PDA

View Full Version : BeerBaron's Week 10 Thoughts


BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 10:25 AM
Since my midseason thoughts were pretty well received and a few people requested some thoughts each week, I thought I'd give it a shot if I had enough time.

And yes, I know week 10 isn't officially over but I'm about 99% sure the Packers will win tonight in a blowout. So. Sorry Vikings.

1.) Mike Smith should not have gone for it.
This one is getting played up quite a bit in the media today, and it seems that most of the various analysts are correctly saying that this was a bad decision.

Now, I'm heavily in favor of "going for it" more often than real coaches seem to be. You can say that it's easier for me to say "go for it" when I'm sitting behind a computer instead of actually coaching, and that maybe true, but I think most coaches are overly conservative in this regard.

In my opinion, you should go for it on 4th and 2 (or less) anywhere between midfield (could possibly even stretch back to your own 40 if you're really confident) and a reasonable FG range (under 50 yards for me.) Now there may be a few mitigating factors, such as the details of the situation, how much you trust your defense vs. the opposing offense, how good your kicker is from beyond 50, etc.

But Smith going for it fits none of that criteria. Even if they pick up at first down, they have a long way to go before they're in scoring position. Perhaps if they were just slightly out of FG range, I could have understood going for it. But from your own 30? That's a bad call.

2.) The Cards should stick with John Skelton.
While he hasn't played great by any stretch of the imagination, he's played well enough to win 2 games in 2 starts, which is more than Kolb won in 7 starts.

Unless and until Skelton really starts blowing games, they should ride with him. He seems have a far better connection with Larry Fitzgerald for instance than Kolb ever developed. (Having actual arm strength is probably a factor in that...)

Kolb, for lack of a better term, is awful. He was not a good QB during his time in Philly and the Cardinals gave up way to much for him in a panic to find a QB. Them going back to Kolb without Skelton failing beforehand would just be a backhanded slap at the other players and fans by saying "we paid a lot of this guy, he's going to play."

Kolb isn't even the QB AJ Feeley was with Miami. He's a trade bust and is not an NFL caliber starting QB. Acquiring him was a poor, panicked decision by the Cardinals and those in charge of the organization may end up paying for it with their jobs.

3.) The 49ers are legit.
I, like most of you, still had plenty of concerns with the 49ers. They had beaten down their weaker competition but hadn't faced many real tests this season. Win, lose or draw, the Giants game was going to give us a good measure of what the 49ers are as a team.

And a good football team is what they are. They matched the Giants (one of the NFC's better teams) blow for blow and made the plays they needed to play in crucial spots to come away with the win. Alex Smith played good-but-not-great as he managed the game. The 49ers weren't great in running the ball, but ran well enough when they had to. They proved that they have a decent stable of receivers as they spread the ball around well. Their o-line held the vaunted Giants defense to only 2 sacks. And while their defense struggled a bit between the 20s, they buckled down in the red zone holding the Giants to field goals more often than not.

While it was hardly a perfect performance, they played well enough to assure themselves a spot in the upper echelon of NFC teams.

However, they struggled with the Giants passing attack and receiver depth. If they hope to contend with a team like the Packers come January, they need to find way to fix that.

Speaking of the Packers, I'm lead into my next point...

4.) The Bears may be the best "Packer Killers" the NFC has.

It's a small stretch and you're probably about to call me out as being a homer, but hear me out.

Over the past 2 years, and especially this season, very few teams have been able to slow the Packers down. They just have so ungodly many targets for Rodgers to throw to that your best bet in beating them is to try and win a shootout, something no team has done yet this year.

But if there is one team who has at least played the Packers tough in recent years, it's the Bears. The Bears held the Packers below their season average in their first meeting this year and were a phantom hold on the Hester/Knox trickeration punt return from pulling to within 3 points.

Dating back to last year, the Bears won the team's first regular season meeting, holding the Packers to 17 points. In the season finale, the Bears gave up only 10 points to the eventual champions. Then in the NFC Championship game, the Bears held the Packers offense to 14 points (they got to 21 on the Raji pick 6.)

Additionally, each time they play, it seems like the Bears manage to force a key turnover or two that the Packers really don't make in their other games. No other defenses have shown to be capable of even slowing the Packers down a little bit.

Whenever the two teams play, be it later this season or possibly again in the playoffs, the Packers should be and will be favorites. But if there is one team in the NFC (or perhaps even the whole NFL) capable of beating the Packers, it's the Bears.

5.) Tim Tebow needs to go away.

It's not funny. It's not cute. It's not good football. Tim Tebow and the Broncos are the biggest running joke in the league right now.

The Dolphins, Raiders and Chiefs should be absolutely embarrassed with themselves for letting this joke of a team beat them. I'm talking like "poop your pants at school borderline suicidal" embarrassed. You have no right calling yourself a PROFESSIONAL football player if you let a Tim Tebow led team beat you.

I feel fully confident that when the Broncos face a real defense, Tebow will be absolutely gang raped like he was by the Lions.

2 of 8? 55-8 run-pass ratio? Get the **** out. What were you expecting Chiefs? Load up the box and press the Broncos receivers for gods sake! Take away the run and force Tebow to throw open his receiver because I guarantee he ******* can't!

And that one Eric Decker TD....ugh. It's nothing against Decker, I like Decker, but that one play apparently "justifies" Tebows completely backwards ******* awful performance for 99% of the rest of the game, just like against the Dolphins.

Imagine for a moment if Tom Brady went out, completed 25% of his passes and looked horrible for 59 minutes, then threw one great pass to win the game. Would that be considered a "good" performance? No it ******* wouldn't.

The sooner this guy is proven to be a fraud and the media gets off his dick, the better for the sport of football.

And don't give me **** about "oh, Tebow isn't putting up big passing numbers so you don't like him" BS. I ******* love me some run game and power football and great defense. But Tebow is an ugly abomination on the sport and the sooner he is outed as a fraud, the happier I'll be.

</rant>

6.) The Eagles.

Oh man, the Eagles. It seems silly that people still talk about a 3-6 team as having a shot at the playoffs, but for some reason, people still do with the Eagles. They'd literally have to win every game for the rest of the year to even have a chance at making the playoffs. Something I cannot fathom this gutless, leaderless, no heart or backbone team doing.

If this poor level of play keeps up, I think the best thing for the Eagles and Andy Reid to do would be to have a mutual split.

Reid has been a fixture there for a very long time and had some success when he had a great Jim Johnson defense there to back up his offense. He's also managed to build up some gilded QBs to fleece other teams out of draft picks as well. But I think he's done all he can with the Eagles. The team he has this year has plenty of pure talent to be successful...but they aren't winning. That goes squarely on the coach in my opinion.

What is the excuse for allowing Larry Fitzgerald to run wild on a defense with 3 great man corners? Are you going to try to tell me that if they just allowed Nnamdi to play man on Fitzgerald the whole game, that they couldn't have held Fitzgerald to less?

And that defense...they're terrible against the run, so you'd think they'd at least be good against the pass right? Well no...despite being 3 deep with solid corners, they're forcing them to play zone where clearly, they are not comfortable.

I think the best move for the Eagles and Reid is a mutual split. The Eagles can bring in someone new who will give the franchise a breath of fresh air while hopefully motivating the talent there while Reid can go rebuild a floundering franchise elsewhere. Miami seems like they might be a good fit. Or perhaps Indy if they decide to (rightfully) clean house. Imagine Reid getting to develop Andrew Luck...

Speaking of the Colts...

7.) Fire Everyone Indy!

Has there ever, and I mean EVER, been a potentially winless team whose GM wasn't on the hot seat?

I said this in my last write up and I'll say this again, THIS ENTIRE SITUATION IS MORE BILL POLIAN'S FAULT THAN ANYONES AND HE SHOULD ABSOLUTELY BE FIRED FOR IT!

A team that goes from the playoffs to potentially winless because one player got hurt? No. Bull ****. This team's lack of a better backup plan and overall reliance on one freaking player is a horrible stain on the sport of football.

Like I said last week, fire everyone. Then hire a new GM to evaluate the Manning situation and draft Luck.

The fact that a team this bad could possibly keep it's GM is a joke. A bad joke. When the Dolphins went 1-15, their newly hired head coach and GM were fired. When the Lions went 0-16, it marked the final nail in the coffin for Matt Millen.

No exception should be made for Polian. This is his fault and he should not be allowed another chance.

8.) Cincy still isn't out of it.

Though they lost to the Steelers, they still have a very good chance to finish the season with double digit wins. They played the Steelers hard, still have another game against them, and have two games left against the Ravens. If Seattle can beat a team, the Bengals definitely can.

Additionally,the Bengals have very winnable games left against St. Louis, Arizona and Cleveland. If they can steal even one game away from the Ravens then win those 3, we're looking at a 10-6 and likely playoff bound team.

So there are my thoughts for this week. Take from them what you will.

Edit:

Oh, and one more thing:

9.) The "Garrarding" of Fitzpatrick has begun.

I said this in the thread about Fitzpatrick's extension, and I'm starting to be justified.

There should always be some concern when extending a QB who is playing well above his career averages for just 1 season. The Jaguars did the same thing with David Garrard in his first full year starting. He was great that year, playing better than he ever did before. But he was on a short term deal and the team had to decide whether or not to extend him long term with franchise QB money, or risk letting him walk.

The Jaguars chose to pay Garrard, and he was never as good as he was that year afterward. They were stuck with him for a few seasons....he was never bad enough to dump, but never really played up to his deal either, remaining average at best during his time there.

Everyone wanted to tell me when I made that comparison how different Fitzpatrick was. "Oh but BeerBaron, Fitzpatrick is way smarter and a way harder worker and etc. etc. etc."

That's fine and dandy, but if I went back and predicted that extending Garrard would be a bad idea when he was extended, everyone would have made the same argument then.

It's difficult to do, but I'd like to see any QB put up two straight great seasons before extending him.

In both of these cases, Garrard and Fitzpatrick were on short term deals and the teams needed to act quickly. I understand why they did what they did, but that doesn't mean I have to like it.

Frankly, I'd strongly consider using the franchise tag. See if they can play great 2 years in a row before extending them long term or if they just revert back to their averages.

Garrard never played like he did the year he was extended, and so far, Fitzpatrick isn't even playing like he was in the first half of THIS year.

Nalej
11-14-2011, 10:28 AM
Bias man wants more Pats talk.
Reading now, looks good so far.

brat316
11-14-2011, 10:31 AM
From last week. I gotta agree with you on Troy, he cannot play pure safety. His skill/speed have diminished some, with the age and playing like he does.

He could play pure safety well in the early years, when he played nickle back his rookie year, and pure safety for 2 years after that.

But now he feels out of place in the deep zone, and can't keep up with guys playing man on TEs. A.J. Green catch, either he would have leveled him or most likely INT, but nope lets him catch it. He has turned into an above average safety, but still a very good one in the box. To bad the NFL is moving towards the pass where he needs to drop deeper.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 10:33 AM
Oh, and one more thing:

9.) The "Garrarding" of Fitzpatrick has begun.

I said this in the thread about Fitzpatrick's extension, and I'm starting to be justified.

There should always be some concern when extending a QB who is playing well above his career averages for just 1 season. The Jaguars did the same thing with David Garrard in his first full year starting. He was great that year, playing better than he ever did before. But he was on a short term deal and the team had to decide whether or not to extend him long term with franchise QB money, or risk letting him walk.

The Jaguars chose to pay Garrard, and he was never as good as he was that year afterward. They were stuck with him for a few seasons....he was never bad enough to dump, but never really played up to his deal either, remaining average at best during his time there.

Everyone wanted to tell me when I made that comparison how different Fitzpatrick was. "Oh but BeerBaron, Fitzpatrick is way smarter and a way harder worker and etc. etc. etc."

That's fine and dandy, but if I went back and predicted that extending Garrard would be a bad idea when he was extended, everyone would have made the same argument then.

It's difficult to do, but I'd like to see any QB put up two straight great seasons before extending him.

In both of these cases, Garrard and Fitzpatrick were on short term deals and the teams needed to act quickly. I understand why they did what they did, but that doesn't mean I have to like it.

Frankly, I'd strongly consider using the franchise tag. See if they can play great 2 years in a row before extending them long term or if they just revert back to their averages.

Garrard never played like he did the year he was extended, and so far, Fitzpatrick isn't even playing like he was in the first half of THIS year.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 10:34 AM
Bias man wants more Pats talk.
Reading now, looks good so far.

I did a lot of Pats talk last week. I'm all Pats'd out.

From last week. I gotta agree with you on Troy, he cannot play pure safety. His skill/speed have diminished some, with the age and playing like he does.

He could play pure safety well in the early years, when he played nickle back his rookie year, and pure safety for 2 years after that.

But now he feels out of place in the deep zone, and can't keep up with guys playing man on TEs. A.J. Green catch, either he would have leveled him or most likely INT, but nope lets him catch it. He has turned into an above average safety, but still a very good one in the box. To bad the NFL is moving towards the pass where he needs to drop deeper.

That was my overall point with that. Troy is still an above average overall safety and when the whole of that defense is clicking, he can do a lot of damage roaming the field.

But he's not great in deep coverage. Never really was, but he's looking worse with each passing game at that.

ImBrotherCain
11-14-2011, 10:35 AM
Love the write ups keep them coming.

Jughead10
11-14-2011, 10:42 AM
The worst part about the Mike Smith 4th down play is obviously losing the game, but how does your defense feel now? They had already held New Orleans to a 3 and out in OT already. It wasn't like New Orleans was scoring every time they touched the ball.

Giantsfan1080
11-14-2011, 10:43 AM
Excellent writeup BB. The 49'ers O-Line is going to be the best in the league within the next year or two. Iupati and Davis did a really good job yesterday and they have the nasty demeanor you want to see.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 10:47 AM
The worst part about the Mike Smith 4th down play is obviously losing the game, but how does your defense feel now? They had already held New Orleans to a 3 and out in OT already. It wasn't like New Orleans was scoring every time they touched the ball.

There was also some talk that he didn't have faith in his punter and was a little scared of Sproles who had some decent returns previously.

But that's still a bad idea. Like you said, his defense was playing well.

And if he doesn't like his punter, he should get a new one. Unless you have a Shane Lechler or Mike Scifries, punters are fairly interchangeable. Work one out in practice this week and replace Bosher.

Excellent writeup BB. The 49'ers O-Line is going to be the best in the league within the next year or two. Iupati and Davis did a really good job yesterday and they have the nasty demeanor you want to see.

Agreed. That line is built out of high draft picks and a decent free agent pickup at center. They had some issues with gelling last year as they were pretty young, but Harbaugh really puts an emphasis on developing the o-line, which he also did at Stanford.

Right now, I think Houston might have the overall best line in the NFL, but the 49ers are probably the most purely talented.

Jughead10
11-14-2011, 10:47 AM
Excellent writeup BB. The 49'ers O-Line is going to be the best in the league within the next year or two. Iupati and Davis did a really good job yesterday and they have the nasty demeanor you want to see.

Alex Smith is exactly the type of QB who gives us fits though. He has just enough speed that we just missed getting our hands on him a couple of times and he broke out of the pocket. But he doesn't have enough speed that we treat him like we do with Vick, and give him the more exotic blitzes from safeties and DBs.

Bengalsrocket
11-14-2011, 10:49 AM
I feel like you're being irrational about Tebow. I tried to look back at all my time watching football, and I've never rooted for a player to fail, ever.

I agree it's a little annoying to listen to all the Tebow talk every week, but I don't think he's bad for football at all. There aren't a ton of options out there for him:

1) He continues to play the way he does right now and is successful for the rest of his career (the very unlikely scenario considering how gimmicky that offense looks with all the running).

2) He fixes his fundamentals and can transform into a serviceable QB that is actually able to make NFL throws.

3) He fails and is no longer a starter in 2 years or less.

Either way, the NFL learns a lesson from Tebow and I don't see how any of that is bad for the league.

vidae
11-14-2011, 10:51 AM
You're 100% abso-*******-lutely right about the Broncos and Chiefs. Jesus ******* christ. Everyone in the god damn country knew what kind of offense they were going to run EXCEPT THE CHIEFS COACHING STAFF. It was the worst thing I think I've ever seen. A game like that costs people their jobs, and honestly, it ******* should. We've been blown out multiple times this year (and don't let the score in the Broncos game fool you, it was a blowout from start to finish) and I'm just sick of it.

Get rid of everyone. I love Haley, but winning is what matters. Get a DC with some balls, get an OC who knows the game TODAY, and fix this ****.

jrdrylie
11-14-2011, 10:51 AM
Excellent writeup BB. The 49'ers O-Line is going to be the best in the league within the next year or two. Iupati and Davis did a really good job yesterday and they have the nasty demeanor you want to see.

I don't get to see the 49ers very often. Is Davis playing well. Wasn't he awful last year?

Jughead10
11-14-2011, 10:53 AM
Either way, the NFL learns a lesson from Tebow and I don't see how any of that is bad for the league.

It's not bad for the league. Just bad for the fans of the Broncos and any team playing them any given week. Although it's bad for all of us this week because they are on Thursday.

Giantsfan1080
11-14-2011, 10:55 AM
Alex Smith is exactly the type of QB who gives us fits though. He has just enough speed that we just missed getting our hands on him a couple of times and he broke out of the pocket. But he doesn't have enough speed that we treat him like we do with Vick, and give him the more exotic blitzes from safeties and DBs.

Yeah the Fewell soft zone specialty was out in full force yesterday. We didn't do that good of a job either though up front. Tuck was kind of invisible yesterday.

Giantsfan1080
11-14-2011, 10:57 AM
I don't get to see the 49ers very often. Is Davis playing well. Wasn't he awful last year?

Yesterday was the first time I saw them this year and Davis played really well. I think he got off to a pretty slow start last year but started coming on at the end of the year and it looks like it's continuing this year. I'm a bit bias on Davis but he's going to be a good one. Like I said in the previous post he's got the OL mauling attitude that you love.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 10:59 AM
I don't get to see the 49ers very often. Is Davis playing well. Wasn't he awful last year?

The whole line is playing better. There's still some rawness to it but the talent there is clear.

It's not bad for the league. Just bad for the fans of the Broncos and any team playing them any given week. Although it's bad for all of us this week because they are on Thursday.

"Bad for the league" might have been strong, but in a week where some great games were played, "2 for 8" Tebow being the lead story is a joke.

And two years is waaaay to long to put up with this. If he were any other QB there would be talk of him being one of the worst ever going on right now. But no, it's Tebow. Instead, we get **** like "Can the Broncos make the playoffs with Tebow at QB? Will Tebow revolutionize the QB position?"

No no no no no. No to everything Tebow related. I hope Briggs and Peppers CRUSH him when the play in a few weeks. Make him afraid to ever run the ball again.

Raiderz4Life
11-14-2011, 11:01 AM
Other than rubbing salt in my Tebow wound...I don't believe I disagree with anything. Andy being un Indy with Luck would be pretty good....but only if Polian is gone

Jughead10
11-14-2011, 11:04 AM
Yeah the Fewell soft zone specialty was out in full force yesterday. We didn't do that good of a job either though up front. Tuck was kind of invisible yesterday.

I thought Tuck played ok. We stopped the run. Which had to be the #1 priority heading into the game. He also had a big pressure but Smith got out of the pocket and threw it away.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 11:05 AM
Other than rubbing salt in my Tebow wound...I don't believe I disagree with anything. Andy being un Indy with Luck would be pretty good....but only if Polian is gone

Yeah, Polian would have to be gone in that situation. No way he hires a coach with any sort of free will as long as he remains in power.

Jughead10
11-14-2011, 11:05 AM
"Bad for the league" might have been strong, but in a week where some great games were played, "2 for 8" Tebow being the lead story is a joke.

And two years is waaaay to long to put up with this. If he were any other QB there would be talk of him being one of the worst ever going on right now. But no, it's Tebow. Instead, we get **** like "Can the Broncos make the playoffs with Tebow at QB? Will Tebow revolutionize the QB position?"

No no no no no. No to everything Tebow related. I hope Briggs and Peppers CRUSH him when the play in a few weeks. Make him afraid to ever run the ball again.

Sanchez vs. Tebow? Jets win 11-3?

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 11:07 AM
Sanchez vs. Tebow? Jets win 11-3?

Rex Ryan should be put on suicide watch if his defense can't stop Tebow. They should go straight 46 defense and put Revis and Cro in the hardest press coverage possible.

If they did that, the Broncos might be the first team ever to somehow score negative points.

Go full blown Waterboy. Get a lead either via careful offense or a defensive score, then just have Sanchez kneel every play. Jets win 3 to -10.

Raiderz4Life
11-14-2011, 11:15 AM
Yeah, Polian would have to be gone in that situation. No way he hires a coach with any sort of free will as long as he remains in power.

If the Colts don't clean the house....they're officially ******** and deserve to lose. Bill Polian can not hold that franchise hostage

brat316
11-14-2011, 11:19 AM
And hopefully no one hires him. Please lose the power to vote.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 11:21 AM
But people want to give him a break because how was he supposed to know Manning was hurt? Yanno....how was he supposed to know Manning was too hurt to play before extending him with a ludicrous contract?

