Lord Raven
-
Posts
9,206 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Lord Raven
-
-
8 hours ago, CA Valkyrie said:
IDK. Everytime I see these new record breaking deals (Ryan-2018, Flacco-2008, even A-Rod in 2000) I always ask myself "Is anyone really worth that much money?" It's more of a philosophical question than a technical one. But to be fair I do believe Ryan and Flacco were deserving at the time they did get their contracts.
if it were up to me all the players would get 20m/year
-
19 hours ago, Anacybele said:
Speaking of later eras, Ben says the Mason Rudolph era won't begin for us for "3-5" years. Dude, Ben, you're not playing in no 5 years. lol I can only see him playing for two, maybe three more.
I'm looking forward to see how Rudolph does for us though! Also, he SO needs to wear antlers and a red nose for the Steelers' Christmas caroling videos at Christmas time. XD
He complained that it won't help them win now.
In the off-season where a backup became Super Bowl MVP.
Like yeah it's not entirely false but don't throw your FO under the bus
-
17 hours ago, CA Valkyrie said:
1) Matt Ryan signed a 5-year, $150M ($100M guaranteed) contract extension with the Falcons. A contract this size was inevitable given previous deals paid to other QB's of lesser caliber: Jimmy G ($27.5M/year, 7 career starts) and Kirk Cousins ($28M/year, 0 playoff wins)
Yeah, i think Rodgers was waiting on this too. Expect like a 32m/year and like a 110m guaranteed contract from Rodgers.
Makes me sad. Flacco, Rodgers, and Ryan began in the NFL (as starters) at the same time (2008) and got their extensions at the same time always. Flacco era is really about to be over.
-
1 hour ago, Excellen Browning said:
Lets not lose ourselves in the hitler argument. Instead, lets laugh about Rudy Giuliani's interview, and how fucked Cohen is.
omg i just saw this, rudy giuliani is a fucking moron. he went on tv and got his immigration ban struck down due to intent
i love watching him
-
25 minutes ago, Anacybele said:
That was pretty awesome for you guys!
Especially because it happened via the Bengals embarrassing the Ravens and stripping them of a playoff spot. lolಠ_ಠ
people really underestimate how much i hate them, theyre #3 to the Patriots and Steelers and once BB/TB retire they might leapfrog the Patriots
31 minutes ago, Life said:Finally. Someone who nailed it about the Bills. We weren't deserving of that playoff spot but it didn't matter because we ended the drought.
The Bills' playoff drought was one of the weirdest phenomenon in sports and especially the NFL. They somehow have stayed so mediocre the last 17 years that when they had a mediocre team in a bad AFC they actually had a chance and took it. That's probably one of the main flaws of the salary cap (also that it harms players moving off their rookie contracts); mediocrity has a hard time leaving the cycle.
-
1 hour ago, CA Valkyrie said:
Cuz the other team was playing hard and wanted to win too? So does this mean Tom Brady's Super Bowl wins are diminished cuz they were all by one possession?
When did I say that? We get it: you're a smart dude and like football. No need to try so hard to impress us
You're missing my point entirely. I would advise you to re-read my posts with the intention of listening, not responding, considering I've never said anything close to that. The way the Patriots have performed in Super Bowl 49 and 51 required all sorts of good and bad luck to go their way. One example is their formations in the divisional round in 2014-2015 -- such formations were made illegal as of that off-season. Then against Seattle they we're simultaneously unlucky with the Kearse catch and lucky with the Butler int. It makes sense though, because that was one of the greatest super bowls of all time and the only 50/50 in NFL history.
There's no doubt both teams "wanted" it. But if you go into the nuts and bolts -- Butler made a pick on a play that Seattle was largely successful with in the one yard line, and it was due to extremely good execution against pretty good execution. That's lucky, out executing your opponents on a routine play that you, in particular, practiced heavily for that moment.
And in 2014 itself, do you remember that NFCCG? The one where Seattle somehow took it to overtime and won it in a hilarious series of once-in-a-blue-moon errors?
Likewise, in SB51, remember the Edelman catch? The sack on Matt Ryan on 3rd down in field goal range?
It's really insane how much luck goes into this. You can conclude that the 01 Patriots were one of the worst teams to win a super bowl in the same breath as praising them, and you can extrapolate how 2002 might go based on their errors in 2001.
