Jump to content

2018/19 NFL Season (the Buffalo Bills are worse than pizza with pineapple on it)


Life
 Share

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, CA Valkyrie said:

Wilson had a decent line in his early years in Seattle that featured Russell Okung, Max Unger, James Carpenter, and Justin Britt; not to mention having Beast Mode in the backfield.  Up until 2015 or so the Seahawks ranked top 10 in rushing, and Wilson was completing over 63% of his passes at over 8 yds/attempt.

Last two years were rough but I wouldn't blame it all on Cable.  Having locked up Wilson and much of the Legion of Boom to long term deals meant there was no money left for guys like Okung, Unger, and Sweezy.  He was left with a rag tag group that included George Fant, a former college basket player.  His strength as a coach lies in developing raw talent and guys with little experience as offensive linemen.  JR Sweezy was a DL in college who became a solid guard , and even Fant became a decent tackle given the circumstances. 

They were better run blockers than pass blockers. Marshawn Lynch would also frequently break tackles because of his running style. Wilson was always under pressure, even with Okung/Unger. (They traded Okung, and I specifically remember injury issues somewhere).

Also: 

You actually don't have a career 43% pressure rate from just two years. They were horrific at pass blocking.

 

19 hours ago, CA Valkyrie said:

Players who sign $100M+ deals don't become terrible by any means, but they rarely get back to the level of play that earned them that contract in the first place: case in point Joe Flacco. Jury's still out on dudes like Stafford, Wilson, and my boy Carr (who I really hope proves me wrong).

Stafford has overall played well in spite of not having a 100-yard rusher in years.

David Carr's only a year in.

I can talk about Flacco in detail, but in 2013 (the first year after the Super Bowl win) like 25% of our team retired of left in free agency because we had like 10m in cap space. For the record, Flacco had a 6m cap hit this year. We also had the absolute worst center in the league, leading to 3.1 YPC overall. If Ray Rice didnt rush for 44 yards in his final run against the Lions, we'd have 2.9 YPC.

2014 - Flacco didn't have a dominant year but he had an extremely good year that the stats don't show. Our run game was pretty much #2 in the league to Dallas as well, and we lost at least 3 games due to secondary issues. As well as New England in the playoffs. (By the way -- he put up his best playoff performances ever against New England and Pittsburgh that year, and New England had an insanely good secondary that year).

2015 - Most of the team was injured, DBs lost us a lot of early one-score games, and he tore his ACL/MCL due to our Left Tackle being one of the worst in the league and fallling into him.

2016 - first year after ACL/MCL tear

2017 - he tweaked his back working out and played with a tweaked back for 10 games. He was on fire in the last six games of the season. We had the second worst receiving group in the league, probably tied with Buffalo but definitely only better than like Chicago.

This year is pretty much his "prove it" year because he's cuttable. I have a lot of confidence he will bounce back with our revitalized receiving corps and a fire under his ass for not only being cuttable after 2018 but for having drafted his heir.

Examples of people balling out after getting paid: Russell Wilson, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Matt Ryan, Cam Newton, Philip Rivers, etc etc. Wide receivers like Antonio Brown. Guards like Marshal Yanda and Kelechi Osemele. Fuck, like Darrelle Revis won a Super Bowl with New England with a massive one year contract. 

"Getting worse" often occurs with bad drafting. Very rarely do players give up after getting paid (Albert Haynesworth is a very very tiny example). Most of the time, the drafting isn't great (Ravens 2010-2012 drafts were not very good at all, 2013 was good, then 2014 onwards were mediocre to bad full of injury prone players). That's part of why Seattle was so dominant and then when their players got paid they started going on the downswing -- turns out they haven't drafted that well since 2013, and they can't always go after pricey free agents. My philosophy is that you need to get capable players in the draft and you use free agency to fill holes, and often times people don't do as well due to not fitting a system or poor drafting.

The lowest paid MVP QB of the last like 10 years was like 2011 Aaron Rodgers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 556
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

AB bailing out, what? Dude, he's still playing consistently amazingly every year and even smokes good corners like Boiye sometimes.

AB is pretty much the best and is my fav. I got his jersey for a reason. :3

Or am I misunderstanding something?

Edited by Anacybele
Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's a compliment...  many of the people I listed were MVPs over the last few years. also listed ravens guard and a former ravens guard right after

Edited by Lord Raven
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Lord Raven said:

Examples of people balling out after getting paid: Russell Wilson, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Matt Ryan, Cam Newton, Philip Rivers, etc etc.