So many mistakes were made....and some people want to give him another chance because of "past success." No no. The guy is 1 for 6 in Superbowls plus countless other playoff failures. His style of team building wins regular season championships...but they don't hand out the hardware for those.

princefielder28
11-14-2011, 11:23 AM
I agree that the Bears are the greatest threat to the Packers in the NFC.

1. The Bears can get pressure with their front four and that allows for more players to play coverage against the Packers elite passing attack. Marshall Newhouse has done a decent job at left tackle but he's had his issues and I think he'll continue to have his bumps in the road so the Packers can be exposed on the left side.

2. The Packers, outside of Clay Matthews, have nobody to rush the passer and when Cutler gets time in the pocket he can be lethal even with an average group of receivers. The Packers secondary has also been exposed this season with Nick Collins going down and Sam Shields not performing as well as last year.

3. Martz has shown an obligation to give Matt Forte the football and he has proven to be one of the best five backs in the league, and that also shortens the football game, leaving the Packers offense on the sideline.

4. Since Lovie Smith has gotten to Chicago they have always played the Packers tough and close. When they meet again on Christmas and possibly in the playoffs, there's no reason to think it'll be any different.

Raiderz4Life
11-14-2011, 11:26 AM
And hopefully no one hires him. Please lose the power to vote.

You know someone will yhough...because he's one of the winningest GMs of the last X years and he drafted peyton manning and omg he's geniuzzz when it comes to building a team

Jughead10
11-14-2011, 11:37 AM
I think the Giants could give the Packers a run at home too. I imagine that would be the game they are least favorites in the rest of the season.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 11:42 AM
I think the Giants could give the Packers a run at home too. I imagine that would be the game they are least favorites in the rest of the season.

I don't know, Alex Smith and the 49ers spread you out pretty good. The Packers might up 40+ unless you got consistent pass rush with just the front 4 the entire time.

jth1331
11-14-2011, 11:44 AM
Just to note something yesterday, Tebow really only had 1 pass attempt that was atrocious.
I think its more horrible play calling and his WR's dropping passes now. I think Broncos OC McCoy just said "Screw it, they can't stop the run, lets ram it down their throats." and once they got the lead, they never looked back.

Jughead10
11-14-2011, 11:47 AM
I don't know, Alex Smith and the 49ers spread you out pretty good. The Packers might up 40+ unless you got consistent pass rush with just the front 4 the entire time.

It's a totally different offense. We'll play more man against the Packers. We always do against the tougher competition. The more vertical teams we can cover. The 49ers had an H-back wide open all day in zone. The 49ers also have a better defense than the Packers in my opinion.

But since it is in NJ, I don't see how that wouldn't be the smallest spread remaining on the board for the Packers.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 11:47 AM
Just to note something yesterday, Tebow really only had 1 pass attempt that was atrocious.
I think its more horrible play calling and his WR's dropping passes now. I think Broncos OC McCoy just said "Screw it, they can't stop the run, lets ram it down their throats." and once they got the lead, they never looked back.

But see, that's not going to fly every week. Like I said earlier, I think the Jets should just run a 46 this week. Crush the run and let your corners man up hard against the Broncos lackluster receivers. Tebow lacks the quick release to to beat blitzes and if you stuff the run, the Broncos won't be able to do anything.

And seriously, Tebow is the only QB who could complete 25% of his passes and have excuses made for him.

Ridiculous.

Giantsfan1080
11-14-2011, 11:47 AM
The Packers will eat us alive just like last year. Fewell's soft zone will get us killed against Rodgers.

Jughead10
11-14-2011, 11:49 AM
Wrong thread.

Iamcanadian
11-14-2011, 11:50 AM
Since my midseason thoughts were pretty well received and a few people requested some thoughts each week, I thought I'd give it a shot if I had enough time.

And yes, I know week 10 isn't officially over but I'm about 99% sure the Packers will win tonight in a blowout. So. Sorry Vikings.

1.) Mike Smith should not have gone for it.
This one is getting played up quite a bit in the media today, and it seems that most of the various analysts are correctly saying that this was a bad decision.

Now, I'm heavily in favor of "going for it" more often than real coaches seem to be. You can say that it's easier for me to say "go for it" when I'm sitting behind a computer instead of actually coaching, and that maybe true, but I think most coaches are overly conservative in this regard.

In my opinion, you should go for it on 4th and 2 (or less) anywhere between midfield (could possibly even stretch back to your own 40 if you're really confident) and a reasonable FG range (under 50 yards for me.) Now there may be a few mitigating factors, such as the details of the situation, how much you trust your defense vs. the opposing offense, how good your kicker is from beyond 50, etc.

But Smith going for it fits none of that criteria. Even if they pick up at first down, they have a long way to go before they're in scoring position. Perhaps if they were just slightly out of FG range, I could have understood going for it. But from your own 30? That's a bad call.

Hindsight makes geniuses of us all. If they make it and win, he is a genius, fail to make it and every critic will come out of the cellar and call you an idiot.
Smith believed NO would very likely score if they gave them the ball and punted.

2.) The Cards should stick with John Skelton.
While he hasn't played great by any stretch of the imagination, he's played well enough to win 2 games in 2 starts, which is more than Kolb won in 7 starts.

Unless and until Skelton really starts blowing games, they should ride with him. He seems have a far better connection with Larry Fitzgerald for instance than Kolb ever developed. (Having actual arm strength is probably a factor in that...)

Kolb, for lack of a better term, is awful. He was not a good QB during his time in Philly and the Cardinals gave up way to much for him in a panic to find a QB. Them going back to Kolb without Skelton failing beforehand would just be a backhanded slap at the other players and fans by saying "we paid a lot of this guy, he's going to play."

Kolb isn't even the QB AJ Feeley was with Miami. He's a trade bust and is not an NFL caliber starting QB. Acquiring him was a poor, panicked decision by the Cardinals and those in charge of the organization may end up paying for it with their jobs.

You might be right about Kolb or perhaps he needs a year in Arizona's system especially since there were no OT's. Skelton offers them total mediocrity so I think they won't give up so easily on Kolb although you might be right by saying they panicked in acquiring him.
3.) The 49ers are legit.

I, like most of you, still had plenty of concerns with the 49ers. They had beaten down their weaker competition but hadn't faced many real tests this season. Win, lose or draw, the Giants game was going to give us a good measure of what the 49ers are as a team.

And a good football team is what they are. They matched the Giants (one of the NFC's better teams) blow for blow and made the plays they needed to play in crucial spots to come away with the win. Alex Smith played good-but-not-great as he managed the game. The 49ers weren't great in running the ball, but ran well enough when they had to. They proved that they have a decent stable of receivers as they spread the ball around well. Their o-line held the vaunted Giants defense to only 2 sacks. And while their defense struggled a bit between the 20s, they buckled down in the red zone holding the Giants to field goals more often than not.

While it was hardly a perfect performance, they played well enough to assure themselves a spot in the upper echelon of NFC teams.

However, they struggled with the Giants passing attack and receiver depth. If they hope to contend with a team like the Packers come January, they need to find way to fix that.

Speaking of the Packers, I'm lead into my next point...

Nice season so far and it is nice to see Alex Smith prove all his critics ignorant.

4.) The Bears may be the best "Packer Killers" the NFC has.

It's a small stretch and you're probably about to call me out as being a homer, but hear me out.

Over the past 2 years, and especially this season, very few teams have been able to slow the Packers down. They just have so ungodly many targets for Rodgers to throw to that your best bet in beating them is to try and win a shootout, something no team has done yet this year.

But if there is one team who has at least played the Packers tough in recent years, it's the Bears. The Bears held the Packers below their season average in their first meeting this year and were a phantom hold on the Hester/Knox trickeration punt return from pulling to within 3 points.

Dating back to last year, the Bears won the team's first regular season meeting, holding the Packers to 17 points. In the season finale, the Bears gave up only 10 points to the eventual champions. Then in the NFC Championship game, the Bears held the Packers offense to 14 points (they got to 21 on the Raji pick 6.)

Additionally, each time they play, it seems like the Bears manage to force a key turnover or two that the Packers really don't make in their other games. No other defenses have shown to be capable of even slowing the Packers down a little bit.

Whenever the two teams play, be it later this season or possibly again in the playoffs, the Packers should be and will be favorites. But if there is one team in the NFC (or perhaps even the whole NFL) capable of beating the Packers, it's the Bears.

I guess we will have to wait till they play them to find out. Sounds more like your hoping as a Bear's fan that it is true. Yesterday's game was more of a self inflicted Detroit destruction than an impressive Chicago win. However, the Bears do have a solid history playing Green Bay but don't hold your breath.

5.) Tim Tebow needs to go away.

It's not funny. It's not cute. It's not good football. Tim Tebow and the Broncos are the biggest running joke in the league right now.

The Dolphins, Raiders and Chiefs should be absolutely embarrassed with themselves for letting this joke of a team beat them. I'm talking like "poop your pants at school borderline suicidal" embarrassed. You have no right calling yourself a PROFESSIONAL football player if you let a Tim Tebow led team beat you.

I feel fully confident that when the Broncos face a real defense, Tebow will be absolutely gang raped like he was by the Lions.

2 of 8? 55-8 run-pass ratio? Get the **** out. What were you expecting Chiefs? Load up the box and press the Broncos receivers for gods sake! Take away the run and force Tebow to throw open his receiver because I guarantee he ******* can't!

And that one Eric Decker TD....ugh. It's nothing against Decker, I like Decker, but that one play apparently "justifies" Tebows completely backwards ******* awful performance for 99% of the rest of the game, just like against the Dolphins.

Imagine for a moment if Tom Brady went out, completed 25% of his passes and looked horrible for 59 minutes, then threw one great pass to win the game. Would that be considered a "good" performance? No it ******* wouldn't.

The sooner this guy is proven to be a fraud and the media gets off his dick, the better for the sport of football.

And don't give me **** about "oh, Tebow isn't putting up big passing numbers so you don't like him" BS. I ******* love me some run game and power football and great defense. But Tebow is an ugly abomination on the sport and the sooner he is outed as a fraud, the happier I'll be.

</rant>

Well, talk is cheap and RESULTS are what counts not stats, he is 2-1 as a starter and until he enters the realm of constantly losing, we'll have to put up with all the talk, I'm afraid.

6.) The Eagles.

Oh man, the Eagles. It seems silly that people still talk about a 3-6 team as having a shot at the playoffs, but for some reason, people still do with the Eagles. They'd literally have to win every game for the rest of the year to even have a chance at making the playoffs. Something I cannot fathom this gutless, leaderless, no heart or backbone team doing.

If this poor level of play keeps up, I think the best thing for the Eagles and Andy Reid to do would be to have a mutual split.

Reid has been a fixture there for a very long time and had some success when he had a great Jim Johnson defense there to back up his offense. He's also managed to build up some gilded QBs to fleece other teams out of draft picks as well. But I think he's done all he can with the Eagles. The team he has this year has plenty of pure talent to be successful...but they aren't winning. That goes squarely on the coach in my opinion.

What is the excuse for allowing Larry Fitzgerald to run wild on a defense with 3 great man corners? Are you going to try to tell me that if they just allowed Nnamdi to play man on Fitzgerald the whole game, that they couldn't have held Fitzgerald to less?

And that defense...they're terrible against the run, so you'd think they'd at least be good against the pass right? Well no...despite being 3 deep with solid corners, they're forcing them to play zone where clearly, they are not comfortable.

I think the best move for the Eagles and Reid is a mutual split. The Eagles can bring in someone new who will give the franchise a breath of fresh air while hopefully motivating the talent there while Reid can go rebuild a floundering franchise elsewhere. Miami seems like they might be a good fit. Or perhaps Indy if they decide to (rightfully) clean house. Imagine Reid getting to develop Andrew Luck...

It is becoming obvious that in fighting for his job last year, Vick looked better than perhaps he is and is going to be. He isn't the Vick of old and may never be again, he's certainly not playing like the old Vick and he never was a consistent accurate thrower.
They may fire Reid but I don't think he is the problem.

Speaking of the Colts...

7.) Fire Everyone Indy!

Has there ever, and I mean EVER, been a potentially winless team whose GM wasn't on the hot seat?

I said this in my last write up and I'll say this again, THIS ENTIRE SITUATION IS MORE BILL POLIAN'S FAULT THAN ANYONES AND HE SHOULD ABSOLUTELY BE FIRED FOR IT!

A team that goes from the playoffs to potentially winless because one player got hurt? No. Bull ****. This team's lack of a better backup plan and overall reliance on one freaking player is a horrible stain on the sport of football.

Like I said last week, fire everyone. Then hire a new GM to evaluate the Manning situation and draft Luck.

The fact that a team this bad could possibly keep it's GM is a joke. A bad joke. When the Dolphins went 1-15, their newly hired head coach and GM were fired. When the Lions went 0-16, it marked the final nail in the coffin for Matt Millen.

No exception should be made for Polian. This is his fault and he should not be allowed another chance.

I totally disagree, blaming him for Peyton not playing is absurd. Getting a shot at Luck to replace Peyton is pure genius. With a decent backup, maybe they win 6 games and if Peyton cannot ever go again, what would their future be. Far better to accept last place and pick up the best QB prospect in a generation. Indy fans must be overjoyed to know that the Colts will be contenders likely for the next 10-15 years with a couple of SB's in their future.

8.) Cincy still isn't out of it.

Though they lost to the Steelers, they still have a very good chance to finish the season with double digit wins. They played the Steelers hard, still have another game against them, and have two games left against the Ravens. If Seattle can beat a team, the Bengals definitely can.

Additionally,the Bengals have very winnable games left against St. Louis, Arizona and Cleveland. If they can steal even one game away from the Ravens then win those 3, we're looking at a 10-6 and likely playoff bound team.

As they move into the meat of their schedule and teams play a lot harder to make the playoffs, Dalton's rookie mistakes will be magnified more and more. He has a great future but he has gone about as far as he could expect. I think you'll see a falloff after the Pittsburgh game.

So there are my thoughts for this week. Take from them what you will.

Edit:

Oh, and one more thing:

9.) The "Garrarding" of Fitzpatrick has begun.

I said this in the thread about Fitzpatrick's extension, and I'm starting to be justified.

There should always be some concern when extending a QB who is playing well above his career averages for just 1 season. The Jaguars did the same thing with David Garrard in his first full year starting. He was great that year, playing better than he ever did before. But he was on a short term deal and the team had to decide whether or not to extend him long term with franchise QB money, or risk letting him walk.

The Jaguars chose to pay Garrard, and he was never as good as he was that year afterward. They were stuck with him for a few seasons....he was never bad enough to dump, but never really played up to his deal either, remaining average at best during his time there.

Everyone wanted to tell me when I made that comparison how different Fitzpatrick was. "Oh but BeerBaron, Fitzpatrick is way smarter and a way harder worker and etc. etc. etc."

That's fine and dandy, but if I went back and predicted that extending Garrard would be a bad idea when he was extended, everyone would have made the same argument then.

It's difficult to do, but I'd like to see any QB put up two straight great seasons before extending him.

In both of these cases, Garrard and Fitzpatrick were on short term deals and the teams needed to act quickly. I understand why they did what they did, but that doesn't mean I have to like it.

Frankly, I'd strongly consider using the franchise tag. See if they can play great 2 years in a row before extending them long term or if they just revert back to their averages.

Garrard never played like he did the year he was extended, and so far, Fitzpatrick isn't even playing like he was in the first half of THIS year.

Tough call for Buffalo, risk losing Fitzpatrick and ending up with nothing or take the shot and sign him. Their OL is nothing to write home about and if they can upgrade it, just maybe Fitz will be the answer. Time will tell. Remember with that OL, nobody expected Buffalo to be even competitive. If they had just franchised him it might have been safer but it would have cost them 3x his current salary and Wilson is far too cheap to pay that kind of money.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 11:51 AM
I missed the first drive of the game where it looks like Jacobs got some good yardage but I guess after that he was terrible. Stop running for the sidelines. No surprise Ware was in there the entire 4th quarter.

I had jokingly said before the Patriots game when I heard Bradshaw was out that Jacobs would probably run for 10 yards on 5 carries in the first quarter then get benched for some practice squad player.

That was a slight exaggeration but it looks like I was only a week off from Jacobs being terrible then getting replaced. The guy runs like he's half his size. I don't like it.

Breed
11-14-2011, 11:52 AM
We don't need no stinking Andrew Luck we have Mike Vick! What we need is some LBs.

keylime_5
11-14-2011, 11:53 AM
No is gonna get more out of Mike Vick than Reid has. If they get rid of Reid they might as well start looking for a new QB to replace Vick. He isn't gonna take the team any farther than he has without that coaching staff. I don't think Eagles fans will know what they had until it's gone in the case of Reid. Who do they think they're gonna get to replace him? Belichick? Harbaugh? No, if they get a new coach it will likely be another unproven guy that would probably be 50/50 of being any good at all. How often do teams replace coaches who had a lot of success like Reid and Schottenheimer in SD with a better coach?

They need to find a real defensive coaching staff, it's a shame how badly they are utilizing their talent in the secondary on defense, they should take a page out of Rex Ryan's playbook and use their great corners in press man coverage. Putting DRC in the slot is a bad idea as well. Vick is really bad this year after being great last season. That kind of crap happens all the time in the NFL.

jth1331
11-14-2011, 11:55 AM
But see, that's not going to fly every week. Like I said earlier, I think the Jets should just run a 46 this week. Crush the run and let your corners man up hard against the Broncos lackluster receivers. Tebow lacks the quick release to to beat blitzes and if you stuff the run, the Broncos won't be able to do anything.

And seriously, Tebow is the only QB who could complete 25% of his passes and have excuses made for him.

Ridiculous.

I still think the Broncos should go with a spread-option offense instead of lining up with a heavy set formation.
I guess they feel Tebow can't make the necessary quick decisions for that to work though.
The biggest ingredient for Tebow's future will actually be the offseason. If he comes back next season still making some crappy ass throws, he isn't a long term solution.

SickwithIt1010
11-14-2011, 12:01 PM
Bring on a Bill Cowher HC/Mangini DC coaching staff. Scary 3-4 blitzing for days in Philly!....

.....I could only hope.

Iamcanadian
11-14-2011, 12:01 PM
No is gonna get more out of Mike Vick than Reid has. If they get rid of Reid they might as well start looking for a new QB to replace Vick. He isn't gonna take the team any farther than he has without that coaching staff. I don't think Eagles fans will know what they had until it's gone in the case of Reid. They need to find a real defensive coaching staff, it's a shame how badly they are utilizing their talent in the secondary on defense, they should take a page out of Rex Ryan's playbook and use their great corners in press man coverage. Putting DRC in the slot is a bad idea as well. Vick is really bad this year after being great last season. That kind of crap happens all the time in the NFL.

I agree, quite often, the other side of the mountain turns out to be a disaster and it takes the team a decade to recover. Firing Reid should be thought out by the owner long and hard, any rush to judgment could prove terrible.
Great CB's are fine but without a consistent pass rush, CB's become a dime a dozen and can be beaten regularly if the WR has enough time to get open.

jrdrylie
11-14-2011, 12:08 PM
Tough call for Buffalo, risk losing Fitzpatrick and ending up with nothing or take the shot and sign him. Their OL is nothing to write home about and if they can upgrade it, just maybe Fitz will be the answer. Time will tell. Remember with that OL, nobody expected Buffalo to be even competitive. If they had just franchised him it might have been safer but it would have cost them 3x his current salary and Wilson is far too cheap to pay that kind of money.

Not going to quote your entire post, but I want to talk about pretty much everything you said.

1. Mike Smith should not have gone for it. If he gets it, he still has 40 yards to go to get into field goal range. Don't make it and the Saints are already in field goal position. This wasn't hindsight. I watched this at a sports bar with a bunch of people (most of whom are pretty smart concerning football) and nobody thought going for it was a good idea even before they didn't get it.

2. I don't really have an opinion on Kolb. But while Skelton offers pure mediocrity, that is better than what Kolb is giving them.

4. BeerBaron is completely right about the Bears. It isn't blind homerism. If it was, he would say the Bears WILL be the team to beat the Packers. But he didn't. In fact he says the Packers should be favored. But look at the last two years. Nobody has stopped Rodgers. He has been a top-two QB for the last year and a half. Against Chicago? He looks about on par with Mark Sanchez and Joe Flacco.

7. It is completely Bill Polian's fault. People calling for him to be fired don't expect Indianapolis to be 7-2 right now without Indianapolis. But they don't even look like an NFL team. The team has no talent. Look at his last few first round picks. Jerry Hughes, Donald Brown, Anthony Gonzalez, Tony Ugoh (second round pick but traded a first for him), Joseph Addai, and Marlin Jackson. When your best first round pick in 6 years is a mediocre, injury-prone running back, you have a problem.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 12:09 PM
I'm getting behind....

To the whole Reid fired thing, look at what Tampa Bay did when the fired Tony Dungy. He turned that franchise from a creamsicle colored joke into a perennial playoff contender. After several season of falling just short, they fired him and brought in Gruden who was lot more fiery and ass-kicky and pressed that team towards a Superbowl.

