th round draft picks on Defensive players. Even with Curry - I'd say that defense is about even. If there is any slight edge, I'd go with AZ.

el_Prez]Also, If the addittion of Beanie Wells creates a significantly improved run game - Warner really won't need to carry the offense as much as he did. Even Matt Leinart can win games with a somewhat effective run game and 2 awesome recievers.

He can? He has a 5-9 record throwing to two awesome receivers last time I checked.

Well, that was his ROOKIE year. He's got a lot more EXP, not to mention Fitz and Boldin are much improved since Lienart was a rookie.

el_Prez]Why would you forget that?

Because it's fluky. The Arizona D played better in this offseason than they did in the regular season or will in the next season

You mean postseason. We don't know how AZ will play this year. Don't know if you've noticed but since Ken Wisehunt has taken over the Cards have gone 8-8 and 9-12 with a Super Bowl appearance. Much improved from their 5-11 records in 2005 and 2006. Does it seem logical that the Cardinals might keep improving? Their record has gotten better the last 3 years. You really expect them to take a dump and go back to 5-11?

And the Hawks were carried on the broad shoulders of Shaun Alexander.

Please. Alexander was a flash in the pan. He had ONE really good year and that was because his team was awesome. Hasselbeck had his best year, the O-Line played great and their Defense wasn't to shabby either.

el_Prez]7-8 of those teams finished at or above .500

I could finish above .500 too if all I have to do is stomp on bad teams.

Well, all of the out of division teams that the NFC West played - those teams played GOOD teams. The Redskins and Cowboys have to play the Giants and Eagles TWICE. Not to mention each other twice. The Jets had to play the Pats and Dolphins twice and they still got above .500

el_Prez]Manny Lawson wasn't a "bust". He's a starter who made a transition from college DE to NFL OLB (which is a very similar position - but still).

Last year he had 45 tackles, 3 sacks and 2 blocked kicks!

Wow, special team plays, just what you're looking for in a first-round draft pick.

Actually it is. Many high profile draft picks play special teams as well as an offensive or defensive position. It makes the draft pick that much more valuable if the CAN play special teams as well.

Man, I seem to be oozing sarcasm here.

I don't think you understand the mentality of NFL teams that goes into draft picks.

So far, Lawson is a bust. I don't think he'll do well next year, since I fully expect the entire 49ers D to suck and for Willis to have to do all the cleaning again, as their messy transition from 4-3 to hybrid to 3-4 continues.
Injury did shorten last year, so he can still prove himself. In some ways, so can Vernon Davis. But so far, they're both busts. Lawson is just more anonymous about it.

Do you know how many draft picks do absolutely dick? There are a lot of them. I don't give a shit if the pick is first round-first PICK. If that player gets the starting spot at his position and plays for 4-5 years. That draft pick was a success. Lawson was far from a high profile pick. He was 22th overall. There were many more big names than him.

In that same draft Seattle drafted Kelly Jennings in the first round. Is he a starter?

el_Prez]Well, the Raiders are being bled to death slowly by Al Davs - I don't think it's fair to put the 9ers in the same boat.

Why not? After Denise and John York took over in 1999, the 49ers have gone a combined 64-91 in - again - a terrible division. The output of their current GM is bust bust bust and nothing from day 2 drafts. They made the playoffs in 2001 and 2002, sure, but so what? The record under their three last head coaches is 32-64. And I have my doubts about the long-term prospects of Samurai Mike. So far both he and Hill have only shown winning percentages when faced with scrub teams.

In the last 3 seasons the 9ers have had 19 wins. STL had 12. Oak had 11. STL and Oak are at the bottom. The 9ers (along with many other teams) are looking to break out of the basement. Teams like Tampa Bay are similar. Tampa has had 2 playoff appearences in the last 3 years. How many games did they win in that span? 22. 3 more wins than the 9ers.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

Also guys, Vick is back

6 Weeks - I question the motivation, seems like enough to appease the PETA freaks and it's far enough off that I think the general public will be tired of Vick and occupied with other shit for there to be anymore public outcry come Week 7. Smart PR move for the NFL. Goodell maintains his "law and order" facade. (Meanwhile Leonard Little actually killed a woman and is enjoying a healthy career, Dante Stallworth is next to come back in after his 28 day jail stint for killing a dude too?)

If you have a strong locker room, Vick might be worth the trouble, but not as a starting QB by any stretch. Some kind of flanker/z-back/wildcat/slot/option "slash" type QB a la Cordell Stewart, strictly utility/trick plays and shit - HB option Passes, screens, draws, reverses, reverse or lateral kick returns, all that crazy shit. Lateral to him as a WR and let him toss downfield, or run whatever - he can produce.
He can never be an every down, drop back QB, but even as mediocre as he was at that, there'll be worse starting QBs than him out there this year.
Kids got a ton of athletic ability, and can be gotton on the cheap.
He's a great value! There's not going to be a bidding war on this dude. If you're willing to deal with the PR fallout. Big if.


I believe the guy deserves a chance to play again. If he proves to be an egrigious felon he has to got. But for the most part let him prove his merit. That's what's doomed guys like Pacman. If he can cotribute, I take him on my team. If you're a felon and you suck, well then I have no use for you.

 

[Brother None]

el_Prez]Not really. Every conference has at least one playoff spot.

That, again, has nothing to do with a conference being defined as week or not.

el_Prez]Maybe the best but not by much. TJ is the only one that would be noteworthy. Burleson is garbage, he wouldn't be a #3 on most teams.

Burleson isn't great, but don't even pretend most of any NFL team wouldn't be ecstatic with a former 1000-yard WR as their #3. Hell, if he were a FA, he could probably sign with Baltimore as a #1 or #2 right now.

Butler is a rookie, but he's more NFL-ready than, say, Crabtree, and should be an ok situational slot receiver.

Not by much? What receiving corps Hasselbeck has thrown to comes close?

el_Prez]Hasselbeck is 33 coming of a back injury. Warner was healthy ALL last season. Hasselbeck is coming of the most injured season of his career.

Exactly. You say there's no determinants for injuries, you're factually wrong. There's two:
1. "Tendency to injury", if someone is injured a lot, he'll likely miss time again. I don't think Westbrook will run a full season. Nor will Branch. Nor will Warner.
2. "Tendency to regress to the mean", thunder doesn't hit the same spot twice, if you're not often injured, and you're just coming of the most injured season of your career, that doesn't mean your chances of getting injured again are large. Tom Brady is a good example of this, as is Matt Hasselbeck.

You ignored that Warner wasn't healthy all last season, he just started all last season. He had off-season surgery. In a lot of ways, that's worse.

The only worrying thing is that it's a back injury, and those are hard to peg.

el_Prez]I bet JJ doens't break 800 yards. He shares too much time with Morris. BTW, JJ probably has 1 or 2 more years of productivity before he starts to decline. IMO he's at his peak right now.

Exactly. MoMo is gone to Detroit, so JJ only has TJ Duckett stealing goal-line carries. He should hit 1000 easy, especially considering he's on a peak-point in his career.

Will he last long? No. So what? Nobody ever pegged him as RB of the future.

el_Prez]An entire OL that spend last season injured means trouble for SEA. OL injuries tend to be serious and the kind that you never really come back 100 percent.

Statistically injures always regress to the mean. I'm going to keep repeating this until you get it through your skull.