I'll give you a break on Flacco who I actually like as well, but even you have to admit he hasn't performed up to his $20M/year worth since winning the Super Bowl.  And all these QB's are ballers, but no one on that list has won a ring since signing $20M+/year extensions.  I suppose I'll have to give a pass to Matty Ice since it was only terrible playcalling from Mike Shanahan that prevented him from lifting the Lombardi Trophy in 2017.

6 hours ago, Lord Raven said:

You actually don't have a career 43% pressure rate from just two years. They were horrific at pass blocking.

I agree that the Seattle line were better run than pass blockers, but I wouldn't go so far as to call them horrific.  I attribute some of the added pressure to Wilson's height, due to him having to scramble around to find a proper throwing lane.  It's something Drew Brees has had to deal as well, but he has a much quicker release and his line does a much better job of shifting the pocket to give him a lane to pass.

And I think you mean Derek Carr.  David is his older brother who used to play for the Texans :P:

Edited by CA Valkyrie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CA Valkyrie said:

I'll give you a break on Flacco who I actually like as well, but even you have to admit he hasn't performed up to his $20M/year worth since winning the Super Bowl.

Yeah, but he's also had 4 different OCs and for 3 of those years he didn't have a QB Coach. It's no coincidence his worst years post-contract were with Caldwell, Trestman, and Mohrningweg and his best was with Kubiak. He also was going to be a 17m QB before that Super Bowl run propelled him to .1m above Brees.

3 hours ago, CA Valkyrie said:

And all these QB's are ballers, but no one on that list has won a ring since signing $20M+/year extensions.

Tom Brady's won two rings since he's been making 20m+. Aaron Rodgers won an MVP award. Matt Ryan and Cam Newton both won MVPs and the latter two took their teams to the Super Bowl.

The Packers just fired their whole offensive coaching staff. Their drafts were not good. Neither was their free agency. It's just that people are on cheap rookie contracts and leaving your first team leads to changing a system...  staying means you stay with possible stale coaching and your team may not have the ability to sign other free agents. It also means that your team needs to rely on the draft to rebuild; that's been a common theme with teams making the Super Bowl.

3 hours ago, CA Valkyrie said:

I agree that the Seattle line were better run than pass blockers, but I wouldn't go so far as to call them horrific.  I attribute some of the added pressure to Wilson's height, due to him having to scramble around to find a proper throwing lane.  It's something Drew Brees has had to deal as well, but he has a much quicker release and his line does a much better job of shifting the pocket to give him a lane to pass.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol2012

Click from 2012 to 2017. You'll consistently see bottom 10 pass blocking and top 5 run blocking. The difference is absolutely insane. His best pass blocking line was ranked #20. They were horrific with pass blocking in Wilson's entire career. Wilson's also the best QB under pressure.

Furthermore, Wilson got paid and he lead the league in TD passes this season with Wentz. He was his team's leading rusher, too. His height isn't the only factor, because even with a clean pocket he's been on fire. You don't average around 8 ypa on passes in your career by having trouble passing. He also has to scramble because his line seemingly doesn't care.

Here's a good example of what I'm talking about:

https://streamable.com/78psf

He literally almost got sacked by a one man rush. Drew Brees is only an inch taller than Wilson so their passing fundamentals are only a little bit different, and Brees has also been playing extremely well since he got paid. He has broken a ton of insane records since he got paid, including throwing 5400 or so yards with 46 TDs in 2011, and he only lost MVP to Aaron Rodgers who somehow had a better season than that. Drew Brees has actually been insane since he's been paid. The issue is that a lot of the NFL is about luck and a deep playoff run doesn't just go through one guy.

3 hours ago, CA Valkyrie said:

And I think you mean Derek Carr.  David is his older brother who used to play for the Texans :P:

and this is why my kids wont have alliterative names

Edited by Lord Raven
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lord Raven said:

Tom Brady's won two rings since he's been making 20m+

Good point.  I guess he's the first $20M QB I can think of who has a ring.  But keep in mind he and Brees are on team-friendly short term deals that don't handcuff their GM's. I believe both are on 2 year contracts in the $40 - $50M range (60-70% guaranteed). 

