YOUR GM
-
Posts
1,983 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by YOUR GM
-
-
Potentially a great line........and we have to deal with it
Don't worry, we've got Mewhort
-
Well, you're not a genius GM either, so your opinion doesn't matterOk my thoughts on this are. 1. We got much needed depth at our O-line. which was more of a need then at safety. Gotta keep luck off his back.
2. All of you that think Grigson is so terrible. If you are such a genius, why are you not a gm or even a scout for a pro team. Obviously they no more then you. And they spend a lot more time looking at tape and going to games then you would even think about doing. They obviously seen what they liked in the tape. I am happy with the draft.
-
Our number one issue is not secondary, it is health. Hopefully we can stay healthier this year better than next year.
I think at a certain point, you have to look at the training staff and wonder are they effectively conditioning our guys to endure a 16 game schedule. Injuries happen to every team but we have to be towards to top in that category over the last 5 or so seasons. I would seriously look at Chip Kelly's training staff to model after. He has a sports science department that takes data/information and uses it to individualize their training for each player. I believe they had (if not, then close to) the fewest injuries in the league last year
-
Good god, it's like they get blown out every week and have to make a frantic comeback. People need to stop acting like Pagano is Barry Switzer at Oklahoma. If he Pagano really wanted to be a run first team he would never have hired Arians in the first place.
I'm seriously starting to question whether you've even watched any of our games the past 2 seasons. We HAVE had to comeback multiple times. We had a signicant string of games last year where he didn't even score in the 1st quarter. I'm not making this up. I'd suggest you go back and watch the games.
And Pagano hired Arians because he felt he was one of the best coordinators available at the time whom he had familiarity with. And he runs the man blocking scheme that Pagano loves so much
-
Welcome to year 3 of a rebuilding team. And we have people already wanting to behead Grigson. You guys should be ashamed to call yourself fans. Should of followed peyton manning if you wasn't willing to go through a rebuild. Even with only 5 picks... I think we out drafted some teams like.... The panthers, browns, pats, and broncos.
I don't agree with the sentiment that Grigson should be fired, but people really need to stop saying this now. Most coaches don't even get 3 years to try to rebuild if they're failing. That being said, we're not rebuilding at this point. We've made the playoffs 2 years in a row, and he's had 2 off-seasons to spend as much as he wants, trade whoever and whatever he wants and draft whoever he wants. At this point, this is Grigson's team, from the best player to the worse. Anything he does or doesn't address can no longer be given pardence because of the "rebuild" excuse anymore
-
I think early last season happened because the coaches were trying to force the run game. It worked a couple times, and when things are great you'll see games like the Niners game, with 25 passes and 40 runs. But more likely you'll see games like Seattle, Denver, etc., where we get some balance but Luck still gets plenty of chances to throw the ball.
I don't think being a power run team means you aren't going to use your passing attack.
I'm not saying we'll never pass it. I'm just saying I doubt we'll ever become some spread attack offense long-term, as long as Pep and Pagano are here. I don't much see the point in loading up on receivers when we have a coordinator who prefers to operate with 2 TE/2 back sets, and pass off play action, to begin with.
I'm all for shoring up the position in the future, but not if it's at the expense of addressing more pressing needs in the present. It's like they're obsessed with finding Reggie's replacement, but meanwhile, we don't have a starting free safety or depth at multiple positions. So essentially, we're splurging on a position that we probably won't even fully utilize, while ignoring glaring weaknesses currently on the roster. It's a total waste
-
If they were constantly playing catch up they wouldn't have made the playoffs the last two yrs. and I hope Pagano wants that stat to go down.
I'm not sure what you're getting at??? It's a fact that we've won a lot of come from behind games the last 2 seasons. I'm not making this up. Where have you been?
-
You realize that they will play football in 2015 too right? Not that hard to figure really - outsie of Hilton they have a bunch of question marks. Age, injury, marginal talent - preparing for future without Wayne is not so bad an idea.