Also, what the hell is an "OL injury"? Do they have other injuries than other people? Rob Sims had a torn pec, just like Burleson. Locklear had a knee injury. Pretty standard stuff, and they're young guys. The only one you shouldn't drink the kool-aid on is Hall of Famer Walt Jones. When he plays, he improves the line, but he's coming of multiple injuries on IR, is 35, and has had an injury-filled last few years. Locklear is a better #2 LT than most people realise, tho'.

Besides, even if multiple O-line man struggle coming back, the line will still be better than it was last year, when it was just a patchwork of injuries.

el_Prez]Actually, FO ranked the Seahawks below the Cards.

Injuries!

el_Prez]The Cards also spend 2nd,3rd, and 4th round draft picks on Defensive players.

The Seahawks got Curry, picked up Ken Lucas, are getting back Kerney, and hopefully will finally bench B-Russ. No way but up.

el_Prez]If there is any slight edge, I'd go with AZ.

You do realise Arizona is transitioning, right? Ds in transition never do well in their first transition year.

el_Prez]Well, that was his ROOKIE year.

Nope. Rookie and second year. Dude was even anointed starter before 2008, but lost the job before training camp even opened. Honestly, he's got every chance, but failed. That's usually the sign of a bust. I'd like to see him succeed, I don't mind the kid and him doing MMA-exercises in the offseason is funny, but he looks like a bust.

el_Prez]We don't know how AZ will play this year.

Not really, no, but I wouldn't be surprised if they collapse when Warner goes out.

The Niners will suck, tho', that much is easy to guarantee. And the Hawks will grab the division if they avoid injuries. Again, such things aren't that hard to predict.

el_Prez]Please. Alexander was a flash in the pan.

Yes. But a flash in the pan good enough to carry a team to the Superbowl. True, he couldn't have done it without the OL, but that's kind of implied when you talk about running games. The D was solid but nothing special, nor was the passing game.

el_Prez]Many high profile draft picks play special teams as well as an offensive or defensive position.

Yes, as a rule, in their first year. If the biggest thing your 1st-round OLB is doing in his third year is blocking kicks, there's something pretty wrong in here.

el_Prez]If that player gets the starting spot at his position and plays for 4-5 years. That draft pick was a success.

Depends. If he's a solid contributing starter, then yes, no waste of a pick there. But neither Lawson nor Davis are that, they're both "borderline" starters, whose continued tepid contributions would lead to them being punted to special teams permanently.

Though Davis is a solid blocker, really good. That's not what he was drafted for though.

el_Prez]In that same draft Seattle drafted Kelly Jennings in the first round. Is he a starter?

Jenning is a bust who has slid down the depth chart.

el_Prez]In the last 3 seasons the 9ers have had 19 wins. STL had 12. Oak had 11.

Why pick the last 3 seasons? Pick the last 5; 25 wins for 49ers, 27 for St Louis, 20 for Oakland. Puts 49ers dead in the middle, if in a worse division than the Raiders.

el_Prez]The 9ers (along with many other teams) are looking to break out of the basement.

Along with many others indeed. According to FO, St Louis will, and Oakland and San Francisco won't. We'll see about St Louis, it's a pretty daring prediction...

But what makes the 49ers poised to turn things around? What sets them up to break out along the lines Atlanta or Miami did? Nothing is what. They don't have an NFL-worthy QB on their roster, as evidenced by them trying to sign Kurt Warner; Shaun Hill is 7-3 as a starter, but 4 of those wins came against the 2-14 Rams or were in meaningless games, the other 3 were against the Bengals in 2007 and the Bills and Jets last year, games in which the 49ers scored a combined 54 points. Yegh.
Their WR corps looks great for the future but not for this year. They've been waddling in mediocre seasons for years, and are 9-5 in games decided by 3 points or less in the past few years, their Pythagorean win numbers since McLoughlan entered are *lower* than that of the Lions, meaning they only have a better record than the Lions due to luck and weak scheduling. They just replaced a rookie Head Coach with a drill sergeant style with another rookie Head Coach with a drill sergeant style, so I doubt the answer will be found there.

Another year of mediocrity is in the books for the Niners. And while Patrick Willis is great and Crabtree could well be great, neither play in a position you can build a team on, so there's no immediate great future prospect either.

el_Prez]Tampa has had 2 playoff appearences in the last 3 years.

Uhm, no they didn't. They had one.

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

holywtfomfgwtf!

you guys have gone fucking

crazy! i can't even read the last page n' a half. fuck. i better go tuck my shirt in and see what's up at NFL.com today.

 

[Sander]

holywtfomfgwtf!

you guys have gone fucking quote crazy! i can't even read the last page n' a half. fuck. i better go tuck my shirt in and see what's up at NFL.com today.

Michael Vick can play in the NFL.

The media backlash against him is absolutely insane. You'd think he went on a murder spree the way some people hate him.

 

[Brother None]

Told you, Assman

you guys have gone fucking quote crazy!

But it's all so fascinating!

By the way, Twinks, you'd be interested in FO's piece on the Pack, no? Last season they predicted about 10 wins, their biggest error of 2008, but they do note that while the Pack went 6-10 their Pythagorean Wins are 8.9, 15th in the league, meaning they lost about 3 games due to bad luck, injuries or SOS. The 2008 Pack had the best DVOA of a 6-10 team ever.

However, this year they're not too ecstatic about the switch to 3-4 and Kampman's role in it, and they got you guys pegged for 7.4 wins, 24% playoff contender (9-10 wins), 14% Superbowl contender (11+ wins)

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

You're not into the whole NFC West breakdown? It's a riveting division.
One of them might actually break .500 this year.

It's when divisions go bad like this (and I know it's cyclical) that I miss the old system of 3 division winners and three wildcards in the playoffs. San Diego won their division by default last year with a .500 record while the Pats get nudged out with 11 wins. That's lame. What did SD prove by winning that division?
It's not helping the competitiveness of the playoffs when .500 teams get a 4 seed - that's just wicked retahded.

I still can't get used to this North/South divisions shit. Like I said artificially manufactured divisions like the NFC West. Seriously, contract the leagues back 2 teams. Go back to three 5 team divisions. Too many teams makes for a diluted talent pool and inferior product.

The media backlash against him is absolutely insane. You'd think he went on a murder spree the way some people hate him.

He should've just beat the shit out of his baby momma or kill somebody in a drunk driving accident. People would be more forgiving, shit happens you know.

PETA's going to use it as an opportunity to grandstand, for some reason they protest even more when cameras are around hmmmm wonder why. It could backfire on them, they are such wackos and their tactics so ... petty I can see people becoming apathetic to their mewlings.

edit: If Vick plays against the Browns this year, somebody needs to burn a "dawg" in effigy. That'll get you on the TV - "Hi Mom! Yer boy done you proud!"

 

[[PCE]el_Prez]

el_Prez]Maybe the best but not by much. TJ is the only one that would be noteworthy. Burleson is garbage, he wouldn't be a #3 on most teams.

Burleson isn't great, but don't even pretend most of any NFL team wouldn't be ecstatic with a former 1000-yard WR as their #3. Hell, if he were a FA, he could probably sign with Baltimore as a #1 or #2 right now.

Maybe because Derrick Mason retired AND Baltimore never has really had any great recievers. But still Burleson is a bargain basement WR.

Not by much? What receiving corps Hasselbeck has thrown to comes close?