If the Bucs could let Dungy go, the Eagles could let Reid go. Take a team to the cusp over and over again might look great, but I think it's clear that Reid isn't the guy to push this team over the top.

And you know what, I think Reid should make the split mutual. The Philly fans and media are going to be unbearable if this year keeps going badly. Even though it's extremely unlikely that they make the playoffs, he needs to win more than he loses the rest of the way just to turn down the heat a little bit. If they finish off in an abysmal fashion.....

Rosebud
11-14-2011, 12:12 PM
I don't know, Alex Smith and the 49ers spread you out pretty good. The Packers might up 40+ unless you got consistent pass rush with just the front 4 the entire time.

Just look at the difference in playcalling though between the 9ers game and the Pats game. Against the pats we were aggressive, creative and played to stop the pass. Against the 9ers we played to stop the run and against the pass just dropped back into soft zones so that we didn't get beat deep. The giants have done this as long as Coughlin's been coach, the giants don't bust out their best and most aggressive play calling unless they're out gunned, or expected to be out gunned. When we're not scared of an offense tearing us apart they play so passive and vanilla it's infuriating. It's something that's been consistent from Co-ordinator to co-ordinator, from player to player to the point where this has to be coming down from Coughlin. I can only assume it's the same reason we don't blitz in Preseason, "the more teams know about us the better prepared they'll be to stop us." Which is fine and all when you're running backups out there, but starts to backfire when the games matter and you need your starters to get comfortable and establish some momentum playing to succeed rather just not to screw up too badly.

You'll see it in games where we're playing flat that the team can just flip a switch and become an aggressive and sneaky blitz heavy squad when they need to make a stand/stop/big-play. This relying on being able to turn up the dial and comeback against teams thing is great and all cause the Giants have been an abnormally successful 4th quarter team, but is so infuriating because you just never know what to expect from the team as a fan.

jrdrylie
11-14-2011, 12:15 PM
But see, that's not going to fly every week. Like I said earlier, I think the Jets should just run a 46 this week. Crush the run and let your corners man up hard against the Broncos lackluster receivers. Tebow lacks the quick release to to beat blitzes and if you stuff the run, the Broncos won't be able to do anything.

And seriously, Tebow is the only QB who could complete 25% of his passes and have excuses made for him.

Ridiculous.

Screw 4-6 defense, go back to the early 1900s and bring out the 7-2-2 defense. Start Wilkerson, Pouha, DeVito, Dixon, Pitoitua, Pace, and Maybin on the line, Harris and Scott at linebacker, with Revis and Smith as DB. No need to have two corners out there, Denver's receivers suck anyways.

Complex
11-14-2011, 12:31 PM
Bring on a Bill Cowher HC/Mangini DC coaching staff. Scary 3-4 blitzing for days in Philly!....

.....I could only hope.

You don't have the personal to become a 3-4 team. Your linebackers suck, you will probably have to move Babin and and Trent Cole to linebacker. You will need DE's I guess you could move Patterson to DE but I am pretty sure Cullen Jenkins signed a one year deal. To top it all off your safeties blow.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 12:32 PM
Also, someone somewhere (I can't find the post) said that the Broncos should run a spread instead of the power run.

A John Fox team running the spread would be like giving a 90 year old man an iPhone. That **** won't fly.

killxswitch
11-14-2011, 12:35 PM
Fire Bill Polian. 1000x, yes.

Though IMO it's a forgone conclusion. BillPo used terrible roster moves to tank the season so his son can get Andrew Luck. He will retire at the end of the season, taking all criticism onto himself for the team going 0-16. His son will draft Luck and become the heir of the Polian "genius". Hopefully though he won't be a complete ass like his dad.

DraftSavant
11-14-2011, 12:36 PM
Bring on a Bill Cowher HC/Mangini DC coaching staff. Scary 3-4 blitzing for days in Philly!....

.....I could only hope.

The Eagles have the most undersized front 7 in the league. Switching to the 3-4 would make them worse than they already are.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 12:38 PM
Another thing...Michael Vick actually fits well into the Garrard/Fitzpatrick "long term deal after 1 good year" category.

His last year in Philly was phenomenal. He had never put up passing stats anything like that before. So, they extend him with a franchise QB deal, and this years he looks more like Atlanta Vick only more injury prone and minus the scrambling.

It's something teams should be more aware of. Rarely does a QB suddenly get better overnight and keep it up. If a guy suddenly comes out and starts performing well above his career averages, try hard to have him go through a 2nd year before extending him long term, even if it means the franchise tag. The money you spend there will surely be less than his guaranteed money on a long term deal, and if he fails to keep it up, you can let him go with far less of a consequence.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 12:40 PM
Fire Bill Polian. 1000x, yes.

Though IMO it's a forgone conclusion. BillPo used terrible roster moves to tank the season so his son can get Andrew Luck. He will retire at the end of the season, taking all criticism onto himself for the team going 0-16. His son will draft Luck and become the heir of the Polian "genius". Hopefully though he won't be a complete ass like his dad.

ORLY:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/11/06/chris-polian-catching-more-blame-for-the-state-of-the-colts/


As pointed out by Brad Wells of StampedeBlue.com via email and Jason Whitlock of FOXSports.com via Twitter, Bob Kravitz of the Indianapolis Star has crafted a compelling case for blaming the team’s current struggles on the son of Vice Chairman Bill Polian.

Based on interviews with several unnamed former Colts employees conducted in recent weeks, Kravitz writes that G.M. Chris Polian is a “toxic force who has brought this franchise to its knees for reasons other than Peyton Manning’s injury.” Apart from Chris Polian’s decisions as the man in charge of personnel, Kravitz explains that damage was done as Chris Polian stood on his father’s shoulders to leapfrog others on the organizational chart.

“[S]ince he started moving up the organizational ladder in the early 2000s for no apparent reason other than being a Polian,” Kravtiz writes, “he has been instrumental in hastening the exits of scouts and assistant coaches who led the Colts to previous greatness.”

I would definitely not want Chris in charge as a Colts fan. Full house cleaning or bust. Irsay seems somewhat insane, but even he should know this isn't working.

Jughead10
11-14-2011, 12:41 PM
When everyone was overrating the Eagles I was trying to keep people calm in the Giants thread.

I gave Vick about a 20% chance of repeating last season. You knew it wasn't going to happen.

I brought up the point that they could be run on and their LB are trash. They also have an offensive line coach calling plays.

And I thought the rookie kicker and punter would hurt them. Although it really hasn't too much.

I was 2 for 3. I'll take it.

jrdrylie
11-14-2011, 12:51 PM
Another thing...Michael Vick actually fits well into the Garrard/Fitzpatrick "long term deal after 1 good year" category.

His last year in Philly was phenomenal. He had never put up passing stats anything like that before. So, they extend him with a franchise QB deal, and this years he looks more like Atlanta Vick only more injury prone and minus the scrambling.

It's something teams should be more aware of. Rarely does a QB suddenly get better overnight and keep it up. If a guy suddenly comes out and starts performing well above his career averages, try hard to have him go through a 2nd year before extending him long term, even if it means the franchise tag. The money you spend there will surely be less than his guaranteed money on a long term deal, and if he fails to keep it up, you can let him go with far less of a consequence.

Alex Smith potentially falls into this category too. He is playing much better than he ever has in his career on a one yera deal. Next offseason, some team is going to offer him big money. Does San Francisco match that offer, franchise him, or just left him walk.

DraftSavant
11-14-2011, 12:51 PM
ORLY:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/11/06/chris-polian-catching-more-blame-for-the-state-of-the-colts/



I would definitely not want Chris in charge as a Colts fan. Full house cleaning or bust. Irsay seems somewhat insane, but even he should know this isn't working.

Jim Buss part 2.

Jughead10
11-14-2011, 12:54 PM
Alex Smith potentially falls into this category too. He is playing much better than he ever has in his career on a one yera deal. Next offseason, some team is going to offer him big money. Does San Francisco match that offer, franchise him, or just left him walk.

Probably let him walk. And Harbaugh could get similar production out of the rookie from Nevada or he can spend money on a better QB and even be more set.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 12:58 PM
Alex Smith potentially falls into this category too. He is playing much better than he ever has in his career on a one yera deal. Next offseason, some team is going to offer him big money. Does San Francisco match that offer, franchise him, or just left him walk.

That is a tricky spot...I for some reason thought he signed a two year deal. Maybe I was thinking of one in the past.

He's playing well, definitely. He's what I like to call a "game manager +" in that he's not going to carry the team like a franchise QB, but can step up to do it for brief stints if the team needs it, beyond what a typical game manager would do.

The situation reminds me a bit of Matt Hasselbeck during Shaun Alexander's prime when they made the Superbowl.

I guess it depends on Colin Kaepernick's development. Harbaugh is able to see him every day in practice to know. If he doesn't seem ready by the end of the season to take over, I say franchise Smith. That's a **** ton of money for a non-elite QB, but you won't be stuck with him for years to come as you would be if you sign him to a big money long-term deal.

jrdrylie
11-14-2011, 12:59 PM
Probably let him walk. And Harbaugh could get similar production out of the rookie from Nevada or he can spend money on a better QB and even be more set.

You think Kaepernick will be ready. He was extremely raw coming out. Maybe Tim Tebow raw. And there doesn't seem to be any free agent upgrades. Brees isn't leaving New Orleans, Matt Flynn is an unknown, Kyle Orton and Jason Campbell aren't really uprades, and the rest of the free agent quarterback class is just awful. My guess is he is franchised.

Jughead10
11-14-2011, 01:02 PM
You think Kaepernick will be ready. He was extremely raw coming out. Maybe Tim Tebow raw. And there doesn't seem to be any free agent upgrades. Brees isn't leaving New Orleans, Matt Flynn is an unknown, Kyle Orton and Jason Campbell aren't really uprades, and the rest of the free agent quarterback class is just awful. My guess is he is franchised.

Did anyone think Alex Smith was ready after 7 years? But you're right Franchise probably is the best coarse of action. Overpay but only for one year. Does San Fran have any other big FAs they need to save the tag for?

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 01:05 PM
Did anyone think Alex Smith was ready after 7 years? But you're right Franchise probably is the best coarse of action. Overpay but only for one year. Does San Fran have any other big FAs they need to save the tag for?

I don't think so...I just went through every other 49er I could think of and they seem locked up. Carlos Rogers has been a solid pickup and only signed a one year deal, but if he's the biggest one, the I'd say franchise Smith all the way.

Diehard
11-14-2011, 01:10 PM
"Bad for the league" might have been strong, but in a week where some great games were played, "2 for 8" Tebow being the lead story is a joke.

A lot of people, even many Broncos fans, hate the Tebow hype as it is more a reflection of his Gator days than his tenure so far in the NFL.

No no no no no. No to everything Tebow related. I hope Briggs and Peppers CRUSH him when the play in a few weeks. Make him afraid to ever run the ball again.

Many things can happen, but face it, the bolded part never will...

The fact is the Broncos are winning with him at the helm. For a team that was left for dead, that's encouraging. Back-to-back wins in our archrivals' stadiums is particularly encouraging.

The test will be if they can start shifting toward the 60/40 run/pass ratio they want to have. I think they'll happily keep the spread option framework in place if they can consistently pass from it. If they can't, then the Tebow experiment will be over after this season.

Iamcanadian
11-14-2011, 01:10 PM
Not going to quote your entire post, but I want to talk about pretty much everything you said.

1. Mike Smith should not have gone for it. If he gets it, he still has 40 yards to go to get into field goal range. Don't make it and the Saints are already in field goal position. This wasn't hindsight. I watched this at a sports bar with a bunch of people (most of whom are pretty smart concerning football) and nobody thought going for it was a good idea even before they didn't get it.

Normally, I would agree with you that the reward isn't worth the risk, but Smith said, he had lost a couple of times to NO on last minute drives and felt they would at least kick a FG to win if he gave them the ball. In hindsight, it obviously looks like the better call to kick, but NO does have a high powered offense and a franchise QB and could easily have won anyways. After all, in overtime, people claim that the 1st team to touch the ball wins too often so turning the ball over to NO carried a lot of risk as well.

2. I don't really have an opinion on Kolb. But while Skelton offers pure mediocrity, that is better than what Kolb is giving them.

Cannot argue based on this year. For Arizona's sake, I hope Kolb bounces back next year.

4. BeerBaron is completely right about the Bears. It isn't blind homerism. If it was, he would say the Bears WILL be the team to beat the Packers. But he didn't. In fact he says the Packers should be favored. But look at the last two years. Nobody has stopped Rodgers. He has been a top-two QB for the last year and a half. Against Chicago? He looks about on par with Mark Sanchez and Joe Flacco.

I said these teams seem to play close to the vest and just maybe Chicago could upset them but they had better hope the GB plays like Detroit and self destructs in the game. Just teasing beerbaron!

7. It is completely Bill Polian's fault. People calling for him to be fired don't expect Indianapolis to be 7-2 right now without Indianapolis. But they don't even look like an NFL team. The team has no talent. Look at his last few first round picks. Jerry Hughes, Donald Brown, Anthony Gonzalez, Tony Ugoh (second round pick but traded a first for him), Joseph Addai, and Marlin Jackson. When your best first round pick in 6 years is a mediocre, injury-prone running back, you have a problem.

Here, I disagree, without Peyton, Indy was going nowhere this season, so why not go after the 1st pick in the draft with a special prospect like Luck sitting there. Indy could have another 10-15 year run as a top NFL team.
I also disagree with you on Polian's drafting. He consistently finds middle rounders who become solid players and drafting where he does, you have to do the best you can drafting round 2 talent which is all that is left where the Colts draft. You have to remember that Indy is a very small market city and he has to pay Peyton huge $$$$'s. Every year, he is forced to cut his LBers and CB's to meet payroll.
I'd rate Polian among the top 5 drafters in the NFL year after year for his overall draft and I think he made a decision this year to ride it out and see what he would end up with at the draft table since it is quite obvious the team was going nowhere.
He's not going to be fired and even if Peyton cannot play another game, Indy will be a serious contender again within a couple of seasons if not right away.

jrdrylie
11-14-2011, 01:13 PM
Did anyone think Alex Smith was ready after 7 years? But you're right Franchise probably is the best coarse of action. Overpay but only for one year. Does San Fran have any other big FAs they need to save the tag for?

Ted Ginn? Joe Nedney? Those are pretty much their only free agents. it seems like their salary cap situation won't be too bad so franchising Smith (although he'll be overpaid) won't be too damaging.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 01:18 PM
Here, I disagree, without Peyton, Indy was going nowhere this season, so why not go after the 1st pick in the draft with a special prospect like Luck sitting there. Indy could have another 10-15 year run as a top NFL team.
I also disagree with you on Polian's drafting. He consistently finds middle rounders who become solid players and drafting where he does, you have to do the best you can drafting round 2 talent which is all that is left where the Colts draft. You have to remember that Indy is a very small market city and he has to pay Peyton huge $$$$'s. Every year, he is forced to cut his LBers and CB's to meet payroll.
I'd rate Polian among the top 5 drafters in the NFL year after year for his overall draft and I think he made a decision this year to ride it out and see what he would end up with at the draft table since it is quite obvious the team was going nowhere.
He's not going to be fired and even if Peyton cannot play another game, Indy will be a serious contender again within a couple of seasons if not right away.

There was a post...possibly in the Andrew Luck Sweepstakes thread or another thread like that where a Colts fan basically broke down every Colts draft class of the past several years, and it looks downright abysmal.

He neglected the o-line for years, and constantly drafts guys to fit his broken system. I keep saying it over and over to the point where I feel like a broken record, but Polian's system has only ever built regular season championships. For all of those years with Buffalo and now with Indy, he's 1-6 in Superbowls plus countless years where they won 12, 13, 14 games only to see quick playoff exits.

He builds his Arena league styles teams that get crushed by more well rounded playoff caliber teams far more often than not. His finesse system just doesn't work and he shouldn't be given another decade and another franchise QB to waste running it.

SickwithIt1010
11-14-2011, 01:24 PM
The Eagles have the most undersized front 7 in the league. Switching to the 3-4 would make them worse than they already are.

More of a joke than anything. I wouldn't mind seeing it, but I'd be happier with a Brian Billick or Gruden type signing. Guys with offensive backgrounds, but understand the importance of a great defense.

killxswitch
11-14-2011, 01:36 PM
There was a post...possibly in the Andrew Luck Sweepstakes thread or another thread like that where a Colts fan basically broke down every Colts draft class of the past several years, and it looks downright abysmal.

He neglected the o-line for years, and constantly drafts guys to fit his broken system. I keep saying it over and over to the point where I feel like a broken record, but Polian's system has only ever built regular season championships. For all of those years with Buffalo and now with Indy, he's 1-6 in Superbowls plus countless years where they won 12, 13, 14 games only to see quick playoff exits.

He builds his Arena league styles teams that get crushed by more well rounded playoff caliber teams far more often than not. His finesse system just doesn't work and he shouldn't be given another decade and another franchise QB to waste running it.

That was me, I will see if I can find it.

Also, re: Chris Polian, I am choosing to be positive because otherwise the team is screwed. A Polian will be running the team. That seems certain. So if I had to choose between the young guy that drafted Anthony Castonzo, Ben Ijalana, Drake Nevis, and Delone Carter in 2011 and the old guy that hasn't had 4 good draft picks total from 2007-2010, I'll take the young guy.

jrdrylie
11-14-2011, 01:39 PM
There was a post...possibly in the Andrew Luck Sweepstakes thread or another thread like that where a Colts fan basically broke down every Colts draft class of the past several years, and it looks downright abysmal.


Since 2005, only two of his picks have made the Pro Bowl (Joseph Addai and Antoine Bethea, both from 2006). So six of his last seven drafts have produced zero Pro Bowlers. And the two players who actually made the Pro Bowl aren't even that good.

2007 was especially terrible. Clint Session is the only quality pick from that draft and he isn't even on the team. 2008 was slightly better. Pierre Garcon is talented (although slightly inconsistent). Phillip Wheeler is a borderline starter. 2009 netted a starting defensive tackle, Curtis Painter, and a Punter. Pat Angerer from 2010 was probably the best pick the Colts have made in a while. But that is pretty much it from that draft. It's too early to judge 2011.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 01:42 PM
They've needed an Angerer type for the previous 8 years or so. Basically since Rob Morris was done.

And no, I don't mean a white guy. I mean a tackle machine. They draft a lot of smaller, more athletic cover guys but they always get trounced by teams committed to running the ball. (At least whenever Bob Sanders was out...)

jsa230
11-14-2011, 01:45 PM
That was me, I will see if I can find it.

Also, re: Chris Polian, I am choosing to be positive because otherwise the team is screwed. A Polian will be running the team. That seems certain. So if I had to choose between the young guy that drafted Anthony Castonzo, Ben Ijalana, Drake Nevis, and Delone Carter in 2011 and the old guy that hasn't had 4 good draft picks total from 2007-2010, I'll take the young guy.\

i get your point but all these guys were pretty solid picks. Garcon, Collie, Session, Tamme, Wheeler, Gonzo . .almost forgot PainterZ. all drafted between 07-10 iirc. I agree with you, Bill shouldn't run the team, but i don't know Chris should either. Either way I despise the colts so I don't really care.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 01:46 PM
Painter is about as good as Brodie Croyle, who is something like 0-11 as a starter. It's bad.

killxswitch
11-14-2011, 01:48 PM
Found it, I will update it.


Here's a breakdown of Bill Polians drafting from 07 - 10 that I wrote on another forum.

07
WR A Gonzalez - known slow healer, hurt too much to make a difference, presumably healthy now but can't get on the field. Supposedly in BillPo's doghouse.
OT T Ugoh - "Nogoh", gave up a 1st and 3rd for him
CB D Hughes - is he still in the NFL?
DT Q Pitcock - "Quitcock"
LB C Session - a good 4th rounder now playing against us for the Jags twice a year
Condren, Hall, Coe, Dawson - nobodies

08
OG M Pollak - bust
LB P Wheeler - can't keep his job, playing better but still mediocre in his contract year
TE J Tamme - decent fill-in for Clark when he's hurt
DE M Howard - is he still in the NFL?
TE T Santi - is he still in the NFL?
OG S Justice - is he still in the NFL?
RB M Hart - cut pre-2011, now retired and coaching for UM
WR P Garcon - good 6th round pick.
OG J Richard - cut and re-signed several times, I don't remember now if he's still on the team.

09
RB D Brown - bust so far, has run better than previously but still not close to 1st round worthy
DT F Moala - huge disappointment, big 3rd year regression
CB J Powers - good 3rd rounder, hurt a lot, scheme limits him.
WR A Collie - good 4th rounder, but definitely a Manning product
DT Taylor - didn't make it through his first camp
QB C Painter - worst backup QB in the NFL, didn't need to be drafted to get him
P/K P McAfee - might be a Pro Bowler, our best special teams tackler
OG J Thomas - cut this year in camp

10
DE J Hughes - MASSIVE BUST. Worse than Brown right now.
LB P Angerer - overdrafted at the time, he may turn into the future starter at MLB
CB K Thomas - injured early, limited by scheme, doesn't seem very good
OG J McClendon - cut
TE B Eldridge - hurt all the time, hasn't made an impact when on the field.
DT R Mathews - Looks ok in limited playing time, was demoted to practice squad but is back on the roster now
LB K Conner - starting out of necessity, OK vs. run and terrible in coverage
CB R Fisher - is he still in the NFL?