But because of Kirk Cousins, every QB in the prime age range will be demanding long term deals near $30M/year.  Sure, they'll get their stats but I am not too sure if it will translate in total team success.  IMO the recipe for potential SB run lies in a top caliber bargain-priced vet (Brady, Brees) or a young stud QB still in his rookie deal (Wentz, Goff).  This enables the team to build around the QB with weapons on offense and/or use their resources to build a championship defense.  I mean look at what the Rams are doing getting Goff WR Brandin Cooks; and bolstering their defense with Suh, Talib, Peters and Shields (all on short term deals).   They understand they have a 1-2 year window to make a serious Super Bowl Run.  Not sure if it will work, but kudos to them for doubling down and going for it.

2 hours ago, Lord Raven said:

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol2012

Click from 2012 to 2017. You'll consistently see bottom 10 pass blocking and top 5 run blocking. The difference is absolutely insane. His best pass blocking line was ranked #20. They were horrific with pass blocking in Wilson's entire career. Wilson's also the best QB under pressure.

[Pretty cool site by the way.  Will have to check that out]

The high sack percentage was countered by their low pass volume so the number of sacks Wilson took was never absurdly high.  2012 thru 2014 the Seahawks ranked last in pass attempts, and 27th in 2015.

The Seahawks passing attack was never a quick hit West Coast style with possession type receivers. The sack numbers could've been lower had Wilson dinked n' dunked it down the field or checked down to his backs more (like what many QB's were starting to do), but that just wasn't who they were. Because of their strong run game they were able to utilize play-action effectively and stretch the field with their speedy receivers. Seahawks ranked top 4 in yards/completion from 2012-14 and 9th in 2015. 

2016 and 2017, he had no real 3-down back and one of the cheapest lines those two seasons.  So yeah, he had rough last two years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CA Valkyrie said:

Good point.  I guess he's the first $20M QB I can think of who has a ring.  But keep in mind he and Brees are on team-friendly short term deals that don't handcuff their GM's. I believe both are on 2 year contracts in the $40 - $50M range (60-70% guaranteed). 

Well, Brees is at 25m/year (Flacco's at 24.5m/year). There's quite a lot of them. Most QB contracts have a 2-3 year out for age or inconsistency. Flacco's had that (they extended him and there is one that almost ensures that 2018 will be his last season), Brees' had that, Brady's had that. It's really not new. People don't necessarily play worse after getting paid.

3 hours ago, CA Valkyrie said:

The high sack percentage was countered by their low pass volume so the number of sacks Wilson took was never absurdly high. 

A high sack percentage is bad, and low pass volume with a high number of pressures is bad. If he's getting more sacks from less dropbacks that's an absurdly bad pass blocking line. It's not always about volume and arguably, Wilson never has been about volume. But his OL's pass blocking has been horrific.

3 hours ago, CA Valkyrie said:

The Seahawks passing attack was never a quick hit West Coast style with possession type receivers. The sack numbers could've been lower had Wilson dinked n' dunked it down the field or checked down to his backs more (like what many QB's were starting to do), but that just wasn't who they were. Because of their strong run game they were able to utilize play-action effectively and stretch the field with their speedy receivers. Seahawks ranked top 4 in yards/completion from 2012-14 and 9th in 2015. 

They were pretty West Coast-y with Baldwin/Tate in Wilson's early years, but even that duo couldn't stop that pass blocking line from being catastrophically terrible in 2013. It's just that plays broke down often (those receivers are big bodied about YAC or blocking; they're definitely not always reliably open) often resulting from poor OL play. Regardless, Wilson's been achieving a career 8.0 ypa which most QBs don't have because they opt to dink and leave yards on the field.

The crazy part is that even despite that nonsense, they had a high number of pressures and a horrible pass blocking line. That should show you just how bad Tom Cable's been for them, and you talked them being talented -- but despite their talent, their pass blocking has been horrible. OLs need to be good on both phases to be considered good.

Also, 2016-2017 has been completely catastrophic. People talk about how Alex Collins was doing incredible with the Ravens and just how bad Seattle's running backs were and how Seattle made a huge mistake cutting Alex Collins...  but I have no doubt in my mind Alex Collins would just be relegated to the scrap heap behind that line. It was atrocious then, and the fact that Cable couldn't get it to work speaks volumes about how bad he is.

Edited by Lord Raven
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I'll also point out that the reasons AB doesn't have even one ring yet pretty obviously have nothing to do with him. For the most part, at least. The Steelers have been contenders the last several years, but different things have been keeping them out of the SB each time.

