NFL 2010

[Cimmerian Nights]

I never said Belichik can turn water into wine, or the Patriots are some juggernaut. But ask around, and I'd wager that 75% of the teams would trade positions with where the Patriots were, are and will be in a heartbeat. That's all I'm saying.

So you agree with me that the Pats have not been a playoff threat lately and don't look like they will be anytime soon?

Well yeah, they had a little setback at the QB position, I'd like to see how quickly if at all, another team would deal with the same situation. Anytime soon? I'd like to see how the draft and trade market shake out before a hazard a guess how they, or anyone else can do.
Besides, this is the parity era, it's not out of the realm of possibility that they (or anyone else) can be.

And? Every team has flaws, if you win out by some fieldgoals - which would be called what, flukey?

If this isn't trolling, then by all means, keep digging your football credibility's grave. I'm throwing you a line here, but if you want to expand on this, by all means...

I think it's fair enough to think you might be winning despite flaws, certainly not because of flaws...
Are you saying the Pats are guaranteed to get by with gaping holes just because they did it early in the Naughties?

I'm just not sweating your analysis. It's March 16 and a lot is going to happen between now and Week 1 kickoff. Good things, bad things, a lot of things. The Patriots have gaping holes every year, so doesn't everyone else. Their backfield and WR corps you mentioned are all better in every possible way than the scrubs they won 3 SBs with. Gaping holes have a way of filling themselves, like when a broken down #3 receiver like Troy Brown started all year at CB and was 2nd on the team in INTs during a SB campaign.
Point being, you, I, nobody knows what is going through Belichik's mind, but to assume he doesn't have plans to address these areas would be silly. By all accounts this draft is top heavy and loaded with so-called conversion pass rushers, TEs and WRs. RBs are expendable, fungible commodities. Consensus is that there's 1st round talent running about 50 spots deep, where the Pats have something like 4 picks.
Let's talk after the draft. Maybe they move up? You never know, they've got enough ammo stockpiled.

You mean 6th-lineman blocking TEs never have a function. Huh. Your football insight is certainly growing. Grrrlulz.

6th lineman blocking TEs?
Why not use, oh I don't know, this is kind of a novel idea, a 6th lineman reported eligible like has been going on for decades instead? Like what that big Teutonic bully Voellmer and Lavoir do already for the Patriots. Same thing they do with FB. I'd personally draft an H-back to serve both roles.
The TE today is an euphemism for "Big receiver", I don't see Gates, Clark, Gonzo and Cooley blocking anybody.
Besides, when was the last time a TE figured into a Patriots scheme - Ben Coates circa 1995?
I'm not worried about the Patriots offense, it's their defense that loses them games and is in major transition.

I'm criticizing failed FA trades, which the Pats have a lot of lately. Do I comparatively give the Hawks leeway for, I dunno, the idiotic Deion Branch trade? Nope. Same standards.

Other than Burgess, which was a gamble that didn't pan out (you can do that when you stockpile picks), to which trade do you refer? Seymour? Welker? Moss? Cassel?
I think I've already gone over their draft gaffes, but everybody has those. Maroney is a big disappointment, not a bust.

As for the Seahawks, I've not heard you say boo on their moves. Couldn't get Watson for $12M so you sign his backup for $2.75. What have either of these guys shown to warrant this money?
You ask me, I'm glad to see these guys walk then get that money here. I'd rather have no TE than an overpaid slug.

Are you seriously claiming QBs simply won't get injured anymore? They won't "allow" it? What are they going to do, replace him by a robot if he tears an ACL?

Don't fool yourself, the league has them studying Hinkley's assassination attempt on Ronnie Reagan so that officials can now act as human shields in defenses of their Golden Boys.
I'm waiting for when the league markets them like Disney does the Princesses. That 4-8 y.o. female demographic is an untapped market the NFL needs to exploit.

I never called him a genius, in fact I've expressed my distaste with the national medias penchant for doing so.

