2017 NFL Off-season Thread

Thread for NFL discussion before the 2018 NFL season. To kick off the thread, I wanted to vent about QB evaluations (something I’ve probably said several times before). When evaluating QBs, in addition to look at their performance statistics, the performance of the OL, WRs/TEs, quality of the running game, and nature of the offense and play calling must be factored in. If these things aren’t, the assessment of the QB is close to worthless. In other words, evaluating a QB must be done within the context of his supporting cast and the nature of the offense. I’m pretty sure this is an uncontroversial point–and some may think this is an unnecessary point because it’s obvious. Yet, time and again, I hear people making comments that seem to not take the contextual factors into account. If a QBs stats dip, I’ll hear analysts talk as if the QB is entirely to blame, as if the supporting cast might have been the primary reason for this. The opposite can occur as well. Analysts can give more credit to the QB, overlooking the fact that the supporting cast is really terrific. In any event, failing to account for these factors that affect a QB’s performance is a big pet peeve of mine.

115 thoughts on “2017 NFL Off-season Thread

  1. Keenum or Foles:
    Not sure if either will be available, but who would you choose or maybe none of the above if you were a Denver or a Cleveland? I guess you have to put Cousins on there, but I’m guessing most would choose Cousins over Keenum and Foles (I could be wrong, though).

  2. I would take Cousins over Keenum or Foles, but not at the price he’s going to demand. I think Foles and Keenum could be had for a lot less, despite one of them being the reigning Super Bowl MVP.

    For the Browns, I would take either Keenum or Foles because I don’t think either is your franchise, long-term guy. But they’ll both be fine for developing a young team around them while trying to find their Derek Carr. I think I’d pick Foles because of his history and attitude. He’s been to the mountain, and maybe the mountain was a bit of a lucky thing. Seems to be grateful just to be in the game, if that makes sense.

    The Broncos have a closing window, not an opening one, and I think Keenum makes more sense for them (although they really should go after Cousins). Because Keenum is on the upswing and because he just had a better season than Foles. He could be the real deal, and the Broncos seem like the team to find out.

    What do you guys think the Vikings will do about QB?

  3. I would take Cousins over Keenum or Foles, but not at the price he’s going to demand.

    I agree with Mitchell here, although I have a feeling Keenum and Foles will be too pricey for what they’re worth as well. I like Cousins and Keenum. With Cousins, I think he could be a franchise QB on a team with a really good run game–e.g., the Jaguars or maybe the Vikings. But I’m not sure the money you’d have to fork over would be worth even that. (Think of someone like Flacco. Is he worth the money?) With Keenum, I think he’s a great backup, but not really a starter. Think of someone like Dave Krieg. As for Foles, I’m really skeptical about him. The body of his work suggests that he’s a flash in the pan–mostly based on the scheme/play calling. Peterson seemed to make adjustments that defenses couldn’t catch up to. I’d be surprised if Foles repeats this. I definitely think Keenum has a better shot at being a solid starter, and I say this because I’ve seen good things from him in the past. (However, I think he just got into a good groove, and I’m not confident he’ll sustain this. Keenum’s seasons feels like the really good season Ryan Fitzpatrick had for the Bills.)

    The Broncos have a closing window, not an opening one, and I think Keenum makes more sense for them (although they really should go after Cousins).

    I kinda agree about the Broncos–or at least I think their offensive situation isn’t all that great. I actually don’t think Cousins-Broncos is a good fit for either party.

    If the Jags could get Keenum for a good price, that might not be a bad thing–although I think they’d have to draft a QB.

    I like Mitchell’s suggestion of Keenum going to the Browns, as long as Keenum isn’t too expensive.

    What do you guys think the Vikings will do about QB?

    No idea. While I’ve been rooting for Bridgewater, I’m not confident he’s a franchise QB. Bradford might be a franchise QB, and I might go with him over the other two. (In a way, I actually like Keenum better than Bradford, as the former as a better ability to improvise, but I just have a feeling Keenum’s going to come down to earth. Another thing: The defenses were relatively weak this year, so Keenum might have performed better because of it.)

    What do you guys think of Alex Smith going to Washington? I’m scratching my head with that move.

  4. Based on a small sample size at Minnesota, I think Keenum can be “good enough” and a franchise guy. I’m not saying a top ten guy, but maybe top twenty. I would guess and say Reid would say Keenum is vulnerable to make mistakes and turnovers and I would agree with that assessment. But that guy is pretty cool under pressure and he can move enough to make plays. It’s just if you get him on the run, it’s hard to say if he will always make the right decision. I heard somewhere (cannot remember) that Minnesota will have to assess (ie: play by play) which Minnesota completions should be credited to the two great receivers and which to Keenum. The person said they went through and did that and Keenum had enough creditable plays to say he should be a starting QB. I don’t think Keenum’s numbers in that assessment was phenomenal, but I think it was good.

    Foles was spectacular that one year in Philly under Chip and he was unbelievable in the Super Bowl and playoff game against Minnesota (I didn’t watch that game.). Yes Philly’s coaching staff deserves a lot of credit, but Foles made some throws and was really good in the pocket. Man tough not to give this guy a chance if you were a team.

    I would lean Keenum over Foles, but I think I would take both over any rookie for anything under top ten money.

    Many rumors about Minnesota such as franchising Keenum and trading him (Which seems absurd to me.) and getting more QBs (Which would mean releasing Bradford?). If it was me, I would keep Keenum and get rid of Bridgewater and Bradford. I have more confidence in Keenum. I like Bradford, but he’s an injury waiting to happen.

    Reid hates Alex Smith. Haha. I think I’ve stated this before, but I think Alex Smith is a top fifteen QB (or right around there). I’m fine with Washington getting him, but if they handled Cousins better that would have been the smarter thing to do. I would lean Cousins over Smith, but not by a whole lot.

    I’ll add that Mitchell sort of alluded to certain QBs being better in certain situations hence on certain teams. I like that assessment and agree.

  5. The thing with Keenum is sample size. How do you know he’s not a one-hit wonder? Fitzpatrick has consistently flashed positive attributes–and he’s had two solid seasons in his career. He got on a roll, or maybe (with Chan Gailey and the Bills) he was in an offense that the defenses took a while to adjust to. It wouldn’t completely surprise me if Keenum turned into a solid starter, but I think the risk is quite significant.

    Foles was spectacular that one year in Philly under Chip and he was unbelievable in the Super Bowl…

    His one great year sort of speaks against him, though. Namely, I think defenses weren’t used to Chip Kelly’s offense. Same with whatever Peterson did at some point.