Well he threw for 3500+ yards twice. Kind of hard to do that with incompetant WRs. Both Darrell Jackson and Bobby Engram have had over 1000 yards seasons in the past. It doesn't really matter. Their WR have been shitty and now they are less shitty.

el_Prez]Hasselbeck is 33 coming of a back injury. Warner was healthy ALL last season. Hasselbeck is coming of the most injured season of his career.

Exactly. You say there's no determinants for injuries, you're factually wrong. There's two:
1. "Tendency to injury", if someone is injured a lot, he'll likely miss time again. I don't think Westbrook will run a full season. Nor will Branch. Nor will Warner.

Tendency to injury is a falacy. There is NO way you can predict who is going to get injured. If a player has a serious injury - can they re-injure it? Sure? Is it sometimes easier to get injured if you have been injured a lot in the past? Sure. But that does not accurately predict who is going to get injured.

Besides, you seem to be contradicting yourself. You say that becuase Warner has been injured in the past - he will DEFINITELY be injured this year. But then when you look at the Seahawks whole team (who i guess was injured last year?) - you don't think theres a chance in hell that they will be injured.

2. "Tendency to regress to the mean", thunder doesn't hit the same spot twice,

I believe the expression is "lightning" doens't hit twice in the same spot. Which is incorrect anyways.

if you're not often injured, and you're just coming of the most injured season of your career, that doesn't mean your chances of getting injured again are large. Tom Brady is a good example of this, as is Matt Hasselbeck.

In 2005 Hasselbeck was injured twice. 8n 2008 he had problems with his back, his knee, AND i'm pretty sure he had a concusion. Last season wasn't just a freak accident. Hasselbeck is an older guy as well. Not as old as Warner but most of the time QBs don't have near the longevity as guys like Warner. That's why Warner will probably be in the HOF and Hasselbeck most likely won't be.

You ignored that Warner wasn't healthy all last season, he just started all last season. He had off-season surgery. In a lot of ways, that's worse.

Really, sugery is different for every person. If you don't commit to rehab - you won't return to full potential. But there are players out there who come back and are still extremely effective. An example would be Mark Schlereth - he had 29 surgeries in his career and played 12 seasons in the NFL (at OL!)

el_Prez]An entire OL that spend last season injured means trouble for SEA. OL injuries tend to be serious and the kind that you never really come back 100 percent.

Statistically injures always regress to the mean. I'm going to keep repeating this until you get it through your skull.

You can keep repeating all you want - but if you seriously believe that you can accurately predict who in the NFL is going to get injured and who isn't with an algebra formula I'm going to assume you have no idea what your talking about.

Also, what the hell is an "OL injury"? Do they have other injuries than other people?

Well, OL injuries are mostly knee or leg injuries. Why? Because they usually get injured when they are locked up with a defender and someone comes crashing through and takes their legs out. Leg injuries are always the most serious for OL becuase footwork is EVERYTHING for them. If they come back a step too slow - it will show. Also, NFL OL are huge people. It's harder for a 330 lb guy to come back off of a ACL tear than a 220 lb guy.

Rob Sims had a torn pec, just like Burleson. Locklear had a knee injury. Pretty standard stuff, and they're young guys. The only one you shouldn't drink the kool-aid on is Hall of Famer Walt Jones. When he plays, he improves the line, but he's coming of multiple injuries on IR, is 35, and has had an injury-filled last few years. Locklear is a better #2 LT than most people realise, tho'.

Besides, even if multiple O-line man struggle coming back, the line will still be better than it was last year, when it was just a patchwork of injuries.

And after all that you really expect them to do better than the AZ OLine? The guys who made it to the Super Bowl together?

el_Prez]Actually, FO ranked the Seahawks below the Cards.

Injuries!

So, It's your contention that the ENTIRE seahawks team was injured last year AND they will all be healthy this year AND they will be better than the were before they were injured?

el_Prez]Well, that was his ROOKIE year.

Nope. Rookie and second year. Dude was even anointed starter before 2008, but lost the job before training camp even opened. Honestly, he's got every chance, but failed. That's usually the sign of a bust. I'd like to see him succeed, I don't mind the kid and him doing MMA-exercises in the offseason is funny, but he looks like a bust.

2006 was his first year. That was the year that he he saw the most significant playing time. 2007 he only played in 5 games. He's still very young, and if he utilizes his time behind Warner - he can still turn out to be a good NFL QB.

el_Prez]We don't know how AZ will play this year.

Not really, no, but I wouldn't be surprised if they collapse when Warner goes out.

I won't be surprised if they win 6 of their first 8 games. I won't be surprised if they take the NFC west and make it deep into the playoffs.

el_Prez]Please. Alexander was a flash in the pan.

Yes. But a flash in the pan good enough to carry a team to the Superbowl. True, he couldn't have done it without the OL, but that's kind of implied when you talk about running games.

Not when you say "carried squarely on the shoulders of Shaun Alexander". Seriously - Alexnader sucks. He took advantage of being on a damn good offense. You could have stuck anyone in his place that year and they would of had great success.

The D was solid but nothing special, nor was the passing game.

Defense was highly rated on FO that year. Hasselbeck had the best year of his career in 2005.

el_Prez]Many high profile draft picks play special teams as well as an offensive or defensive position.

Yes, as a rule, in their first year.

Oh really? So high profile RBs and DBs who are also KR and PR - they only play special teams in first year?

News flash: Special Teams are extremely important. Games are won and lost on Special Teams. Having a contributing starter that is a badass on special teams is a good pet to have.

If the biggest thing your 1st-round OLB is doing in his third year is blocking kicks, there's something pretty wrong in here.

The biggest thing he is doing is STARTING at OLB and making plays. However, I don't see how him being awesome at special teams is a negative.

el_Prez]If that player gets the starting spot at his position and plays for 4-5 years. That draft pick was a success.

Depends. If he's a solid contributing starter, then yes, no waste of a pick there. But neither Lawson nor Davis are that, they're both "borderline" starters, whose continued tepid contributions would lead to them being punted to special teams permanently.

Please. David and Lawson are both soldified starters. Davis hasn't really done much because 9ers passing offense hasn't done much. The whole slew of coordinatores is responsible for that. Lawson has done plenty.

el_Prez]In that same draft Seattle drafted Kelly Jennings in the first round. Is he a starter?

Jenning is a bust who has slid down the depth chart.

So how are the Seahawks so much better than the 9ers at avoiding busts?

el_Prez]In the last 3 seasons the 9ers have had 19 wins. STL had 12. Oak had 11.

Why pick the last 3 seasons?

Because things change A LOT in 3 seasons. Do you know that the NFL players get a pension after only 3 years? Why do you think that is? It's because the average NFL player won't last 3 years.

Pick the last 5; 25 wins for 49ers, 27 for St Louis, 20 for Oakland. Puts 49ers dead in the middle, if in a worse division than the Raiders.

Because now your getting crazy. Why don't we look at the last 7 years? If so - every single team in the NFC West has been to the playoffs in that span.

Why don't we compare the 2001 Rams to the 2009 Cardinals? Oh yeah - Kurt Warner was the Qb for both teams! Why don't we just look at the whole history of the club? The 9ers have 5 super bowl trophies. How many do the Seahawks have?

The farther back you go - the more inconclusive your stats are going to be. 2-3 years is a LONG time in the NFL. Hell, look at the difference one year makes.

el_Prez]Tampa has had 2 playoff appearences in the last 3 years.

Uhm, no they didn't. They had one.