I'm not sure you understand why saying "doesn't matter they won" or "doesn't matter they lost" is a simplistic and unproductive way to look at the way the season went.. a close score means it was much more of a 50/50 game that went in their favor. As it stands, the Patriots are 5-3 in one score super bowls, and they would've been 4-4 had Atlanta not given up a 25 point lead. And that's... Kind of my point tbh, especially since their strongest team ever didn't even win a title. But the 07 Patriots is one of the most dominant teams of all time, and they still lost a coin flip game despite being clearly superior to 99.999% of teams to ever step onto the field.
This is how I speak on forums these days. Don't flatter yourself.
1 hour ago, Hylian Air Force said:If only I were so confident about AFCS. All 4 teams are inconsistent, and one of them is younger than my younger sister by more than a year. The only real contender in it, besides my Titans bias, is Jacksonville, who caused a major AFC upset, and almost caused another one.
Tbf my team and the current iteration of the Browns are younger than I am so it's not that crazy. But since 2002 the AFCN has had a track record of cannibalizing playoff spots. It's actually one of the most interesting divisions to follow sometimes because somehow 3/4 teams can pull really dumb wins out of their asses. I could point to the Ravens in 2012, Bengals in 2013, and the Steelers in 2017 as the most blatant examples but these are really crazy teams that despise each other.
(Also Ana I follow hockey now and I'm a caps fan lol, there's something about Maryland and Pennsylvania that makes them hate each other in sports)
-
Pythagorean W-L is meant to be used as a predictive stat to analyze the season. The thing about close wins and losses is that as fans, we go "at least we got the W" and players feel some relief -- but the coaches don't have that relief and when making decisions and analyzing their season, they don't say "you are what your record says you are".. they said "why was this game so close? Oh, here are things we could've done. We got lucky there, let's not try it again."
The analysts also look at these kinds of things because it's not interesting at all to just say "doesn't matter; got a W." The off-season is pretty much about roster turnover, predictions, and hype and saying "well at least they got 13 wins" isn't productive to any of those things. I'm also looking in as a Ravens fan who once had a season where we were 5-9 in one score games and almost undefeated if the games ended with two minutes left. One score games are more about luck than most care to admit.
Now at this point, I'm being labeled a hater or whatever weird random thing CA Valk is making a point. The 13-3 Steelers had the point differential of a 10.5 win team (basically, there's an adjusted stat which I think normalizes it for strength of schedule?) which means they definitely had a lot of luck on their side. Just because they went 13-3 one year doesn't mean that the next year, especially since a bunch of plays happened or bounced their way. You guys point to the Jesse James catch and I point to the other 8 50/50 games they played.
As for the AFCN, the division is historically extremely strong and we've had 2 instances of sending 3 teams from our division in the past decade, and at least 5 instances of sending exactly 2. It's rare for the AFCN to not have two teams in the playoffs in any given season since the re-alignment. Bengals have a decent coach that can take them there and the Ravens are a low key complete team, whereas the Steelers are generally always dangerous. The last two years were "the Steelers against a Ravens team that doesn't know what it wants and a Bengals team with PTSD".. but given how the Ravens and Bengals closed out their seasons there's no way they will lie back and watch the Steelers cruise again.
-
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...
-
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.
-
-
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.
-
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.
-
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:
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
and this is why my kids wont have alliterative names
-
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
-
Larry Willmore was great because he was pretty much going in on a lot of the media that was present. Wolf definitely did it much better, but Willmore did not make members of the media happy at all.
-
My family called me and told me to watch that. Based on this year and last year this one's going to be straight fire; Michelle Wolf is incredible.
I'll edit this when I finish.
EDIT: the crowd is NOT loving this. This is amazing. It reminds me of Larry Willmore a few years back.
EDIT: it was amazing. One of the best I've seen, and I love just how blunt it is. There's no doubt in my mind that what she prepared to give was not congruent with what they requested from her, specifically because I remember Lewis Black hating his WHCD for how much they wanted to restrict him.
-
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.
-
53 minutes ago, CA Valkyrie said:
This is why I like Tom Cable coming back to Oakland to coach up the young OL's.
Tom Cable was Seattle's OL coach for Wilson's entire career so far, more or less.
Russell Wilson is literally the only player in the league that could function behind that line. He was their leading rusher in 2017.
I wouldn't get my hopes up.
53 minutes ago, CA Valkyrie said:To be fair, neither did Carr. That's what happens: players' production tends to drop after they land a huge contract.
Jack Del Rio isn't really a good coach. Didn't he get injured a few times? I remember you guys lost to the Cowboys when he tried to make a heroic play. Also, I remember in 2016 (whichever year Oakland was good but they lost Carr for the playoffs) the Raiders won a ton of extremely close one-score games, and that kind of model isn't sustainable.