    I think I’ve stated this before, but I think Alex Smith is a top fifteen QB (or right around there). I’m fine with Washington getting him,…

    The key question is, do you think he can lead a team to the Super Bowl and win it? He’d have to play on a team like the 2015 Broncos or 2000 Ravens to do that, in my opinion. You don’t pay good coin for that type of QB.

  6. True, but they’re paying less than they’d have to pay Cousins. In a way, they’re sorta getting the Cousins situation but for slightly less.

  7. But how you’d like to be a Redskins fan, knowing that you traded away a good player, a good pick for a QB that probably doesn’t have the ability to win a Super Bowl?

  8. Alex Smith is better than Trent Dilfer by quite a bit I think.

    No doubt the Redskins messed this whole deal up by not signing Cousins two seasons ago. But at this point in time, there are worse things that could the Redskins could do then signing Alex Smith. However, I wonder if they could have traded Kendall Fuller and a third round pick to get a top three pick this year? Maybe selecting a rookie QB with a top three pick would be better.

  9. Me too, but compared to what management has done over the past 20 years, this doesn’t seem bad at all. Feels kind of hopeful, actually.

    Also, we all agree that the Redskins should probably have signed Cousins two years ago, but the question is really WOULD you have? Because it was not a clear issue then. I think I would have franchised him, just as Washington did.

  10. I don’t get why you would be hopeful. If the Raiders or Seahawks got Alex Smith (assuming they didn’t have Carr and Wilson respectively), I’d be close to despair. If you’re fairly confident a QB doesn’t have what it takes to lead a team to a Super Bowl and win it, who cares if you have a good season–if you’re almost sure to lose in the playoffs? I can sort of relate to this because I felt this way, to a degree, in the last three years with the Seahawks. By mid-season, I had a strong feeling the OL and defense weren’t good enough to take the team all the way. Indeed, I don’t really feel bad that the Seahawks missed the playoffs, and a part of me actually preferred it.

    As for Cousins, I don’t really agree the Redskins should have signed Cousins, and I agree with you that franchising him was the right move. Cousins may not be the guy, but why give up a promising young CB and 3rd round pick for an older QB who probably isn’t capable of winning a Super Bowl? That seems crazy. Let Cousins go, but then build your team around you–that would have been better. If they could have gotten Keenum or Bridgewater (if he’s available) for non-franchise QB money, that might have been better, too.

  11. I’m guessing Keenum or Foles could get similar money to Alex Smith. I wouldn’t doubt it anyway. But I agree with Reid that I would rather have taken a chance on Keenum or even Foles then Smith, even for the same money. On the other hand, I wouldn’t be all that surprised if Alex Smith in Washington becomes a top ten QB, sort of in and around the level of a Matt Ryan.

    As far as Smith winning a Super Bowl, I definitely wouldn’t bet that he could lead his team. But he’s always had decent regular seasons, so I wouldn’t really question him there. And if Foles can lead an Eagle team to a Super Bowl and win it, Smith has to be able as well. Foles looked like a bottom five QB at times this season.

  12. I wouldn’t be surprised if Alex Smith puts up decent numbers during the regular season, but does it really matter, if you believe he won’t perform well enough to take a team to the Super Bowl?

    And if Foles can lead an Eagle team to a Super Bowl and win it, Smith has to be able as well. Foles looked like a bottom five QB at times this season.

    Here’s the difference I see. Foles seemed to struggled until Pederson made adjustments. My hypothesis is that these schematic changes elevated Foles play, and the defenses didn’t have time to adjust. Smith and the Chiefs came out strong in the beginning of the season, but by the end, defenses seemed to have adjusted. Maybe Jay Gruden can develop schemes for Smith that defenses will take a long time adjusting to. Then again, besides Belichick, I don’t think any other coach is better at using schemes to elevate players/offense like Andy Reid has. And even with this elevation, Smith hasn’t looked good in the playoffs.

  13. Spending a top-20 pick on a RB is one of the worst decisions a team can make. Don’t do it. Like, ever.

    In general, I don’t think choosing a RB in the top twenty is a good idea, but I wouldn’t say it should be never done. Here’s a situation where it would be sound:

    1. Team run-based offense, with strong commitment to the running game;

    2. Team has strong consensus and high confidence that RB has Hall of Fame potential;

    Also, for me, even if the two conditions are met, I’d be reluctant to choose a RB that was the smaller, quicker RB who ran in the scat back style. For me, I’d want someone kinda big and physical, and ran in that way. They don’t have to be straight-line, north-south, but I prefer guys who can run in a physical way.

  14. Blake Bortles signs with Jags

    Unless this contract is really team friendly, I wouldn’t be happy with this signing if I’m a Jags fan. I never was high on Bortles, but in the last two seasons, he’s gotten worse. To be fair, he stabilized at some point in this season. However, my guess is that something is wrong upstairs–i.e., there’s a psychological issue. Think Shaq shooting free throws or Rick Ankiel not being able to pitch anymore or Mackey Sasser not being able to throw the ball back to the pitcher’s mound. Maybe it’s not that bad with Bortles, but I feel like it’s in that ball park. (Another: Blair Walsh kicking in pressure situations.) I think these problems are really, really difficult to overcome. If the problem isn’t really psychological, then this may be an acceptable, even good move, but, again, I was never high on him even without these problems.

  15. An Idea to Boost Offense That I Might Like

    To boost, more scoring and offense, the NFL seems to look at making it easier for WRs, harder for DBs.

    But I wonder if they’ve ever considered changing rules or enforcing them in a way to give more of an advantage to the O-linemen–for example, maybe be less stringent on holding. Maybe if this became too obvious, I wouldn’t like that, but if there were subtle ways to help O-linemen, I think that would appeal to me.

  16. Activity Involving Running Backs

    Carolina releases Jonathan Stewart. Stewart was my kind of back; I liked him, except he seemed to get hurt too often. Carolina–and teams like the Jaguars, maybe Bills, Vikings, 49ers–should look at Eddie Lacy and Thomas Rawls, if the Seahawks move away from both. Taking a chance on both, especially if you have a good starter, would be a good move. It wouldn’t surprise me if both were really productive, especially with a good OL. Cowboys and Raiders might be too other good destinations.

  17. Bears release Mike Glennon

    I sort of liked Glennon, but he was awful last year–particularly in terms of ball security. Having said that, you know who he reminds me of? Nick Foles. I don’t think Foles had as many issues with ball security as Glennon, but they have a similar build, and their talent seems similar. If Foles can rehabilitate himself, I wonder if Glennon could.