There was that year Burfict went and injured all our top guys, the son of a bitch. So we had no Bell and AB for the divisional after beating the Bengals, and Ben had a bum throwing shoulder.

Our defense was having a lot of issues for a few years too.

Bell got season-ending injuries a couple times before he even got a chance to play one playoff game. And at that time, we didn't have much depth in RB outside of him.

That AFC title game vs the Pats we made it to became a mess because Bell went down early and it killed our momentum and just seemed to throw everything off. Tomlin is also to blame for not being able to make the proper adjustments though.

And this year, Tomlin thought too much about the Patriots and not enough about the Jaguars. On one hand, I can't really blame him after the stupidity that was the end of the regular season Steelers vs Pats matchup. I'd seriously want my revenge too, and we play them in Pittsburgh again this year, so damn yeah, I want it. But it wasn't any excuse to just basically assume we'd beat the Jaguars or anyone else we could've played in the divisional instead. Bell shouldn't have assumed either. Dude needs to think before he tweets sometimes. He did play well vs the Jags though, so the direct blame for the loss isn't on him. He believed in his team, and they let him down. But still. That kind of tweeting is very risky and dumb.

Our defense was also thrown off by Ryan Shazier's injury too. This D was top 5 before he went down and after that it had problems. He was a big part of it, not just through his playmaking, but as a leader too. Also, he and Joe Haden could shut down much of the field together.

Mostly, it's been injuries, honestly. Which has sucked. :/

Edited by Anacybele
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think the Steelers got screwed on the Jesse James "imcompletion" which would've gave them homefield advantage throughout the AFC playoffs had it been ruled a touchdown (from what I hear it was a correct call based on the written rule, but the rules committee stated recently that the rule was bad and subsequently changed).

They have a solid defense but I was a bit surprised they didn't fill big needs during the draft with a CB and ILB.  They need depth behind Joe Haden and Artie Burns, and someone to fill the massive void left by Ryan Shazier.  I suppose these will be addressed in free agency instead.  I actually like some of their picks though.  Mason Rudolph was a steal that many experts had as a second round choice, and can be a suitable heir to Big Ben.  FB Jalen Samuels is also another good value pick that can block and catch out of the backfield.  ESPN loves the ACC so I was able to see him ball out for NC State quite a bit.

I have the Steelers picked to win the AFC North, but a deep playoff run will greatly depend on what they do with Le'veon Bell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, CA Valkyrie said:

I personally think the Steelers got screwed on the Jesse James "imcompletion" which would've gave them homefield advantage throughout the AFC playoffs had it been ruled a touchdown (from what I hear it was a correct call based on the written rule, but the rules committee stated recently that the rule was bad and subsequently changed).

Yeah, pretty much. That play was the whole reason they changed the rule. And I'm glad, because it did screw us hard! The whole playoff picture would've changed otherwise. We'd have had the first seed, and thus would not have played the Jaguars in the divisional. We'd have played the Titans instead and that was a team we had a higher chance of beating.

And speaking of Bell, I wish he'd just sign the god damn paper already! He wants to stay with us, but there's only so much the Steelers management can pay him and I think they were offering him a fine deal.

Edited by Anacybele
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Anacybele said:

Yeah, pretty much. That play was the whole reason they changed the rule. And I'm glad, because it did screw us hard! The whole playoff picture would've changed otherwise. We'd have had the first seed, and thus would not have played the Jaguars in the divisional. We'd have played the Titans instead and that was a team we had a higher chance of beating.

And in don't forget the AFC Championship game would've been played at Heinz Field had you won the Divisional! Which would've set up a potential PA Super Bowl!  Oh well, maybe this season it will happen :D:

23 minutes ago, Anacybele said:

And speaking of Bell, I wish he'd just sign the god damn paper already! He wants to stay with us, but there's only so much the Steelers management can pay him and I think they were offering him a fine deal.

The $14.5M/year (the amount of his franchise tag for the 2018 season) Bell is asking for in a long-term deal is way above the going rate for a running back.  The next highest is LeSean McCoy at around $9M per.  The market is pretty much saying that this is currently not a runningback's league.  I think Bell will play for the Steelers this season.  But after that . . . who knows?