Our whole team outside of QB is one big question mark. I'd say after QB, with the addition of Nicks, receiver is our most solid unit (especially if you count Fleener and Allen as receiving threats), hands down. Where's the insurance for cornerback, NT, C, Safety and outside linebacker?... Oh that's right, we need another receiver, even though we'll spend a good portion of our games pounding the ball with 6 linemen and a fullback. Brilliant
-
Yet, Luck has attempted 1200 passes in two yrs
That tends to happen when you're constantly playing catchup. I'm pretty sure Pagano is aware of that statistic as well, and likely wants that figure to go down the next 2 seasons
-
Wanting to run the ball effectively, and even wanting to run it more than 40% of the time, doesn't mean you don't want to throw the ball. And it doesn't mean you want a "ground oriented offense." I think that's a stretch.
To me, Pagano's strategy is far more nuanced than that. But to sum up, I think he wants our run game to not suck, so we can take some pressure off the QB and shorten games for the defense. I'm sure we'll make good use of our passing game.
If early last season (before all the injuries) is any indication of what our offense is supposed to look like, we will be a ground oriented team. We went away from that when our backs and Reggie went down. Had to reinvent the offense for the rest of the season to a spread attack. Now, I hope Chuck and Pep are smart enough to shift the offense more this year, given all the weapons added, but Pagano has made too many public statements about wanting to be a power run team, and "delivering body shots.." and whathaveyou. That likely will be his same approach going forward. And I won't lie, I'll be very disappointed if we still plan on using Havili on an extended number of snaps. Why stockpile on receivers and then have them sit behind a fullback for much of the game? And we still have Allen and Fleener who will both see the field plenty, don't forget
-
So you really think the Colts WRs do not need to be covered? Luck needs no WRs I suppose. We have 1 starting WR at this point but I guess we don't need no more. Wayne is getting old and we really have no clue if he will play the same. Wayne can say all the right things but that don't over ride father time. Nicks has not proven anything at this point. Most WRs take a couple of years to develop but what do I know?
If Nicks wasn't supposed to be the answer at wide receiver, we shouldn't even have signed him. I get wanting insurance for Reggie, but it's not like we don't have weapons outside of him. We did win a playoff game without him last year. The Moncreif pick was overkill. Especially for a team that likely won't employ many 4 receiver sets unless playing from behind
-
Not gonna lie, I would've liked to have seen Nix or Gabe Jackson with the 2nd pick. Now we have to deal with Clowney, Watt and Nix for the next several years. I don't like that. We acquired some depth at o-line and grabbed another receiver to sit on the bench while we line up in power-I all game. I don't understand that pick. I get that Moncreif has talent, but why are we splurging on receivers when we still don't have starters at some positions on defense?
-
And you got this from.....where?
You serious? Pagano has made it clear since Arians left for Arizona that he wants a ground oriented offense. We now have 5-6 receivers who realistically should be seeing playing time, be it for their developed talent or because of their potential, and 2-3 of them likely won't get significant snaps because we'll be in run personnel frequently. I think it was a pointless pick
-
Don't know much about him but I'm glad Grigson invested in the line early. Hopefully he's got talent
-
I don't much see the point in grabbing all of these receivers via free agency and draft when we have a head coach who doesn't even want to throw the football. Seems like he's got talent, I just think we had more pressing needs
-
Grigson in his presser spoke of going to see potential UDFA, sometimes in the middle of nowhere, to show real interest and to build relationships.
Hmmm! Pretty classy way to do it, IMO. That, or a brochure?
Grigson is good at finding gems in unlikely places,, and he's definitely a closer in terms of getting his man... but how do you know Seattle doesn't visit their UDFA prospects as well?
-
I'm sorry....... what did I miss?
Which draft picks did they cut and admit mistakes on?
I'm not trying to yank your chain here.... I'm unaware of high ranking picks they've cut? They've been drafting fabulously under their new regime....
As to their brochure.... very smart.... not surprised, Carroll has always been an outside the box thinker that way. He and Schenider, their GM, are very progressive. That's a very well run organization.
I look forward to your answer.....