  18. Another candidate in the Kirk Cousins sweepstakes? Someone mentioned Arizona the other day for Cousins. I like that fit for some reason.

  19. It makes sense, especially if the new coach implements a run-based offense with David Johnson.

    By the way, if I were Cousins, I’d consider the OL of the team. The Cardinals seemed kinda iffy last year. Vikings seemed solid, but will they be able to keep that up next year?

    Oh, going back to RBs. I think the Lions should also look into Lacy and/or Rawls.

  20. Man I don’t think I would take Lacy or Rawls. Rawls plays and runs hard which is a great thing, but that guy cannot stay on the field because of how he plays. Lacy I don’t have any confidence in. If a team really wants to make a play on a “proven” RB, they should look to get Tevin Coleman via a trade. He and Freeman won’t sign after next year, and the Falcons will (or should) listen to an offer. I think I would consider Alf Morris over Rawls or Lacy and Jonathan Stewart too depending on the price tag that comes with Stewart.

    If Quinn wanted Richard as a DC, how did he end up as a defensive backs coach?

    Glennon is out only because of his price tag and what the Bears did to get Trubisky in the draft. I liked Glennon as well. In fact I don’t think there is much difference between Glennon and Keenum in terms of skillset.

  21. Ooops forgot to comment on Cousins. Denver should really go after him (or someone in his caliber), and if they don’t I have no clue why not or what kind of GM Elway is. Their window to be great will close really quickly and they have to do it soon. Although I’m not sure what kind of cap space they have. Any team without a QB right now should be happy to get Cousins, but his price tag may be outrageous at this point (I’m not sure.).

  22. To be clear, I’m thinking of Rawls/Lacy as a backup–e.g., teams like Jags, Cowboys, Lions. I’m not saying teams expect them as a #1 back. I like Stewart, but I think there’s too much wear on the tires. Same with Frank Gore, who is apparently going to be available as well. Actually, if I were the Broncos, I would look at Rawls and Lacy, too. Titans might be another good team for them. Alfred Morris would be a good one in this role as well.

    If Quinn wanted Richard as a DC, how did he end up as a defensive backs coach?

    The year Quinn left to the Falcons, Carroll promoted Richard to DC. He was lauded by players and other coaches as a really good teacher of the secondary, for what it’s worth.

    In fact I don’t think there is much difference between Glennon and Keenum in terms of skillset.

    Glennon might have a better arm, but Keenum is more mobile, and has a better ability to create when a play breaks down. Glennon might have been a decent starter if he just didn’t make awful INTs. (To be fair, I didn’t watch a ton of Bears games. But the ones I saw, he forced Fox to take him out.)

    Any team without a QB right now should be happy to get Cousins, but his price tag may be outrageous at this point (I’m not sure.).

    To me, that’s just one of the reasons the Broncos should be wary. The Broncos don’t seem like they’re just missing a QB. Their OL and run game is still suspect in my view, and if neither improves significantly, I’m not sure that’s a good situation for Cousins, or the Broncos. Then add a costly price tag–I don’t really like it. I think I’d prefer Keenum/Bridgewater, whomever is cheapest, especially if they can draft a good QB prospect. Now, if Denver has a really good run game, solid OL, then going after Cousins, even if he’s costly, could be justified in my view. To me, the Jags are the type of situation that would be ideal for Cousins. You can say that about a lot of QBs, perhaps, but other really good QBs could thrive and take their teams to the Super Bowl in different situations. The Jags situation is basically the only way I see Cousins taking a team to the Super Bowl. (Vikings could be another if their run game gets going.)

  23. You don’t think the Broncos overall as a team is close? I think it’s not impossible to believe their defense can be dominate again. They seem to have lost so players up the middle – Maliek Jackson, Trevathan, etc. They also lost their DC in Phillips, but they have a lot of talent left. If a QB can help the offense just a little and their defense returns to form, they have a shot. Not to mention that everyone was stuffing the box and was all in trying to defend the run. That might change with a QB. I would agree that the Broncos need a lot more help on offense, but I think they may be close enough that a QB can make the difference. I just saw the Broncos are going for Cousins which prompted this post.

  24. I wasn’t thinking about any deficiency in the defense. I was mainly thinking about the offense. I don’t get the sense that they have a solid run game–and I don’t think it was just because of weak QB play. If key injuries were the reason for this, and they can have a really good run game, then I think Cousins could make a big difference. If the run game is just OK to iffy, I think Cousins could be a big disappointment. (Plus, they don’t seem to have a lot of weapons for him.)

    Going back to the defense, I think it’s unlikely that they approach the 2015 level–unless they pick up some really good players in the off-season. The players that I think they really miss are Ware and Ward.

    1. Going back to the defense, I think it’s unlikely that they approach the 2015 level

      I agree that’s highly unlikely. But I would think they can be as good as the Jags were last year, which would put them in the hunt with a Cousins.

  25. I’m a little confused about how good the Jaguars defense actually was last year. At times, they could be dominant, but at other times, they didn’t look so good. I’m thinking specifically of the way they gave up big plays.

    I’ll say this: If the Broncos can have an OL and run game like the Jaguars, the Broncos defense could be good enough to take them far. Add Cousins to the mix and, yes, it’s believable that they could be contenders.

  26. Compelling Argument for Going For It on 4th Down More Frequently

    Most of the arguments I’m familiar with have been unpersuasive to me, but here’s a more persuasive argument that recently came to mind. If going for it on fourth down, increased third down conversions that might make going for it on fourth down worth it, depending on how much that increased third down efficiency. To me, third down efficiency is super important. I suspect it not only contributes to scoring more points, but it’s really important in controlling the clock.

    How would going for it on fourth down help third downs? It’s conceivable to me that this would give more options to the offense and make them more unpredictable and difficult to defend on third down.

    I think the situation would have to be considered–the field position, score and time remaining–but being more open and aggressive would be justified if it improved third down efficiency.

  27. Not sure if the Eagles have lost anyone on their DL, but if not, their DL just got a lot scarier. This is a good situation for both the team and Bennett, as the team doesn’t have to rely a lot on Bennett, and Bennett’s snaps can be greatly reduced. Dang.

  28. That’s an interesting take on this story. 🙂

    What’s the latest on Richard Sherman? I’m hearing buzz.

  29. The Hawks couldn’t get more for Bennett? I don’t even know the receiver they received from the Eagles. I guess it just a salary dump for the Seahawks, but why not try get a little more? What the word on that trade from Seahawk insiders?