Well, 1 time in the last 3 years. 2 out of the last 4 years.

 

[Brother None]

el_Prez]But still Burleson is a bargain basement WR.

Yes. Which isn't bad as WR3. Hell, I don't think many teams have better WR3s.

el_Prez]Well he threw for 3500+ yards twice. Kind of hard to do that with incompetant WRs. Both Darrell Jackson and Bobby Engram have had over 1000 yards seasons in the past. It doesn't really matter. Their WR have been shitty and now they are less shitty.

None of that gives me a year when Hasselbeck had a better receiving corps to throw to. Seriously, he has an excellent pass-catching TE, a solid receiving corps and good pass-catching HB. I don't care how shitty you think they are overall, this is the best he's ever had.

el_Prez] But that does not accurately predict who is going to get injured.

Accurately? No, but you don't need to. You're going to claim Westbrook will start all 16 games this season? I wouldn't put any bets on it.

el_Prez]But then when you look at the Seahawks whole team

Yes, because teams statistically tend to regress to the mean. If a team runs through an entire season injury-free, like the Dolphins last year, they're more likely to run into injuries next year. FO has proven as much statistically, look it up.

el_Prez]That's why Warner will probably be in the HOF and Hasselbeck most likely won't be

Most likely? Try not at all. Hass isn't a HoF QB period, Warner is.

And yes, all you've just said is that it's likely for Hass to be injured. I know that. In fact, I find it extremely unlikely that he and Jones fill out the season. If they do, the Hawks will stomp through the NFC West, but they won't.

But again, neither will Warner be flagging Arizona through. I can put little hope in Leinart, but hey, maybe he'll succeed, I dunno.

el_Prez]And after all that you really expect them to do better than the AZ OLine? The guys who made it to the Super Bowl together?

Wow...I can't believe you say that as if it means anything. The Steelers OL, generally considered one of the worst of the NFL (though Ben makes them look bad at times) also made it to the SB. Does that mean anything? Nope.

el_Prez]So, It's your contention that the ENTIRE seahawks team was injured last year

Didn't I just say the Seahawks have the most games lost due to injury since 1996 according to Football Outsiders? Most of those injuries were on the offensive, but they lost some key defensive and special teams players too. This isn't a contention, it's fact.

el_Prez]AND they will all be healthy this year

Never claimed that. I said FO thinks they will, and has statistical reasons to think so. I'm not drinking the kool-aid on it, especially not on the older or more fragile guys, including Hasselbeck, Big Walt, Branch and Kerney. But if FO is correct and they're all healthy, they'll sweep the division sitting on their thumbs.

el_Prez]AND they will be better than the were before they were injured?

Uhhh...I said this where?

el_Prez]He's still very young, and if he utilizes his time behind Warner - he can still turn out to be a good NFL QB.

Alex Smith could also be a good NFL QB. Hell, I could be a good NFL QB. You never know until I try right?

Fact is, all signs for Leinart point to bust: bad record, benched for veteran, couldn't hold on to job when given it in training camp 2008. Again, I like the kid, and he could be good NFL QB, but is that something we should seriously consider?

el_Prez]I won't be surprised if they win 6 of their first 8 games. I won't be surprised if they take the NFC west and make it deep into the playoffs.

Good for you. I wouldn't put any money on it.

el_Prez]Seriously - Alexnader sucks.

Not really. He wasn't incredibly talented and tended to dance around a bit, but he was an above average RB. Could he be replaced with the replacement putting up similar numbers? Probably, but not just by anyone.

He's not as good as his numbers would tell you, but saying he sucks is just stupid.

el_Prez]Defense was highly rated on FO that year. Hasselbeck had the best year of his career in 2005.

I would say not. His QBRat was lower in 2007, but he did much more for the team.

And what's "highly rated"? Seahawks D has been top-16 for a while now, but rarely that top-5 defense needed to carry a team. They always had holes anyway, whether it's pass rush or secondary (or both, as it is now).

el_Prez]So high profile RBs and DBs who are also KR and PR - they only play special teams in first year?

First-round picks? Sure. How many 1st round KR and PRs are there in the league? There's Reggie Bust, and otherwise?

Special Teams is way underrated. The Bears excellent special teams was one of the major reasons they made it to the Superbowl a few years back (and I don't just mean Hester). But the positions aren't prioritized, meaning you can get the talent in later rounds; the best KR and PRs in the league are mostly undrafted (like Glen Holt) or second-day fliers (like Jamaal Charles, Justin Forsett, Leon Washington, Jerious Norwood).
Same goes for kickers, nobody denies they're important but who except the Raiders would draft one in the first round?

el_Prez]The biggest thing he is doing is STARTING at OLB and making plays. However, I don't see how him being awesome at special teams is a negative.

A negative? Hell no. If he was putting up sacks like crazy and making special teams play: awesome. But he's a non-contributor, with only 5.5 sacks over 3 years: that's not enough for a 1st round OLB. Besides, he even made most of those sacks out of position, and not when playing OLB. So how well will he do when permanently slotted there? Maybe he'll break-out, and show what he can do if left in a single position in a normal, non-hybridized D. But like with Leinart, he doesn't seem like the likeliest break-out candidate; wouldn't be surprised if Marques Harris pushes him out of the starting lineup.

el_Prez]David and Lawson are both soldified starters. Davis hasn't really done much because 9ers passing offense hasn't done much. The whole slew of coordinatores is responsible for that. Lawson has done plenty.

I hope you're just joking, because there's no way the above statement can be taken seriously.

Blaming Davis' woes on the coordinators got old last year, by the way. Right now he's a starting blocking tight end with very limited catching ability, drafted 6th overall. That's a bust.

el_Prez]So how are the Seahawks so much better than the 9ers at avoiding busts?

Because the Seahawks bust-rate is around the normal 50% for 1st-round picks. No franchise avoids busts 100% of the time, not even the Pats.

Not to mention Seahawks front office has picked up some positional top-players (Tatupu and Carlson) in the 2nd round.

And unlike the 49ers, the Seahawks don't suck on day 2. You can't rebuild if you don't get any contributors from day 2 of the draft. The Seahawks have Sims, Locklear and Hill as solid, contributing starters picked up in day 2. SF got a few day 2-draftees starting too, but only one selected under McLoughlan. That shouldn't inspire confidence in him as a GM.

el_Prez]Because things change A LOT in 3 seasons.

Franchise ownership didn't change, and that was the question: not "is this team good", but "is this franchise being run into the ground?" Answer: yes, the Niners are being mismanaged pretty much as badly as the Raiders or Millen's Lions.

el_Prez]Because now your getting crazy.

Am I? Again, the question is about York's ownership tenure. That one only goes 10 years back, and has given the Niners two playoff appearances and one division championship in those 10 years, nothing more, nothing less.

el_Prez]Well, 1 time in the last 3 years. 2 out of the last 4 years.

Yeah, in which period they went 9-7 twice and 11-5 once. Oh wow, that's really comparable to the Niners. DOI!

 

[[PCE]el_Prez]

el_Prez]Well he threw for 3500+ yards twice. Kind of hard to do that with incompetant WRs. Both Darrell Jackson and Bobby Engram have had over 1000 yards seasons in the past. It doesn't really matter. Their WR have been shitty and now they are less shitty.

None of that gives me a year when Hasselbeck had a better receiving corps to throw to. Seriously, he has an excellent pass-catching TE, a solid receiving corps and good pass-catching HB. I don't care how shitty you think they are overall, this is the best he's ever had.

