Jump to content

Official 2018-19 NFL Thread


Recommended Posts

Raiders have a lot of 1st round picks. 

If only you could trust Gruden to not mess that up.

 

So far in the next two years the Raiders will have 5 first round picks.  Crazy.

Edited by GoSox05
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, GoSox05 said:

Raiders have a lot of 1st round picks. 

If only you could trust Gruden to not mess that up.

 

So far in the next two years the Raiders will have 5 first round picks.  Crazy.

Wait until they get the Jags' 1st round pick in 2019 for Derek Carr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, soxfan49 said:

Wait until they get the Jags' 1st round pick in 2019 for Derek Carr.

Wouldn't be a bad idea for Raiders. If they did that...I'll give Gruden credit...maybe the Mack trade is less bad when you consider they were blowing things up and took what they felt was their best offer. Basically they are hitting "refresh" and planning for Vegas.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chisoxfn said:

Wouldn't be a bad idea for Raiders. If they did that...I'll give Gruden credit...maybe the Mack trade is less bad when you consider they were blowing things up and took what they felt was their best offer. Basically they are hitting "refresh" and planning for Vegas.  

If that's the case, then why did he spend the whole off season acquiring "win-now" players?  At the start of week 1, the Raiders had the oldest roster in football.  All signs of someone with no plan who is just winging it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tony said:

 

Yeah - I don't agree with this; They have to pay him a lot of money in a year vs. a typical draft pick. And that is for a guy having a down 18 month span.  That said, he clearly had a ton of talent and an upward arrow after those 1st two seasons.  The move might work for the Cowboys, who knows, but the fundamentals behind the trade just don't make sense to me (for the Cowboys).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chisoxfn said:

Wouldn't be a bad idea for Raiders. If they did that...I'll give Gruden credit...maybe the Mack trade is less bad when you consider they were blowing things up and took what they felt was their best offer. Basically they are hitting "refresh" and planning for Vegas.  

That second round pick Pace got for Mack in 2020 is looking sweeter and sweeter. Likely a top 3 second round pick... maybe even the 1st pick in the second round. Just a steal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

Yeah - I don't agree with this; They have to pay him a lot of money in a year vs. a typical draft pick. And that is for a guy having a down 18 month span.  That said, he clearly had a ton of talent and an upward arrow after those 1st two seasons.  The move might work for the Cowboys, who knows, but the fundamentals behind the trade just don't make sense to me (for the Cowboys).  

I agree, draft picks dont become UFA s in just 23 games from now nor do they cost $13 million a year, that's why they are so advantageous. He is coming off an injury, has been struggling,  and has to immediately get comfortable in their system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Tony said:

And not to give out too many passes, but Nagy is still a rookie HC as well. Expectations were rightly raised after the Mack trade, but 8-9 wins always seemed realistic given where this team was in October of 2017. If Mitch can take some strides, along with Nagy getting a season of head coaching under his belt hopefully will go a long way.  

I think most people jumped the gun on the team after the Mack trade. The offense is much better than most anticipated, but the defense is much worse. A lot of the defense being average has to do with Mack being injured. He makes everyone better. I thought 6-8 wins after the trade, while I thought 4-6 without it. 9 wins would be a hell of a good season, with the arrow clearly pointing up. At this point, they'd have to win a game they aren't supposed to in order to get that 9th win. Anyone heard the update on Xavier Rhodes? That could have a huge impact on the NFCN race, as it would make the Vikings significantly worse. 

Edited by Jack Parkman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the Cowboys are trying to take advantage of a weak division. They are actually 5th in the NFC in point differential. Their +17 leads the division despite being 3-4. 

And speaking of point differential.....the Rams are at +107 right now. Jeeeeeeeezsus. Another blowout next week vs. the Packers and they could have twice as many Point For as they do Points Against.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Jack Parkman said:

I think most people jumped the gun on the team after the Mack trade. The offense is much better than most anticipated, but the defense is much worse. A lot of the defense being average has to do with Mack being injured. He makes everyone better. I thought 6-8 wins after the trade, while I thought 4-6 without it. 9 wins would be a hell of a good season, with the arrow clearly pointing up. At this point, they'd have to win a game they aren't supposed to in order to get that 9th win. Anyone heard the update on Xavier Rhodes? That could have a huge impact on the NFCN race, as it would make the Vikings significantly worse. 