34 picks from 07 - 10 and the four best picks are a good-but-often-injured CB, a WR with potential that drops passes, a concussion-prone slot WR, and a punter.

THAT is the reason the Colts were so active in free agency. Polian was at one time a great drafter. But he hasn't had a good draft since 06. For a team that builds through the draft, that is bad news. It's incredible the team hasn't missed the playoffs yet.

DraftSavant
11-14-2011, 01:52 PM
Almost impossible to answer, but how many wins does this Colts team have with a healthy Manning? They were already on a pretty steep decline last year...

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 01:54 PM
Almost impossible to answer, but how many wins does this Colts team have with a healthy Manning? They were already on a pretty steep decline last year...

I think they'd be close to or right at .500. They've played a few teams tough, right down to the wire like the Steelers and Bucs. They probably beat the Jags yesterday with Manning.

Rosebud
11-14-2011, 01:54 PM
Almost impossible to answer, but how many wins does this Colts team have with a healthy Manning? They were already on a pretty steep decline last year...

9+...which is why it's so embarrassing that they're this pathetic without him.

killxswitch
11-14-2011, 02:00 PM
I'd say they'd be 7-3. Losses would be to Houston, New Orleans, and probably ATL. Pretty pathetic when you lose one guy and all chance of winning goes down with him.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 02:03 PM
Eh, the Colts 5 years ago maybe. But now, I think they would have still found a way to lose at least another two games. Possibly Cincy and/or Tennessee.

I say 4-5 atm, 5-4 at best.

killxswitch
11-14-2011, 02:06 PM
Eh, the Colts 5 years ago maybe. But now, I think they would have still found a way to lose at least another two games. Possibly Cincy and/or Tennessee.

I say 4-5 atm, 5-4 at best.

Impossible to know for sure.

Thanks so much for making me re-live that draft pick review. ****in Bill Polian. I seriously hate that guy.

49ersfan_87
11-14-2011, 02:10 PM
The 49ers are definitely for real, although i think they proved it in their win against Detroit. 10+ penalties, lost the turnover and TOP battle and still fought for a win on the road against a winning team. Alex Smith has also stepped up when we've need him to, eg passing for 9/9 179 yards in the 3rd quarter against the Eagles when we were down 20-3 to start the 2nd half, as well as yesterday against the Giants. I would call him a "game manager" too but when we've needed him to step up he has. Four 4th quarter comebacks this year, quick, decisive, and accurate with the ball, he's really improved. Looking at other teams that may be contenders/pretenders...

The Texans are also for real. 7-3 and dominating games without their two blue chip players in Williams and Johnson. Johnson will come back after the bye so this team gets even more dangerous if you can believe that. They're not just taking advantage with Peyton out, they would be legit competing even if Manning was healthy. Although i won't count out the Titans just yet.

I still think the Bengals are for real. Lost by a TD against a good Steelers team. I think they can end up 11-5 or 10-6 and end up with the 6th seed.

The Bills however, are starting to look like pretenders. I'm rooting for them because no fan deserves to go 12 years without a chance at the playoffs. It seems like their lack of impact drafting in the 1st round is coming back to haunt them. From 2006-2010, Whitner, McCargo, Maybin and Lynch are already off the team. McKelvin and Spiller aren't making an positive impact either. Just too many missed picks that don't help the talent level of this team. Fitzpatrick has also struggled recently, although Fred Jackson and Steve Johnson are still producing. But you can't excuse being dominated the last 2 weeks, and i'm not even 100% sure they will beat the Dolphins this week.

Iamcanadian
11-14-2011, 02:10 PM
There was a post...possibly in the Andrew Luck Sweepstakes thread or another thread like that where a Colts fan basically broke down every Colts draft class of the past several years, and it looks downright abysmal.

He neglected the o-line for years, and constantly drafts guys to fit his broken system. I keep saying it over and over to the point where I feel like a broken record, but Polian's system has only ever built regular season championships. For all of those years with Buffalo and now with Indy, he's 1-6 in Superbowls plus countless years where they won 12, 13, 14 games only to see quick playoff exits.

He builds his Arena league styles teams that get crushed by more well rounded playoff caliber teams far more often than not. His finesse system just doesn't work and he shouldn't be given another decade and another franchise QB to waste running it.

I again disagree. Those playoff failures rest on Peyton's shoulders not Polian's. Peyton couldn't win the big game in college with a very talented Tennessee team that won the National championship a year later with Martin at QB and he cannot win the big games consistently as a pro.
What is Polian supposed to do, fire Peyton?????
As I said in another post, Indy is a very small market city, strapped with Peyton's huge salary, which has forced the team to cut starters especially at LBer and CB every year. They stay competitive by carefully using the salary cap to keep their stars on board and jettisoning starters who Polian must replace every year.
As for his draft, Polian gets 2nd round talent that late in the draft when all the real 1st rounders are long gone. How successful has BB been in keeping his defense competitive drafting late in round 1????
Polian doesn't have the budget either here or in cash strapped Buffalo, to keep the team he has built around him. He must constantly rebuild through the draft and outside of this year, he has kept Indy in the hunt for a decade until Peyton got injured. It is ridiculous to jump all over him for this season, which I happen to think he handled extremely intelligently, by accepting that it would be an off season for Indy and putting the Colts in the Luck sweepstakes. Sure, he could have brought in somebody who might have scraped 5 or 6 wins out of the season, but what was that going to accomplish going forward if Peyton is finished. He was brilliant IMO if he gets either Luck or Bradley out of this season and unless he retires, the Irsay's aren't going to fire him for keeping their franchise competitive and financially stable.
Criticizing a GM for producing 12-14 wins a year for a decade after his franchise QB gets hurt is absurd if you ask me.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 02:16 PM
Ok, a number of things.

A.) Peyton wasn't out there trying to tackle the running backs crushing the undersized defenses POLIAN chose to build. Peyton wasn't out there trying to sack Tom Brady and Drew Brees and whoever else has blasted the Colts in the postseason.

B.) Losing one player, no matter who that player is, should EVER EVER sink a well built team from playoff caliber to possibly winless. Electing to build the team in that fashion is on Polian and he should lose his job for that. The same way Cam Cameron did in Miami and Matt Millen did in Detroit.

We're just going to have to agree to disagree on this it would seem.

killxswitch
11-14-2011, 02:17 PM
You are Canadian so you clearly don't understand that Jim Irsay is filthy rich and the salary cap means the Colts are not financially obligated to let good players walk.

Here are some examples of bad contracts:

Bob Sanders - could've cut him long before they did but instead Bill held on to hope (and lied to everyone in the process about how he was progressing). IIRC ~$5M cap hit each year.

Kelvin Hayden - Huge $40M contract for a decent Cover 2 corner. Insane. Also, they cut him this year and avoided paying him $9M, but his accelerated bonus meant they only saved $1M in cap space.

Gary Brackett - He's due ~$5M this year and next year and hasn't been good since 2009. Overpaid the black version of Rudy.

Kerry Collins - $4M for 2.5 games of crappy QB play. And gave the guy 2 weeks to learn the offense.

Ryan Diem - sucked since 2008 but was making between $4M and $6M/year. Finally took a pay cut this year.

Dallas Clark - big TE contract at the time but Tamme stepped in and gave the exact same level of production at 1/5th the price. Clark is terrible this year and is probably headed to IR. Injury prone, drops lots of balls, a product of Manning. Due about $5M next year I think.

BillPo has made a habit of overpaying his own players and/or keeping them too long. THAT more than anything else is why other areas have suffered. Not because Indy is a small market.

Also the silly "Peyton can't win da big gamez!" argument is so outdated and stupid I don't even think it's worth addressing.

Rosebud
11-14-2011, 02:22 PM
I can't see how it's hard to understand what a damning indictment of how a team is put together being this absolutely pathetic just because of a single injury, is.
yeah, **** you grammar!

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 02:22 PM
I can't see how it's hard to understand what a damning indictment of how a team is put together being this absolutely pathetic just because of a single injury, is.

Exactly. The Patriots lost Tom Brady and won 11 games. Peyton is not 11 games better than Tom Brady.

DraftSavant
11-14-2011, 02:29 PM
Exactly. The Patriots lost Tom Brady and won 11 games. Peyton is not 11 games better than Tom Brady.

So many variables in that as well. Remember, the Pats were 18-1 with Brady the year before. They had a 7 game dropoff from the previous season (against a significantly weaker schedule as well - they lost the division to a Miami team that went 1-15 the previous year and has been average/terrible since then).

The Colts had 10 wins last year - an identical 7 game drop-off would put them at 3-13.

Simplified and (again) highly variable. But the Pats dropped off way more than people think. This Indy team is so uncompetitive, though, that the entire situation is just laughable.

killxswitch
11-14-2011, 02:29 PM
Exactly. The Patriots lost Tom Brady and won 11 games. Peyton is not 11 games better than Tom Brady.

OR IS HE?!

http://thecovertwo.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/tom-brady-goat1.jpg

No, no he's not. But yeah. The Pats, until perhaps recently, have just been a much better overall team. Lots of Colts fans think if Manning had had a good (not great, just good) defense we'd have at least 3 Lombardis by now.

I think if you take Brady off the Pats now though they're a .500 or worse team.

Rosebud
11-14-2011, 02:29 PM
Exactly. The Patriots lost Tom Brady and won 11 games. Peyton is not 11 games better than Tom Brady.

While true I was hesitant to bring up that example as those Patriots were the significant exception going the other way, having a borderline franchise QB in the making as a backup with a roster that went undefeated through the regular season prior. Most teams that lost their franchise QB would not still make the playoffs, in fact I'd say that most teams wouldn't even contend for the playoffs, but threatening the winless Lions' record is something I don't think a single other team with a franchise QB would be on pace to accomplish if they lost their starter before the season.

Rosebud
11-14-2011, 02:31 PM
So many variables in that as well. Remember, the Pats were 18-1 with Brady the year before. They had a 7 game dropoff from the previous season (against a significantly weaker schedule as well - they lost the division to a Miami team that went 1-15 the previous year and has been average/terrible since then).

The Colts had 10 wins last year - an identical 7 game drop-off would put them at 3-13.

Simplified and (again) highly variable. But the Pats dropped off way more than people think. This Indy team is so uncompetitive, though, that the entire situation is just laughable.

Just looking at the regular season the Pats only did 5 wins worse. That would mean Indy being 5-11...do you think there's even a chance of this Colts team going 5-2 over the rest of the season? Hell I'm willing to bet that losing Peyton will cost them 8 or more wins from last year's total and that's just embarrassing for every single player on that roster not named Peyton Manning and is even more pathetic for the man who's assembled that roster.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 02:34 PM
Just looking at the regular season the Pats only did 5 wins worse. That would mean Indy being 5-11...do you think there's even a chance of this Colts team going 5-2 over the rest of the season? Hell I'm willing to bet that losing Peyton will cost them 8 or more wins from last year's total and that's just embarrassing for every single player on that roster not named Peyton Manning and is even more pathetic for the man who's assembled that roster.

Even going 2-14 is questionable at this point. I think they win one...somewhere.

BYE
Carolina
at New England
at Baltimore
Tennessee
Houston
at Jacksonville

I give them one win somewhere in there. At most two.

princefielder28
11-14-2011, 02:36 PM
Even going 2-14 is questionable at this point. I think they win one...somewhere.

BYE
Carolina
at New England
at Baltimore
Tennessee
Houston
at Jacksonville

I give them one win somewhere in there. At most two.

I would say their best shot is either that Carolina game right after the bye or the Jacksonville game to end the year otherwise not a chance

brat316
11-14-2011, 02:37 PM
Is it just me or does Mick Vick, look like the old ATL, MV7?

Running around, chucking it up deep, doing what he has to do, and being inaccurate.

DraftSavant
11-14-2011, 02:38 PM
Just looking at the regular season the Pats only did 5 wins worse. That would mean Indy being 5-11...do you think there's even a chance of this Colts team going 5-2 over the rest of the season? Hell I'm willing to bet that losing Peyton will cost them 8 or more wins from last year's total and that's just embarrassing for every single player on that roster not named Peyton Manning and is even more pathetic for the man who's assembled that roster.

Meh, I like to count the postseason for everything. I've always felt those "consecutive (home) games won" records by the Colts and Pats in recent years were the stupidest thing ever, as both teams had fat postseason losses right in the middle of the streaks.

Iamcanadian
11-14-2011, 02:47 PM
You are Canadian so you clearly don't understand that Jim Irsay is filthy rich and the salary cap means the Colts are not financially obligated to let good players walk.

Here are some examples of bad contracts:

Bob Sanders - could've cut him long before they did but instead Bill held on to hope (and lied to everyone in the process about how he was progressing). IIRC ~$5M cap hit each year.

Sure, why would anyone hope that an All Pro Safety might return to form. Oh Yeah, player of the year too.

Kelvin Hayden - Huge $40M contract for a decent Cover 2 corner. Insane. Also, they cut him this year and avoided paying him $9M, but his accelerated bonus meant they only saved $1M in cap space.

How much was guaranteed if they are only saving 1 million in cap space.

Gary Brackett - He's due ~$5M this year and next year and hasn't been good since 2009. Overpaid the black version of Rudy.

Another injury victim I believe. But Polian should be responsible for keeping his players injury free. That's every GM's job????

Kerry Collins - $4M for 2.5 games of crappy QB play. And gave the guy 2 weeks to learn the offense.

Yeah, he should have known Peyton wouldn't play this season, then he could have gone after McNabb or Kolb like other GM's did. Of course, they would have cost double what Collins got????

Ryan Diem - sucked since 2008 but was making between $4M and $6M/year. Finally took a pay cut this year.

Only took a pay cut so Peyton could be paid.

Dallas Clark - big TE contract at the time but Tamme stepped in and gave the exact same level of production at 1/5th the price. Clark is terrible this year and is probably headed to IR. Injury prone, drops lots of balls, a product of Manning. Due about $5M next year I think.

Just think, he's played injured all year and will finally go on IR. A healthy Clark is hardly worth anything. Tamme is so much better. Yeah, we all believe that.

BillPo has made a habit of overpaying his own players and/or keeping them too long. THAT more than anything else is why other areas have suffered. Not because Indy is a small market.

Seems to me that he has paid his own players the going rate or lose them to FA. He has also cut a # of starters to find the money to pay Peyton.
All NFL owners are filthy rich just like Irsay but none of them have the financial resources to make up for a small market team like Indy.

Also the silly "Peyton can't win da big gamez!" argument is so outdated and stupid I don't even think it's worth addressing.

Well I'll give Peyton credit for that one SB win, results are results, but his playoff record is horrible compared to his regular season success. But as an Indy fan, I can understand your reluctance to believe he isn't the same player in the playoffs that he is during the regular season. I am sure however, that if the Colts get Luck and stay competitive for the next 10-15 years, you'll bask in their glory especially if it produces a couple of SB wins even if Polian is still on the job.

killxswitch
11-14-2011, 02:50 PM
Lots of things.

I think we deeply and fundamentally disagree on enough things that I'd rather just agree to disagree.

Iamcanadian
11-14-2011, 02:55 PM
So many variables in that as well. Remember, the Pats were 18-1 with Brady the year before. They had a 7 game dropoff from the previous season (against a significantly weaker schedule as well - they lost the division to a Miami team that went 1-15 the previous year and has been average/terrible since then).

The Colts had 10 wins last year - an identical 7 game drop-off would put them at 3-13.

Simplified and (again) highly variable. But the Pats dropped off way more than people think. This Indy team is so uncompetitive, though, that the entire situation is just laughable.


H...mmm, BB vs Jim Caldwell, could that be the difference???? That's the reason if you ask me. I was never sold on Caldwell and his 10 victories left a lot of room for doubt. 0 wins this year just solidifies my thoughts.

Iamcanadian
11-14-2011, 02:56 PM
I think we deeply and fundamentally disagree on enough things that I'd rather just agree to disagree.

OK by me. I agree to disagree.

ShutDwn
11-14-2011, 03:00 PM
The Broncos know that they are terrible, and they know that Tebow is the only thing that brings any amount of interest to the team. Is he better than Orton? No, but to the fans he is more interesting.

As far as I'm concerned, there is no argument. Tebow is awful. Get that "wins" ******** out of here. If we are going to talk about wins, we should talk about the goal of every team: winning the superbowl. Tebow has no shot at being the QB of a superbowl team. All you have to do with Tebow is get a lead that forces him to throw and let your DBs sit back and wait for all those crazy passes.

My question is, if he weren't named Tim Tebow, would he still be playing? I doubt it.

SuperMcGee
11-14-2011, 03:18 PM
Everyone wanted to tell me when I made that comparison how different Fitzpatrick was. "Oh but BeerBaron, Fitzpatrick is way smarter and a way harder worker and etc. etc. etc."


I have no reason to disagree with your point (it's a prediction, so that would be pointless), but you said the same thing when you made that post. Nobody disagreed in such a manner. I think I was the only person that responded to it and I was just defending Fitzpatrick's performances this season that you felt garnered criticism. Not sure why you feel the need to create this idea of opposition. It's actually a pretty decent take on the situation. They are different players and I hope you're wrong, but it's tough to argue against it. Of course, I do think it would've been an even bigger mistake to not sign him. From what I remember of the contract, it could essentially be a three year deal. I'd take the commitment factor and completing the defensive rebuild over those early years and maybe even some development time for a new guy if things get really bad.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 03:19 PM
The Broncos know that they are terrible, and they know that Tebow is the only thing that brings any amount of interest to the team. Is he better than Orton? No, but to the fans he is more interesting.

As far as I'm concerned, there is no argument. Tebow is awful. Get that "wins" ******** out of here. If we are going to talk about wins, we should talk about the goal of every team: winning the superbowl. Tebow has no shot at being the QB of a superbowl team. All you have to do with Tebow is get a lead that forces him to throw and let your DBs sit back and wait for all those crazy passes.

My question is, if he weren't named Tim Tebow, would he still be playing? I doubt it.

He wouldn't be. And that is what I meant by my comparison.

Maybe Brady is a bad one....let's change it around.

If Mark Sanchez or Joe Flacco completed 25% of their passes in a game then threw one pass to win it late, would that be considered a good game?

**** no. They'd be laughed right off the field as being terrible. Tim Tebow is the only guy on this planet that can play like a miserable PoS, make one play to win, and be the lead story from the NFL.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 03:21 PM
I have no reason to disagree with your point (it's a prediction, so that would be pointless), but you said the same thing when you made that post. Nobody disagreed in such a manner. I think I was the only person that responded to it and I was just defending Fitzpatrick's performances this season that you felt garnered criticism. Not sure why you feel the need to create this idea of opposition. It's actually a pretty decent take on the situation. They are different players and I hope you're wrong, but it's tough to argue against it. Of course, I do think it would've been an even bigger mistake to not sign him. From what I remember of the contract, it could essentially be a three year deal. I'd take the commitment factor and completing the defensive rebuild over those early years and maybe even some development time for a new guy if things get really bad.

Ok, I have an issue where one person disagreeing with me means it's "everyone." I'm a very defensive, pessimistic person by nature.

But I also kind of took everyone else saying how great it was as being a bit against my line of thought too.

And like I said, I understand why they did it. You have a potentially very good QB who you need to resign and franchise tags for QBs are very high. Doesn't mean I like it, but I understand that it had to be done.

Raiderz4Life
11-14-2011, 03:23 PM
Actually I do remember a few ppl defending Fitz. I even remember someone saying the "He's smarter and works harder" line. Just don't remember who.

fenikz
11-14-2011, 03:38 PM
To be fair the Cardinals defense has allowed a total of 14 points in those 2 games if you don't include the 2 safeties, pick 6 and pick that turned into a 3 & out/FG. But Skelton does seem to know the system better than Kolb and he's a better fit behind our terrible o-line because of his size and athleticism.

The only real benefit of trading for Kolb at this point was getting Fitz to sign his extension which I'd probably trade DRC & a 2nd for anyways

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 03:42 PM
To be fair the Cardinals defense has allowed a total of 14 points in those 2 games if you don't include the 2 safeties, pick 6 and pick that turned into a 3 & out/FG. But Skelton does seem to know the system better than Kolb and he's a better fit behind our terrible o-line because of his size and athleticism.

The only real benefit of trading for Kolb at this point was getting Fitz to sign his extension which I'd probably trade DRC & a 2nd for anyways

Agreed, that definitely helped there.

I just don't like Kevin Kolb. I don't think he'll be successful short term or long term. He wouldn't be the first Andy Reid QB to do it and honestly, he wasn't even that good under Reid.