  30. Apparently, there were several other possible teams–Browns, Patriots, Falcons, one or two others maybe–so I imagine this was the best deal. It doesn’t seem that great of a deal. I think they’re only getting a 2 million savings in cap space, which seem paltry. I’m not sure what insiders are saying. Unless they get someone good for the 5th rounder and/or this WR is good, I’m not happy with this (obviously; the WR is a UDFA, by the way).

  31. You would think they could have gotten more from the Browns who have like 20 some draft picks. 15 in the first three rounds. Only slightly an exaggeration.

    NFL players cannot choose the team they want to play for or block unwanted trades right? It’s not like Bennett had any say in this trade, why trade him to the best team in the NFL.

    Oh by the way yes the Hawks got a fifth round pick, but gave up a seventh so they only moved up two rounds. As a Cowboy fan, all I can say to the Seahawk’s FO is “stupid, stupid, stupid”. Haha, nah the Boys will be back next year.

  32. Yeah, I would think the Seahawks would have been able to get a better deal with Bennett, and if they did, I’m pretty sure the ‘Hawks would have pulled the trigger (i.e., Bennett would have no say). This had to have been the best deal they could get.

    Re: Sherm. Some news from a beat writer:

    On another note, while I approved of the trade for Sheldon Richardson, I don’t think he’s really worth big money–not based on what I saw from him last year.

  33. I wonder if the asking price on Bennett was forced down because he’s so vocal about non-football stuff. If that was a factor, I’m annoyed.

  34. I’m not sure if this is true, but I’m going to throw this out there:

    Initially the explanation at the end wasn’t included–and I had a hard time believing that this was true. I still have a hard time believing the ‘Hawks pulled out because “they felt bad.” I mean, yeah, they can feel bad, but wouldn’t it be understandable–the Patriots’ offer is significantly better.

    The other explanation I’ve heard, which would explain forgoing the Patriots offer–the Hawks are really high on the Marcus Johnson, the WR from Philly. Indeed, I think I saw reporting that said the Seahawks had their eye on him for a while. Still, if the guy is that good, would the Eagles give him up…Well, if they wanted Bennett badly enough, maybe; and maybe Johnson isn’t “that” good so much as he’s a promising prospect. I guess if is equivalent to a 3rd round player or better, the deal makes more sense. That’s the only way this makes sense. I’m still leaning towards getting a 3rd and 5th, though.

  35. You seem to be forgetting all the stuff you espouse about coaches and systems. What if Johnson just doesn’t fit the Eagles’ plans for that position? They just won the Super Bowl with three excellent pass catchers. If they have what they deem a surplus at receiver, and if they think they need a guy like Bennett on their team (I love that it will be Bennett and Long in the same locker room), it seems like a great deal for them. And if Pete Carroll has been looking for a guy like Johnson for whatever reasons a coach likes a receiver, I don’t see what there is to be puzzled about. I’m only offering this because you’re saying “that’s the only way this makes sense,” but here’s another. Right?

  36. It’s possible that Johnson is a really good prospect, but he’s a not the best fit for the Eagles. This could mean that Johnson is actually a good prospect–and the Seahawks give him a 3rd round grade or higher–then the deal makes sense.

  37. According to this report from Ian Rapopport, the Seahawks traded with the Eagles because the deal was because the Patriots offer came in light, and the Seahawks wanted to honor their agreement with the Eagles. This weakens the hypothesis that they think Marcus Johnson is equivalent to a 3rd round player or higher. Shoot!

  38. Holy Heck! Rams Trying to Create the 2015 Broncos Defense

    The secondary should now enable Phillips to blitz more frequently and more daring ways. Shoot!

  39. RBs like Rawls and Lacy. There’s probably a lot more to go after as backups as well.

  40. I heard the Titans wanted a versatile back (ie: pass catcher and maybe more shifty), which would leave Lacy and Rawls out.

  41. Well, it happened. I’m kinda surprised about the degree to which I felt sad about losing Sherm and Bennett (not so much Lane).

  42. I think the logic here is reasonable–if Carroll’s teams struggled at the end, then maybe he’s the problem. This could be the case. Maybe Carroll is too loose and lax–the opposite of being too much of a drill sergeant. I think there’s a definitely a possibility of that. To me, a great coach finds the right balance, and maybe Carroll was too far on the permissive side.

    However, if Carroll had two ingredients, we might not be having this conversation: 1) a great OC and/or; 2) a really good roster. Cowherd mentions the sustainability of Belichick and Saban. Belichick is sui generis–his coaching can elevate the team in all phases and he’s playing in an era where this approach can have success. This is a sustainable style, if you can coach like that, but I don’t think anyone else can, including Carroll. With Saban, he’s a really good (maybe great) coach with never-ending pipeline of great talent (including coaching?). In Seattle that stream of talent petered out, most conspicuously on the offensive line. If the OL was merely competent, we may not be having this conversation.

    Besides the talent, especially on offense, another problem might have been the lack of a great OC. I think Darryl Bevell is a solid coach, just not great. Give him really good talent, and you’ll have a good offense, but he won’t really elevate an offense, like some great coaches. (I’d put Mike Shanahan in there.) If Carroll had a coach like Shanahan, I think we might not be having this conversation. Whatever you want to say about Carroll, he seems like a guy who needs a really good OC to succeed. Mike Shanahan is similar in that I think he really needs a good DC to succeed. (Same with Mike Holmgren.) I don’t think Seattle ever had that type of coach. Had they had that coach or just didn’t disastrously fail on the OL, we might not be having this conversation.

    Having said that, I don’t rule out the possibility that all of these deficiencies–with the coaching and personnel–points back to a failing of Carroll’s. In fact, I think there’s a good chance that is the case.

  43. My only question to your post is you think Belichick could have had similar success with Eli Manning or Joe Flacco?

  44. Let me first say that I think Brady was important part of their success, and while Belichick can make do without a lot and other positions, I do think he needs a good QB, and maybe more than that to win Super Bowls.

    With regard to your specific question, I’d ask how much better do you think Eli and Flacco are compared to Matt Cassel? I think they’re considerably better, and based on that, I think Patriots could have had a lot of success. Would they have won as many Super Bowls? That, I’m not sure about.

  45. I totally agree with this (at least the first two points. I tend to think the DL deserves more emphasis) The sad thing is her points were relevant at least starting in 2015 and every season after that.

  46. This totally sucks.

  47. It’s funny when a team is winning the most vocal/out-there players are the “heart and soul” of the team. When the team is not winning or it’s time to clean house, those players are the first to go. In Sherman’s case it could be he overstayed his welcome. I wonder if it’s the same for Bennett.