But my main point was that it doesn't matter. Having a slighly less shitty receiving core doesn't really do anything.

el_Prez] But that does not accurately predict who is going to get injured.

Accurately? No, but you don't need to. You're going to claim Westbrook will start all 16 games this season? I wouldn't put any bets on it.

I wouldn't bet on ANY player in the NFL starting all 16 games this year.

el_Prez]But then when you look at the Seahawks whole team

Yes, because teams statistically tend to regress to the mean. If a team runs through an entire season injury-free, like the Dolphins last year, they're more likely to run into injuries next year. FO has proven as much statistically, look it up.

No. FO has shown statistics that suggest that the hawks might be healthy next year. They haven't proven shit.

el_Prez]That's why Warner will probably be in the HOF and Hasselbeck most likely won't be

Most likely? Try not at all. Hass isn't a HoF QB period, Warner is.

Well pretty much - but I don't like to slam a door in someones face when their career is 100% over. I mean, when Warner played for the Giants if you asked if he was HOF worthy - most people including me wouold have told you no. A lot can change in a couple years.

el_Prez]And after all that you really expect them to do better than the AZ OLine? The guys who made it to the Super Bowl together?

Wow...I can't believe you say that as if it means anything. The Steelers OL, generally considered one of the worst of the NFL (though Ben makes them look bad at times) also made it to the SB. Does that mean anything? Nope.

The Steelers have one of the worst OLine's in the NFL? ???

I guess it was their shitty O-Line that paved the way for a 3rd string RB to average 4.2 yards per carry. Obviously Big Ben puts a lot of sacks on their resume - but the Steelers O-Line is far from shitty. Besides, the Steelers aren't even an offensive team. They have a good offense but they are probably the most balanced team out there - which is why they have so much success.

el_Prez]So, It's your contention that the ENTIRE seahawks team was injured last year

Didn't I just say the Seahawks have the most games lost due to injury since 1996 according to Football Outsiders? Most of those injuries were on the offensive, but they lost some key defensive and special teams players too. This isn't a contention, it's fact.

LOL. So because football outsiders say so - the Hawks lost because of injuries, the 9ers lose because they suck, and the Cardinals win because they got lucky? Gimme a break.

el_Prez]He's still very young, and if he utilizes his time behind Warner - he can still turn out to be a good NFL QB.

Alex Smith could also be a good NFL QB.

Well, I don't know. My fan-dom wants me to say yes but my intelligence and understanding of the game of football tells me no. Smith was a fantastic college QB becuase he was a playmaker. He didn't have the natural ability that guys like Leinart, Cutler, Brees, had in college. Plus he was a mobile QB. In the NFL - mobile QBs usually struggle to have the kind of success they had in college because all the defenders are that much better.

Hell, I could be a good NFL QB. You never know until I try right?

Uh... I'm pretty sure I can say no. Have you ever played QB in a competitive form? How big are you (will you be able to see over your 6'6'' OL)? How fast are you? How strong is your arm? Can you read defenses? Can you recognize man coverage or zone coverage? Can you see blitzs and dogs coming? Do you carry out your fakes when you hand the ball off? Do you know which target is your first read on each play? Can you stay calm under pressure and check down to your next targets? Thats all the stuff a HS QB can do. Now you have to do it better than 99.9 percent of HS QBs in America.

Good for you. I wouldn't put any money on it.

If I had to put 50 bucks on who I thought was going to have more wins Cards, Rams, or Seahawks - you better fucking believe I would pick the Cards.

el_Prez]Seriously - Alexnader sucks.

He's not as good as his numbers would tell you, but saying he sucks is just stupid.

Saying he sucks is no more obtuse than saying that Manny Lawson is a bust.

el_Prez]Defense was highly rated on FO that year. Hasselbeck had the best year of his career in 2005.

I would say not. His QBRat was lower in 2007, but he did much more for the team.

Oh really? How far did they go in 2007? How about 2005? Hmm, better passer rating, almost as much yards and TDs, plus got to the Super Bowl. Also, Hasselbeck was All-Pro in 2005, but not in 2007.

And what's "highly rated"? Seahawks D has been top-16 for a while now, but rarely that top-5 defense needed to carry a team. They always had holes anyway, whether it's pass rush or secondary (or both, as it is now).

You don't need to be carried by a defense. You only need a defense to be competant. When you have a top 16 Defense playing for you - you can't say that you were "carried" to the SuperBowl by a fucking RB. If the Seahawks defense was ranked 32nd in 2005 - would they still have made it to the super bowl?

el_Prez]So high profile RBs and DBs who are also KR and PR - they only play special teams in first year?

First-round picks? Sure. How many 1st round KR and PRs are there in the league? There's Reggie Bust, and otherwise?

Your not getting this. NFL usually don't draft players purely on special teams ability. They draft players to play either an offensive position or a defensive position. However, most good skilled players - play special teams anyways. So when you draft a Reggie Bush, Santoni Holmes, or Manny Lawson - it makes them that much more valuable becaue they can help you out on special teams. But their #1 job is to start at their position.

Special Teams is way underrated. The Bears excellent special teams was one of the major reasons they made it to the Superbowl a few years back (and I don't just mean Hester). But the positions aren't prioritized, meaning you can get the talent in later rounds; the best KR and PRs in the league are mostly undrafted (like Glen Holt) or second-day fliers (like Jamaal Charles, Justin Forsett, Leon Washington, Jerious Norwood).
Same goes for kickers, nobody denies they're important but who except the Raiders would draft one in the first round?

They aren't drafting these players on the assumption that they will ONLY play special teams. They draft these players hoping that they get starters on offense or defense. The fact that these guys can play special teams is just extra. Do you know why guys in the later rounds make good returners? It's becuase the teams don't like to put their most valuable players as returners because they might get hurt. Of course coaches will make excpetions if they think that that specific player can take a few to the house (guys like Bush and Holmes).


I think you and me have different understanding of a draft "bust". You seem to think that if the #1 round pick isn't a superstar - its automatically a bust.

Was Anthony Gonzales a bust for the Colts?

el_Prez]The biggest thing he is doing is STARTING at OLB and making plays. However, I don't see how him being awesome at special teams is a negative.

A negative? Hell no. If he was putting up sacks like crazy and making special teams play: awesome. But he's a non-contributor, with only 5.5 sacks over 3 years: that's not enough for a 1st round OLB.

He's only been in the league for 3 years and he was hurt for 1 of them! Give him a chance for fuck's sake. Sacks are an overrated stat anyway. Uh, and yes 2 blocked kicks on special team is awesome. Only 4 players in the NFL had 2 blocks this last year. Also, Lawson had 6 Tackles for Loss (1 less than Patrick Willis who led the team).

el_Prez]Davis and Lawson are both soldified starters. Davis hasn't really done much because 9ers passing offense hasn't done much. The whole slew of coordinatores is responsible for that. Lawson has done plenty.

I hope you're just joking, because there's no way the above statement can be taken seriously.

Again - it seems that think that if a 1st rounder isn't in the pro bowl that he is an automatic bust.

If a drafted player becomes the starter and major contributer to the team - I don't call it a bust.

el_Prez]So how are the Seahawks so much better than the 9ers at avoiding busts?

Because the Seahawks bust-rate is around the normal 50% for 1st-round picks. No franchise avoids busts 100% of the time, not even the Pats.