You seem to harp on specific words a lot. Why?

It's not the words themselves, it's their misuse. Belichik is not a genius. 4th and 2 is a perfect example, he always makes those calls. Yet when he's lucky or for whatever reason makes them he's a genius, when the ball bounces the wrong way, he's not for making the same decision.
Also, the Brady drafting, Drew Bledsoe injury, series of events. I don't see why he gets credit for that. When I hear someone call Bill Belichik a genius, it tells me they have no idea what they're talking about.

Beats having Pete Carroll here.

This has what to do with the Pats exactly?

Well, #1 he was the predecessor to the current coach, and things improved dramatically after he passed the torch.
#2 I like rubbing your nose in the fact that he's your problem now.

j/k Pete isn't that bad, it's just that he was sandwiched between Parcells and Belichik, so kind of tough standards to live up to.
He's better suited to college and recruiting IMO.

I don't know who'll do what next year. All I know is the Pats look like a troubled franchise in many areas, and it's up to them to prove they can maintain any level of success.

Well, there's a reason why they actually play the game, and this has never been more true than during the parity era. Sometimes the teams we think are going to do bad, don't. Sometimes they do, even worse. Same goes for the good teams we think we'll succeed. Sometimes the teams that look invincible in week 8 don't even make the playoffs, while a hopeless team makes a late run and does.
We can watch football and watch it all unfold, or we can drink Kiper's Kool-Aid and pretend and prognosticate and posture.

The Pats got annihilated in a game in which they looked like an old, failing team.

Failing yes. I think the old tag is pre-'09. Vrabel, Colvin, Seymour, Harrison, Bruischi at al have made way for Wilfork, Merriweather, Mayo, Butler and Chung. The old, tired tag is false. More like young, unprepared and lacking unity.

The Jets looked young, energized and ran their D deep into the play-offs (an impossibility according to you, but they did it).

Did I say something their own coach didn't in week 14?

I hate the Jets and have nothing against the Pats (other than you being their fan), but ignoring the franchise names,

OK, I guess I'll have to amp up my Seahawks ridicule then. Bawk bawk ba-GAWK!

Dude, I give you and Sander credit for not being frontrunners. Sander is some kind of masochist methinks.

 

[Sander]

Gotta love how the Bucs' front office now looks more competent than the Hawks' front office.

I'm disappointed the Bucs haven't gone after Boldin, Dunta Robinson and maybe Marshall, but honestly the high-pitched whining from the fanbase on cheap Glazers and Man U sucking away money is annoying and unrealistic. The current free agency class is overvalued and overpaid because there's only a small offering of free agents. The current draft class is of a really high quality because of the threat of a rookie payscale and the accompanying influx of juniors. Add to that that next year's free agent class will be much better because all the people who've been signed to tenders will (probably) be unrestricted next year.

So the correct, longterm strategy (there's no way the Bucs are really competitive next year no matter what) would be to stay out of free agency now, stockpile draft picks, and get into free agency next year.

6th lineman blocking TEs?
Why not use, oh I don't know, this is kind of a novel idea, a 6th lineman reported eligible like has been going on for decades instead? Like what that big Teutonic bully Voellmer and Lavoir do already for the Patriots. Same thing they do with FB. I'd personally draft an H-back to serve both roles.
The TE today is an euphemism for "Big receiver", I don't see Gates, Clark, Gonzo and Cooley blocking anybody.
Besides, when was the last time a TE figured into a Patriots scheme - Ben Coates circa 1995?
I'm not worried about the Patriots offense, it's their defense that loses them games and is in major transition.

Just look at the Saints on how to use a proper, multi-purpose TE. And I'm not just talking Shockey, who they use a lot as a means to confuse defenses on their actual formations, but also David Thomas, who is often in as a blocking TE but also featured more and more in the passing game as a crucial component as the season progressed. In a passing league, as you keep arguing the NFL now is, TEs are really important because they give you a lot of formation flexibility and ways to exploit matchups.