But yeah, at that price the Steelers will have a hard time trying to address their needs on defense, namely LB and another corner maybe.  TJ Watt is a stud but I don't think he's ready to fully replace Shazier just yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CA Valkyrie said:

And in don't forget the AFC Championship game would've been played at Heinz Field had you won the Divisional! Which would've set up a potential PA Super Bowl!  Oh well, maybe this season it will happen :D:

Yeah, that PA Super Bowl would've been awesome. I'm thinking the Eagles might've still won though. They just looked that good.

And yeah, I'm rather surprised we didn't draft any LBs. Hope they know what they're doing here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Anacybele said:

Yeah, pretty much. That play was the whole reason they changed the rule. And I'm glad, because it did screw us hard! The whole playoff picture would've changed otherwise. We'd have had the first seed, and thus would not have played the Jaguars in the divisional. We'd have played the Titans instead and that was a team we had a higher chance of beating.

And I would've felt a little bit better losing to a team we had a chance of beating instead of the nearly invincible juggernaut that is the New England Patriots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hylian Air Force said:

And I would've felt a little bit better losing to a team we had a chance of beating instead of the nearly invincible juggernaut that is the New England Patriots.

We're a juggernaut too, you know. I doubt you would've fared much better against us.

Also, I forgot to mention, I get why Bell is asking for what he's asking. He wants to be paid like a no. 1 RB and no. 2 receiver. Which he basically is both. But it's just a bit too steep right now. And we probably have an actual no. 2 in Juju Smith-Schuster now.

Edited by Anacybele
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, CA Valkyrie said:

I personally think the Steelers got screwed on the Jesse James "imcompletion" which would've gave them homefield advantage throughout the AFC playoffs had it been ruled a touchdown (from what I hear it was a correct call based on the written rule, but the rules committee stated recently that the rule was bad and subsequently changed).

They didn't get screwed by anything. They needed a giant broken coverage to even get there in the first place and Ben Roethlisberger shouldn't have even forced the ball into sextuple coverage then throw his OC and HC under the bus about it. He definitely had a chance to tie it up and go into overtime and he blew it. Besides with how leaky the Steelers defense was AND Tom Brady being the MVP are we sure that the Jesse James gated them from HFA the whole playoffs? Besides, they won like 10 of like 11 one score games, so I wouldn't say the Steelers got "screwed over," when it's one of the times they got lucky then subsequently unlucky. The 2017 Steelers were an extremely lucky team. There's easily 7-8 plays this season I could point to with this Steelers team that makes them a 9-7 team this year.

Furthermore, the Steelers playing at home against NE is not at all a guarantee. They've gotten one pick on Tom Brady in like 10 years..

Also Bell is worthy of a ridiculous contract. Especially since the Steelers are intent on running him into the ground with his 350-400 touch seasons and he plays a position that has a much lower shelf life than every other position. Let him get his money tbh, he's worked his ass off for it.

 

Also I'd argue that as of right now the AFCN is up in the air. The Ravens finally fixed their offense after 3 years, the Bengals were clearly coasting until this year, and the Browns actually stocked up on talent. If you looked at the last 5-6 Bengals/Ravens/Steelers games last season then you'd see it was pretty much similar to every other year of the AFCN except for the minor detail that it was only for the second half of the season. At least 3 of these teams are too talented to not make a push.

Edited by Lord Raven
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm at work so I'll keep this short.

22 hours ago, Anacybele said:

And yeah, I'm rather surprised we didn't draft any LBs. Hope they know what they're doing here.

Shazier will be a tough guy to replace, but hopefully you guys can get some value pickups in free agency to add depth and maybe help in Watt's development.

20 minutes ago, Lord Raven said:

There's easily 7-8 plays this season I could point to with this Steelers team that makes them a 9-7 team this year.

You can say that for many teams. But I generally agree with Parcells who said, "You are what your record says you are."

22 minutes ago, Lord Raven said:

Furthermore, the Steelers playing at home against NE is not at all a guarantee. They've gotten one pick on Tom Brady in like 10 years..

I'd rather play the Patriots in my place than in theirs.

22 minutes ago, Lord Raven said:

Also Bell is worthy of a ridiculous contract.

