4 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

I think is where you debate bringing back Peters. Should you just be rolling with the Mailata’s of the team?

Agree... not sure we can say that anywhere else though.  So in essence,  it's exactly like a rebuild year except for Peters.

4 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

I think is where you debate bringing back Peters. Should you just be rolling with the Mailata’s of the team?

We had a "comedy" of BS at the time. We were scrambling for a RG then, Peters knows this team well, we let him test the waters and brought him back to play ROG, then the LOT issues when we didn't know if Mailata was ready, so we caved to Peters higher pay demands. The silver lining for me is,through this pain and suffering,we have found guys that can PLAY, because we had no choices left but to play them. If everything had gone smoothly, Mailiata would still be a BU only and never played an NFL snap. Now we know what we have! Same with our WR's, they were forced into action and we found out they had some talent(I'm glad because that's why you get them lol). Scott would have remained as a BU or on the PS if he had not been pressed into service, so IMO when someone says "we need to rebuild". I feel we already are, because basically that's what we have been doing all season. Finding future players, and that's the object isn't it? So, they are not "stars",but they can play and I am glad we found out because now we know what we have

4 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

It seems like it’s conditioning, maybe diet and a big one is the misdiagnosis and mismanagement of injuries. I mean, Lane  missed the last four games of LAST season with his injury. Then had surgery during TC this year. Still dealing with it. That’s just a missed diagnosis. Probably even lead to him injuring his knee. I have no proof the ankle lead to the knee....but these things can lead to such problems.

I brought up turf at the Linc. I would be interested to know if the majority of our injuries are HOME games and if bad turf has any bearing on that. I can't say if it does or not, but with these annual SAME issues,I would leave no rock unturned. I would want that reviewed. We need to do whatever it takes to stop the annual injury fiasco

Off topic-proud papa. My daughter works 12-14 hour days as a store manager. She also takes care of house, 3 kids, her hubby(kid 4), 2 dogs and 3 cats and today she goes for her insurance license. I would get so much done with 2% of her energy.

Just now, GreenbleedinNC said:

 We need to do whatever it takes to stop the annual injury fiasco

I think that's going to happen. Our defense was largely healthy this year. And I think there will be an influx of young talent in the draft next year to replace some aging players. On offense, DJax, Peters and Jeffery aren't going to be here next year, and we could also lose Kelce to retirement and Ertz to a trade. So by getting younger we will have less of a problem with injuries.

 

4 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Yeah, F that! If I want to go on a bike ride I shouldn’t have to wear a freakin mask. I put one on to go in stores. But telling me I have to wear a mask while riding in a car by myself....that’s just stupid. 

There was a guy in Calif who was arrested and jailed for paddle boarding 4 miles out in the pacific with no mask. Someone called the Coast Guard on him lmfao. What's next, telling you when you're allowed take a dump?

16 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Agree... not sure we can say that anywhere else though.  So in essence,  it's exactly like a rebuild year except for Peters.

IDK tough to say for me. A rebuild is like what they did in Miami, get rid of basically everyone, change QB's and start all  over, I would tend to call us "transitioning" from old to new. So I suppose it depends on your definition

14 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

I think that's going to happen. Our defense was largely healthy this year. And I think there will be an influx of young talent in the draft next year to replace some aging players. On offense, DJax, Peters and Jeffery aren't going to be here next year, and we could also lose Kelce to retirement and Ertz to a trade. So by getting younger we will have less of a problem with injuries.

 

I hope so, so far our young offensive guys are staying on the field. Fingers crossed we can keep them playing the rest of the year. My first draft pick is a DT. I want to get that domination factor back we had once. Now though,all the rules to protect QB's means there may be a slight shift in what D line players you choose. We don't need 12 roughing penalties per game, but I would still opt for as many QB pressures as we can get, so my round 1 pick is Twyman which I presented vid of earlier

If Parons(LB) falls to us and we don't take him though, we are dumber than 5 boxes of rocks. But I think alot of teams would move for him. DL, LB in any order are my first 2 if it's me

18 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Why would Hicks sign for less? He just finished his rookie contract. Hadn’t made any real money yet. I wouldn’t pass on that first big payday. It’s different once you’ve made millions. Then you can afford to be more choosy.

Problem is we don't know for sure. Was he even offered 7.5 mil per year for 3-4 years? Yes he signed for 9 AFTER we released him. If we offered him a contract before he was released/ or hit FA (not sure which), There is no reason to think he wouldn't sign. After all, he was hurt most of the time he was here.....