It's not the words themselves, it's their misuse. Belichik is not a genius. 4th and 2 is a perfect example, he always makes those calls. Yet when he's lucky or for whatever reason makes them he's a genius, when the ball bounces the wrong way, he's not for making the same decision.

Honestly, a lot of those calls are really close and would be fine either way. Yet people want to make a huge deal out of those calls because they're unorthodox - even though their value isn't much different from the orthodox calls in a lot of cases.

Did I say something their own coach didn't in week 14?

Weak, Cimmie. Their own coach miscalculated,h he didn't say that out of a lack of belief in his own team.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

I'm disappointed the Bucs haven't gone after Boldin

He's a steal for a 3rd rounder, high price tag though.

Marshall

So productive, so ... wack. Can be such a dominant WR, but he's a basket case. I don;t think he's worth the drama he'd create.

but honestly the high-pitched whining from the fanbase on cheap Glazers and Man U sucking away money is annoying and unrealistic.

Ahhh, it's the South. Panhandle redneck mentality.

Just look at the Saints on how to use a proper, multi-purpose TE. And I'm not just talking Shockey, who they use a lot as a means to confuse defenses on their actual formations, but also David Thomas, who is often in as a blocking TE but also featured more and more in the passing game as a crucial component as the season progressed. In a passing league, as you keep arguing the NFL now is, TEs are really important because they give you a lot of formation flexibility and ways to exploit matchups.

...as receivers. Shockey is a perfect example. He's an underneath receiver. He's worthless in run blocking.
Thomas, another decent NEP TE that walked...

Did I say something their own coach didn't in week 14?

Weak, Cimmie. Their own coach miscalculated,h he didn't say that out of a lack of belief in his own team.

[/quote]
Neither did I. They were as long as a longshot could be. Can't account for Indy and Cincy laying down like that. From that point on in the playoffs, the Jets deserve all the credit. And I seem to recall being the only Jets proponent at that time...

 

[Brother None]

If this isn't trolling, then by all means, keep digging your football credibility's grave. I'm throwing you a line here, but if you want to expand on this, by all means...

Of course it's trolling. You don't think I'm taking any of these "debates" seriously, do you? With the kind of viewpoints spouted out? You better be kidding me.

That said: Dismissing a Superbowl win because you feel the opponent is weak is fine, pointing out winning on lastminute fieldgoals is pretty flukey (or if you're just going to harp on the word again, fill in whatever word you feel more comfortable with: flukey, lucky, flip-of-a-coin, not dominant, not a convincing win, whichever you like man) is "omfg no football credibility". The preceding sentence makes no sense, until you add Colts to the former and Pats to the latter, then it's Masshole logic.
Here's the logic I personally apply: I win is a win. The rest is just fluff. It can be important fluff, it can be unimportant fluff, but it is fluff. Do I believe the Pats wins are worth less because they were won in the last second or because of the taping thing? Of course not. And neither should you. Then again, neither should you be spouting this kind of nonsense on the Colts, which discredits your "football credibility", but hey. Different standards.

As for the Seahawks, I've not heard you say boo on their moves.

Then you did not read the end of my last post, preceding page. I'll repost if the edit gets lost:
Back on topic (maybe we should have separate NFL and Patriots threads), the Hawks off-season has now officially gone from "eh" to "what the fuck are they thinking?"

- Letting Burleson walk when you have no WR depth
- Cutting Deon Grant, who started 48 games at SS over the past 3 years, with no heir apparent on the roster
- Trading Wallace, fine. Trading Wallace for chump change, stupid.
- Trading promising young DE Tapp for significantly less promising and less young DE Chris Clemson and a fourth. Tapp was an absolute fan darling too, only thing worse would be trading Forsett or Mebane
- Meanwhile sitting pat only clearly useless, expensive players (Deon Branch, Kerney, Hasselbeck (but he should stay, as a security blanket, only has one year left in his contract anyway), Julius Jones, Kelly Jennings)

Standard seems to be: useful veterans can go, promising youth can be lowball traded, expensive useless shits should stay.