In a perfect world everyone would get paid what their worth.  Like Bell, I don't get paid enough for what I do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lord Raven said:

They didn't get screwed by anything. They needed a giant broken coverage to even get there in the first place and Ben Roethlisberger shouldn't have even forced the ball into sextuple coverage then throw his OC and HC under the bus about it. He definitely had a chance to tie it up and go into overtime and he blew it. Besides with how leaky the Steelers defense was AND Tom Brady being the MVP are we sure that the Jesse James gated them from HFA the whole playoffs? Besides, they won like 10 of like 11 one score games, so I wouldn't say the Steelers got "screwed over," when it's one of the times they got lucky then subsequently unlucky. The 2017 Steelers were an extremely lucky team. There's easily 7-8 plays this season I could point to with this Steelers team that makes them a 9-7 team this year.

Extremely lucky? lol NO. That's just a big fat no. You're just biased against them, as usual. We all know how much you hate the Steelers. You just don't want to admit that they were possibly the best AFC team last year besides the Patriots (though that isn't saying much, admittedly, because the rest of the AFC was pretty ass, they were still a first seed worthy team).

Also, losing Shazier possibly FOREVER is not what I call lucky. That hurt our defense more than you know. Like I said, it was top 5 before he got hurt. He was the leader there and a big part of them on the field. His injury stung hard. Emotions were running high here.

We've made changes in coaching staff and on the defense as well, so there's as much of a chance that those issues were resolved as there is that your Ravens fixed their offensive issues.

Also, that play where Ben threw into that coverage wouldn't have even had to happen if the Jesse James catch wasn't overturned. We simply got unlucky/screwed there while the Patriots were the ones to get extremely lucky. And if Ben didn't call that final play, he didn't, and that means the blame is on the coaches.

7-8 plays in one whole season does not mean we're a 9-7 team. Every team has a bad play sometimes too, not just us.

Point is, we were screwed because the rule was stupid and it ended up costing us big and the NFL realized that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Anacybele said:

Extremely lucky? lol NO. That's just a big fat no. You're just biased against them, as usual. We all know how much you hate the Steelers. You just don't want to admit that they were possibly the best AFC team last year besides the Patriots (though that isn't saying much, admittedly, because the rest of the AFC was pretty ass, they were still a first seed worthy team).

Piittsburgh had a pythagorean win-loss record of 10.63-5.37 by virtue of their point differential. Having a a 2.5 game differences between the Pythagorean W-L ratio and the real W-L ratio indicates that the Steelers were lucky. These things have been quantified.

Remember, 7-8 plays going the other way is all it took for them to be around 7-9 instead of 13-3. They were 7-2 in one score games which is shown to be very unsustainable, and many of their one score games were come from behind victories. In the case of Chicago and New England, it fell short; against everyone else they had to tap into it in the very late quarters and get a huge play off that doesn't count.

They were a 10 win team in disguise as a 13-win team. These things happen a lot; I was just talking about the 2016 Raiders in the exact same way if you scroll up. They had 12 wins but their Pythagorean W-L was predicting around 8 or 9, and the next year they regressed.

Granted, you said I was biased against the Steelers, but I said it's going to be a 3 way dogfight in the AFC North next year, so it's not like my biases weren't controlled? They were definitely one of the weakest 13-win teams I've seen in a while. Their 2014-2016 teams were definitely better than their 2017 team. It doesn't help the whole AFCN had a ridiculously easy schedule, either (because I've also said throughout the season that the Ravens and Falcons had about as many wins as each other at points throughout the season but the Falcons are a significantly better team).

7 hours ago, Anacybele said:

Also, that play where Ben threw into that coverage wouldn't have even had to happen if the Jesse James catch wasn't overturned. We simply got unlucky/screwed there while the Patriots were the ones to get extremely lucky. And if Ben didn't call that final play, he didn't, and that means the blame is on the coaches.

You don't get short passes breaking off into 50-60 yard runs very often either. There was extremely luck both ways -- but Ben decided to force a pass into coverage instead of playing for the tie. Refs screw everyone over every game, but having one play go your way and one call go against you is not really *bad luck*, especially since he forced a pass into like quintuple coverage with the game on the line anyway.

Also, it's been proven quite a few times that the ref was not stupid -- the ref called it correctly according to the letter of the book. We've argued this before and ultimately you failed to provide proof that the play contradicted the letter of the rulebook. I wouldn't recommend bringing it up again, because that was called 100% correct as shown, and it wasn't just one ref...  it was multiple in a committee double checked by New York, and it was fairly definitive.

It feels like arguing the Tuck Rule at this point. It was called according to the rules.