  48. Sherm may have overstayed his welcome–personally, I leaned toward moving on last year, especially if he felt no remorse about chewing out Darrell Bevell. My sense is that the main reason they’re moving on is that they believe he should be paid less given his injuries. (He recently had two surgeries, one to repair his Achilles tendon.) My understanding is that after the 49er offer, Sherm gave the Seahawks a chance to match it, but they didn’t.

    With Bennett, maybe he’s too difficult, but I kinda thought he provided leadership, too. I could be wrong about that. But I think it comes down to what he’s being paid given his age and some of his injuries. Actually, I think that’s what it comes down to for both of these players. If they were younger and healthier, I suspect they’d be signed up already.

    In other news, I heard the Dolphins have or will release Ndamukong Suh, and he’s visiting the Seahawks today. I have questions about his attitude (and some of his dirty play in the past angered me; although I didn’t hear about any incidents when he was in Miami), but if his attitude is solid and he’s a good teammate, I would love a player like him. By this I mean a guy who can, almost by himself, make it impossible for an offense to run against–especially when you LBs like Wagner and KJ playing behind him. In this way, I think I’d prefer him over Sheldon Richardson.

    What I’d like to see is the Seahawks having a DL (or at least their front seven) absolutely shut down a running game. The Seahawks have been statistically good against the run, from what I understand, but I don’t think they’ve been dominant. A guy like Suh could make them take on running teams like the Cowboys.

  49. JG with Rodgers is a scary thought. (He’d probably be scary on the current Saints offense, too.)

  50. The Saints with Graham are a scarier thought than Graham with the Saints. That’s a lot of offensive weaponry.

    I hope the Bennett and Sherman moves were strictly football related.

    Suh did have a few incidents and suspensions early in his Dolphins tenure, but he appears to have been a model citizen these last couple of years. For the price he’ll likely demand, I question whether the Seahawks are a good place for him. Seattle is not a Suh away. He should look for a team that is.

  51. Did you mean, Graham would be scarier with Packers or with Saints?

    For the price he’ll likely demand, I question whether the Seahawks are a good place for him.

    Yeah, I have a feeling he’ll be too expensive.

    Seattle is not a Suh away.

    You mean, the addition of Suh wouldn’t make the Seahawks strong contenders for the Super Bowl? I would agree with that–but that’s only because the OL and running games are question marks. If the OL and running game is solid, or more than solid next year, I think they could contend. On the other hand, given their track record, it’s hard to be optimistic.

  52. I mean Graham going back to Brees isn’t likely to see a return to the kinds of numbers he once put up. It’s not that much a better situation for him. But the Saints adding another weapon make the Saints scarier. I’m not sure why this is confusing. It would be a nice move for Graham. It would be a great move for the Saints.

  53. OK, I think I understand. I wasn’t making a distinction between how it would affect Graham’s numbers versus how Graham would impact the team. I was mostly thinking in terms of the latter–Graham on either team would make both scary.

    As for Graham’s numbers, I think they could be better than they were at Seattle, and he could equal or surpass the numbers he had previously with the Saints. I say this because my sense is that the Saints’ weapons were in decline at the end of Graham’s tenure with the Saints. If that’s true, and the weapons are now better, adding Graham could elevate his production. Then again, with better weapons that could diminish his numbers, I guess.

  54. Could Drew Brees Be in Another Uniform Next Year?

    Vikings seems like a decent landing spot, although I think a better spot would be a team with a young QB waiting in the wings…like KC. Andy Reid would be a good match, and this would be ideal if Mahomes could use another year on the bench. The one bad thing about KC (if they have cap space) is that KC plays outdoors. I think Brees needs to go to a good indoor team, and the Vikings would qualify. Another team: the Cardinals, although they’re not in as good a situation as the Vikings, in my opinion.

  55. Here’s something in response to Mitchell wondering if the Seahawks released Bennett and Sherm primarily for football related reasons:

    Of course, you have to take this with a grain of salt, as Brown wouldn’t likely say, openly, that the Seahawks released them for non-football reasons. Having said that, I don’t think they did–at least not for the political protests. As the clip points out, both Brown and Doug Baldwin have been outspoken on social issues. The major difference is that both are healthy, and there are less questions about their ability to perform at a high level. I think that’s the main difference.

    Having said that, I think Sherm’s public outbursts against coaches is very different from being outspoken about social issues. This is especially true if Sherm never felt like he did anything wrong. That’s a really big deal for me, and if truly felt like he never did anything wrong, I would have wanted the Seahawks to trade him last year.

  56. I’m pretty sure nobody thinks Brees is going anywhere. It’s pretty clear he wants to play in New Orleans. Every pundit I’ve heard has said he’s a free agent only in name.

  57. I haven’t read what other pundits have said–I assume Brees would stay in NO, but then I saw that tweet, and I started wondering where would be an ideal landing spot.

  58. Sorry I’ve been slow to get our old content back up. It may be a while Until I do, feel free to continue re-starting some old topics.

    I’m not sure if the draft evaulation topic is worth starting again, so I’ll put this here. Thought you guys would find it interesting.

    This website AccuProSports evaluated the 2017 mock drafts (first round only) of 36 mock draft publishers, then scored each mock draft according to this system:

    Number of Correct Picks — Simply, how many correct selections the expert had.

    Total Error -– Total error refers to the total amount of difference between a mock pick and actual pick. For example, if a expert made a correct selection, there was 0 error. If the expert mocked a player to be selected 1st overall but fell to 5th overall, that is a error of 5. We calculate the entire first round error to give us the total error for each expert.

    Average Mock Error — Average mock error takes the total error and averages it to each pick. This gives a window of error for each expert’s pick in the first round. The least amount of error the expert has, the smaller of a window the expert made. The higher the average gets, the bigger of a window the expert has. So if a expert had a average error of 5, this means each selection was within a 5 pick range (either higher or lower) to being correct.

    Difficulty Points -– Difficulty points are weighted to give more value to more difficult picks further into the first round. The degree of difficulty between correctly mocking the first overall pick as opposed to picks 20-32 are vastly different. That is why the deeper we get into the first round, more points are awarded for a correct selection.

    Team Matching -– Team matching is correctly mocking a specific player and team together. No matter if the team trades up or back, if they select the player the expert mocked, points will be awarded.

    The winner for 2017 was Jason LaCanfora, which makes me very happy (Don knows why). The scoresheet is here. I’m also pleased to see Mel Kiper at 12 and Todd McShay at 20. Interestingly, LaCanfora only had to get 8 picks right in the first round (that’s a 25% success rate) to come in first.