I didn't say anything about "high ranking picks" being cut. I'm using the same language that was used in the brochure. The answers you want are on pages 6 and 8 of said brochure. They've cut 2 4th rounders and 2 5th rounders the same seasons they were drafted since the new regime was put in place. That's not 1st or 2nd round value but it's still a significant move to part with a 4th rounder in the same season. Imagine if we cut Khaled Holmes last year, for example
I didn't post this article for any agenda, I just thought it was interesting
-
Thanks, 21isSuperman
Also, I meant to post this is "NFL General," if a mod could move it. Thanks
-
I don't know how common this is throughout the league but I thought this was awesome. The fact that the Seahawks have the philosophy of fielding the best team, even if that means admitting draft mistakes and releasing them, is one thing. For them to actually put together a brochure to lure agents of undrafted free agents is genius. If there will ever be a modern day dynasty again in today's league, something tells me that organization will be the one who produces it
Here's a direct link to the brochure:
http://static.nfl.com/static/content/photo/2014/05/06/0ap2000000347146.pdf
-
I think losing Dwayne Allen in week 1 was a huge blow to Pep's offense where the 2 TE formation is a very important factor. Prior to the season, everyone expected Allen to be a pro-bowl TE -- he goes down for year in week 1, which completely changed the dynamic of this offense. Then D. Thomas' going down in week 2 was another huge blow -- our o-line was bad even with him in it, but once he went down we pretty much any ability we had to run powerfully inside which is another huge component of Pep's offense.
Then losing Ballard and Bradshaw both in the first 3 weeks was another crushing blow -- Pep's offense was built much more to suit a power runner like the 2 of them than it is for a guy like Donald Brown. Yes, T-Rich had his struggles, but he was playing behind a terrible line and you have to give him a little cushion giving the fact that it was his 3rd offense in less than 2 NFL seasons. I think losing Allen forced us to run a lot of the telegraphed power runs that we did because we lost our best TE (don't get me wrong, I like Jack Doyle's blocking skills but he nor Saunders is anywhere near the receiving threat that Allen is).
Then losing Reggie Wayne was huge -- he was Luck's security blanket and no team would do very well losing their Hall-of-Fame WR (especially a team already having lost 4 offensive starters). I said in a thread the other day, I think Wayne's injury wound up being good for Luck -- not at the immediate time of it, but he was forced to learn to check through all his options and read his progressions. Something he seemed to avoid when he knew he had Wayne to fall back on. Something that will make him a much better QB this season when he has weapons outside of TY and Fleener (especially if Rogers and Brazzill step up like they did towards the end of the year).
If healthy, and if our young OL guys can improve from Satele/McGlynn's play last year -- I think we will see Pep run this offense the way it was meant to be run -- and with Nicks' (who I am positive will be better than DHB -- who I think we thought would be our 'poor man's NIcks' as far as a big, physical WR goes) in our line-up I cannot wait to see our TE's and TY/Reggie exploit mismatches we will have all over the interior of the field. Just have to hope that we don't get the injury bug as bad as we had it last year and that our interior OL play can improve dramatically and I think we will all see that we are lucky to have Pep.
I really hope Havili's role is reduced to goal line/short yardage plays, primarily in jumbo packages this year. Having him on the field at this point, over guys like Hilton, Fleener or Allen is just taking talent off the field. Allen can pretty much do everything Havili does anyways, probably better. I like Havili but his versatility still isn't enough to justify pulling any of those guys off the field for a significant number of snaps
-
It's not left tackles, it's offensive linemen. The tags and options don't differentiate between linemen at different positions.
So the question would actually be whether AC is a top 25 offensive lineman, not a top 25 LT. Big difference. And I don't think he is. Doesn't mean I wouldn't have pulled the trigger on the option, especially since it's not fully guaranteed; I absolutely would have used the option. But I hope and expect that AC will continue to improve.
He's only had three years in the league. He's had a different coordinator and position coach in all of those three seasons. He's probably played alongside 6 or 7 different LGs in those three years. He gets very little help from TEs in pass protection. And his coordinators and QBs haven't really helped him because they've either been terrible at progressions and timing passes (Collins, Painter and Orlovsky), or have a tendency to hold the ball too long (Luck). His absolute worst games have come against some really good pass rushers (Suggs, Matthews, Quinn), but he's also had some good games against good pass rushers (Jared Allen, etc.) And I think his issues are technical, not a matter of talent or ability.
It would be awesome to see AC justify the 2015 option salary with a great 2014. We play some good pass rushers this season, so he'll definitely get a chance to prove himself. But I don't think it would be smart to move him to another position. We have a good RT who can't play LT, so that's a nonstarter. I don't think AC would be a good guard, and I don't think we have a player to put at LT in his place. And because AC is at least adequate, and maybe better, and because we could give him more help in pass protection (better playcalling, more decisiveness from Luck, etc.), I don't think it makes sense to draft a starter level tackle.
Yeah, I'm fully aware that it's not going to happen, at least this year anyways. It doesn't make sense to move him this year for the reasons you just listed. I believe Reitz could be a serviceable LT, but he wouldn't be an obvious upgrade over Castonzo. And we honestly don't know what we have in Nixon. All that being said, I still feel like RT is his natural position, and if he never develops into a consistent pass blocker, I would hope the staff would consider moving him at some point. I do think he would still have value even if he doesn't pan out as a left tackle. And the lack of consistency around him is a very valid point. I'm not rooting against the guy, I actually hope he becomes our long term starter at left tackle. As of right now, I'm not seeing it though.
And the tag rules are so confusing. I thought the figure was based on each position. That's why Jimmy Graham was upset about being tagged as a tight end instead of a receiver, am I correct? Or are there a different set of rules for franchise tags than the new option tag? Eitherway, the language in the article I read awhile ago was very ambiguous in regards to positional pay scale for the option. It said, "top 25 at their position" so I assumed that meant tackle in the case of Castonzo. I would've picked up his option as well. The risk is so minute, and it keeps him out of free agency an extra year. It would be silly not to pick up the option
-
Yep. We will just wait to hear how your conversation with Pagano and Grigson goes.
Good one!
-
The only thing left to do now is for you to call the Colts up and explain to them they have it all wrong with Castonzo. Evidently in your mind, all of his past coaches have misunderstood his talents too.
Let me know how that goes.
Hopefully you find the switch to your light bulb that your are projecting onto me and others.
You will be better served to find something more realistic to dig your heels in about, because this is just ridiculous.
womp, womp, womp
Nothing else to see here, folks
-
Oh, this "debate?"
I agree with some of what you are saying, but I do not agree that Pep showed more adaptability than Arians. Bruce is not one-dimensional. Heck he was part of the Colts/Moore group who initially brought the 2 TE set back to the NFL. In Pittsburgh his offense passed more than the fans were used to, and he was labeled as a offensive coordinator that like to sling the ball. In was all just in contrast though.
I will agree that Arians likes to run deeper passing routes than most, but we still ran our fair share of WR screens with him too. I will also agree that Arians prefers to have the passing attack setup the run; whereas Pep wants the run to setup the pass. Both can work in the NFL and one is not any better than the other. The one big difference is that if a team is going to run the ball then it had better be able to play great defense.
Bruce Arians became the offensive coordinator of the Steelers in 2007 and through 2011.
Pittsburgh Rushing Yards:
2006 - 1,992 - No Playoffs
2007 - 2,168 - Lost Wild Card Game
2008 - 1,690 - Super Bowl (Won against Arizona)
2009 - 1,793 - No Playoffs
2010 - 1,924 - Super Bowl (Lost to Green Bay)
2011 - 1,903 - Lost Wild Card Game
2012 - 1,537 - No Playoffs
This is just a small snapshot of Bruce Arians tenure as offensive coordinator in Pittsburgh, but it does paint a picture of where the NFL has evolved. In Bruce's lowest rushing output his team won the Super Bowl. It also shows how the Steelers performed prior to Arians and after him.
Colts Rushing Yards:
2011 - 1,594
2012 - 1,671 (Arians)
2013 - 1,743 (Pep)
Bruce is notoriously stubborn about his scheme an ideology. There are plenty of quotes available where he's made comments on things ranging from not throwing to running backs because they're paid to run, to him not shortening his route concepts because he doesn't run a west coast system. He also wants full control of the offense, which means no extended no-huddle like we saw from Luck at the end of last season. All of that is stubborness and shows he's not easily adaptable... which is probably why he was ran out of Pittsburgh.
As for the Steelers record when he was there, I see more correlation between how the defense played in those years to their success rate than I do to Arians and his offense. The Steelers were a middle of the pack offense that was high on yardage but mediocre in scoring. His offenses have always statistically been high yardage, high turnover, sub-par scoring wherever he's gone because he doesn't know how to call games consistently when the field shortens and those passing concepts have to be shortened as well. His record as a red zone signal calller speaks volumes, in my opinion
Houston gets Nix..
in NFL General
Posted
Moncreif dropped too. What was his reason?