At least they're mostly minor moves (though Grant and Tapp were pencilled in as starters), but all they're doing is creating more holes in an already needy team. Talk about regressing. They'd better come up with an ace draft.

Don't fool yourself, the league has them studying Hinkley's assassination attempt on Ronnie Reagan so that officials can now act as human shields in defenses of their Golden Boys.

Heh, you're such a parody.

Even soccer players get injured and that's a namby-pansy sport. You can't forbid players getting injured.

j/k Pete isn't that bad, it's just that he was sandwiched between Parcells and Belichik, so kind of tough standards to live up to.
He's better suited to college and recruiting IMO.

I'm not worried about PC the coach. I am worried about PC the apparent chief of our football operations. Not sure what they were thinking there.

We can watch football and watch it all unfold, or we can drink Kiper's Kool-Aid and pretend and prognosticate and posture.

It's the off-season. What football are you going to watch right now?

Failing yes. I think the old tag is pre-'09. Vrabel, Colvin, Seymour, Harrison, Bruischi at al have made way for Wilfork, Merriweather, Mayo, Butler and Chung. The old, tired tag is false. More like young, unprepared and lacking unity.

You're talking defense. The D looked young and lost, yes. The O looked old and jittery (which is impressive because it's not that old on average).

OK, I guess I'll have to amp up my Seahawks ridicule then. Bawk bawk ba-GAWK!

Sure. No lack of ammo there.

 

[UniversalWolf]

Seattle traded The Masticator to Philly. I have no reaction at all.

Sounds like Tebow looked horrible at the Florida Pro Day today.

 

[Brother None]

Seattle traded The Masticator to Philly. I have no reaction at all.

I do

(also who calls him the Masticator? Name from fans was just Tapp. Or Double Tapp)

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

That said: Dismissing a Superbowl win because you feel the opponent is weak is fine, pointing out winning on lastminute fieldgoals is pretty flukey (or if you're just going to harp on the word again, fill in whatever word you feel more comfortable with: flukey, lucky, flip-of-a-coin, not dominant, not a convincing win, whichever you like man) is "omfg no football credibility".

Let's back up a little, Adam Vinatieri is 20 of 21 when kicking a FG in the last 1:00 of play.

That bears repeating, because it's remarkable: 20 of 21 when kicking a FG in the last 1:00 of play. You can't compare that to a sample size of one Colt's victory, oops make that 1 for 2 now.

20 of 21 with time expiring is not a fluke, that's money, it's an established pattern of big game success. When Vinatieri misses, that's what I'd call a fluke. Really, I get your point, but you need to make a distinction when comparing the sample size of 1 Colts game vs. I don't know how large of a sample size of games or kicks you're looking at on the other side.

Vinatieri established a pattern of success and clutch performances in big games, again and again and again. The Colts established a post-season pattern too, unfortunately for them things haven't turned out quite as well, even with Adam.

Here's the logic I personally apply: I win is a win.

Heh, I assume you mistyped. And I will grant you that, and any Patriots fan who claims otherwise is hypocrisy personified, as that was the rallying cry in defense of that Patriots all those years. And I give you credit, you don't swing the other way in blowouts like some flip-floppers might.

But again, sample size. I don't get off on posting the Patriots' dynasty numbers, but I will if pushed too far with this frivolous fluke flappery. (FYI: since my sincerity and sarcasm evidently cause some confusion, pompous alliteration is a cue I'm not being entirely serious). If you want me to I can, and I think you'll see that fluky circumstances can't account for their sustained success.

Do I believe the Pats wins are worth less because they were won in the last second or because of the taping thing?

Just curious, to what tape do you refer?