At best, I think he'll be a weak armed game manager who panics easily under pressure and checks down a lot.

jsa230
11-14-2011, 03:45 PM
Knew Kolb wouldn't work out. looked for a while for a post of mine bashing the trade but couldn't find it . . .
"At best, I think he'll be a weak armed game manager who panics easily under pressure and checks down a lot." BB totally agree with this

to lazy to go advanced

fenikz
11-14-2011, 03:46 PM
I basically agree, he isn't as bad as NFLDC makes him out to be but I think Skelton has higher upside and the team has his back more so than Kolb

Complex
11-14-2011, 03:47 PM
Knew Kolb wouldn't work out. looked for a while for a post of mine bashing the trade but couldn't find it . . .
"At best, I think he'll be a weak armed game manager who panics easily under pressure and checks down a lot." BB totally agree with this

to lazy to go advanced

Your not the only one on this board that thought the same thing besides JCBX(right name), some guy that got banned and maybe 2 other people everyone else thought he was terrible or a below average starting QB.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 03:49 PM
So me, the pro football insider guy and someone who got banned disliked Kolb.....

jsa230
11-14-2011, 03:50 PM
That's whats so great about SWNFLDC forums. People actually know football. I hate the "average" fan so I come here to talk about football with people who know WTF they are talking about.

fenikz
11-14-2011, 03:50 PM
i always hated Kolb and that trade :(

jbond even made a thread mocking me about it :(

Iamcanadian
11-14-2011, 03:56 PM
And how many people were so sure, Alex Smith was a total flop. I'm not impressed by Kolb but I'll give him another year with a real training camp before I write him totally off.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 03:57 PM
And how many people were so sure, Alex Smith was a total flop. I'm not impressed by Kolb but I'll give him another year with a real training camp before I write him totally off.

Alex Smith WAS a total flop. He's turning it around a bit now. He has a long way to go though.

As discussed a few pages back, the 49ers will have a Garrard/Fitzpatrick/Vick situation as Smith is only on a one year deal. They'd be stupid to extend him long term unless Harbaugh is seeing in practice that Kaepernick is awful.

jsa230
11-14-2011, 03:58 PM
And how many people were so sure, Alex Smith was a total flop. I'm not impressed by Kolb but I'll give him another year with a real training camp before I write him totally off.
Yeah, plus his oline is suck. I still don't like Kolb but good point.

DraftSavant
11-14-2011, 03:59 PM
And how many people were so sure, Alex Smith was a total flop. I'm not impressed by Kolb but I'll give him another year with a real training camp before I write him totally off.

I fear that Alex Smith is going to forever turn into the poster boy for the "just be patient!" QB crowd.

Alex Smith has turned the corner after 7 years, but he still is what he is. I wouldn't want to waste 7 years hoping that a guy develops into a "game manager +" type.

Kolb is Joey Harrington with fewer physical tools to work with.

CC.SD
11-14-2011, 04:01 PM
NFL 'investigating' Rex saying 'shut the **** up' but can't be bothered with two coaches starting a brawl? k.....

http://espn.go.com/new-york/nfl/story/_/id/7234366/nfl-looks-rex-ryan-words-fan-new-york-jets-fall

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 04:01 PM
Also, if not for the lockout and abbreviated offseason, there's a good chance that Smith isn't even in San Fran right now. He was simply the best option in an abbreviated offseason, so Harbaugh stuck with him.

I don't buy the "he believed in Alex all the long" stuff. He probably said it to pump Smith up a bit, but in a full offseason, I bet Smith is let go of.

I don't think any other first round pick QB had as many chances as Smith did despite never showing much of anything. David Carr had games and seasons better than anything Smith did, and he was let go of as a bust more quickly.

DraftSavant
11-14-2011, 04:04 PM
Also, if not for the lockout and abbreviated offseason, there's a good chance that Smith isn't even in San Fran right now. He was simply the best option in an abbreviated offseason, so Harbaugh stuck with him.

I don't buy the "he believed in Alex all the long" stuff. He probably said it to pump Smith up a bit, but in a full offseason, I bet Smith is let go of.

I don't think any other first round pick QB had as many chances as Smith did despite never showing much of anything. David Carr had games and seasons better than anything Smith did, and he was let go of as a bust more quickly.

Carr still had a lot of supporters/excuse-makers until he completely bottomed out in Carolina.

Jughead10
11-14-2011, 04:05 PM
NFL 'investigating' Rex saying 'shut the **** up' but can't be bothered with two coaches starting a brawl? k.....

http://espn.go.com/new-york/nfl/story/_/id/7234366/nfl-looks-rex-ryan-words-fan-new-york-jets-fall

What two coaches started a brawl?

Also this isn't Rex's first time with something like this.

jrdrylie
11-14-2011, 04:05 PM
Also, if not for the lockout and abbreviated offseason, there's a good chance that Smith isn't even in San Fran right now. He was simply the best option in an abbreviated offseason, so Harbaugh stuck with him.

I don't buy the "he believed in Alex all the long" stuff. He probably said it to pump Smith up a bit, but in a full offseason, I bet Smith is let go of.

I don't think any other first round pick QB had as many chances as Smith did despite never showing much of anything. David Carr had games and seasons better than anything Smith did, and he was let go of as a bust more quickly.

The closest comparison I can think of is Jason Campbell. And his supporters make the same excuses as those who support Smith, which is that he would be really good if he didn't have to deal with so many coordinators. Some even going so far as to say Smith would be an All Pro had Rodgers gone first and he had fallen to Green Bay.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 04:09 PM
The closest comparison I can think of is Jason Campbell. And his supporters make the same excuses as those who support Smith, which is that he would be really good if he didn't have to deal with so many coordinators. Some even going so far as to say Smith would be an All Pro had Rodgers gone first and he had fallen to Green Bay.

Even Campbell showed more than Smith ever did. On any other team, Campbell's 2009 is a good year:

20 TD - 15 INT - 65% - 7.1 YPA - 3618 yards

But Dan Snyder saw he could get a washed up McNabb and quit on Campbell.

Prior to this year, Smith didn't have a year even close to that.

descendency
11-14-2011, 04:15 PM
Exactly. The Patriots lost Tom Brady and won 11 games. Peyton is not 11 games better than Tom Brady.

I don't want to start a debate but...

The Patriots (and the rest of the AFC East) played the AFC West and NFC West. The best team NE beat that year was the Dolphins, who went 1-15 the year before. They lost to the Dolphins, Jets, Colts, Steelers, and Chargers who were the 5 legitimate teams they played.

Lots of Patriots fans were wondering if the Pats would go 16-0 again. It was that weak of a schedule.

If the Colts played that schedule this year, I'm sure they'd have a few wins.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 04:16 PM
I don't want to start a debate but...

The Patriots (and the rest of the AFC East) played the AFC West and NFC West. The best team NE beat that year was the Dolphins, who went 1-15 the year before. They lost to the Dolphins, Jets, Colts, Steelers, and Chargers who were the 5 legitimate teams they played.

Lots of Patriots fans were wondering if the Pats would go 16-0 again. It was that weak of a schedule.

If the Colts played that schedule this year, I'm sure they'd have a few wins.

Winning 11 games in the modern NFL, regardless of schedule, is no small feat.

Even on that schedule, there's no way the Colts come close to 11 wins. Maybe they'd have 1 or 2 now...they're playing some bad football.

jth1331
11-14-2011, 04:21 PM
Screw 4-6 defense, go back to the early 1900s and bring out the 7-2-2 defense. Start Wilkerson, Pouha, DeVito, Dixon, Pitoitua, Pace, and Maybin on the line, Harris and Scott at linebacker, with Revis and Smith as DB. No need to have two corners out there, Denver's receivers suck anyways.

Denver's WR's are decent, they got some guys who can make plays, just a little inexperienced.

Also, someone somewhere (I can't find the post) said that the Broncos should run a spread instead of the power run.

A John Fox team running the spread would be like giving a 90 year old man an iPhone. That **** won't fly.

I stand by that Tebow needs to work in an "unconventional" offense to really thrive. I understand Fox is more smash mouth, line em up and run it right at em.

The Broncos know that they are terrible, and they know that Tebow is the only thing that brings any amount of interest to the team. Is he better than Orton? No, but to the fans he is more interesting.

As far as I'm concerned, there is no argument. Tebow is awful. Get that "wins" ******** out of here. If we are going to talk about wins, we should talk about the goal of every team: winning the superbowl. Tebow has no shot at being the QB of a superbowl team. All you have to do with Tebow is get a lead that forces him to throw and let your DBs sit back and wait for all those crazy passes.

My question is, if he weren't named Tim Tebow, would he still be playing? I doubt it.

Orton was 1-4 this year, and 4-14 counting this year and last year.
Tebow is already 3-1 this year and 1-2 last year, 5-3. Its hard to overlook that. Will need to see how he fares the rest of the way if its an outlier, or the real deal.

Job Reborn
11-14-2011, 04:24 PM
I stand by that Tebow needs to work in an "unconventional" offense to really thrive. I understand Fox is more smash mouth, line em up and run it right at em.



More like Tebow needs to face a college defense to be successful.

49ersfan_87
11-14-2011, 04:43 PM
Alex Smith WAS a total flop. He's turning it around a bit now. He has a long way to go though.

As discussed a few pages back, the 49ers will have a Garrard/Fitzpatrick/Vick situation as Smith is only on a one year deal. They'd be stupid to extend him long term unless Harbaugh is seeing in practice that Kaepernick is awful.

Alex likes Harbaugh, he came back despite being booed in multiple home games because he thought Harbaugh could turn his career around. Alex also had a chance to jump ship back in 2009 but took a paycut to stick around because he wanted to "finish what he started", something of that nature. Harbaugh won't re-sign him to a long-term deal like a David Garrard or Ryan Fitzpatrick when he traded up for Kaepernick expecting him to be his future QB, it'll probably be a 2-3 year deal or so, then re-evaluate as things go on.


Also, if not for the lockout and abbreviated offseason, there's a good chance that Smith isn't even in San Fran right now. He was simply the best option in an abbreviated offseason, so Harbaugh stuck with him.

I don't buy the "he believed in Alex all the long" stuff. He probably said it to pump Smith up a bit, but in a full offseason, I bet Smith is let go of.

I don't think any other first round pick QB had as many chances as Smith did despite never showing much of anything. David Carr had games and seasons better than anything Smith did, and he was let go of as a bust more quickly.


There's some truth to that. We also tried to sign Hasselbeck to compete with Alex for the starting job so Harbaugh wasn't 100% confident in him. But i do think Harbaugh really liked him regardless. I believe Harbaugh sees a bit of himself in Alex Smith. Harbaugh was an average QB with the Bears back in 80's and 90's, got cut loose and became Captain Comeback with the Colts. So he knows how it feels to be a 1st round QB who fails to meet expectations, and he probably knew it wasn't all on Alex and that he was salvageable.

gpngc
11-14-2011, 05:09 PM
Mike Smith has to go for it on 4th and inches. The argument for punting is that your defense can stop Drew Brees from getting into FG range then... ...get the ball back to your offense. The probability of stopping one of the best QBs in the league from getting into FG range is lower than being able to convert a 4th and inches against the last-ranked rush defense in the NFL. And even if you stop them, you're back to square one - game-on-the-line type situations that you want your offense to revel in (3rd-and-3, 4th-and-inches, etc.)

I think more credit should be given to Greg Williams and the Saints defense on that stop than the Falcons call. They COMPLETELY sold out to stuff the A-gap, and that chess move happened to be the best counter to the call the Falcons came up with. In other words, the Saints played that 4th-and-inches EXACTLY how the Falcons did - to WIN the game rather than to NOT lose. Had the Falcons had ANY type of misdirection, PA, naked boot, or outside run out of that formation, the Falcons probably would have hit a big-play, pretty much ensuring victory. The Saints would have then fallen victim to exactly what the Falcons did - losing because of an aggressive play call - but no one would say anything because it's an Xs and Os thing rather than a simple 'go or punt' concept.

I credit the Saints for winning the chess match rather than fault the Falcons for losing it.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 05:11 PM
Again, no.

If they make it, they still have to go quite a ways just to get in scoring position. If they miss it, they lose.

It was a stupid decision that backfired horribly. As I explained, I'm all for "going for it" in reasonable spots. In overtime at your own 30 is not reasonable at all, whatsoever.

Larry
11-14-2011, 05:27 PM
I don't get to see the 49ers very often. Is Davis playing well. Wasn't he awful last year?

He did a great job against Tuck. Besides the Philly game against Babin, he's really improved this season.

Larry
11-14-2011, 05:34 PM
BTW No way Alex Smith gets the franchise tag because he's going to re-sign. If he didn't want leave after 6 years of misery, why would he want leave now when times are good?

Plus leaving would mean he would have to work with another OC. I doubt he wants to go through that after doing it over five or six times.

ShutDwn
11-14-2011, 05:37 PM
Denver's WR's are decent, they got some guys who can make plays, just a little inexperienced.



I stand by that Tebow needs to work in an "unconventional" offense to really thrive. I understand Fox is more smash mouth, line em up and run it right at em.



Orton was 1-4 this year, and 4-14 counting this year and last year.
Tebow is already 3-1 this year and 1-2 last year, 5-3. Its hard to overlook that. Will need to see how he fares the rest of the way if its an outlier, or the real deal.

Fox is a terrible head coach for today's aggressive NFL. Tebow can keep the midseason wins that really only amount to a lower draft pick. What do people think the potential is with Tebow that you can't get with a real QB? I bet they win a few more games and they continue the project based on the "winz" argument.

They have nothing better to do right now, like I said, but keeping this up will just be a waste of time and energy. They're putting so much work into a player that doesn't have that much potential in the first place.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 05:42 PM
BTW No way Alex Smith gets the franchise tag because he's going to re-sign. If he didn't want leave after 6 years of misery, why would he want leave now when times are good?

Plus leaving would mean he would have to work with another OC. I doubt he wants to go through that after doing it over five or six times.

A few reasons I can think of.

One, the 49ers may simply think he's too costly to keep outside of the franchise tag. I realize that's a huge number, but it's only one year and most of San Fran's better players are already locked up. They can franchise him, see if he can string together two good years and then work out a longer term deal.

Additionally, he might want too much money. The 49ers may not want to pay him a Garrard/Fitzpatrick level contract if they like what they're seeing in Kaepernick in practice.

Finally, Smith may want to test the market. This is SUCH a QB needy league that some other team may wildly overpay him. If guys like Carson Palmer and Kevin Kolb demand high draft picks in trades and, at least for Kolb, a much bigger salary, Smith may want to see what the market holds for him.

Larry
11-14-2011, 05:56 PM
The franchise tag would be a lot more costly considering the Niners have 4-5 other guys they'll need to re-sign. That's a sacrifice I doubt the Niners would make.

The Niners have more leverage with Smith than you think because continuity is one thing the guy has never had in One system. It just wouldn't make any sense for him to throw it away.

JBCX
11-14-2011, 06:11 PM
4.) The Bears may be the best "Packer Killers" the NFC has.

It's a small stretch and you're probably about to call me out as being a homer, but hear me out.

Over the past 2 years, and especially this season, very few teams have been able to slow the Packers down. They just have so ungodly many targets for Rodgers to throw to that your best bet in beating them is to try and win a shootout, something no team has done yet this year.

But if there is one team who has at least played the Packers tough in recent years, it's the Bears. The Bears held the Packers below their season average in their first meeting this year and were a phantom hold on the Hester/Knox trickeration punt return from pulling to within 3 points.

Dating back to last year, the Bears won the team's first regular season meeting, holding the Packers to 17 points. In the season finale, the Bears gave up only 10 points to the eventual champions. Then in the NFC Championship game, the Bears held the Packers offense to 14 points (they got to 21 on the Raji pick 6.)

Additionally, each time they play, it seems like the Bears manage to force a key turnover or two that the Packers really don't make in their other games. No other defenses have shown to be capable of even slowing the Packers down a little bit.

Whenever the two teams play, be it later this season or possibly again in the playoffs, the Packers should be and will be favorites. But if there is one team in the NFC (or perhaps even the whole NFL) capable of beating the Packers, it's the Bears.


I like how you conveniently downplay the fact that the Packers dispatched the Bears fairly easily (27-17, thoroughly outplayed the Bears all game too) in Week 3 this season already, AT Soldier Field. I watched that game and the Packers outclassed the Bears in almost every phase of the game.

The Bears don't have the firepower, the offensive line, or the quarterback to win shoot-outs. If their Cover-2 defense isn't playing lights-out, they will lose every game they play against an elite QB.

mqtirishfan
11-14-2011, 06:18 PM
I like how you conveniently downplay the fact that the Packers dispatched the Bears fairly easily (27-17, thoroughly outplayed the Bears all game too) in Week 3 this season already, AT Soldier Field. I watched that game and the Packers outclassed the Bears in almost every phase of the game.

Oh, for ****'s sake. The Bears have played the Packers tight every time they've played for years now. A ten point victory isn't total destruction, and it was still the most lopsided game in some time between the two teams. The Bears have a good defense, a good running back, a good quarterback and great special teams play. I doubted them last year and they proved me wrong. I doubted them before the season and they proved me wrong. The Bears make up for their clear weaknesses with special teams dominance and good defense. Deal with it.


Now, excuse me while I go burn a Hester jersey to make up for defending these assholes.

gpngc
11-14-2011, 06:18 PM
As for the Broncos, it's a fascinating story so I definitely don't want it to go away. In terms of the Xs and Os, it's extremely interesting because the way teams have built their personnel have been to counter against the passing league this has become. Because of this, there are CBs who simply cannot tackle, LBs and S who practice coverage just as much as wrapping up ball carriers and technique (if not more), and DL who are much better at penetrating up the field to get to the QB rather than gap integrity. So basically, defensive players and schemes have evolved AWAY from the types that are best suited to stop the type of offense the Broncos are running. I think it's important to credit the way the Broncos OL is run-blocking and to also give Tebow a little credit with being able to hit big plays with his arm. It hasn't been pretty or consistent, but he's thrown a TD pass in every game he's played and has taken advantage of defenses focusing on the run by putting up points - for example the two TDs to Decker the past two weeks. So while the passing game hasn't been efficient in terms of first downs, it HAS been generating points...

I understand the defenses he's beaten aren't great units but it's still 3 different NFL teams (2 division rivals that they'll see twice a year). Someone compared this phase to the wildcat, which may turn out to be true - a trend teams aren't prepared for but once they figure it out it won't be effective anymore. While that's possible, it's not out of the realm to believe Tebow could make some progress in terms of his passing ability. He'll never be Brees, but I'd never question his work ethic.

I watched him struggle throughout the Lions game and there's no way you can't be impressed with how he's bounced back. That's character and leadership to be able to handle that beating, get back up and lead your team to victories.

I wouldn't bet on this offenses continued success, but it clearly has been successful enough to help the Donkeys win games right now. That much has me intrigued, and I very much want to see how/if defenses that are built to stop the other 31 offenses in the league adjust and when/if they figure out a way to stop it consistently, maybe putting an end to Tebow and vindicating those of us (myself included) who didn't think he'd be an NFL QB. But remember, players aren't groomed in today's NFL to stop the run for 50+ plays a game, which makes it so damn interesting...

DraftSavant
11-14-2011, 06:24 PM
Fox is a terrible head coach for today's aggressive NFL. Tebow can keep the midseason wins that really only amount to a lower draft pick. What do people think the potential is with Tebow that you can't get with a real QB? I bet they win a few more games and they continue the project based on the "winz" argument.

They have nothing better to do right now, like I said, but keeping this up will just be a waste of time and energy. They're putting so much work into a player that doesn't have that much potential in the first place.

That's the inherent Tebow problem. You have to change so many things to make him successful in terms of offensive philosophy, draft and teambuilding strategy, etc. But his talent level does not justify making those kinds of sweeping organizational changes.

JBCX
11-14-2011, 06:25 PM
Oh, for ****'s sake. The Bears have played the Packers tight every time they've played for years now. A ten point victory isn't total destruction, and it was still the most lopsided game in some time between the two teams. The Bears have a good defense, a good running back, a good quarterback and great special teams play. I doubted them last year and they proved me wrong. I doubted them before the season and they proved me wrong. The Bears make up for their clear weaknesses with special teams dominance and good defense. Deal with it.



If you watched that game, you'd realize that the score was understating the dominance of the Packers over the Bears. Aaron Rodgers had his way with the Cover-2 defense the Bears trotted out onto the field. The Bears' defense has been average all season long. It's certainly not as dominant as in years past and elite QBs will have their way with it.

I doubted their ability to get offensive production out of Cutler against *good* defenses last year, and was proven correct when they imploded offensively in the playoffs against the Packers after being gifted a home game against the inept Seahawks. I see no difference this year. Cutler will struggle to put up points against good defenses this year, and the Bears' Cover-2 will not be able to contain good offenses effectively enough to win those playoff games against good opponents.

RaiderNation
11-14-2011, 07:07 PM
I think Smith would sign a 3 year deal for the 49ers, with Kaepernick slowly being integrated into the offense. Maybe a $27M contract, which would mean 9M a year which is around what Fitzpatrick and other QBs have been signed to recently.

phlysac
11-14-2011, 08:41 PM
Ted Ginn? Joe Nedney? Those are pretty much their only free agents. it seems like their salary cap situation won't be too bad so franchising Smith (although he'll be overpaid) won't be too damaging.