Oh yeah? Does the all-knowing FO have that bust rate listed?

Not to mention Seahawks front office has picked up some positional top-players (Tatupu and Carlson) in the 2nd round.

And unlike the 49ers, the Seahawks don't suck on day 2. You can't rebuild if you don't get any contributors from day 2 of the draft. The Seahawks have Sims, Locklear and Hill as solid, contributing starters picked up in day 2. What has SF got?

I seem to remember the 9ers drafting a guy in the 3rd round that everyone thought was a stupid move. What was his name? Oh yea... Frank Gore.

el_Prez]Because things change A LOT in 3 seasons.

Franchise ownership didn't change, and that was the question: not "is this team good", but "is this franchise being run into the ground?" Answer: yes, the Niners are being mismanaged pretty much as badly as the Raiders or Millen's Lions.

el_Prez]Because now your getting crazy.

Am I? Again, the question is about York's ownership tenure. That one only goes 10 years back, and has given the Niners two playoff appearances and one division championship in those 10 years, nothing more, nothing less.

How many teams in the NFL have 2 playoff appearances and one divisional championship in 10 years?

 

[Brother None]

el_Prez]But my main point was that it doesn't matter. Having a slighly less shitty receiving core doesn't really do anything.

Wait, you just said he had to have had competent receivers to throw 3500+ yards, yet despite this corps being better than that one, they're shitty?

Man, your NFL-brain must be infinitely better than mine because this one is beyond me.

el_Prez]I wouldn't bet on ANY player in the NFL starting all 16 games this year.

Heh, really? Let's phrase the Q differently: do you think the odds of Peyton Manning playing 16 games are equal to that of Brian Westbrook playing 16 games?

el_Prez]FO has shown statistics that suggest that the hawks might be healthy next year. They haven't proven shit.

Not, just shown that it pretty much always happens (injuries regressing to the mean, that is, not the Hawks being fully healthy, they can't make a prediction on that). If you want to believe that it always happens, but won't happen with the Hawks this year, and they'll somehow be even worse than the most injured year in recent memory, then...ok?

el_Prez]A lot can change in a couple years.

Sure. I doubt it tho', but who knows.

el_Prez]The Steelers have one of the worst OLine's in the NFL? ???

Yes. It's certainly not league average.

You seem to have missed my point, tho'; saying an O-Line reached the SB isn't really a determinant of their quality. O-Lines are a deciding factor, but not all O-Lines in the SB ever are good.

el_Prez]So because football outsiders say so - the Hawks lost because of injuries, the 9ers lose because they suck, and the Cardinals win because they got lucky? Gimme a break.

Why? I don't slavishly follow the FO, again, I'm not drinking the Kool-Aid on next year's Hawks and have my question marks about their Rams prediction, but if their logic is solid, it's solid. They've statistically proven the 2008 were a historically injured team and shown how that caused losses. That the 49ers suck is obvious to anyone who isn't a homer, but even that has statistical backing, such as a 9-5 record in 3-point wins, or an anomalous fumble recovery rate.

Dunno about the Cards, did I say anything about that?

el_Prez]Uh... I'm pretty sure I can say no.

You're a bit of a meat-head, arentcha?

el_Prez]If I had to put 50 bucks on who I thought was going to have more wins Cards, Rams, or Seahawks - you better fucking believe I would pick the Cards.

Really, why? They only won 9 matches last year despite playing 6 games against fellow-divisionists with losing records, two of which (Hawks and Rams) were absolutely pathetic. They did that weakly last year, what makes you think they'll dominate this?

el_Prez]Saying he sucks is no more obtuse than saying that Manny Lawson is a bust.

Right, saying a Pro Bowl, All-Pro, NFL MVP sucks is exactly as obtuse as claiming a first-round OLB with 5.5 sacks over 3 years is a bust.

el_Prez]Oh really?

Yes really. In 2005, the running game, defense and O-Line were all better. In 2007 there was no running game, and the O-Line was seeing significant injuries. While the 2005 team was clearly better, Hass was definitely a bigger difference-maker in 2007.

el_Prez]When you have a top 16 Defense playing for you - you can't say that you were "carried" to the SuperBowl by a fucking RB.

Why not? If the entire offense, defense and special teams sucked, then obviously you're not making the SB, that's kind of implied by default. If they're all pretty mediocre, then you can identify the bits that stick out (O-Line and running game) and say "they're the reason we won".

el_Prez]Your not getting this.

Obviously my not.

el_Prez]NFL usually don't draft players purely on special teams ability. They draft players to play either an offensive position or a defensive position.

That's...what I said.

el_Prez]However, most good skilled players - play special teams anyways.

No they don't. In fact, you state they don't. You draft a player for his O/D playmaking ability, and sometimes, particularly with WRs, you let them get some time on the field on special teams.

Santonio Holmes is one good example of a fairly good 1st-round pick playing special teams. Reggie Bush is a bust and still playing special teams because of it. How many 1st-round picks do you think there are that still play special teams in their 3rd year? You honestly think that's a normal situation?

el_Prez]He's only been in the league for 3 years and he was hurt for 1 of them! Give him a chance for fuck's sake.

I am. I stated more than once now that it'll be interesting to see if he curves either way now he's been given a permanent position. But so far, he's a bust.

el_Prez]Also, Lawson had 6 Tackles for Loss (1 less than Patrick Willis who led the team).

See, now that's a meaningful stat I can get behind. Not bad

el_Prez]Again - it seems that think that if a 1st rounder isn't in the pro bowl that he is an automatic bust.

If a drafted player becomes the starter and major contributer to the team - I don't call it a bust.

Skipped the rest of your "you don't get drafting" lines for this one: this is exactly what I'm saying. He has to start, and he has to contribute. A third-year 1st overall QB throwing 12 TDs and 18 INTs is a bust. A third-year starting OLB/DE who gets less than 5 sacks and no other meaningful plays is a bust.

It's nice that Manny Lawson is starting, but what is he contributing? Let me put it this way: if Lawson breaks out he's obviously not a bust. If he continues at the rate of less than 5 sacks a year in the rushing position he'll be put in, would he not be a bust, regardless of blocked kicks?

el_Prez]Oh yeah? Does the all-knowing FO have that bust rate listed?

Dunno. Feel free to look it up.

el_Prez]I seem to remember the 9ers drafting a guy in the 3rd round that everyone thought was a stupid move. What was his name? Oh yea... Frank Gore.

You seem to have quoted before my edit; I'm talking about McLoughlan-era picks. Parys Haralson is a solid starter, but otherwise he got nothing. On a rebuilding team, that's not a good sign.

el_Prez]How many teams in the NFL have 2 playoff appearances and one divisional championship in 10 years?