Don't fool yourself, the league has them studying Hinkley's assassination attempt on Ronnie Reagan so that officials can now act as human shields in defenses of their Golden Boys.

Heh, you're such a parody.

I was hoping I didn't go too subtle on the reference to human shields and the Brady Bill. Hey, the shit must work, nobody's shot a president since!

I'm not worried about PC the coach. I am worried about PC the apparent chief of our football operations. Not sure what they were thinking there.

Well, obviously building a college program and Pro program is entirely different, and the USC name alone probably sells itself. But the guy deserves credit for building one of the most dominant programs of all time, with some stellar talent on both sides. How that carries over I don't know.
He's a west coast guy too, he'll fit in nicely with the Seattle culture. His laid-back, affable persona was a cryptic thing for NEP/NYJ fans to grasp. Well, that and he didn't do all that well.

It's the off-season. What football are you going to watch right now?

NFL Films. It's kind of tough to wager on though. Better than any of the overhyped bottom tier NFL games.

You're talking defense. The D looked young and lost, yes. The O looked old and jittery (which is impressive because it's not that old on average).

They looked all kinds of not deserving to go anywhere in the playoffs.

OK, I guess I'll have to amp up my Seahawks ridicule then. Bawk bawk ba-GAWK!

Sure. No lack of ammo there.

But lots of apathy on my part. They are so irrelevant I can't be bothered

 

[Brother None]

Man, the hits just keep on coming.

It's like we're competing with the Browns for the title of this off-season's 2009 Broncos.
(not that I disagree with getting a QB who could potentially start for us, but that's pretty steep for 3rd-round tendered 3rd-string QB with not a regular season snap to his name)

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

Why did no one tell me that Roethlisberger was going to be on South Park last night?

It's like we're competing with the Browns for the title of this off-season's 2009 Broncos.

Even with the accelerated mobility that the parity era provides, Cleveland and Seattle are in classic franchise rebuild mode. I wouldn't expect to see anything out of them for the next 2-3 years. If this were Tuna we were talking about, I'd give them a shot to make the playoffs. But they are pretty much starting from scratch, expectations would be low even if all their moves were blockbusters

I'm surprised that with all his maneuverings, Holmgren has kept Mangini, a guy at complete opposite ends of the spectrum from him philosophically, scheme-wise, everything.

 

[Brother None]

"Classic" franchise rebuild mode? If only, I would be ecstatic if they were.

Dump Hasselbeck. Dump Kerney. Dump Branch. Dump Wallace. Dump Julius Jones. Get as many draft picks as you possibly can. Suck it up for the next 2-3 years. That's classic rebuild, that's what I want.

What I'm getting is overpaying for a 28-year old quarterback, while selling your young starting DE for chump change and an older rotational DE. What I'm getting is moving down in picks this year *and* next to - what - win now? 2-3 years of mediocrity before starting the whole process over again?

This.
Is.
Fuck.

If Whitehurst pans out, the FO is somewhat vindicated. But even then, bad moves are bad moves.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

"Classic" franchise rebuild mode? If only, I would be ecstatic if they were.

I never said it in and of itself guarantees success, not unless you bring in the Big Tuna. But even he has consistantly shown diminishing returns and longevity in each subsequest stop in his career. He also never sticks around to finish the job.

NYG 6 years 2 Super Bowl victories
NEP 4 years 1 Super Bowl appearance (took a 2 win team to the SB in 4 years)
NYJ 3 years 1 AFCC appearance (took a 4-12 team to the title game in 3 years)
Dallas 3 years (took perrenial 5 game winner to first playoff victory in years, only to have it blown by Romo)
Miami - As GM takes a 1 win team and wins division with them next year.
That's a stellar track record.

Besdies the Big Tuna, Holmgren is probably the only other guy I would trust to give the keys to the castle to (Jury's out on Belichik, he's only just cleared house of all the old Parcell's picks). I'm hard pressed to think of anyone else who can do so much to change the culture and personnel in a franchise so dramatically - well, in the successful direction I mean.