Joe Nedney retired. :shakes head:

Regular contributors...

QB - Alex Smith
WR - Joshua Morgan
WR - Braylon Edwards
WR - Ted Ginn
RG - Adam Snyder

OLB - Ahmad Brooks
CB - Carlos Rogers
FS - Dashon Goldson
FS - Reggie Smith

They have a TON of contracts to worry about. That's 6 starters and I didn't include many key ST contributors.

Complex
11-14-2011, 08:46 PM
The Giants have the best chance to beat the Packers followed by the cowboys then the bears. If the eagles had a great to good defensive coordinator they would be in the top 2.

phlysac
11-14-2011, 09:00 PM
Alex Smith WAS a total flop. He's turning it around a bit now. He has a long way to go though.

As discussed a few pages back, the 49ers will have a Garrard/Fitzpatrick/Vick situation as Smith is only on a one year deal. They'd be stupid to extend him long term unless Harbaugh is seeing in practice that Kaepernick is awful.

Or look at it differently. "Unless Harbaugh is seeing in practice that Smith is legitimately good."

Gay Ork Wang
11-14-2011, 09:16 PM
If you watched that game, you'd realize that the score was understating the dominance of the Packers over the Bears. Aaron Rodgers had his way with the Cover-2 defense the Bears trotted out onto the field. The Bears' defense has been average all season long. It's certainly not as dominant as in years past and elite QBs will have their way with it.

I doubted their ability to get offensive production out of Cutler against *good* defenses last year, and was proven correct when they imploded offensively in the playoffs against the Packers after being gifted a home game against the inept Seahawks. I see no difference this year. Cutler will struggle to put up points against good defenses this year, and the Bears' Cover-2 will not be able to contain good offenses effectively enough to win those playoff games against good opponents.
im gonna trust you on this just as much as your predictions about anything you have made so far about the bears.

They imploded offensively against the packers? We had ******* Todd Collins throwing the ball. The offense had 2 TDs for the packers. Id say the packers offense was a lot worse compared to what they had done beforehand than the bears offense..

Bears Defense is not a Cover-2 defense. It is not. Please just go away.

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 09:18 PM
im gonna trust you on this just as much as your predictions about anything you have made so far about the bears.

Ignore the trolls and eventually they'll just go away.

the new jesus
11-14-2011, 09:28 PM
Ignore the trolls and eventually they'll just go away.

So he's a troll because he posted a well-reasoned response to refute your argument?

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 09:30 PM
So he's a troll because he posted a well-reasoned response to refute your argument?

JBCX is a known Bears hater and contrarian who compares the Bears to being one of the 5 worst teams in football. All he does is go around trying to start fights by arguing stupid points and backing it up with obscure statistics pulled from Pro Football Insider or where the ****** ever.

Just shut up. Don't post in threads I start if you don't have anything intelligent to say, which you never do.

Xonraider
11-14-2011, 10:05 PM
BB, so much writing and no hate for Palmer? Are you finally admiting teh greatnez of Palmer? lol

BeerBaron
11-14-2011, 10:06 PM
BB, so much writing and no hate for Palmer? Are you finally admiting teh greatnez of Palmer? lol

Much like Patriots talk, I'm spent on the Palmer talk. Plus, he lost to Tebow. Unacceptable.

Bob Sanders Dreadlock
11-14-2011, 11:29 PM
There was a post...possibly in the Andrew Luck Sweepstakes thread or another thread like that where a Colts fan basically broke down every Colts draft class of the past several years, and it looks downright abysmal.

He neglected the o-line for years, and constantly drafts guys to fit his broken system. I keep saying it over and over to the point where I feel like a broken record, but Polian's system has only ever built regular season championships. For all of those years with Buffalo and now with Indy, he's 1-6 in Superbowls plus countless years where they won 12, 13, 14 games only to see quick playoff exits.

He builds his Arena league styles teams that get crushed by more well rounded playoff caliber teams far more often than not. His finesse system just doesn't work and he shouldn't be given another decade and another franchise QB to waste running it.
I feel like that is the most useless point you could ever make. Especially when talking about teams as regular season championship teams. He may not have a good winning record in super bowls but find me another GM that has gotten his team to 7 super bowls.

Rosebud
11-14-2011, 11:54 PM
I feel like that is the most useless point you could ever make. Especially when talking about teams as regular season championship teams. He may not have a good winning record in super bowls but find me another GM that has gotten his team to 7 super bowls.

Which is also a faulty argument because what GM wouldn't get replaced if he went to that many title games without coming through but the one time where his team managed to do everything he didn't build them to do, run the ball and stop the run...

Raiderz4Life
11-15-2011, 12:12 AM
So he's a troll because he posted a well-reasoned response to refute your argument?

Don't trolls like...hibernate for winter? Maybe we'll stop seeing them soon???

One can hope.....

jrdrylie
11-15-2011, 08:28 AM
I like how you conveniently downplay the fact that the Packers dispatched the Bears fairly easily (27-17, thoroughly outplayed the Bears all game too) in Week 3 this season already, AT Soldier Field. I watched that game and the Packers outclassed the Bears in almost every phase of the game.

The Bears don't have the firepower, the offensive line, or the quarterback to win shoot-outs. If their Cover-2 defense isn't playing lights-out, they will lose every game they play against an elite QB.

Last year, the Packers averaged 25.8 points per game. Against the Bears, they averaged 13.5. That is over 1.5 touchdowns per game less. Rodgers averaged 0.85 TDs per game less against the Bears than any his average and 0.4 more INTs per game. His passer rating against the Bears was 14.3 points lower against the Bears than in his other 14 games.

This season, the Bears held Rodgers to his lowest QB rating, were one of three teams to pick him off, held the packers to their third lowest point total (8 points below their season average). And the Bears were one bad call away from having a chance to win that game. The holding call (on number 25 I believe when the Bears don't even have a number 25 on their team) that called back the punt return happened with about a minute left. That would have brought the score to within 3. If the Bears recover an onside kick, they have 45 seconds (and all three timeouts if I remember correctly) to gain about 30 yards to give Gould a chance to put it into overtime.

As Bears fans, we aren't saying that Chicago will beat Green Bay. But over the last season and a half, Aaron Rodgers has been unstoppable. The Bears however, have made him look human. But I forgot, the Bears are a bottom five team in the NFL who would lose to LSU if they played in a game, so I'm sure when they play on Christmas, the Packers are going to win 217-6.

BeerBaron
11-15-2011, 08:33 AM
Last year, the Packers averaged 25.8 points per game. Against the Bears, they averaged 13.5. That is over 1.5 touchdowns per game less. Rodgers averaged 0.85 TDs per game less against the Bears than any his average and 0.4 more INTs per game. His passer rating against the Bears was 14.3 points lower against the Bears than in his other 14 games.

This season, the Bears held Rodgers to his lowest QB rating, were one of three teams to pick him off, held the packers to their third lowest point total (8 points below their season average). And the Bears were one bad call away from having a chance to win that game. The holding call (on number 25 I believe when the Bears don't even have a number 25 on their team) that called back the punt return happened with about a minute left. That would have brought the score to within 3. If the Bears recover an onside kick, they have 45 seconds (and all three timeouts if I remember correctly) to gain about 30 yards to give Gould a chance to put it into overtime.

As Bears fans, we aren't saying that Chicago will beat Green Bay. But over the last season and a half, Aaron Rodgers has been unstoppable. The Bears however, have made him look human. But I forgot, the Bears are a bottom five team in the NFL who would lose to LSU if they played in a game, so I'm sure when they play on Christmas, the Packers are going to win 217-6.

6? With Jay Cutler's mechanics we'll score in the negatives. Pro Football Insider ranks him as the 56th best QB when passing the ball on 2nd and 12 during a full moon on the 3rd Sunday of the month when the temperature is below 50 degrees and the opposing team has cleats a color other than white.

Clearly, he's the worst QB in football and the Bears are a bottom 5 team.

JBCX
11-15-2011, 08:35 AM
im gonna trust you on this just as much as your predictions about anything you have made so far about the bears.

They imploded offensively against the packers? We had ******* Todd Collins throwing the ball. The offense had 2 TDs for the packers. Id say the packers offense was a lot worse compared to what they had done beforehand than the bears offense..

Bears Defense is not a Cover-2 defense. It is not. Please just go away.

- Before Todd Collins entered the game, Jay Cutler was *just* as ineffective. You do realize that Cutler started the game and played for a significant portion of that game and looked awful in the process, right?

- The Bears defense is clearly still a base Cover-2 that has mixed in a little bit of 2-Man (Man under, 2 safeties deep) and Cover-1 (Man under, 1 safety deep) this year.

Raiderz4Life
11-15-2011, 08:38 AM
At least jbcx got the blow out part right

JBCX
11-15-2011, 08:43 AM
Last year, the Packers averaged 25.8 points per game. Against the Bears, they averaged 13.5. That is over 1.5 touchdowns per game less. Rodgers averaged 0.85 TDs per game less against the Bears than any his average and 0.4 more INTs per game. His passer rating against the Bears was 14.3 points lower against the Bears than in his other 14 games.


Why are we still talking about things that happened last year? Last year, the Eagles were a playoff team. Last year, Peyton Manning was winning games for the Colts. Last year, The Dallas Cowboys were being blown out on a weekly basis prior to the Wade Phillips firing. LAST YEAR IS IRRELEVANT IN THE MERCURIAL NFL.


This season, the Bears held Rodgers to his lowest QB rating, were one of three teams to pick him off, held the packers to their third lowest point total (8 points below their season average). And the Bears were one bad call away from having a chance to win that game. The holding call (on number 25 I believe when the Bears don't even have a number 25 on their team) that called back the punt return happened with about a minute left. That would have brought the score to within 3. If the Bears recover an onside kick, they have 45 seconds (and all three timeouts if I remember correctly) to gain about 30 yards to give Gould a chance to put it into overtime.


Let's talk about this year. In the first Packers-Bears game this year, IN Soldier Field, the Bears held Aaron Rodgers to a 73.7% completion rate, 297 yards passing, 3 touchdown passes and 1 interception. Wow. I'd say the Bears certainly did a hell of a job "slowing him down", huh? Bragging about that kind of defensive performance is kind of like, um, bragging that you're the least "challenged" kid at the Special Olympics.

The Bears defense is worse this year than last, and will only continue to get worse with their aging superstars. Rodgers is playing historically well this year and NO defense will stop him, or even slow him down. If you want to feel good about holding a great QB to "only" 3 TD passes and 73.7% completion rate, then by all means do so, but realize that if Rodgers played the Bears 10 times this year, the Packers would probably 10 of those games.




As Bears fans, we aren't saying that Chicago will beat Green Bay. But over the last season and a half, Aaron Rodgers has been unstoppable. The Bears however, have made him look human. But I forgot, the Bears are a bottom five team in the NFL who would lose to LSU if they played in a game, so I'm sure when they play on Christmas, the Packers are going to win 217-6.

The Bears are one of the bottom 16 teams in the NFL. Their defense has kept them in games recently, but the defense is by no means dominant. Their offense is Matt Forte and Jay Cutler running for his life. This team is incapable of beating an elite QB because their defense is not good enough to shut down an elite QB, and their offense is not good enough to win a shoot-out. That's my only point. Of course, you had to throw some hyperbole in there to construct an entirely misleading strawman.

jth1331
11-15-2011, 09:09 AM
And the Bears were one bad call away from having a chance to win that game. The holding call (on number 25 I believe when the Bears don't even have a number 25 on their team) that called back the punt return happened with about a minute left. That would have brought the score to within 3. If the Bears recover an onside kick, they have 45 seconds (and all three timeouts if I remember correctly) to gain about 30 yards to give Gould a chance to put it into overtime.


I thought you were just being a homer about the holding call, but man that was bad. It was number 21 by the way they called it on.
Still, its asking a lot to then recover an onside kick and go 30 yards, and try a game tying field goal just to send the game to overtime where you hope Rodgers doesn't touch the ball.


The Bears are one of the bottom 16 teams in the NFL. Their defense has kept them in games recently, but the defense is by no means dominant. Their offense is Matt Forte and Jay Cutler running for his life. This team is incapable of beating an elite QB because their defense is not good enough to shut down an elite QB, and their offense is not good enough to win a shoot-out. That's my only point. Of course, you had to throw some hyperbole in there to construct an entirely misleading strawman.

I wish the Bears were a bottom 16 team but they aren't. They have a solid offense and a solid defense with a good special teams. Put that together, you got a good team that when they don't turn the ball over, are going to stay in games and win.

BeerBaron
11-15-2011, 09:13 AM
I thought you were just being a homer about the holding call, but man that was bad. It was number 21 by the way they called it on.
Still, its asking a lot to then recover an onside kick and go 30 yards, and try a game tying field goal just to send the game to overtime where you hope Rodgers doesn't touch the ball.


I looked at the replay over and over, and the only Bear even touching a Packer when the flag flew was I believe Corey Graham, one of our best special teamers, who had one hand against a Packer in no real position to hold.

I honestly think the refs got confused and just threw a flag in a panic. The Packers were completely lost, the announcers were lost, the camera crew was lost...it would come as no surprise if the refs got confused too.

And while it's unlikely anything comes of it still needing an onsides kick, it would have at least kept the game alive and made for one of the greatest highlights...maybe ever.

jrdrylie
11-15-2011, 09:15 AM
Let's talk about this year. In the first Packers-Bears game this year, IN Soldier Field, the Bears held Aaron Rodgers to a 73.7% completion rate, 297 yards passing, 3 touchdown passes and 1 interception. Wow. I'd say the Bears certainly did a hell of a job "slowing him down", huh? Bragging about that kind of defensive performance is kind of like, um, bragging that you're the least "challenged" kid at the Special Olympics.

The Bears defense is worse this year than last, and will only continue to get worse with their aging superstars. Rodgers is playing historically well this year and NO defense will stop him, or even slow him down. If you want to feel good about holding a great QB to "only" 3 TD passes and 73.7% completion rate, then by all means do so, but realize that if Rodgers played the Bears 10 times this year, the Packers would probably 10 of those games.


The Bears are one of the bottom 16 teams in the NFL. Their defense has kept them in games recently, but the defense is by no means dominant. Their offense is Matt Forte and Jay Cutler running for his life. This team is incapable of beating an elite QB because their defense is not good enough to shut down an elite QB, and their offense is not good enough to win a shoot-out. That's my only point. Of course, you had to throw some hyperbole in there to construct an entirely misleading strawman.

The truth is, the Bears have been one of the only defenses to even slow down Aaron Rodgers. They haven't stopped him. But they played well enough to be in the game and possibly even win it if not for one of the worst phantom calls I have ever seen. Yes, the defense is worse than last year. But it is not getting worse now. At the beginning of the season, they were atrocious. That was almost entirely because Chris Harris has the speed of a defensive tackle with a torn AClL and Brandon Merriweather is only good at getting personal fouls. They benched both of them for younger, faster, more talented guys and now they look nearly as good as last year.

And I can't see how you can say the Bears are a bottom half team. Indianapolis, Jacksonville, Washington, Seattle, Minnesota, Miami, St. Louis, Arizona, Cleveland, Carolina, and Denver are unarguably worse than the Bears. Chicago also killed Philadelphia and beat Tampa Bay (the score was much closer than the actual game). I have to believe Chicago is better than Kansas City. I would also say they are better than the Lions after that demolition on Sunday. That makes 15. And I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority of people would say they Bears are better than one of the following teams: Oakland, San Diego, Cincinnati, Buffalo, Oakland, Tennessee, and Atlanta (who they beat convincingly).

You don't know anything about football. How about you go find some stats on Pro Football Focus that show the Bears are one of the worst teams in the league, jack off to it, and stop trolling this forum.

Denver Bronco56
11-15-2011, 10:33 AM
1) i dont see the problem with how Tebow is playing... he is learning on the go, The coaching staff is getting him some confidence and he is leading the team to winning while he is learning.

2) i love some power football, and i think the broncos running all over the cheifs and raiders seem to prove the broncos are a really good running team. The 55 rushes isnt anything new for John Fox he did it with the Panthers.

3)Why would you pass the ball anymore then 8 times if you have ran for 300 yards and they cant stop it?



Sorry but i dont care how the broncos win... Case in point Champ Bailey said it best he has been on teams that have thrown the ball 50+ times and they lost... So if running the ball 55 times leads to winning im all for 8 passes a game and ill take a W every week

BeerBaron
11-15-2011, 10:36 AM
The problem is it will stop leading to wins very soon. I don't normally make guarantees, because in football anything can happen, it's why we American football, but I feel confident in this one.

The Denver Broncos will never win a Superbowl with Tim Tebow at QB. Sig quote me all you want, I have 110% confidence in that one.

Denver Bronco56
11-15-2011, 10:36 AM
Another thing i want to hear from you guys.


The NFL is a passing league, which means that the defenses are set up to stop the pass, meaning smaller players and more speed. The perfect way to attack this is to go back to Power Smash mouth football... The Broncos have done that and the past two games they knew we were going to run and it didnt matter..

I think What fox is doing is smart, running on defenses that are set up to defend the pass

Denver Bronco56
11-15-2011, 10:39 AM
The problem is it will stop leading to wins very soon. I don't normally make guarantees, because in football anything can happen, it's why we American football, but I feel confident in this one.

The Denver Broncos will never win a Superbowl with Tim Tebow at QB. Sig quote me all you want, I have 110% confidence in that one.


I understand alot of people believe that, but do you not think after a REAL offseason with coaching and development will not help tebow? everyone thinks he will not get better...

You can say that about alot of quarterbacks, the Bucaneers probably wont win a super bowl with Josh Freeman...

BeerBaron
11-15-2011, 10:40 AM
Another thing i want to hear from you guys.


The NFL is a passing league, which means that the defenses are set up to stop the pass, meaning smaller players and more speed. The perfect way to attack this is to go back to Power Smash mouth football... The Broncos have done that and the past two games they knew we were going to run and it didnt matter..

I think What fox is doing is smart, running on defenses that are set up to defend the pass

This is something that BBD and I have been championing for at least 2-3 years now. And you are correct in your logic. Look at all the teams drafting copious amounts of pass rushers and DBs.

However, I think a team like the 49ers or possibly even the Bengals is better equipped for that task than the Broncos. Yes, they ran an insane number of times against Chiefs and Raiders defenses who couldn't stop them.

But that is ALL they have. It's like a triple option college football team like Georgia Tech or one of the service academies. It's great when your winning and really takes time off the clock, but if the other team gets a two score lead, good night. Game over. Do you think Tebow could take it upon himself to throw out of a two TD hole in the 4th quarter? I don't. And it's why I think the Broncos are never going to achieve much in the long run.

Once they get to the playoffs and play the Baltimores, Pittsburghs, or hell, even Bengals or Jets of the AFC world, teams with quality defenses and great defensive minds at coordinator and head coach, they're going to get blown out.

BeerBaron
11-15-2011, 10:41 AM
I understand alot of people believe that, but do you not think after a REAL offseason with coaching and development will not help tebow? everyone thinks he will not get better...

You can say that about alot of quarterbacks, the Bucaneers probably wont win a super bowl with Josh Freeman...

Freeman is a good young QB who got it done last year. He's having a down year this year. But I'd bet on Freeman winning a Superbowl long before Tebow ever would.

Denver Bronco56
11-15-2011, 10:43 AM
This is something that BBD and I have been championing for at least 2-3 years now. And you are correct in your logic. Look at all the teams drafting copious amounts of pass rushers and DBs.

However, I think a team like the 49ers or possibly even the Bengals is better equipped for that task than the Broncos. Yes, they ran an insane number of times against Chiefs and Raiders defenses who couldn't stop them.

But that is ALL they have. It's like a triple option college football team like Georgia Tech or one of the service academies. It's great when your winning and really takes time off the clock, but if the other team gets a two score lead, good night. Game over. Do you think Tebow could take it upon himself to throw out of a two TD hole in the 4th quarter? I don't. And it's why I think the Broncos are never going to achieve much in the long run.

Once they get to the playoffs and play the Baltimores, Pittsburghs, or hell, even Bengals or Jets of the AFC world, teams with quality defenses and great defensive minds at coordinator and head coach, they're going to get blown out.

Well actually Tebow multiple times in his short career has brought the broncos back from 14+ points in the 4th quarter....

But i think its a team game and right now we are not talented enough across the board to compete with the ELITE teams... but i think with fox drafting defense and establishing a running game will get us in the right direction

Raiderz4Life
11-15-2011, 10:44 AM
Another thing i want to hear from you guys.


The NFL is a passing league, which means that the defenses are set up to stop the pass, meaning smaller players and more speed. The perfect way to attack this is to go back to Power Smash mouth football... The Broncos have done that and the past two games they knew we were going to run and it didnt matter..

I think What fox is doing is smart, running on defenses that are set up to defend the pass

That's all good and dandy but when teams stack the box and dare Denver to pass on them...haha good luck..it'll be a looong day

Denver Bronco56
11-15-2011, 10:45 AM
Freeman is a good young QB who got it done last year. He's having a down year this year. But I'd bet on Freeman winning a Superbowl long before Tebow ever would.

