The 2018 NFL OffSeason Thread

[caketastydelish]

Brandon Cook to the Rams? What weakness does the team even have left?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

That's better than anything they were going to get with that first round pick, no question.

On the flip side, what are the Patriots trying to accomplish with two late first round picks? Is this a two for one move up to draft the next Garoppolo?

 

[Sommerswerd]

It works. But you have to watch it on YouTube, not CFC.

Got it . that was a nice video... a little corny, but still fun to watch with the music and all. Thanks cake

Then again, the Pats ended up in the Superbowl again anyway, while the Chiefs got booted in the first Round... so who had the last laugh... plus it's nigh-impossible to call the empire, dynasty, whatever you want to call it... "ended" when they are still going to Superbowls, right.

As for the Rams...



To quote the late Dennis Green... "If you wanna crown them then crown their..."

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I see a 49ers fan, and I smell desperation.

It should be noted that after Dennis Green ranted about having let the Bears "off the hook" and how everyone was jumping the gun about "crowning their..." the Bears did in fact go 13-3 and on to the Super Bowl.

 

[Darkness]

Brandon Cook to the Rams? What weakness does the team even have left?

Linebacker. Right now the starters are Samson Ebukam, Cory Littleton, Mark Barron and Matt Longacre. And there is virtually no depth behind them.
Although Ebukam, Longacre and Littleton showed some real flashes of potential (especially Longacre and Ebukam on pass rushing downs), none of those three is a proven starter. And none of them excels as a run defender, nor does Mark Barron. I could see many opposing teams rushing 60% of their offensive downs against the Rams next season if the Rams don't show some good run stopping in the first few games....

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Linebacker. Right now the starters are Samson Ebukam, Cory Littleton, Mark Barron and Matt Longacre. And there is virtually no depth behind them.
Although Ebukam, Longacre and Littleton showed some real flashes of potential (especially Longacre and Ebukam on pass rushing downs), none of those three is a proven starter. And none of them excels as a run defender, nor does Mark Barron. I could see many opposing teams rushing 60% of their offensive downs against the Rams next season if the Rams don't show some good run stopping in the first few games....

Last season their best run stopper was Jared Goff, and I don't expect that to change.

 

[caketastydelish]

I don't get it.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I don't get it.

When your opponent is racking up 40+ it makes it hard to stick with the running game, even when it works. That's why when Peyton Manning was their quarterback the Indianapolis Colts used D-linemen that were linebacker sized. They didn't have to stop the run, they just had to pass rush and protect big leads.

 

[caketastydelish]

Cool, never thought of it that way.

 

[stinkubus]

The Rams are going to have Donald and Donkey Kong lining up inside on every potential running down. They will be just fine even with mediocre linebackers.

 

[Sommerswerd]

I see a 49ers fan, and I smell desperation.

It should be noted that after Dennis Green ranted about having let the Bears "off the hook" and how everyone was jumping the gun about "crowning their..." the Bears did in fact go 13-3 and on to the Super Bowl.

I am a 49ers fan and I am reaching the desperation point... so much so that Jimmy G's huge contract seems... OK, I guess?

About the Bears... they lost that Superbowl. So crowning them was premature.

Cool, never thought of it that way.

I like to refer to that style of team as "Power-Pass"... score fast and often to get a big lead, then use superstar pass-rushers and/or superstar D-backs to create turnovers and disrupt the comeback attempt via passing.

The other proven winner I call "Ground-and-Pound", where you stack your Defense to keep opponents scores low, and on the other side of the ball you run it down their throats, and clock manage, to drain the clock.

Both approaches work, but the former needs a great QB and receivers as well as a couple Defensive line or D-back superstars... all of which have to be paid handsomely... while the latter allows you to have a pedestrian clock manager QB, mediocre receivers and really spread the moolah around the whole defense to get great linebackers and solid D-line and D-backs across the board.