Uh, let's see, since 1999;
Broncos: 4 playoff appearances, 1 division championship
Chiefs: 2 playoff appearances, 1 division championship
Raiders: 3 playoff appearances, 3 division championships
Chargers: 4 playoff appearances, 4 division championships
Ravens: 3 playoff appearances, 2 division championships
Bengals: 1 playoff appearance, 1 division championship
Browns: 1 playoff appearance
Steelers: 6 playoff appearances, 5 division championships
Texans: nothing
Colts: 9 playoff appearances, 6 division championships
Jaguars: 3 playoff appearances, 1 division championship
Titans: 6 playoff appearances, 3 division championships
Bills: 1 playoff appearance
Dolphins: 4 playoff appearances, 2 division championships
Patriots: 6 playoff appearances, 6 division championships
Jets: 4 playoff appearances, 2 division championships
Cardinals: 1 playoff appearance, 1 division championship
Rams: 5 playoff appearances, 3 division championships
Seahawks: 6 playoff appearances, 5 division championships
Bears: 3 playoff appearances, 3 division championships
Lions: 1 playoff appearance
Packers: 5 playoff appearances, 4 division championships
Vikings: 4 playoff appearances, 2 division championships
Falcons: 3 playoff appearances, 1 division championship
Panthers: 3 playoff appearances, 2 division championships
Saints: 2 playoff appearances, 1 division championship
Bucs: 6 playoff appearances, 4 division championships
Cowboys: 4 playoff appearances, 1 division championship
Giants: 6 playoff appearances, 3 division championships
Eagles: 7 playoff appearances, 5 division championships
Redskins: 3 playoff appearances, 1 division championship

So, out of 32 teams, in the past 10 years, 6 have done worse than the 49ers, including an expansion team that didn't exist 3 of those 10 years, and the woeful Bengals and Lions franchises, and the historically futile Cardinals, who were an afterthought for most of the decade.

And then consider the Lions, Bengals, Browns and Texans compete in significantly harder divisions than the Niners.

Yeah, I'd call the franchise pretty woeful.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

Your petty little pissing contest is killing my preseason buzz.
Who gives a fuck about the NFC West, the SEC is more relevant.

Anyway, lloks like 'Roidy Smurf has reported to camp:

What a tool.

 

[Brother None]

I'm curious to see how Merriman does, returning from injury and presumptively roid-free.

Your petty little pissing contest is killing my preseason buzz.

Uhhhh...isn't petty pissing contents the whole point of the preseason?

 

[[PCE]el_Prez]

el_Prez]But my main point was that it doesn't matter. Having a slighly less shitty receiving core doesn't really do anything.

Wait, you just said he had to have had competent receivers to throw 3500+ yards, yet despite this corps being better than that one, they're shitty?

Competant recievers doesn't mean really good. Most starters in the league can catch the ball if they are wide open. What seperates a good reciver from a copetant one is what the WR does when he's being covered like white on rice. Or if it s a bad throw. What then? If Fitzgerald is in that situation you probably expect a catch and a first down at LEAST. If Deon Branch is in there expect an incomplete pass.

Man, your NFL-brain must be infinitely better than mine because this one is beyond me.

It's not that hard to understand. Sometimes you have to do somethinking and analyzing yourself instead of whole heartedly believing anything some website tells you.

el_Prez]I wouldn't bet on ANY player in the NFL starting all 16 games this year.

Heh, really? Let's phrase the Q differently: do you think the odds of Peyton Manning playing 16 games are equal to that of Brian Westbrook playing 16 games?

Well, in my opinion - its easier for a work horse RB to get hurt than a pocket QB with an established O-Line. So If i was FORCED to bet on which would get hurt - I'd take Westbrook. However, I think Manning has a very good chance of getting hurt as well. He is old, His line is older and coming off injury, his run game was absolute shit last year AND he lost a big time WR.

el_Prez]FO has shown statistics that suggest that the hawks might be healthy next year. They haven't proven shit.

Not, just shown that it pretty much always happens (injuries regressing to the mean, that is, not the Hawks being fully healthy, they can't make a prediction on that). If you want to believe that it always happens, but won't happen with the Hawks this year, and they'll somehow be even worse than the most injured year in recent memory, then...ok?

I'm not saying that they are going to be hurt again nor am I saying that if they ARE healthy they will be worse than they were before. All I'm saying that It's completely ludicris to expect the entire team to be healthy. In 16 weeks most teams have at least a couple starters that miss a few games each year. Sometimes you lose a key player the week before you play a tough opponent and thye exploit your weakness. Sometimes you lose a player and his replacement steps up and makes some great plays. It's UNPREDICTABLE what will happen with injuries. And your never going to convince me otherwise.

el_Prez]A lot can change in a couple years.

Sure. I doubt it tho', but who knows.

el_Prez]The Steelers have one of the worst OLine's in the NFL? ???

Yes. It's certainly not league average.

Hahah WTF was that article? That was the dumbest thing I ever read. Some fanboy loving Big Ben's nuts.

You seem to have missed my point, tho'; saying an O-Line reached the SB isn't really a determinant of their quality. O-Lines are a deciding factor, but not all O-Lines in the SB ever are good.

I think you are missing the point that I was originally trying to make. I wasn't saying that you can't make it to the Super Bowl with a terrible O-Line (even though that is true) - what I was saying was the Cards O-Line were pretty damn healthy all year and they learned and got better TOGETHER. Chemistry is incredibly important on the O-Line. Theres no doubt that the Cards O-Line improved much more than the Seahawks Oline did last year.... right?

el_Prez]Uh... I'm pretty sure I can say no.

You're a bit of a meat-head, arentcha?

Well, I did play football competitively for more than a decade and I coach HS Football now.

el_Prez]If I had to put 50 bucks on who I thought was going to have more wins Cards, Rams, or Seahawks - you better fucking believe I would pick the Cards.

Really, why? They only won 9 matches last year despite playing 6 games against fellow-divisionists with losing records, two of which (Hawks and Rams) were absolutely pathetic. They did that weakly last year, what makes you think they'll dominate this?

Well first off, this year the Cards get to play the Rams and Hawks again... twice. There is 4 wins right there.

I'm thinking they will split with the 9ers and against the AFC South. Thats 3 more wins. I'm thinking they will go 3-1 against the NFC North. The only other games are against the Giants and Panthers. They will either lose both or split. That puts them at 10-11 wins - definitely enough to take the NFC West.

el_Prez]Saying he sucks is no more obtuse than saying that Manny Lawson is a bust.

Right, saying a Pro Bowl, All-Pro, NFL MVP sucks is exactly as obtuse as claiming a first-round OLB with 5.5 sacks over 3 years is a bust.

Pretty much. Alexander was a flash in the pan and is DONE. He had a couple good seasons pretty much because he played on a good team. The first year after signing his new contract (after his MVP fluke run) he didn't even break 1000 yards. In 2007 he was even worse. By 2008 he couldn't even be a backup.

el_Prez]When you have a top 16 Defense playing for you - you can't say that you were "carried" to the SuperBowl by a fucking RB.

Why not? If the entire offense, defense and special teams sucked, then obviously you're not making the SB, that's kind of implied by default.

But they didn't suck - thats the point. They Hawks would not of made it to the superbowl with a shitty defense. In 2005 they were offensively and defensively sound. THAT is the reason they made the superbowl. Not Shaun Alexander.

If they're all pretty mediocre, then you can identify the bits that stick out (O-Line and running game) and say "they're the reason we won".

Your not going to win a lot of games if you are only good at running the ball and your passing game and defense is shit.

You NEED your defense to be mediocre in order to win games. Good running game + mediocre defense = moderate success
Good running game + shitty defense = shitty team.

el_Prez]Your not getting this.

Obviously my not.

el_Prez]NFL usually don't draft players purely on special teams ability. They draft players to play either an offensive position or a defensive position.

That's...what I said.

el_Prez]However, most good skilled players - play special teams anyways.

No they don't. In fact, you state they don't. You draft a player for his O/D playmaking ability, and sometimes, particularly with WRs, you let them get some time on the field on special teams.