Please review all of your own posts when thinking about jumping guns.  On everything

 

we get it, you think the bears are tremendously overrated and that they are lucky to have the wins that they have, and they probably won't win any other games because you have played out all of the possibilities and none of them work for the bears.   Stop repeating it now 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

Sarkisian likes him until they get into the red zone, it doesnt make sense

Jones has never really been a red zone WR.  I don't know if that has something to do with Ryan or maybe Jones isn't good in the red zone.

It's definitely been amplified under Sarkisian.   In the past 23 games he has 3 td.  DeVante Adams has 16 in that span.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Kyyle23 said:

Please review all of your own posts when thinking about jumping guns.  On everything

 

we get it, you think the bears are tremendously overrated and that they are lucky to have the wins that they have, and they probably won't win any other games because you have played out all of the possibilities and none of them work for the bears.   Stop repeating it now 

 

 

Not true. They're pretty much a lock for at least 6 wins right now. They have 2 more that are winnable after that.  I don't think they're overrated, so to speak but I do think the defense has been disappointing, to say the least. Offense has been surprisingly good. Mitch looks like a keeper, we'll see if he keeps playing decently. They're a season or two away from being really good, but I think expectations for this season in particular are out of whack. You have a rookie head coach, a  2nd year QB in his 1st season in a new offense, that had played 25 games since graduating high school coming into the season. There are going to be peaks and valleys. I wasn't happy with the game vs. Arizona, because they are really bad and the Bears barely squeaked by in that game. I also wasn't happy with allowing Osweiler, who is a bad QB and a known commodity as such. They absolutely earned the wins vs. Seattle and TB. the AZ game was a red flag. It isn't a shock to me they lost the 2/3 of the games after that one.

 There are plenty of positives, I don't deny that. I think the most likely outcome for the Bears is that they win 7 or 8 games. That is still a massive step forward from 3 and 5 games the last two seasons. 

I don't think you're ever going to respect me as a poster again so just put me on ignore if you don't want to read my posts. Leave me alone and quit attacking me. If you can't because you're a mod, then just don't respond unless you want to have a constructive conversation. Explain yourself. I have. 

I admit I jump guns every now and then. w/e. Not afraid to admit I'm wrong. Nobody is infallible. If I jump the gun and look stupid, that is nobody's problem but my own. I can look back at it and say, "That was really fucking stupid" and move on. 

Edited by Jack Parkman
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jack Parkman said:

Not true. They're pretty much a lock for at least 6 wins right now. They have 2 I don't think they're overrated, so to speak but I do think the defense has been disappointing, to say the least. Offense has been surprisingly good. Mitch looks like a keeper, we'll see if he keeps playing decently. They're a season or two away from being really good, but I think expectations for this season in particular are out of whack. You have a rookie head coach, a  2nd year QB in his 1st season in a new offense, that had played 25 games since graduating high school coming into the season. There are going to be peaks and valleys. I wasn't happy with the game vs. Arizona, because they are really bad and the Bears barely squeaked by in that game. I also wasn't happy with allowing Osweiler, who is a bad QB and a known commodity as such. They absolutely earned the wins vs. Seattle and TB. the AZ game was a red flag. It isn't a shock to me they lost the 2/3 of the games after that one.

 There are plenty of positives, I don't deny that. I think the most likely outcome for the Bears is that they win 7 or 8 games. That is still a massive step forward from 3 and 5 games the last two seasons. 

They're a Kyle Fuller dropped interception and a 5 foot wide FG from bring 5-1, with their one loss being a pretty fluky game against the best QB ever. I'd say they've overachieved in just about every way this season and if they remain in the playoff hunt and get to 8-10 wins this season is a miraculous improvement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jenksismyhero said:

They're a Kyle Fuller dropped interception and a 5 foot wide FG from bring 5-1, with their one loss being a pretty fluky game against the best QB ever. I'd say they've overachieved in just about every way this season and if they remain in the playoff hunt and get to 8-10 wins this season is a miraculous improvement.

If all else was equal, even if they were 5-1 I wouldn't feel that great about making the playoffs. I'd feel like they'd have a shot for 10 wins at that point. If they win the games they are supposed to, and win a couple they aren't supposed to, that is 9. I don't think anyone should be disappointed if they win 9 games this year. 

Edited by Jack Parkman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, GoSox05 said:

Most teams are a play here and a play there away from being 5-1 or 4-2.  Yet, they aren't.  

The Bears of the last 5 seasons were not one or two plays away from any good record. They were getting blown out. This year their three losses have come at the end of games and within one score. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...