This year, the trend went the opposite way or settled to a more reasonable mean, because the 2016 Raiders had a Pythagorean expectation of 8.7 due to their +31 PD so they outperformed by roughly 3-4 wins.
There's also a ton of evidence going against this point. There's a few duds here and there, and in a lot of cases they get new contracts for new teams and those players might not necessarily be a good scheme fit. In Carr's case, well, his #1 receiver got a case of the drops, Jack Del Rio is a dud, and in all honesty the entire AFC was super ass this year.
-
57 minutes ago, CA Valkyrie said:
Rebuilding a team starts with the line, and then working your way out. Raiders seem to be taking this to heart.
Didn't they already have a good line? I just remember they threw a ton of money at Kelechi Osemele a few years ago and Derek Carr was having a really good season when they added him.
Anyway we got T Orlando Brown Jr. (so we've shored up both tackles now, although I thought Hurst was doing well on the right side and Stanley was doing well on the left) and TE Mark Andrews. I've heard OBJ was pretty good on tape despite his bad combine, and Mark Andrews I know nothing about but we definitely need more TEs. This is the first time in a long ass time I've seen us do this much shit for offense in the draft. It's actually really foreign to me.
-
7 hours ago, SilvertheShadow said:
I’m friends with a Ravens fan and he was absolutely livid that not only they traded down (and eventually up), but instead of picking Calvin Ridley the Ravens took a TE of all things. I found the choice kind of odd myself, but quality tight ends are hard to come across these days.
I didn't. It was a need based draft. Dude can block and catch and run routes with the best of them even if he's raw. He's pretty much pro ready athletically and skills wise.
We have 2 quality WRs (Crabtree and Brown), a solid third WR (Snead), good depth (Moore), Breshad Perriman, and whoever else we draft or go after. Dez Bryant/Eric Decker/etc are still free agents even if Bryant rejected our offer, and we have 17m in cap space before the draft.
Also, our current Tight Ends have talent but they have issues. Boyle's dealt with suspensions and he's primarily a blocker with limited receiving ability. Gillmore (who is actually gone) and Maxx Williams injury issues issues. Ben Watson went back to the Saints. My two Madden franchise TEs don't even exist in real life. Hayden Hurst came out a much better prospect than Crockett Gillmore and Nick Boyle. The pick is fine and I really love it, and hopefully Lamar Jackson can throw to him for 15 years.
-
I'm not too enthused about a dual threat QB, but maybe I'm just way too attached to Flacco. I hope Flacco sticks his middle finger up to the whole league in 2018 with the help we got him.
It explains why we signed RG3 and signed McNabb's QB Coach. I bet they're hoping Lamar Jackson ends up like a much more pissed off McNabb, because Jackson was pissed.
After reading some articles on him, it looks like he's developed well between his seasons and the mental part of his game exponentially increased between years. I am rooting for him to keep up the momentum, but Joe Flacco's still my second favorite NFL player ever :(
Also, I just noticed that the Ravens have 17m in cap space. Holy fuck, Dez really didn't want to play for us.
oh, life, ravens fan (yah i mean duh but)
-
i'm so fucking mad about lamar jackson, but at least we have a receiving end now
-
On 4/22/2018 at 12:47 PM, Hylian Air Force said:
Private business. That's on Waffle House to pay for that. If they want it, they'll shell out for it. Private property is on the owner to protect.
Yeah, but he's pointing out the absurdity in the argument ("security guards" is an argument used to block poignant gun reform).
If anything this shows continued reinforcement that gun crime is far from limited to schools and the idea that security guards fix this issue is laughable when private institutions are targeted as well. Small businesses can't even afford that, so instead of making sensible gun legislation you're forcing poverty on people and their business if they want to keep a madman with a gun from massacring them, or so they'd think.
Also, I will point out that five years ago there was a shooting at my local mall. There's security there, too. What happened there? It's just not an end-all be-all argument and businesses shouldn't have to take the burden on themselves for basic security when Congress refuses to even discuss this.
-
Bill Hicks is a dead stand-up comedian. That youtube video is just conspiracy bullshit. You pretty much fell for the bait.
2018/19 NFL Season (the Buffalo Bills are worse than pizza with pineapple on it)
in Entertainment
Posted
Well, that's not what I was getting at. Average nfl career is short and average player lifetime is like 55 years old. Let them chase that money