Not exactly what I said. You draft a player expecting them to play a o/d position - but you have to fill spots on special teams. Ideally - you'd like to fill those spots with the most talented players. So when teams draft big WR and LB's - they are expecting those players to play on special teams as well. If they draft a guy high - and he turns out to be a starter AND a special teams phenom, thats like hitting the jackpot.

Santonio Holmes is one good example of a fairly good 1st-round pick playing special teams. Reggie Bush is a bust and still playing special teams because of it. How many 1st-round picks do you think there are that still play special teams in their 3rd year? You honestly think that's a normal situation?

Totally. A lot of starters WANT to play special teams - especially when they are young. As players get older - you don't see much of them on special teams because its an injury risk.

As spectators - we only hear about the PR or KR names on special teams. But there are a lot of different special teams. Kick Off, KO Return, Hands team, Punt, PR, PAT, PAT Block.
That is seven different "teams" of 11 players. You don't think that those teams have any starters on them on a regular basis? It happens quite regularly.

Anthony Gonzales is the #2 WR for the Colts now that Marvin Harrison left. He was a regular on many Colt special teams and was the #3 reciever. I bet he still plays on special teams even though he's a full time starter now.

el_Prez]He's only been in the league for 3 years and he was hurt for 1 of them! Give him a chance for fuck's sake.

I am. I stated more than once now that it'll be interesting to see if he curves either way now he's been given a permanent position. But so far, he's a bust.

Maybe that's where we are different. When when I say "bust" I'm referring to either a drafted player that has no value - or a big time top 5 draft pick that hasn't lived up to his expectations. Lawson was FAR from a top 5 pick. Theres a big difference between a top 10 first round pick and a late first round pick.

Any pick that is higher than 10 overall - If they become a starter for that team, I'm not considering it a bust.

Skipped the rest of your "you don't get drafting" lines for this one: this is exactly what I'm saying. He has to start, and he has to contribute. A third-year 1st overall QB throwing 12 TDs and 18 INTs is a bust. A third-year starting OLB/DE who gets less than 5 sacks and no other meaningful plays is a bust.

I'm not disputing that Smith is a bust. He was a high pick that doesn't even start.

But Lawson has been in the league 3 years. I'm not really inclined to look at the first two years. Rookie's don't tend to break into the league and become awesome and his 2nd year he was injured. Last year was his first real year under the microscope.

Lets see: 45 tackles (9th on the team) 6 TFL (2nd on the team)
3 sacks (3rd on the team) and 1 forced fumble. And on top of all that he's a badass special teams player. I don't understand why you don't see this as being a solid contributor.

It's nice that Manny Lawson is starting, but what is he contributing? Let me put it this way: if Lawson breaks out he's obviously not a bust. If he continues at the rate of less than 5 sacks a year in the rushing position he'll be put in, would he not be a bust, regardless of blocked kicks?

Sacks aren't that big of a stat. In fact, they are one of the most overrated stats in football.

el_Prez]Oh yeah? Does the all-knowing FO have that bust rate listed?

Dunno. Feel free to look it up.[/quote]
Well you say that the Hawks bust rate is like 50%? Whered you get that stat? Can we compare it to the 9ers or the Cards? Whats a good bust rate?

el_Prez]How many teams in the NFL have 2 playoff appearances and one divisional championship in 10 years?

Uh, let's see, since 1999;
Broncos: 4 playoff appearances, 1 division championship
Chiefs: 2 playoff appearances, 1 division championship
Raiders: 3 playoff appearances, 3 division championships
Chargers: 4 playoff appearances, 4 division championships
Ravens: 3 playoff appearances, 2 division championships
Bengals: 1 playoff appearance, 1 division championship
Browns: 1 playoff appearance
Steelers: 6 playoff appearances, 5 division championships
Texans: nothing
Colts: 9 playoff appearances, 6 division championships
Jaguars: 3 playoff appearances, 1 division championship
Titans: 6 playoff appearances, 3 division championships
Bills: 1 playoff appearance
Dolphins: 4 playoff appearances, 2 division championships
Patriots: 6 playoff appearances, 6 division championships
Jets: 4 playoff appearances, 2 division championships
Cardinals: 1 playoff appearance, 1 division championship
Rams: 5 playoff appearances, 3 division championships
Seahawks: 6 playoff appearances, 5 division championships
Bears: 3 playoff appearances, 3 division championships
Lions: 1 playoff appearance
Packers: 5 playoff appearances, 4 division championships
Vikings: 4 playoff appearances, 2 division championships
Falcons: 3 playoff appearances, 1 division championship
Panthers: 3 playoff appearances, 2 division championships
Saints: 2 playoff appearances, 1 division championship
Bucs: 6 playoff appearances, 4 division championships
Cowboys: 4 playoff appearances, 1 division championship
Giants: 6 playoff appearances, 3 division championships
Eagles: 7 playoff appearances, 5 division championships
Redskins: 3 playoff appearances, 1 division championship

It seems that 1/3 of the NFL had 3 or less playoff appearances in the last 10 years.

And then consider the Lions, Bengals, Browns and Texans compete in significantly harder divisions than the Niners.

Says who? 3 out of 4 teams from the NFC West have made the SuperBowl since 2001. How many other divisions can boast the same feat?

Yeah, I'd call the franchise pretty woeful.

I'd call them resourcefull

 

[Brother None]

I'll get back to your thickskulledness in a bit, el Prez...

First, we must all thank God, Frith, Allah or whoever you worship...

It looks like Favre is finally gone. THANK YOU.

Yeah I know, we've heard this before so you never know, but since he's dialling out of minicamp, he should be gone for this year at least. No doubt the waffling will begin again next offseason, but significantly fewer people will care, not even if he keeps pulling a Jeff George for years to come.

 

[[PCE]el_Prez]

I'll get back to your thickskulledness in a bit, el Prez...

Thank god. I think I've spent about 5 hours in the last 2 days on this thread

I gotta go back to work next week - don't have time to fuck around all day if this keeps up hehe

First, we must all thank God, Frith, Allah or whoever you worship...

It looks like Favre is finally gone. THANK YOU.

Amen, Brother. Never liked Farva anyway (althought it was fun to watch his career spiral downwards)

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

Prez, what position do you coach?
Dude, Hell Week is coming up must be lethal in AZ .

 

[[PCE]el_Prez]

Prez, what position do you coach?
Dude, Hell Week is coming up must be lethal in AZ .

Mostly O and D-line, but theres only one other coach so we both kind of share coordinator duty.

It's not that bad. You get used to the heat, you get used to practicing pretty much drenched.

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

el_Prez]
Amen, Brother. Never liked Farva anyway (althought it was fun to watch his career spiral downwards)

you fucking cocksucking piece of fucking bullshit.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

It's not official until he cries, is it?

Farva.
Where's the next Broken Lizard flick already?

pulling a Jeff George[/url] for years to come.

The thing that Jeff George doesn't understand is that his age is irrelevant to him coming back - nobody wants him because he's a legendarily, monumental asshole.

el_Prez]Mostly O and D-line, but theres only one other coach so we both kind of share coordinator duty.

Before we platooned I had to play some TE, sucked hitting the sled with the O-lineman. Worst cement legs of my life. Drive those little fuckers til they drop, then The Gauntlet, wind sprints, and the dreaded up/downs. I'd like to get into local coaching as my kids get older.