    I like how you get credit for matching a team with a player, and for getting the predicted draft position close to the actual draft position. Degrees of wrongness are obviously the biggest factor.

  59. Wait, how much do you guys care about predicting the draft order or even the predicting the team that will pick a specific player? Personally, I don’t really care about this. What I care about is their assessment of a player–generally, how good a player will be, and more specifically the comments about the player’s strengths and weaknesses. I also like to knowing the extent to which a evaluator is certain about these comments (e.g., “I’m sure that the player x has toughness, etc.”)

  60. Not entirely sure what you mean by “silly game,” but I don’t think player evaluation is silly at all–I think it takes really knowledge and skill. Not everyone can do this well, in my opinion. The same is true in education. Not everyone can do a good job of evaluate students.

  61. What the heck? I gotta imagine they’re losing some players–right? (I did hear they’re going to move on from Vinny Curry, but still.) The also added a corner from Carolina. If they don’t lose much more players, Eagles are looking like a favorite to return to the Super Bowl. Dang.
    (Seahawks OL has to get way better to have a chance.)


    As Mitchell said, Brees stays in New Orleans as well.

    Andrew Norwell ends up in Jacksonville.

  62. The part that makes the draft supposition silly (and not at all like student assessment) is its predictive nature. Yes, so-and-so can see what kind of skills player x has, but nobody actually knows how good he’s going to be or what he’s going to do in an NFL uniform, although we spend ridiculous amounts of time acting like we might. We’ve been through this. You think it’s not a craps shoot and I do.

  63. If the Eagles go into next season as the NFC favorite, how strong a favorite are they? Even before Wentz went down last year, did you feel they were a very strong contender? I didn’t. If they get better on D and they get Wentz back, I suppose that makes them better, but do they look much better than Dallas or the Rams? I might even pick Carolina to do better than Philly this season, depending on how things roll out this off-season.

  64. The part that makes the draft supposition silly (and not at all like student assessment) is its predictive nature. Yes, so-and-so can see what kind of skills player x has, …

    But that’s where the similarities exist–and not everyone coach, GM, scout, or pundit are equally good at this, just like in education. Educators can assess skills and ability, but they don’t know how successful a student will be in the future. That doesn’t make their assessment less valuable to me.

    If the Eagles go into next season as the NFC favorite, how strong a favorite are they? Even before Wentz went down last year, did you feel they were a very strong contender?

    I think they were a strong contender, at least at some point (before Wentz went down). If all their LBs come back (healthy), and they don’t lose much on their DL, they will have a one of the best front sevens–one that can dominate. (And this doesn’t count who they may add to the draft).

    We still have to see the final roster that will be going into the season, but it looks good for the Eagles right now.

    I suppose that makes them better, but do they look much better than Dallas or the Rams?

    I think there are bigger questions with both the Cowboys and Rams. How will Prescott bounce back in his third year? Is Dez going to be there and will he return to form? What will the defense look like?

    With the Rams, I have big question marks about Goff. I’m really uncertain if he’s a franchise guy. Among good QBs, I think he was one of the worst at throwing under pressure. Specifically, pressure dramatically impaired Goff’s ability to throw the football. But let’s say the Rams get this ironed out. They would also be a big favorite, too.

  65. And they’ve got Jimmy Graham. (They’re losing Jordy, but Jordy seems like a #3 WR, or #2 at best.) Depends on how their roster shakes out, they could also be strong contenders.

    If Butler can return to form, I like this.

    Man, I haven’t mentioned the Raiders. I hope they can finally find a good MLB. They also need help on the DL and the secondary.

  66. QB Shuffle

    Keenum to Broncos. If this is team friendly deal for the Broncos, I kinda like this. If they don’t have a solid OL and run game, though, I think the Broncos are in the decline, maybe a significant one.

    Cousins to Vikings. Is the deal done? if so, there’s a lot of guaranteed money, which surprise. I say this because it will not surprise me at all if Cousins plays a little less than Keenum. The key to me is the OL and run game. If the latter is dominant, then I could see Cousins having success. The thing about Cousins, to me, is that a lot things have to go right, including having a lot of support. I think he’s a better version of Andy Dalton–better in that I think Cousins has more poise, but similar in that they need a great supporting cast.

    Bridgewater (and McCown) to Jets. I’m rooting for Bridgewater. The thing for me: Can he throw the deep ball? He and Mariota seem like two of the worst QBs (among good QBs) at this.

    Bradford (and Glennon) to Arizona. This makes sense

  67. I really dislike Burfict, but he is perfect for the Raiders. Same with Ndamukung Suh. At least the old school Raiders. Honestly, I wouldn’t be thrilled if Burfict goes to the Raiders (even if they really need help at LB). I’m also cooling a lot towards Suh (for both Raiders and Seahawks).

    One of the reasons I don’t want Suh:

    To me, this creates impression he’s more interested in money and himself, versus the team and winning a Super Bowl. The vibe I get is that he was poisonous for a team. If that’s true, I don’t want him.

  68. Vikings QB situation: Cousins and Siemian. I think this is solid. Their Super Bowl hopes demand on quality of run game and defense.

    Raiders secondary: Holy heck! I didn’t realize they lost Sean Smith, TJ McCarrie, and David Amerson. That’s pretty much all of their starters, and they weren’t that good!

    Heard Jordy was going to the Raiders, but now it’s up in the air. Raiders release Crabtree. I like Jordy more than Crab. (I wouldn’t be thrilled if the Seahawks picked up Crabtree, although if he came cheap I guess I wouldn’t mind.) I like Jordy with Lockett and Baldwin, though.

    Raiders also pick up the Muscle Hamster. I don’t usually like small RBs, usually because they don’t run in a physical way that I like, and they’re not durable. Martin is an exception to the former, but not the latter. Dude can’t stay healthy.

  69. Reid,

    You sort of alluded to that if Seattle gets a decent o-line (and maybe a couple other pieces), they can contend, but it almost looks like Seattle is in rebuilding mode. They seem to now want to shop Earl Thomas. In the past, I think we agreed that Thomas, Wilson, and Sherm were on their way to a Hall of Fame career. I think we had Bennett, Wagner, and Chancellor as possible Hall of Famers as well. Of those they currently will have only Wilson and Wagner if they move Thomas. Is it realistic that Seattle is going for any of the big names like Suh or Mathieu? Maybe that are in rebuild mode.