8 hours ago, CA Valkyrie said:

You can say that for many teams. But I generally agree with Parcells who said, "You are what your record says you are."

Not an argument. The 9-7 Bills were a 5-11 quality team. The 9-7 Ravens were a 7-9 quality team. The numbers, stats, and the play on the field say completely differently, and projecting future outcomes require detailed analysis of previous outcomes.

The 7-8 plays bit you can say about most teams, which furthers my point that the Steelers were lucky to get wins off of such things. I'm not sure how what we're saying is different.

8 hours ago, CA Valkyrie said:

I'd rather play the Patriots in my place than in theirs.

My argument is that it may not matter that they have home playoffs. They had home playoffs against Jacksonville and they trailed by 10 for more often than they trailed by 3. They never took a lead. And you're expecting it to matter against a juggernaut that the Steelers could barely even beat in their house earlier in the season? A team that consistently destroys zone coverage teams that the Steelers won't deviate from? And a team that's literally only thrown one interception against them in the past decade or something?

9 hours ago, CA Valkyrie said:

In a perfect world everyone would get paid what their worth.  Like Bell, I don't get paid enough for what I do.

I'm placing forth the argument so that it makes sense why he's asking for so much and to put it into perspective. Not everything requires comments like this which ultimately serve no purpose. Just because neither of us get paid enough doesn't mean Bell shouldn't chase the money if he can. We would all do the same in his spot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Lord Raven said:

Not an argument. The 9-7 Bills were a 5-11 quality team. The 9-7 Ravens were a 7-9 quality team. The numbers, stats, and the play on the field say completely differently, and projecting future outcomes require detailed analysis of previous outcomes.

Wasn't trying to argue, lol. The Bills and Ravens are 9-7 teams because they're 9-7.  So many factors going into deciding an outcome of a game, but at the end of the day the only numbers that matter are the ones on the scoreboard when the game clock reads 0:00.

42 minutes ago, Lord Raven said:

My argument is that it may not matter that they have home playoffs. They had home playoffs against Jacksonville and they trailed by 10 for more often than they trailed by 3. They never took a lead. And you're expecting it to matter against a juggernaut that the Steelers could barely even beat in their house earlier in the season? A team that consistently destroys zone coverage teams that the Steelers won't deviate from? And a team that's literally only thrown one interception against them in the past decade or something?

That's fine.  But I'd rather play at home during the playoffs.

46 minutes ago, Lord Raven said:

I'm placing forth the argument so that it makes sense why he's asking for so much and to put it into perspective. Not everything requires comments like this which ultimately serve no purpose. Just because neither of us get paid enough doesn't mean Bell shouldn't chase the money if he can. We would all do the same in his spot.

Yo dude, what's with the arguing? Chill :lol: If Bell gets paid, more power to him.  It ain't my team's cap he's tying up.  Such an above market contract could create a domino effect of other RB's with similar production asking for similar deals.  It's just not a RB's league right now.

54 minutes ago, Jiac said:

Chargers are winning AFC West. 

Don't @ me unless they don't.

I'll only do that if the Raiders win :lol: Could be a wide open race in that division, but I'd say the Chargers are the favorites right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CA Valkyrie said:

Such an above market contract could create a domino effect of other RB's with similar production asking for similar deals.  It's just not a RB's league right now.

Most RBs will be more like Lesean McCoy b/c they can't literally play two positions at an elite level like Le'Veon Bell.

1 hour ago, CA Valkyrie said:

Wasn't trying to argue, lol. The Bills and Ravens are 9-7 teams because they're 9-7.  So many factors going into deciding an outcome of a game, but at the end of the day the only numbers that matter are the ones on the scoreboard when the game clock reads 0:00.

This has nothing to do with projecting and talking about how a season went. Sure, they had that many wins, but were they really that great a team? They weren't, and that matters when we talk about next season. Teams get lucky and unlucky especially in one score games, and point differential does a better job of showing how "lucky" a team got (hence why I refer to Pythagorean wins) overall. Teams that blow out lesser teams and lose close games to better teams are considered good teams that can do well in the playoffs; teams that have a history of playing down to their opponent cannot sustain their success year to year. I think the Steelers/Bengals/Ravens go 10-6 to 11-5 next year and fight for the division, because the Steelers were not as good as their record showed, the Ravens are on the tail end of a rebuild and the Bengals have retooled.