Dump Hasselbeck. Dump Kerney. Dump Branch. Dump Wallace. Dump Julius Jones. Get as many draft picks as you possibly can.

The same reason you want to jettison these broken down has beens is the same reason nobody else will give you anything for them. What do you hope to get for Branch? I love Kerney's motor (and the fact that he's from Connecticut), but I don't know if he'll be able to bring it like he used to. Hass god love him is just brittle, will he ever be 100% again? I'd take him as a backup. But I don't know what you expect to get on the market with those guys when the draft is supposedly so deep this year.

I have no clue what they're thinking on Whitehurst, quite frankly. At least now I have a name to put with the face of "hey who's the Lorenzo Lamas circa Renegade looking dude standing next to Billy Volek?"

 

[Sander]

...
You want to give Holmgren the keys to the castle? I mean, great coach - but he has shown to be more or less a failure as a GM. And his moves with the Browns don't look too promising either.

No, besides Parcells I'd probably trust only Belichick to be a good football czar.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

...
You want to give Holmgren the keys to the castle? I mean, great coach - but he has shown to be more or less a failure as a GM. And his moves with the Browns don't look too promising either.

I'd give him 2-3 years before pass final judgement on what develops in Cleveland. But hey, it's Cleveland, how bad can he do? Who else out there is better? Gruden? Shanahan got himslef fired for his grocery selection, not his cooking (to borrow a Parcells analgy).

No, besides Parcells I'd probably trust only Belichick to be a good football czar.

They're practically one in the same. But I would withold judgement on Belichik the GM, until we see what materliazes out of all these draft picks he's hoarded away this year and next. A lot of his success came with Parcell's players. That group - Bledsoe, Terry Glenn, Curtis Martin, Willie McGinest, Bruschi, Law etc. are all gone now though.

Nice draft last year (Chung, Butler, Voellmer, Edelman, Brace, Myron Pryor).

This Adalius Thomas thing is just ugly though. Maroney is a frustration. Chad Jackson (passed over a lot of studs for him). Many lost opportunities. 2007 was really bad, other than Merriweather, nobody else made the team. What a waste.

 

[Sander]

I'd give him 2-3 years before pass final judgement on what develops in Cleveland. But hey, it's Cleveland, how bad can he do? Who else out there is better? Gruden? Shanahan got himslef fired for his grocery selection, not his cooking (to borrow a Parcells analgy).

Holmgren may be the best available option as a czar (though Cowher is in the running, too), but that says more about the lack of talent for such a position than his competence in the matter.

Being a football czar takes a special kind of talent, a kind of talent I don't think Holmgren has. The standard formula, with the responsibilities shared between a few people, seems to work much better.

Gruden definitely doesn't have it, though. His draft history with the Bucs reads like a manual on how not to select players, and he deconstructed the core team the Bucs had in place after 2002 until barely anything was left.

They're practically one in the same. But I would withold judgement on Belichik the GM, until we see what materliazes out of all these draft picks he's hoarded away this year and next. A lot of his success came with Parcell's players. That group - Bledsoe, Terry Glenn, Curtis Martin, Willie McGinest, Bruschi, Law etc. are all gone now though.

Nice draft last year (Chung, Butler, Voellmer, Edelman, Brace, Myron Pryor).

This Adalius Thomas thing is just ugly though. Maroney is a frustration. Chad Jackson (passed over a lot of studs for him). Many lost opportunities. 2007 was really bad, other than Merriweather, nobody else made the team. What a waste.

This draft is going to be important for a lot of teams, including the Bucs, 49ers, Seahawks, and Pats.

It's probably a testament to the Bears' failure as an organisation that they have no picks in the first 2 rounds in what is the most loaded draft in, well, decades - maybe ever.

 

[Brother None]

You're welcome for the pick that landed you Merriweather, btw, Cimms.