  70. Don,

    I agree–a part of me does feel like they’re in rebuild mode–maybe not tear everything down, but more concerned about reloading and thinking more about the long term. We might be feeling this for different reasons, though. The decisions relating to Bennett and Sherm feel related to an assessment of their worth and cap management–more than a desire to rebuild. With Earl, I get the sense that either a) Earl may want more money than they can afford and/or; b) Earl kinda wants to leave. But these are guesses, especially “b.” I just don’t think the ‘Hawks would be shopping Earl if these two situations didn’t exist.

    If they lose Sheldon Richardson, a part of me feels like they should definitely go full on rebuild mode (and it sounds like they won’t be able to keep Richardson). I might be OK with trading Earl, as long as they can get really good trade value. (By the way, I doubt they can get Suh or Mattieu).

    But let’s say they sign Richardson and keep Earl. I think the window is open–if they make significant improvements to the OL and run game. I think it’s reasonable to believe some improvement will occur, but it’s iffy that this improvement will be significant enough. If they could consistently put together long drives, while minimizing short drives (especially consecutive ones), that might be enough to win. I’m not super optimistic of this scenario playing out though. And even if it does, when you look at the NFC competition, I’m not sure that will be enough.

  71. I heard the Gruden is bringing in blocking TEs. They also signed Dallas’ fullback, who was a good if not great run-blocker as well. Is he thinking of being a run-first team? What are you guys hearing?

  72. Joe Thomas retired. Do you know that in eleven seasons in the NFL, he was never on a team with a 1-0 record? No wonder he’s leaving.

    Jordy Nelson is supposedly in the Bay Area meeting with the Raiders.

  73. I know they re-signed Lee Smith, who is blocking TE, but I haven’t heard much else. (Whose the Dallas FB they brought in?)

    In other news,

    Vikings putting themselves in position to win it all. I still think it comes down to how good the run game can be. In the regular season, the run game need not be that great for the Vikings to will a lot of games. But come playoff time, without a run game that is a serious threat, a lot of pressure would be on Cousins–and he would need to do more. Even if running game is really good, he still needs to make a handful of plays while avoiding really bad ones–but I think he can do that. Can he take on a bigger burden during the playoffs? I’m iffy on that, which is why I think the run game is critical.

    Wonder if the Vikings and Eagles play in the regular season. I’d like to see that game.

  74. I think when pundits are saying blocking TE, I wonder if they are talking about Derek Carrier? He’s like 250 lbs. The FB from Dallas is Keith Smith.

  75. Haven’t heard anything about Carrier, and I don’t even know anything about him. Man, how often did Keith Smith play? Is he any good? I don’t even remember him. (The fact that the Gruden is getting a FB is a positive sign for me, though. Many, if they’re a run-first offense, I will be happy. By the way, I think I’ve said this before, but the one thing good about Gruden coming to the Raiders is that I expect Carr’s footwork and QB play will get better. I’m excited about that. I hope Mariota has coaches that will help him in those areas as well.)

  76. You right Smith didn’t play a whole lot for the Cowboys but I’ll put it to you this way. The Cowboys love, love, love to run two TE sets, and there were times they had a bountiful of RBs, but they still choose to have Smith on the active roster every week. Part of the reason is he was a good if not very good special team player, but also because Dallas loved this guy. The Raiders may have overpaid for him since he may be mostly a first down player and only an occasional second down player, but he could be a great addition if they use him.

    Gruden loves the tough guys (old school). Yet I think his tenor could be “circus-like”. But I sort of cheer for him, despite me not wanting the Raiders to do well.

    The talk is Earl Thomas asked the Cowboys to pick him up for this year last year when they played each other. Dallas has the draft picks to make it happen. I would lean to say it won’t because Dallas can’t afford or will have a hard time affording him after this year, but it’s interesting fodder. I am actually hoping Dallas goes after a talented WR via trade with their draft picks. Someone like Kenny Stills from the Dolphins, who would make a splash (pun intended), yet won’t cost as much. I think they would have a greater chance doing that then being in a bidding war with other teams for a Crabtree or Sammy Watkins.

  77. The Raiders may have overpaid for him since he may be mostly a first down player and only an occasional second down player,…,

    I tend to think he won’t be overpaid if the Raiders want to be a run-first team (and Smith is a good FB). I think in a run-first offense, a good FB is underrated. Overall, I sense people don’t see value in FBs, and that makes sense when a lot of offenses aren’t run-first. In those type of offenses, FBs aren’t that valuable, to me. If Smith is that good, i wish the Seahawks got him, but they picked up Jalston Fowler, who I thought might have had potential when I saw him play with the Titans.

    Gruden loves the tough guys (old school). Yet I think his tenor could be “circus-like”.

    I don’t get what you mean here….Oh, do you mean that Gruden talking about loving tough guys could just be part of his media schtick?

    The talk is Earl Thomas asked the Cowboys to pick him up for this year last year when they played each other.

    It’s not just talk–he said it. And I believe he reaffirmed in a later interview. Yeah, my sense is that trade isn’t going to happen with the Cowboys.

    Kenny Still makes sense; Crabtree, too, if Dez can return to form. I think KC picked up Watkins, though.

  78. In a way, I think that’s better for Don. Whatever productivity he gave the Raiders, I’m kinda happy he’s not with the Raiders. I felt he was overrated, and his drops were frustrating. (I hope Gruden improves the drops, including from AC.)

  79. Yes the Gruden’s tough-guy thing is a schtick. But even more than that, despite what I conceive as good moves (ie: get run-first personnel), I just have a feeling his time as coach may be a disaster (ie: maybe the game has passed him by or he was never great in the first place).

  80. …I just have a feeling his time as coach may be a disaster

    I think the odds are greater that this is the case. How many coaches have stayed away for a long time and came back having success? Vermeil is one that comes to mind. I don’t know if Parcells would count, but he might be another. Then again, how many coaches have stayed out for a long time, and came back to coach?

  81. Colts and Jets Make a Trade for PIcks

    Jets get Colts’ #3 pick
    Colts get Jets’ #6 pick–plus 2 second rd picks (2018), 1 second rd pick (2019)

    That looks like a heck of a trade for the Colts.

  82. I haven’t read anything explicit, but the trade itself seems to strongly suggest that the Colts are confident Luck will fully recover.

  83. If you guys read this, let me know if you think the author makes a sound and compelling argument.

  84. Well I just ordered a Chucky’s Back shirt to wear during the season, so I’m slightly more optimistic than you guys. 🙂

  85. looks like this, although when i just did a google image search for this, i found one i like better. i might have to get a second shirt.