That's the point I'm making here. Also, that the Steelers playing the Patriots in Pittsburgh wouldn't affect much considering the Jaguars completely destroyed them in Pittsburgh. The Patriots and Jaguars were either on their Pythagorean win stat or below it, showing consistency in beating opponents and bad luck in the Jaguars case. I don't think it'll affect who goes to the Super Bowl from the AFC side, but playing the Titans at home should be an easy enough win.

Making an argument is not arguing...

Edited by Lord Raven
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Lord Raven said:

Piittsburgh had a pythagorean win-loss record of 10.63-5.37 by virtue of their point differential. Having a a 2.5 game differences between the Pythagorean W-L ratio and the real W-L ratio indicates that the Steelers were lucky. These things have been quantified.

Remember, 7-8 plays going the other way is all it took for them to be around 7-9 instead of 13-3. They were 7-2 in one score games which is shown to be very unsustainable, and many of their one score games were come from behind victories. In the case of Chicago and New England, it fell short; against everyone else they had to tap into it in the very late quarters and get a huge play off that doesn't count.

They were a 10 win team in disguise as a 13-win team. These things happen a lot; I was just talking about the 2016 Raiders in the exact same way if you scroll up. They had 12 wins but their Pythagorean W-L was predicting around 8 or 9, and the next year they regressed.

Granted, you said I was biased against the Steelers, but I said it's going to be a 3 way dogfight in the AFC North next year, so it's not like my biases weren't controlled? They were definitely one of the weakest 13-win teams I've seen in a while. Their 2014-2016 teams were definitely better than their 2017 team. It doesn't help the whole AFCN had a ridiculously easy schedule, either (because I've also said throughout the season that the Ravens and Falcons had about as many wins as each other at points throughout the season but the Falcons are a significantly better team).

I'm not sure what the hell you mean by "pythagorean win-loss record" and I don't see 9-7 or 10-6 on there for the Steelers, I see 11-4 and 13-3.

But fine, I suppose what you're arguing is fair anyway.  And yeah, I can see the AFC North being a 3-way dogfight this year myself. And true, yeah, the AFCN's schedule was easy.

9 hours ago, Lord Raven said:

You don't get short passes breaking off into 50-60 yard runs very often either. There was extremely luck both ways -- but Ben decided to force a pass into coverage instead of playing for the tie. Refs screw everyone over every game, but having one play go your way and one call go against you is not really *bad luck*, especially since he forced a pass into like quintuple coverage with the game on the line anyway.

Yeah, but the difference here is that one play decided the game and the playoff picture while the other didn't. The Pats got unlucky with Juju sprinting down field, but we got even unluckier having our game-winning, first seed securing TD overturned.

9 hours ago, Lord Raven said:

Also, it's been proven quite a few times that the ref was not stupid -- the ref called it correctly according to the letter of the book. We've argued this before and ultimately you failed to provide proof that the play contradicted the letter of the rulebook. I wouldn't recommend bringing it up again, because that was called 100% correct as shown, and it wasn't just one ref...  it was multiple in a committee double checked by New York, and it was fairly definitive.

It feels like arguing the Tuck Rule at this point. It was called according to the rules.

I was never arguing that the refs were stupid or anything. I know now that they technically got the call right. I'm saying that the rule was stupid and that play proved it. The NFL changed the rule because of that play alone!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Lord Raven said:

Teams get lucky and unlucky especially in one score games, and point differential does a better job of showing how "lucky" a team got (hence why I refer to Pythagorean wins) overall.

So close wins aren't as good as "regular" wins?  I didn't know this was NCAA :D:

9 hours ago, Lord Raven said:

That's the point I'm making here. Also, that the Steelers playing the Patriots in Pittsburgh wouldn't affect much considering the Jaguars completely destroyed them in Pittsburgh. The Patriots and Jaguars were either on their Pythagorean win stat or below it, showing consistency in beating opponents and bad luck in the Jaguars case. I don't think it'll affect who goes to the Super Bowl from the AFC side, but playing the Titans at home should be an easy enough win.

I get all that; home games are never a sure thing.  But I'd still rather play home in the playoffs.

2 hours ago, Anacybele said:

And yeah, I can see the AFC North being a 3-way dogfight this year myself.

Division games are always tough and chippy, especially AFC North ones.  Can see 2 teams from there making the playoffs.  Three is a stretch but it has been done by them before.

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...