And yeah, still <3 Butler and Chung. I had a big eye on both of em going into the draft, and they both went Pats.

And I'm not saying I expect anything for types like Branch or Hasselbeck. You can have them and a cup of coffee for two bucks.
But you missed my point; we're not in classic rebuild mode, we're in head-scratcher mode.

Also, the football czar model is nonsense. Its exceptional low rate of success reveals it for the empty hype it is.

Also also, Holmgren was terrible as our GM. We had to bring in Ruskell simply because we knew Holmgren couldn't finish his own team up, and in that year we went to the Superbowl.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

Cowher is in the running, too

Forgot about The Chin. I like Cowher as a coach, and in that as an intense, motivational, rah-rah type, much like Tomlin. I don't like him in a heavy X's and O's or GM role. The fact that an inknown like Tomlin could fill his shoes says a lot. Steelers have strong ownership, strong FO, and draft like nobody else. Frankly, I'm not sure that he's any good at all in a personell role, and the trials and tribulations he went through with Slash (and and to a lesser degree some other sketchy QBs like O'Donnell, Bubby Brister, and Tommy Maddux redux) tell me he was probably not involved in as much as he would've liked in bringing them in.

And he's another one that had the "can't win the big one" albatross around his neck almost all his career until some funny calls went his way one particular SB. I like him, I'm sure he can turn a team in the right direction (especially with the kind of intensity he brings and the respect his players had for him), that's whats needed in some of these camps with "loser cultures" : Hello Detriot!).

Also, the football czar model is nonsense. Its exceptional low rate of success reveals it for the empty hype it is.
Yeah, Parcells and Holmgren were the only two guys I could think of to take traditionally basement dwelling teams and turn things around in that capacity. I wouldn't feel great with any one other than that.

I think the Parcells era in New England was an awesome time to be a Patriots fan, he truly brought us out of the dark ages. 2 win team to the SB - then the fat bastard left the team on the same night.

Also also, Holmgren was terrible as our GM.

Yeah I'm not so up on Holmgren's history in Seattle, I was overseas for many years and most of my football news came from that hotbed of pigskin knowledge, The Daily Yomiuri.

I missed the whole Dennis Miller era on MNF. That really sucks. I'm pissed about that.
I missed the whole Greatest Show on Turf and Baltimore heyday too.

 

[Brother None]

Yeah I'm not so up on Holmgren's history in Seattle, I was overseas for many years and most of my football news came from that hotbed of pigskin knowledge, The Daily Yomiuri.

Well I obviously shouldn't be too harsh. As you said, Seahawks are historically futile and he's a big reason they stopped being so. However, he could not craft a team complete enough to seriously compete, and had done brilliant in building an offense from nothing (swapping 1st with Green Bay for Hasselbeck, drafting Koren Robinson and Steve Hutchinson, signing Bobby Engram the Slot Receiving Robot). But he kept bringing teams that were really, really thin at defense, and while not bad at trades he wasn't the bargain hunter Ruskell was.

Mike Holmgren GM/coach record: 31-33, one playoff berth
Mike Holmgren coach/Tim Ruskell GM record: 55-41, five consecutive playoff berths, 4 consecutive NFC West titles, Superbowl berth (and the record is brought down by the final 4-12 season, as those five playoff seasons went 51-29)

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

Pats got their TE.
And here I was thinking they'd be drafting a Heisman winning TE.

 

[Brother None]

He'll certainly fill the space on your roster, and then some.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

He is quite a load to bring down, love watching him in open space against DBs (when he was good, which I don't think he has been since his ATL days).

Heh, gotta love Tom E. Curran :

be prepared for another veteran has-been to follow the Joey Galloway, Kendall Simmons, Cam Cleeland, Doug Gabriel arc of disappointment.

At 6-2, 262 pounds, the 32-year-old Crumpler is a short (relative to others in his profession) fat (relative to others at his position) old (relative to others in his profession) man. And he doesn't look like any 262, either.