 

[stinkubus]

While I largely agree with the paradigm you've laid out these approaches are not equal in terms of how hard it is to construct the roster you want. If you want to be competitive with an elite defense you're going to need 2-3 studs, plus 4-5 more players who are pro-bowl or near pro-bowl quality. You can build a competitive offense with an above average QB and a bunch of scrubs.

 

[Sommerswerd]

You also need great O-tackles and solid Guards and Center, as well as versatile solid backup O-Linemen in either scheme. Paying that superstar OB is always going to be an issue though... Defensive studs tend to be less expensive, particularly linebackers, which are critical in a team that leans heavily on its D.

 

[stinkubus]

Wilson and SEA won a SB with a poor oline. The 08 Steelers did too. A good oline isn't necessary if you have a decent QB.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Wilson and SEA won a SB with a poor oline. The 08 Steelers did too. A good oline isn't necessary if you have a decent QB.

True, but it does put you in that nail biting state where every offensive snap has the potential to end your season...unless you have a Nick Foles standing around on the sidelines, of course.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Wilson and SEA won a SB with a poor oline. The 08 Steelers did too. A good oline isn't necessary if you have a decent QB.

Couple things about that. Seattle had better talent and performance from their Offensive Linemen in their Superbowl years than this year. More importantly, they had Marshawn Lynch in those years, who was powerful enough to make up for lesser Offensive line play. Another thing, as @Timsup2nothin has pointed out... a scrambling QB like Wilson, who is basically an extra running back in some ways makes sloppy play by an offensive lineman irrelevant. So its not so much that a decent QB makes up for bad lineman... its that a great running QB can make a bad lineman or two irrelevant, and a "Beast Mode" running back can do the same.

All the above being said, I don't mean to say that to have a good team you must be a Power-Pass or Ground-and-Pound team. There are all kinds of variations for a successful team. I'm just saying that those two formulas are very commonly followed and are proven successes. I'd tend to put the vaunted "Legion of Boom" Seahawks in a different class, but if I had to pick I'd say they were more of a Ground-and-Pound variation than a Power-Pass one.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

There are certainly degrees of "ground and pound" or "power-pass." For example, the undefeated 1972 Dolphins averaged less than twenty pass attempts per game, placing them among the most extreme examples of ground and pound success ever.

 

[Darkness]

When your opponent is racking up 40+ it makes it hard to stick with the running game, even when it works. That's why when Peyton Manning was their quarterback the Indianapolis Colts used D-linemen that were linebacker sized. They didn't have to stop the run, they just had to pass rush and protect big leads.

That only works if you get a big lead early. If the first few offensive series for the Rams don't end in multiple TD's, why would any opponent not run against that linebacker group? Brockers, Donald and Suh are very good against the run, but both Suh and Donald tend to gamble at times and that can lead to big runs against them (which already happened quite a bit against the Rams last year).
The Rams scored 20 or fewer in 4 games last year (3 if you exclude the last game in which they rested their starters), and lost all of them. With a defense like its build right now the Rams would need big offensive outputs every first half of the game to prevent exposure of a pretty suspect run defense....

 

[stinkubus]

Peyton Manning covered up for bad o-line play in Indy for years and Tom Brady had to do it in NE this past season. Roethlisberger could evade sacks but he wasn't exactly a runner. You don't need to be a running QB to cover for a bad o-line.

Most competitive teams will fall into one of two archetypes. You've either got an elite QB who takes up 20%+ of your cap space by himself or you've got an awesome defense that takes up 50% or more. The only way to avoid it is to get very lucky in the draft and have all your studs on rookie deals. With the constraints imposed by the salary cap you can't build all round great squads like the 49ers or the Cowboys did in days gone by. All teams have a weak link somewhere.

 

[Serutan]

Wilson and SEA won a SB with a poor oline. The 08 Steelers did too. A good oline isn't necessary if you have a decent QB.

You don't need a good O-line when the games starts out with a safety for you, and the defense gives you short fields all the time.

The Steelers' line wasn't horrific, there was the matter of the 10-14 point turnaround with the pick-six of Warner just before halftime, and Ben getting a prevent {the defense's side from winning} defense at the end of the game.