Ok sure you can say before Tebow but i doubt Freeman ever wins a superbowl, or Vick ever wins a superbowl, or Stafford ever winning a superbowl...


alot of quarterbacks are probably never going to win a superbowl.... Hell one of the best quarterbacks EVER Dan Marino never one a superbowl.... i think that proves its a team game and not all of it should rest on the quarterback.


I know im bringing up a mute point, but Trent Dilfer won a superbowl...sure because of the defense but still alot of GOOD quarterbacks will not win a superbowl

BeerBaron
11-15-2011, 10:45 AM
Well actually Tebow multiple times in his short career has brought the broncos back from 14+ points in the 4th quarter....

But i think its a team game and right now we are not talented enough across the board to compete with the ELITE teams... but i think with fox drafting defense and establishing a running game will get us in the right direction

Against the Dolphins barely, barely counts. The team technically won being down by 2 TDs, but still...

But I fully expect what happened to him vs. the Lions more often in the future than what he's done in his wins.

What the Broncos are doing essentially amounts to playing the Wildcat every play. Teams will soon catch on and start defending it the same way.

Denver Bronco56
11-15-2011, 10:47 AM
That's all good and dandy but when teams stack the box and dare Denver to pass on them...haha good luck..it'll be a looong day

Both Hue Jackson and Todd Haley have been quoted as saying they stacked the box, knew the run was coming and still couldn't stop it.... And the raiders have a REALLY good front 4

We will see how the season ends ,but when people know the run is coming and still cant stop it i think it proves that the team running the ball is actually really good at it...

niel89
11-15-2011, 10:48 AM
Do you think Tebow could take it upon himself to throw out of a two TD hole in the 4th quarter? I don't.


While I completely agree that Tebow probably isn't going to work out in the end, Tebow already did that this year against the Dolphins down 15 points.

I just want to see Tebow play some more quality teams who can actually stop the run a little bit. Tebow only threw the ball 8 times last week because he didnt have to throw it more than that.

edit: damn im super late.

Denver Bronco56
11-15-2011, 10:50 AM
Against the Dolphins barely, barely counts. The team technically won being down by 2 TDs, but still...

But I fully expect what happened to him vs. the Lions more often in the future than what he's done in his wins.

What the Broncos are doing essentially amounts to playing the Wildcat every play. Teams will soon catch on and start defending it the same way.

That is a way you can look at it... But if you go back and look tebow has had a couple 300 yard passing games last year and this year has thrown a TD pass in every game... he will get better as a passer, sure he probably will never BE great but combine a DECENT passer and his running ability he will be a weapon...


If every player was supposed to be great when they came out we probably would never have given steve young, john elway, Shannon Sharpe


Thats 3 Hall of Famers that were not good/terrible their first couple years... it takes time to learn and develop

Raiderz4Life
11-15-2011, 10:51 AM
Both Hue Jackson and Todd Haley have been quoted as saying they stacked the box, knew the run was coming and still couldn't stop it.... And the raiders have a REALLY good front 4

We will see how the season ends ,but when people know the run is coming and still cant stop it i think it proves that the team running the ball is actually really good at it...

The Raiders are barely respectable and the chiefs had some moments but have been abysmal all year. The lions smashed the Tebows...that's whats will most likely happen

Denver Bronco56
11-15-2011, 10:52 AM
While I completely agree that Tebow probably isn't going to work out in the end, Tebow already did that this year against the Dolphins down 15 points.

I just want to see Tebow play some more quality teams who can actually stop the run a little bit. Tebow only threw the ball 8 times last week because he didnt have to throw it more than that.

edit: damn im super late.


This is my point... people act like Tebow controls the play calling... why would he pass more if the opposing team cant stop the run?

You find a weakness and take advantage if i told you the opposing team could stop the pass i bet the team would throw alot more then they did

prock
11-15-2011, 10:54 AM
I don't think Tebow is a half decent quarterback. I agree with BB, it's more wild cat than smash mouth. It is essentially a gimmick offense given how little the quarterback actually throws it.

Denver Bronco56
11-15-2011, 10:54 AM
The Raiders are barely respectable and the chiefs had some moments but have been abysmal all year. The lions smashed the Tebows...that's whats will most likely happen


If you based everything on one game then every team minus the packers would be terrible... its a 16 game schedule and since tebow has been the starter whatever critics have said about him... the one thing they can "explain" is why he continues to win... its either a gimick offence, its he got lucky, the other team was bad.... What it really comes down to is he is WINNING

prock
11-15-2011, 10:58 AM
If you based everything on one game then every team minus the packers would be terrible... its a 16 game schedule and since tebow has been the starter whatever critics have said about him... the one thing they can "explain" is why he continues to win... its either a gimick offence, its he got lucky, the other team was bad.... What it really comes down to is he is WINNING

OK, ignore circumstances and only look at one thing. One small sampled statistic perfectly predicts his likely long term success.

Denver Bronco56
11-15-2011, 10:58 AM
And let me point out guys, Im not a Tebow Fanbow... im a Broncos fan...


And my point is that I loved the way Jake Plummer played..he took us to the AFC championship. And he plays alot like Tebow, unconventional but wins. We went with cutler and it has been downhill since then, so im just liking actually winning again, if that's running 55 times im all for it because i have seen first hand going with a "prototypical" quarterback didn't bring victories it essentially doomed our franchise

Denver Bronco56
11-15-2011, 10:59 AM
OK, ignore circumstances and only look at one thing. One small sampled statistic perfectly predicts his likely long term success.

Ok i agree his time in the NFL has been a small sample size but every game MINUS one(lions) he has been competitive and gave the broncos a chance to win

DraftSavant
11-15-2011, 11:00 AM
1) i dont see the problem with how Tebow is playing... he is learning on the go, The coaching staff is getting him some confidence and he is leading the team to winning while he is learning.

2) i love some power football, and i think the broncos running all over the cheifs and raiders seem to prove the broncos are a really good running team. The 55 rushes isnt anything new for John Fox he did it with the Panthers.

3)Why would you pass the ball anymore then 8 times if you have ran for 300 yards and they cant stop it?



Sorry but i dont care how the broncos win... Case in point Champ Bailey said it best he has been on teams that have thrown the ball 50+ times and they lost... So if running the ball 55 times leads to winning im all for 8 passes a game and ill take a W every week

It might work for the rest of this season. It might not. Everyone thought the Wildcat would take the league by storm, and it had fizzled out by the end of its first season (in terms of being used as a foundation of the offense as opposed to the occasional play).

In order for the read option to have any kind of sustaining element this year, two things must happen. The Broncos must allow Tebow to be a true foundation runner, which means at least 10 and closer to 15/20 carries per game. The second thing is that they've got to be able to take advantage of man coverage on the outside. The beauty about the read option is that by declaring the QB a runner, it forces the defense to play a math game. They have to stay in their base personnel (which is more predictable in nature than the extensive sub pass rushing packages all NFL teams have these days), and it limits the variety of coverages the defense can use.

When this season is over, NFL coaches will swallow their pride and ask college coaches how to really stop the read option. After that it will be dead.

BeerBaron
11-15-2011, 11:00 AM
Plummer was still primarily a passer though.

Raiderz4Life
11-15-2011, 11:02 AM
If you based everything on one game then every team minus the packers would be terrible... its a 16 game schedule and since tebow has been the starter whatever critics have said about him... the one thing they can "explain" is why he continues to win... its either a gimick offence, its he got lucky, the other team was bad.... What it really comes down to is he is WINNING

He's won 3 games againt a semi decent team and 2 abysmal teams..when he beats a relevant team without that stupid college level offense I'll be impressed

Denver Bronco56
11-15-2011, 11:03 AM
Plummer was still primarily a passer though.


Sure i agree, but my point is Tebow did not have an offseason to develop so he is learning on the go.... He didnt have much practice time until the dolphins game... Give him an offseason with John Elway and the coaching staff to work on stuff he will be much more then a "Wildcat" player...

descendency
11-15-2011, 11:05 AM
The Broncos are just buying Tebow time to develop. If they can win in spite of his passing patheticness, then more power to them. No doubt he has to get a lot better, but in the mean time - if Tim can keep them above 4-5 wins a season then I think it's time to stop denying that they aren't a good team anymore and move on.

I don't let that keep me from drafting a franchise QB if I feel I have a shot at one, but I certainly don't put the guys I have out there in a position to lose.

BeerBaron
11-15-2011, 11:05 AM
Sure i agree, but my point is Tebow did not have an offseason to develop so he is learning on the go.... He didnt have much practice time until the dolphins game... Give him an offseason with John Elway and the coaching staff to work on stuff he will be much more then a "Wildcat" player...

Right, but he's also not a rookie. This isn't his first year in the NFL where he's adjusting. First year in this scheme, but he had previous experience.

And I don't think any number of offseasons is going to turn him into Rodgers/Brady or even Flacco/Sanchez as a passer. And at the end of the day, to win a championship, you'll have to be able to pass adequately. Trent Dilfer is easily the worst QB to ever win a Superbowl, but he had an all time great defense.

Denver Bronco56
11-15-2011, 11:07 AM
I think everyone just thinks Tebow will be as good as he is now...and never become better, when you have a player with the work ethic as a Tebow he will work to get better, you just have to let him develop and im glad he is getting game experience and practice time and all that... this year to me is exciting only because he is playing ...

But next year i cant wait to see how he develops

Denver Bronco56
11-15-2011, 11:08 AM
Right, but he's also not a rookie. This isn't his first year in the NFL where he's adjusting. First year in this scheme, but he had previous experience.

And I don't think any number of offseasons is going to turn him into Rodgers/Brady or even Flacco/Sanchez as a passer. And at the end of the day, to win a championship, you'll have to be able to pass adequately. Trent Dilfer is easily the worst QB to ever win a Superbowl, but he had an all time great defense.

First of all you need to realize he DIDNT have an offseason...so essentially he didnt have a 2nd year offseason to develop

Denver Bronco56
11-15-2011, 11:09 AM
Right, but he's also not a rookie. This isn't his first year in the NFL where he's adjusting. First year in this scheme, but he had previous experience.

And I don't think any number of offseasons is going to turn him into Rodgers/Brady or even Flacco/Sanchez as a passer. And at the end of the day, to win a championship, you'll have to be able to pass adequately. Trent Dilfer is easily the worst QB to ever win a Superbowl, but he had an all time great defense.


I forgot that Football was a cookie cutter league that you have to be like rodgers or brady to win.... I think if tebow can get a little better throwing he will be very dangerous and will definently be different than every other quarterback but still effective in moving the ball (legs and arm)

Rosebud
11-15-2011, 11:15 AM
And let me point out guys, Im not a Tebow Fanbow... im a Broncos fan...


And my point is that I loved the way Jake Plummer played..he took us to the AFC championship. And he plays alot like Tebow, unconventional but wins. We went with cutler and it has been downhill since then, so im just liking actually winning again, if that's running 55 times im all for it because i have seen first hand going with a "prototypical" quarterback didn't bring victories it essentially doomed our franchise

Dude...that defense went to **** well before the upgrade from Jake the Snake. Plummer had a great defense backing him up and covering up for his screw ups. Cutler had an epically pathetic defense that the winless lions could've supersized with. Just cause you won less with Cutler doesn't mean he wasn't vastly superior to Plummer from the moment they handed him the ball...and I like Tebow and the Donkeys...

BeerBaron
11-15-2011, 11:15 AM
We'll see what happens. I'm just not ready to crown him after 4 games. And the more he gets talked about in the media regardless of actual performance, the more annoyed I'm going to get, which was my point in the first place.

Denver Bronco56
11-15-2011, 11:16 AM
Another thing i want to point out... lets say all of you are right that he CANT throw the ball.... What happens when he does, if he is capable of winning in the NFL by not throwing give him time to learn that and he will easily be one of the most dangerous players in the NFL

ShutDwn
11-15-2011, 11:17 AM
If you based everything on one game then every team minus the packers would be terrible... its a 16 game schedule and since tebow has been the starter whatever critics have said about him... the one thing they can "explain" is why he continues to win... its either a gimick offence, its he got lucky, the other team was bad.... What it really comes down to is he is WINNING

How do you give credit to Tebow for winning the game when he completed two passes and ran for only 43 more? How do you give him credit when so many other QBs could easily step into that and do better? They still had 200 yards rushing without Tebow's yards, most QBs would be having their way when they used play action.

I'd rather have my QB look good playing and lose than look like Tim Tebow. It's about the future for young quarterbacks, not compiling wins that don't amount to anything. Every win Tebow has just hurts the Broncos. It keeps people thinking something could happen.

If the Broncos want keep this up though, I'm sure the Panthers would be willing to trade for Eric Decker. The Broncos don't really need him anymore do they? What wide receiver would want to be on that team? John Fox let Steve Smith rot on the sideline for so long, why would he care about Decker and Royal?

BeerBaron
11-15-2011, 11:18 AM
No team is going to win in this league without being able to throw the ball. When was the last time a triple option/wildcat team won anything in the NFL? Or how about even in college?

It's a low level high school gimmick and I'm confident it will be caught onto by defenses soon enough.

I'll back down slightly if he pulls it off against Rex Ryan. Like I said earlier, put him on suicide watch if he loses to the Broncos this week.

Denver Bronco56
11-15-2011, 11:48 AM
We will have to see... I think Tebow is a "football player" and has the will and talent to win however that is...

NUMEROUS players and coaches have said the same thing such as joe montana, Steve Young, Rex Ryan, Terrell Davis, John Gruden... All seem to think that tebow will make it and or acknowledge that he is capable of winning in the NFL

I think having someone like Tebow is something we havent seen in the NFL... And saying he cant throw i think is handicapped by the playcalling but that is my opinion.. but one thing i can say he has a 20-5 TD to Turnover ratio and that is SECOND only to Aaron Rodgers and that is a big stat because he doesnt make dumb decisions and give the other team the ball

Diehard
11-15-2011, 11:48 AM
How do you give him credit when so many other QBs could easily step into that and do better? They still had 200 yards rushing without Tebow's yards, most QBs would be having their way when they used play action.

Tebow may be unreliable as a passer, but teams have to account for his running ability. That makes it difficult to just sell out vs the RB, unless you like seeing Tebow rumble downfield for 20+ yards.

I'm not saying it's better, it's just different.

If the Broncos want keep this up though, I'm sure the Panthers would be willing to trade for Eric Decker. The Broncos don't really need him anymore do they? What wide receiver would want to be on that team? John Fox let Steve Smith rot on the sideline for so long, why would he care about Decker and Royal?

Even within the limitations of the current system, Decker is good for a long TD pretty much every game. He's also been aggressive blocking in the run game. He's a solid contributor to the cause. Also consider that this offense is a work in progress... if Tebow can show any improvement as a passer over the next few games, I think we'll end up with quite an interesting attack.

Anyway, your posts in this thread betray a certain amount of sourness - is it hate for Tebow or your old coach? Ultimately, DB27 is right - it is about winning, and however unconventional it may be, we're back in the thick of things for the AFC West. You can take draft position and shove it up your ass - I'll take wins.

Raiderz4Life
11-15-2011, 11:56 AM
Hahaha poor broncos fans...starting to get blinded by Tebow

Rosebud
11-15-2011, 12:10 PM
Hahaha poor broncos fans...starting to get blinded by Tebow

To be fair if he did ever learn to pass the ball I agree with them that they'd have a great offense in the works...if...

Diehard
11-15-2011, 12:10 PM
Hahaha poor broncos fans...starting to get blinded by Tebow

???

I think we all know he has to improve as a passer or he's going to get replaced in the offseason. However, we'll take whatever wins we can get.

Btw, it was nice trampling your team into the ground on their home turf.

Raiderz4Life
11-15-2011, 12:14 PM
???

I think we all know he has to improve as a passer or he's going to get replaced in the offseason. However, we'll take whatever wins we can get.

Btw, it was nice trampling your team into the ground on their home turf.

Ouch...that cuts deep ='(....thats ok because we're just even after we beat you at mile high opening day

prock
11-15-2011, 12:16 PM
???

I think we all know he has to improve as a passer or he's going to get replaced in the offseason. However, we'll take whatever wins we can get.

Btw, it was nice trampling your team into the ground on their home turf.

If you want to place your chips in Tim Tebow's basket, enjoy yourself, he is never going to be a decent passer. Even in his comeback win against the Fins he looked terrible.

JBCX
11-15-2011, 12:17 PM
The truth is, the Bears have been one of the only defenses to even slow down Aaron Rodgers. They haven't stopped him. But they played well enough to be in the game and possibly even win it if not for one of the worst phantom calls I have ever seen. Yes, the defense is worse than last year. But it is not getting worse now. At the beginning of the season, they were atrocious. That was almost entirely because Chris Harris has the speed of a defensive tackle with a torn AClL and Brandon Merriweather is only good at getting personal fouls. They benched both of them for younger, faster, more talented guys and now they look nearly as good as last year.


Yeah, I'm sure that a rookie safety will vastly improve this defense from here on out. The problem is that Urlacher and Briggs are older, Peppers is older, and occasionally they will give you some good games but you can't rely on older players to dominate for 16+ games.

I'm sorry, but 3 TDs and 70+% completion is not "slowing down" Rodgers. The Bears' defense, like most others, stand little chance at beating Rodgers at any point in the future. I'd actually give the 49ers a better chance of slowing down Rodgers than the Bears.


And I can't see how you can say the Bears are a bottom half team. Indianapolis, Jacksonville, Washington, Seattle, Minnesota, Miami, St. Louis, Arizona, Cleveland, Carolina, and Denver are unarguably worse than the Bears. Chicago also killed Philadelphia and beat Tampa Bay (the score was much closer than the actual game). I have to believe Chicago is better than Kansas City. I would also say they are better than the Lions after that demolition on Sunday. That makes 15. And I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority of people would say they Bears are better than one of the following teams: Oakland, San Diego, Cincinnati, Buffalo, Oakland, Tennessee, and Atlanta (who they beat convincingly).


Chicago hardly "killed" Philadelphia. At the end of the game, weren't the Eagles driving to score the game-winning touchdown when Jeremy Maclin fell down short of a 1st down in Bears territory? If the Eagles defense was just a little more competent, and didn't give up so many points to the average Bears offense, the Eagles would have won that game. I can use "ifs" and "coulds" just like you did regarding the Packers game.

Chicago split their series with Detroit. The Bears are hardly definitively better than the Lions, because each team used its home field advantage to win games against the other.

I don't see how you can convincingly argue that the Bengals, Raiders, Titans, or Chargers are absolutely worse than the Bears. All of those teams have more competent offenses than the Bears, with the possible exception of the Chargers. The Bears defense is slightly better than those teams', but again, it's simply not a dominant defense, and is maybe only slightly above average at this point.


You don't know anything about football. How about you go find some stats on Pro Football Focus that show the Bears are one of the worst teams in the league, jack off to it, and stop trolling this forum.

Or maybe you could quit being such a Bears homer and be more realistic about the reality of the Bears in 2011: They are basically an average or slightly below-average team that can occasinally win games with great special teams and/or defensive play, and will absolutely not win any playoff games against quality opponents.

I will PayPal you $100 if the Bears beat any one of the following teams in the playoffs: Packers, 49ers, Cowboys, or Giants.

Diehard
11-15-2011, 12:20 PM
Ouch...that cuts deep ='(....thats ok because we're just even after we beat you at mile high opening day

Fair enough. As an aside, that opening day game was one of the worst played I'd seen in a long, long time... execution and discipline sucked ass. The lockout didn't do either team any favors.

prock
11-15-2011, 12:22 PM
I will PayPal you $100 if the Bears beat any one of the following teams in the playoffs: Packers, 49ers, Cowboys, or Giants.

Sig quote this immediately.


The Bears are easily one of the better 16 teams in the league. And I ******* hate the Bears and thought they were gonna completely fall off. Unfortunately they are better than I thought and hoped they would be.

jrdrylie
11-15-2011, 12:43 PM
Yeah, I'm sure that a rookie safety will vastly improve this defense from here on out. The problem is that Urlacher and Briggs are older, Peppers is older, and occasionally they will give you some good games but you can't rely on older players to dominate for 16+ games.

I'm sorry, but 3 TDs and 70+% completion is not "slowing down" Rodgers. The Bears' defense, like most others, stand little chance at beating Rodgers at any point in the future. I'd actually give the 49ers a better chance of slowing down Rodgers than the Bears.



Chicago hardly "killed" Philadelphia. At the end of the game, weren't the Eagles driving to score the game-winning touchdown when Jeremy Maclin fell down short of a 1st down in Bears territory? If the Eagles defense was just a little more competent, and didn't give up so many points to the average Bears offense, the Eagles would have won that game. I can use "ifs" and "coulds" just like you did regarding the Packers game.

Chicago split their series with Detroit. The Bears are hardly definitively better than the Lions, because each team used its home field advantage to win games against the other.

I don't see how you can convincingly argue that the Bengals, Raiders, Titans, or Chargers are absolutely worse than the Bears. All of those teams have more competent offenses than the Bears, with the possible exception of the Chargers. The Bears defense is slightly better than those teams', but again, it's simply not a dominant defense, and is maybe only slightly above average at this point.