  86. I know! I didn’t know how I felt about Gruden coming back until I saw it. Then I was like OH heck yeah. I’m in.

  87. Jags release Allen Hurns and Marcedes Lewis,

    On a cheap contract, Hurns could be a really good signing. Same with Lewis, maybe on a vet minimum contract. I know I would be pleased if Seattle or Oakland added them on those type of deals.

  88. Decker would be a solid #3 or #4 in my view. So, yeah, same feeling, I think. (I kinda would like a speed guy in the mix).

    In other news,…

    Jamale Olawale (FB) goes to the Cowboys. To me, he’s flashed at times, although more as a runner than a blocker. Don might be happy with this, although he’s never really broken out with the Raiders.

    DJ Fluker (OG) goes to Seahawks. If the deal is good, I’m happy with this pick. I want experienced, solid linemen. I understand Fluker is a solid run-blocker, so I like what that says: The priority is getting the run game going. That’s a really high priority for me as well.

  89. I think Decker at 31 or 32 can still be great and much more than a #3 or #4 guy. He would be at least a #2 and be a great possession receiver. He just has injury problems, and always seem to have hamstring issues. This last part could be completely wrong, but that’s what I feel when I think of Decker. So the Raiders could go with Decker, Cooper, and Jordy, that’s a nice trio if they can stay healthy.

    I know nothing about Olawale and didn’t even know he was on the Raiders. Now I don’t get why the Raiders didn’t keep this guy at $1 million or so instead of getting Smith for four? The Raiders better use Smith a lot even on third down as a pass catcher if he is four times better than Olawale.

  90. You thought Decker played like a #2 with the Titans last year? I didn’t really get that impression.

    Now I don’t get why the Raiders didn’t keep this guy at $1 million or so instead of getting Smith for four?

    If Smith is a good blocker–and the Raiders are going to be run-based (Please, please, please!)–then the trade would make sense. By the way, I just remembered that the new OC, Greg Olson, is more of a run-first guy, at least based on his offenses in the last two stops (Jags and Raiders before that). This and the fact that Gruden hired Cable as OL coach gives me hope that the offense will be more run-oriented. I really hope so.

  91. By the way, I’ve been meaning to ask you* about Saquan Barkley. Do you guys know a lot about him? I’ve only seen a few highlight clips. Based on those, my impression is that he’s more like a Reggie Bush type of RB–i.e., the type that relies on speed and moves. I’m not a big fan of those type of RBs. I like the bruisers, the physical RBs that can punish defenders. They can have great speed and great shifty moves (a la Sanders), but those things are secondary in my opinion. Having said that, the great RB usually have good evasive moves. Also, I prefer bigger/heavier RBs to small ones, even if the latter can run with power. (Rawls and Doug Martin are in the latter category for me.)

    To give some examples, I like a RB like Jonathan Stewart (healthy) over a RB like LeSean McCoy. McCoy isn’t afraid of contact, but that’s not really his strength. Stewart is a load, in my opinion, but his problem has been he can’t stay healthy. Someone like LeVeon Bell is great to watch, and he can be more physical than he seems, but he still doesn’t fit my preference. (To be fair, Marcus Allen doesn’t really fit my ideal, but I’d be happy to have him on my team.) Eddie Lacy showed flashes of the kind of RB I like, but he seems a little too limited in evading defenders and maybe not explosive enough. Still, if he could get back in his primed (with a decent OL), and I’d be happy to have him.

    Edit: *Mitchell, Don, or anyone

  92. I never saw Barkley play or at least I don’t remember him. However, from what I understand he’s not just a shifty guy. I believe he is supposed to be a complete package. I’m not sure what kind of pass catcher or pass protector he is, but in terms of running he is supposed to have it all. I think he wouldn’t be going so high if he was just a shifty guy. I assume in terms of running he’s an Ezekiel Elliot.

  93. I thought Decker was okay in spurts for the Titans, but he was amazing the year before with the Jets, opposite Marshall. He didn’t have a real number one to play along side with the Titans with Corey Davis being out most of the year.

  94. I assume in terms of running he’s an Ezekiel Elliot.

    I never saw highlights of Elliot in college, but in the pros, Elliot is very physical (my type of RB).

    I thought Decker was okay in spurts for the Titans, but he was amazing the year before with the Jets, opposite Marshall.

    I agree he was a legit and solid #2 with Jets (and with Broncos). But why’d the Jets let him go? Was he too expensive? I didn’t get the sense many teams were after him after the Jets, too. If he’s a legit #2, I would expect him to get picked up much sooner now.

  95. I had to look up Decker’s stats. I was wrong about a couple things. One, Decker was good three years ago. Two years ago with the Jets he only played in 3 games. And two, last year it seem Decker played in all 16 games, but I swear if he played, he was rarely 100%. So this could explain why he doesn’t have a lot of teams after him (if that’s a true statement).

  96. Don,

    I kinda was thinking the same way–I didn’t realize he had a really good year three years ago, but now when I think about it, it’s coming back to me. Last year was with the Titans; year before Fitz held out and didn’t have a great year. Year before that Fitz had a great year, as did Brandon Marshall and Decker. Teams must think that those days are over, though, otherwise, someone would get him. A solid #2/#3 type of WR has value in my view.

    In other news…

    Sherm going to the Niners sucks, and I admit I felt a little bitter. At the same time, rationally, I knew it wasn’t really his fault. The ‘Hawks released him. But having said that, I’m really disappointed by the line, “Seven years and I didn’t miss a game until my Achilles finally went. And this is what I get. At the first sign of adversity…they let me go.” I really don’t think that’s fair. I assume Sherm’s thinking specifically of Sherm himself experiencing a set back–and not thinking about the difficulty (adversity) he caused the team and coaches. To be clear, I’m not really thinking of him publicly criticizing coaches (Kris Richard and Darrell Bevell, at least), although the fact that Carroll put up with this should count a little at least. What I’m thinking of is how Sherm never seemed to think he did anything wrong. I can totally understand a player yelling or criticizing a coach or teammate, publicly or privately–but a line is crossed when you don’t think what you did is wrong (when, in my opinion, you are wrong). If this is accurate, I felt like the team should trade Sherm before last season. Indeed, I was anticipating that Sherm would be a problem in 2017–but I was wrong about that (unless something occurred that I don’t know about).

    If Sherm’s account is accurate–that the team never did ask Sherm to take a pay cut, the implication being that the team just didn’t want Sherm–then I’m wondering what I said above is accurate. I wouldn’t blame the team from wanting to move on if Sherm really didn’t believe he did anything wrong.

    But again, I think it’s kinda outrageous to imply that the team just instantly gave up on Sherm.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *