-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
-
Thread of the Week
-
-
Topics
-
-
Posts
-
By VikingsFanInChennai · Posted
I don't think that's the case.. when people here say Ballard is good at drafting especially, it doesn't mean he has no misses in his draft picks. I was not trying to convince anyone about anything. My point was Roseman does have a knack of fixing his mistakes, like he missed on QB and WR, but did get top notch players at these positions very soon, while still keeping the rest of the roster a championship material, especially in the trenches. Most of the GMs including Ballard struggle to fix some position groups while few others break down. I think that's where Roseman has differentiated himself from the rest of the crowd. He's got some far sighted vision and execution. Anyway, I can't recall how we got here discussing this in Hopkins trade, probably from Vikings drafting Jefferson. I was not trying to get any point across to you, I just try to add points to the discussion and sometimes it would elicit response from the comment I choose to reply. -
I'm not a football historian. But a big leap probably came in the 1950s when the forward pass was being emphasized and a whole new level of complexity in planning and execution was introduced. Then another in the 1970's when QBs like Bobby Douglas finally were relegated to dinosaur status. Then another leap in the 1980s and 1990s when Bill Walsh and his Tree emphasized even more complexity and nuance. Its probably been more iteration of back and forth and situational strategy from that point on more than its been an evolution as an entire league. Many things get too complex for their own good and the evolution curve runs out of steam. The level gets too complex to be sustainable and sort of implodes. Then "back to basics" rises from the ashes. The NFL probably has run its course in getting more complex so QBs like AR are probably in the perfect spot to capitalize on the NFLs regression back to basics. -
By Moosejawcolt · Posted
It's simple. Watch Philly last year and that's what we will be playing; the 6 back offence. -
They would have to eat $24.8M in dead cap from his signing bonus to do it. But that money has to be accounted for anyways, whether it's all at once or over the next few years. The trading team would be taking $25M gtd in base salary with them and the Colts would be done with the deal. There's some value in that I guess...saving $25M. The problem is that Q is still a useful player, so even though they would save $25M, they would need to get back something decent in return. But how often do vet Gs get traded? The trading team would get Q for 2/$25M...and then have options for years 3 and 4. On the surface, that contract has value, but a team could have just signed Shaq Mason in FA at that AAV. Or paid less for a player like Seumolo. It's not tough to find good LGs in FA. So it would have to come down to the name recognition. I think a R1 pick is out of the question, but perhaps a R2 pick if some team really believed his recent play (especially last season) was an outlier and the medicals checked out. Given I am more pessimistic about Q than others, I would probably take it. -
By LJpalmbeacher2 · Posted
Yes they were a bad team. Coach McCay was asked after a dismal loss what he thought of the teams execution and he replied "I am for it".
-
-
Members
-
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.