Or maybe you could quit being such a Bears homer and be more realistic about the reality of the Bears in 2011: They are basically an average or slightly below-average team that can occasinally win games with great special teams and/or defensive play, and will absolutely not win any playoff games against quality opponents.

I will PayPal you $100 if the Bears beat any one of the following teams in the playoffs: Packers, 49ers, Cowboys, or Giants.

A rookie safety has definitely improved our defense. He has the speed and coverage ability that was lacking in the secondary. Yes, Rodgers torched us. but compared to what he has done to other teams, the defense played well. And remember, that was when our defense was playing poorly. I'm not saying Rodgers is going to go 12-30 for 150 yards and 3 picks come Christmas, but he will have a much more difficult time next time around. You are correct about the Philadelphia game, that was an even game. But the Bears beat them in Philadelphia. They are better. I didn't say the Bears are absolutely better than Cincinnati, Oakland, Tennessee, or San Diego. I did say they are better than at least one of those teams, which would make them at least above average. We'll see soon though, as Chicago plays Oakland and San Diego coming up.

But to say they are below average is ridiculous. Their schedule has included Green Bay, Philadelphia, New Orleans, and Atlanta. That's 75% of the NFC playoffs from last season. They also played Tampa Bay, who was one of the last team out. So out of the top 7 NFC teams from last season 9I'm including Seattle since they made the playoffs), they have played 5 of them, plus two games against this year's sexy pick (Detroit). They are 6-3 against one the toughest schedules in the NFL so far. Yeah, they are totally below-average.

Diehard
11-15-2011, 12:48 PM
the sooner opposing defenses quit pretending like that's a relevant percentage and dare him to put up 21ish points on his arm alone, the sooner we won't win another game.

That's certainly the big issue at hand. Tebow must improve as a passer over the remaining games. The old mantra of "pass to score, run to win" is appropriate - hit some passes early to soften the defense, then pound away with our effective running game. Of all teams, we need to be able to pick our spots to pass, rather than being forced into it by the opponent and circumstances.

Can Tebow step up to the challenge? I don't know... but we'll find out soon enough.

DraftSavant
11-15-2011, 01:06 PM
No team is going to win in this league without being able to throw the ball. When was the last time a triple option/wildcat team won anything in the NFL? Or how about even in college?

It's a low level high school gimmick and I'm confident it will be caught onto by defenses soon enough.

I'll back down slightly if he pulls it off against Rex Ryan. Like I said earlier, put him on suicide watch if he loses to the Broncos this week.

That's actually going to be a very interesting matchup. Schematically, Rex's defense is one of the worst equipped to stop such an offense. Again, I'm talking schematically. On paper.

BeerBaron
11-15-2011, 01:08 PM
That's actually going to be a very interesting matchup. Schematically, Rex's defense is one of the worst equipped to stop such an offense. Again, I'm talking schematically. On paper.

Or is it one of the best? I said earlier to play the 46 straight up and put Revis and Cro on receivers in the hardest man coverage possible.

There would just be too many bodies to run against and there's no way Tebow can throw open blanketed receivers. He just doesn't have the quick release ore reliable accuracy to do it.

Hurricanes25
11-15-2011, 01:27 PM
Or is it one of the best? I said earlier to play the 46 straight up and put Revis and Cro on receivers in the hardest man coverage possible.


I think that's what we'll see on Thursday night. Put 8 guys in the box and have Revis and Cro play man with one of the saftey's in the middle of the field. It seems like the best way to stop the Denver/Tebow O.

brat316
11-15-2011, 01:41 PM
unless they spread it out in 3 & 4 WR sets, and let Tebow go all UF. Now what bitcches?

BeerBaron
11-15-2011, 01:43 PM
unless they spread it out in 3 & 4 WR sets, and let Tebow go all UF. Now what bitcches?

A John Fox team running the spread.....not a chance in hell.

If Fox were the Packers coach right now, Rodgers wouldn't be having a great year unless you count all the handoffs.

This current offense the Broncos are running is about as far from a traditional power run Fox will go.

brat316
11-15-2011, 01:44 PM
Man Elway must be super pissed though. Here he thought, all right we put this clown in, teams are just gonna wail on him and we won't win games. Andrew Luck here I come. A few weeks later, Tebowing is just Winning ahaha.

ShutDwn
11-15-2011, 01:56 PM
yeah, i mean, he only has 34 catches. he's only 4th in receiving tds. we should totally give him to the panthers before we stop throwing him the ball so often.

I'm saying Decker will never reach his potential with Tebow.

Steve Smith led the league in yards, TDs and receptions a while back. People thought he was washed up, turns out he just played in a uncreative offense.

No, Fox wasn't the playcaller, but he prefers a vanilla offense so he brings in coaches that will do that for him. It's not hard to understand. John Fox just doesn't like utilizing talent on offense unless it's a runningback. Maybe that's why he likes letting Tebow waste Decker and Royal's talent?

Malaka
11-15-2011, 02:05 PM
What the Broncos really need to do...

1. Fire John Fox and hire Urban Meyer

2. Draft Chris Rainey and Jeff Demps.

3. Trade Eric Decker for Percy Harvin.

4. Trade Demaryius Thomas for Riley Cooper.

5. Trade and acquire by any means necessary, Maurkice Pouncey, Mike Pouncey, Aaron Hernandez, and Marcus Gilbert.

6. Super Bowl

brat316
11-15-2011, 02:15 PM
shouldn't it be

6. ???

7. superbowl profitzz

gpngc
11-15-2011, 03:03 PM
njx9, it *could* have marginal long-term success for a few reasons:

-The other 31 teams aren't going to change personnel philosophy (pass rushers, coverage DBs/LBs) for the Broncos. They may start to develop better gameplans, but with the art of tackling in a serious decline, teams just aren't equipped or prepared to stop the run 50 times a game.

-The personnel you mention. Decker is a fine option in the role he currently has. Thomas too (think Ga. Tech's passing "tree" lol). McGahee is still a capable running back. Who knew he still had that speed? And the OL (any OL, I'd imagine) clearly loves to run block more than pass block.

-And I know BeerBaron's experience of Tebow is being ruined by the media's ridiculous coverage of him, but if you separate yourself from that you have to be impressed with his perseverance to be able to come back from something as debilitating and downright embarrassing as that Lions loss and come back and win NFL games. He's not a skilled pro passer by any stretch but the way he scratches and claws and somehow throws a TD every week - he clearly ignites the rest of his team - that's special. Because of the intangibles I would never bet against him maybe improving with some experience (that release will still be slower than anything, but whatever). In other words, I wouldn't be surprised to see that offense evolve to where he's completing maybe 12 for 20 each week, but with the 12 completions going for big plays (he's never going to throw WC routes with any consistency).

He's also in a division that doesn't feature good defenses. Like at all.

I don't know - I just don't understand the doom and gloom expectations surrounding a team that is finally having some success. I know most signs point towards this not working, but there are reasons that it could at least (most importantly - it already has this season). I'd probably at least consider those reasons if it were my team but maybe I'm just a blind eternal optimist.

BeerBaron
11-15-2011, 03:29 PM
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/11/15/revis-doesnt-think-broncos-offense-can-last/

It would seem that Revis is the "it won't last" side of Tebow's success. Prove us right on Thursday dude.

Diehard
11-15-2011, 03:35 PM
our interior o-line was pathetic in run blocking last year, and didn't really look that much better early this season. hopefully they're turning a corner and it wasn't just a lackluster effort by the chiefs.

The 3 inside guys were money against the Raiders as well. I'm still leery of Beadles and Walton in pass blocking, but they are getting the job done in the run game. It's nice to see the line mature and gel like this... especially when we have one of the youngest OL's in the league.

gpngc
11-15-2011, 03:43 PM
Well OL generally enjoy run blocking much more than pass pro. I'm sure all the called runs in a row have impacted their performance in a positive way as well...

All I'm saying is I'd be pretty pumped if my squad beat two division rivals and was 3-1 L4 even if I was skeptical with the offense going forward.

TitleTown088
11-15-2011, 03:49 PM
I think when you proclaim the Bears "packer killers" you're ignoring that Dom Capers owns Jay Cutler.

BeerBaron
11-15-2011, 03:50 PM
I think when you proclaim the Bears "packer killers" you're ignoring that Dom Capers owns Jay Cutler.

Cutler is, as always, the wildcard in it all. But if you read fully, you'd see that "Packer Killers" is a gross oversimplification I went with just for the title.

niel89
11-15-2011, 04:01 PM
I really think that a lot of credit needs to go to the OLs run blocking success. They are running the ball really well and its the OL just moving the LOS consistently.

I'm really surprised how well McGahee is doing right now. He was just okay last year in Baltimore, nothing special & not decisive enough. Now, he is running hard and looks great.

bigbluedefense
11-15-2011, 07:22 PM
I have no problem with him going for it on 4th down. I like when coaches are aggressive. Play to win.

If you can't get a yard, you don't deserve to win.

Great thread btw.

BeerBaron
11-15-2011, 07:25 PM
I have no problem with him going for it on 4th down. I like when coaches are aggressive. Play to win.

If you can't get a yard, you don't deserve to win.

Great thread btw.

Again, it goes back to weighing out the positives vs. the negatives. You don't get it, you lose. You're basically handing the ball to the Saints in FG range. Even if you do get it, you have to go another 40 yards to be in realistic FG range. They could have picked it up and had to punt 4 plays later.

I'd completely buy it if he was on the edge of FG range. Or even at least in Saints territory.

But that was too much.

DraftSavant
11-17-2011, 10:31 PM
And that's what can happen when you run the bear front with heavy man coverage behind it. Lose contain: big play.

BeerBaron
11-17-2011, 10:33 PM
Hey, piss off. I'm not letting one more game change my mind.

I absolutely, fully guarantee this statement. You can sig quote it to your hearts content.

I will quit message boards forever if Tim Tebow ever wins a Superbowl (as starter.)

BeerBaron
11-17-2011, 10:34 PM
You know what, I'll quit FOOTBALL forever if Tim Tebow wins a superbowl. (as starter.)

49erNation85
11-17-2011, 10:35 PM
You know what, I'll quit FOOTBALL forever if Tim Tebow wins a superbowl. (as starter.)


Come on man . he won a National Tittle why not a super bowl .

BeerBaron
11-17-2011, 10:36 PM
College is a whole different ball game. Pro defenses won't put up with this forever.

DraftSavant
11-17-2011, 10:40 PM
Hey, piss off. I'm not letting one more game change my mind.

I absolutely, fully guarantee this statement. You can sig quote it to your hearts content.

I will quit message boards forever if Tim Tebow ever wins a Superbowl (as starter.)

Easy there. Never said he'd win the SB. Said it's going to be a problematic offense for Ds until NFL d-coordinators can pick college coaches' brains over the offseason.

Complex
11-17-2011, 10:44 PM
Hey, piss off. I'm not letting one more game change my mind.

I absolutely, fully guarantee this statement. You can sig quote it to your hearts content.

I will quit message boards forever if Tim Tebow ever wins a Superbowl (as starter.)

What about getting a Tebow sig if he beats the bears or make the playoffs?

BeerBaron
11-17-2011, 10:46 PM
What about getting a Tebow sig if he beats the bears or make the playoffs?

Nay, I don't make bets. But I'm confident enough in the fact that this will never lead to anything significant to say I'll quit completely if he ever wins it all.

I mean, at that point, I feel like my football knowledge wouldn't be worth a damn anyway. Might as well get a productive hobby.

JBCX
11-17-2011, 10:51 PM
You should quit this forum if Tebow beats the Bears. Or change your name to "TebowBaron"

BeerBaron
11-17-2011, 11:00 PM
there's just no excuse for blowing contain *that badly* in the final minutes of a game. it was like the jets were playing prevent against our run. they sold out completely to the middle, no one stayed home.

i just don't get how a defense can run so well for 54 minutes, then shatter completely on the final drive.

Now is not the time to try and appeal to rational people applying common sense to the situation, but that right there is why this will eventually stop working.

You just cannot get by playing terrible until the final minutes of the game each week.

When you look at the loss Tebow suffered to the Lions, you see what needs to be done. The opposing team's offense needs to get a lead. A bigger lead than 3 points. Something teams led by QBs like Carson Palmer, Matt Cassel and Mark Sanchez simply did not or cannot accomplish it would seem.

The Broncos defense played better than expected, but a team with a good QB is going to gash them up.

I'll admit that the Broncos could quite possibly ramble their way to the division title with this style of play, mostly because there's no one in that division worth a damn right now.

But get to the playoffs and play against the Steelers or Ravens. This won't hold up. Those guys will punch Tebow right in his prayer spewing mouth on defense while slicing up that defense. (More prevalent in the case of the Steelers unless Cam Cameron grows a brain.)

Now, I'm going to shut my mouth on the subject for a while. It won't last.

JBCX
11-17-2011, 11:02 PM
Does it ever occur to people that defending a running attack for 60 minutes might, um, you know, wear the defense down late in the 4th quarter? And make them more tired in that quarter and more prone to giving up late leads?

Diehard
11-17-2011, 11:02 PM
Nay, I don't make bets. But I'm confident enough in the fact that this will never lead to anything significant to say I'll quit completely if he ever wins it all.

It has already led to something significant - 3 wins in a row for a team that was pretty much written off.

Tebow has a phenomenal will to win and plenty of athletic ability to go with it. I'm not happy with his development as a passer, but I think it would be unwise to bet against him.

Diehard
11-17-2011, 11:14 PM
i agree, and while it's a bit deceiving, i give our defense a ton of credit for keeping the games close enough to allow for those drives.

No doubt. The major improvement in defense and special teams is allowing Fox to play, well, Foxball. Tebow's 4th quarter wizardry doesn't hurt that cause either.

well that and sanchez. man. i didn't want to agree with anyone about him for a while, but he really is terrible.

Yeah, Mr GQ seems to be struggling mightly... what a shame. :)

Timbathia
11-17-2011, 11:16 PM
This Tebow offense may never make it to the superbowl, but Tebow as part of an offense certainly could. Spread a defense and let him run the ball equals yards every freakin time. Let someone else play QB that can throw, and just let Tebow run the wildcat package.

DraftSavant
11-17-2011, 11:19 PM
i agree, and while it's a bit deceiving, i give our defense a ton of credit for keeping the games close enough to allow for those drives. last year we'd have been getting blown out by 60 in that game. this year? they were the sole reason we were in it at any point.

well that and sanchez. man. i didn't want to agree with anyone about him for a while, but he really is terrible.

Just winz gamez.

****, I forgot which QB we were talking about.

Complex
11-17-2011, 11:27 PM
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lufhgmLMX81r5ubj1o1_500.jpg

jrdrylie
11-17-2011, 11:35 PM
This Tebow offense may never make it to the superbowl, but Tebow as part of an offense certainly could. Spread a defense and let him run the ball equals yards every freakin time. Let someone else play QB that can throw, and just let Tebow run the wildcat package.

Wildcat no longer works. Defenses figured it out quickly. The same thing will happen if the Broncos don't change the offense. Defenses can play man with their corners with one safety deep to protect against the deep ball. That leaves seven guys to focus almost entirely on the run. The Broncos could beat this coverage by using short passes and big yard after catch averages, but Tebow's wild inaccuracies makes getting upfield after catches very difficult.

DraftSavant
11-18-2011, 12:27 AM
Wildcat no longer works. Defenses figured it out quickly. The same thing will happen if the Broncos don't change the offense. Defenses can play man with their corners with one safety deep to protect against the deep ball. That leaves seven guys to focus almost entirely on the run. The Broncos could beat this coverage by using short passes and big yard after catch averages, but Tebow's wild inaccuracies makes getting upfield after catches very difficult.

The entire premise of the spread option is the math game between a running QB and the free safety...

BeerBaron
11-18-2011, 08:17 AM
Hey, piss off. I'm not letting one more game change my mind.

I absolutely, fully guarantee this statement. You can sig quote it to your hearts content.

I will quit message boards forever if Tim Tebow ever wins a Superbowl (as starter.)

I would like to add an addendum to this.

*Unless he beats the Packers in said Superbowl.

I might just kill myself if those are the two Superbowl teams anyway, but if for some reason I don't and Tebow beats the Packers...well, that's just ok.

brat316
11-18-2011, 08:51 AM
Whatever happened to everyone, well supporters, drooling over his work ethic of changing his throwing motion thus improving his accuracy?

Has he actually changed it? I think he still winds up, but not as low.

BeerBaron
11-18-2011, 08:53 AM
Whatever happened to everyone, well supporters, drooling over his work ethic of changing his throwing motion thus improving his accuracy?

Has he actually changed it? I think he still winds up, but not as low.

He hasn't. For the first 95% of the game, he was wildly inaccurate. His windup is still trebuchet-esque.

Which is why it's all the more inexplicable that teams are struggling with him right now. Pro defenses won't put up with this forever. Expect someone to pop him in the mouth to make him think a little harder about running and then take advantage of his inability to pass consistently.

jrdrylie
11-18-2011, 08:59 AM
He plays San Diego and Minnesota next. Maybe Jared Allen will knock him down a peg.

brat316
11-18-2011, 08:59 AM
He hasn't. For the first 95% of the game, he was wildly inaccurate. His windup is still trebuchet-esque.

Which is why it's all the more inexplicable that teams are struggling with him right now. Pro defenses won't put up with this forever. Expect someone to pop him in the mouth to make him think a little harder about running and then take advantage of his inability to pass consistently.

I'm wondering wear all those strips are when he brings the ball down. But I guess with the whole don't dive at Qbs' feet, they don't dive to swat the ball.

Ehh one of these days, and end is going to come around the corner and from behind knock that ball out.

I'm sure teams see his tendencies on film, but since he is kind of erratic and unpredictable it makes it harder to pin point when he is going to pull that magic.

BeerBaron
11-18-2011, 09:00 AM
I'm wondering wear all those strips are when he brings the ball down. But I guess with the whole don't dive at Qbs' feet, they don't dive to swat the ball.

Ehh one of these days, and end is going to come around the corner and from behind knock that ball out.

I'm sure teams see his tendencies on film, but since he is kind of erratic and unpredictable it makes it harder to pin point when he is going to pull that magic.

He's definitely had close calls with fumbles. Part of the reason that the ball hasn't been swatted out due to his release is because he's very, very rarely throwing from the pocket. He's always moving and throwing to his one read near the sideline it seems.

Giantsfan1080
11-18-2011, 09:03 AM
I think his throwing mechanics are worse now than they were in college.

MI_Buckeye
11-18-2011, 11:51 PM
[QUOTE=BeerBaron;2748468]The fact that a team this bad could possibly keep it's GM is a joke. A bad joke. When the Dolphins went 1-15, their newly hired head coach and GM were fired. [B]When the Lions went 0-16, it marked the final nail in the coffin for Matt Millen.

I'm not sure if this was mentioned earlier in the thread, but Millen was actually fired early that season; I think it was after week three.

Bucs_Rule
11-19-2011, 08:09 AM
It was his replacement GM that traded Roy Williams to Dallas a couple weeks later.

bigbluedefense
11-19-2011, 10:06 AM
To add a thought, I'm officially off the Mark Sanchez support team. I have been a supporter of his for a little while, but I was expecting much more growth from him this year than I've seen.

He's regressed, or at the very least, stayed stagnant. This is year 3, we were supposed to see a jump. But he's arguably gotten worse.

He's a 1 read quarterback. Everyone wants to kill Schotty, but the man is designing his offense around Sanchez's inability to play the qb position. All those 1 step quick slants are bc Mark struggles making post snap reads.

Mark does a good job identifying who the ball should go to presnap, but if that guy is covered, he's done. He can't make any reads beyond that. That's why he struggles so much.

And in year 3, you expect more. And he hasn't delivered. Yes, he's established himself as a good playoff qb, but I really anticipated him elevating his game this year and he simply hasn't done it yet.

Its hard for me to continue to defend him when guys like Andy Dalton and Cam Newton can step into the league, with less talent around them and no offseason as rookies and both look better than Sanchez has ever looked in 3 years.

If they can do it, why can't he? I think if he continues to play poorly, they should go out and get another qb this offseason. It's just not gonna work if he doesn't show any growth.

You can't hide him forever. If you're THAT scared of him costing you the game that you run such a basic offense designed around him not turning it over, then why play him? And the funny part is, he turns it over anyway, even when you hold his hand.

They have to just let him go all out, take off all the reigns, and see what he does for the rest of the season. After they do that, if he completely falls apart, you gotta move on. If he improves, then maybe it's time you open up the playbook for him.

But the way things are right now is unacceptable. If you're gonna ride and die with Sanchez, throw him to the wolves and see if he can survive. Babying him doesn't solve anything.

But as of right now, until I see some serious growth from him over the next 6 games, I'm officially done defending him. Bc right now, he's not a good qb at all, and doesn't look like he should be starting in this league.

Raiderz4Life
11-19-2011, 01:38 PM
They are 5-5 so its not like they have all that much to lose.

I agree...take off the leash and let him loose and see what happens.