1 minute ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

If Parons(LB) falls to us and we don't take him though, we are dumber than 5 boxes of rocks. But I think alot of teams would move for him. DL, LB in any order are my first 2 if it's me

He looks like a top 5 pick, so we likely won't be high enough to get him. Plus, the problem with a player like that is that his strengths aren't really what we are looking for. He is attractive because he can cover tight ends and rush the passer. But we don't use our LBs to rush the passer or cover tight ends. So essentially we would be adding him to give us the same production we are now getting out of Alex Singleton. So unless we change our scheme, we would be better off grabbing a safety. dlineman or corner.

I know everyone wants us to get a linebacker because they think it would solve our problems, but it won't. We don't use our linebackers the way other teams use them. If we want to get more pressure on the qb, we have to add a dlineman. If we want to stop tight ends from killing us, we need to add a safety. If we want to stop qbs from picking us apart, we have to add a corner.

Adding a linebacker won't do any of that.  

JSB,love most of your analytics/stats and the effort your put in for them. I am no good at that. I tend to approach things differently. So,I will put you on the hot seat for your opinion. There is no right or wrong. Everyone here wants the best for this team. So discounting THIS year,you are the main man. WHO,right now is on your team NEXT year for sure(aka locks). No rush, but I would be interested in your commentary. I mean besides the obvious guys like Wentz and Sanders. No rush,but I would appreciate your views

9 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

He looks like a top 5 pick, so we likely won't be high enough to get him. Plus, the problem with a player like that is that his strengths aren't really what we are looking for. He is attractive because he can cover tight ends and rush the passer. But we don't use our LBs to rush the passer or cover tight ends. So essentially we would be adding him to give us the same production we are now getting out of Alex Singleton. So unless we change our scheme, we would be better off grabbing a safety. dlineman or corner.

I know everyone wants us to get a linebacker because they think it would solve our problems, but it won't. We don't use our linebackers the way other teams use them. If we want to get more pressure on the qb, we have to add a dlineman. If we want to stop tight ends from killing us, we need to add a safety. If we want to stop qbs from picking us apart, we have to add a corner.

Adding a linebacker won't do any of that.  

I'm all for adding a CB, but you know we are not particularly good at those, nor do we try. In my last mock I had Twyman(DT) then Surratt(LB). IDK where Parsons goes,if there is a QB run he could fall into the top 10. Depending how terrible we are we could pick at 9, and being a "homer" I can't rule him out because Howie loves his homers. I had right now Twyman,then Surratt, then I would look at CB,but in my last draft terrance marshall(WR) was there and I could not pass on him. This is why I said we need a 4th desperatly. or trade our 6's to move into 4. There are still a few quality CB's in round 4. If Marshall is gone,then of course I look at CB there. I suppose we could trade Ertz for a 4th. I think that's good value at this point

8 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

He looks like a top 5 pick, so we likely won't be high enough to get him. Plus, the problem with a player like that is that his strengths aren't really what we are looking for. He is attractive because he can cover tight ends and rush the passer. But we don't use our LBs to rush the passer or cover tight ends. So essentially we would be adding him to give us the same production we are now getting out of Alex Singleton. So unless we change our scheme, we would be better off grabbing a safety. dlineman or corner.

I know everyone wants us to get a linebacker because they think it would solve our problems, but it won't. We don't use our linebackers the way other teams use them. If we want to get more pressure on the qb, we have to add a dlineman. If we want to stop tight ends from killing us, we need to add a safety. If we want to stop qbs from picking us apart, we have to add a corner.

Adding a linebacker won't do any of that.  

It may be that the reason we don't use our Linebackers like that is because the linebackers we have cannot do that..... Just imagine if we did. Maybe Swartz would be able to scheme more. Not saying he would, but at least give him the option to do so before we condemn him

13 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

He looks like a top 5 pick, so we likely won't be high enough to get him. Plus, the problem with a player like that is that his strengths aren't really what we are looking for. He is attractive because he can cover tight ends and rush the passer. But we don't use our LBs to rush the passer or cover tight ends. So essentially we would be adding him to give us the same production we are now getting out of Alex Singleton. So unless we change our scheme, we would be better off grabbing a safety. dlineman or corner.

I know everyone wants us to get a linebacker because they think it would solve our problems, but it won't. We don't use our linebackers the way other teams use them. If we want to get more pressure on the qb, we have to add a dlineman. If we want to stop tight ends from killing us, we need to add a safety. If we want to stop qbs from picking us apart, we have to add a corner.

Adding a linebacker won't do any of that.  

I wanted to add this. Maybe we don't use LB's to rush the passer because who we have don't have the skills to do it?? IDK what's in Schwartz's head, but possibly if we had the talent to do it,we would blitz more. Just sayin

3 minutes ago, stine said:

It may be that the reason we don't use our Linebackers like that is because the linebackers we have cannot do that..... Just imagine if we did. Maybe Swartz would be able to scheme more. Not saying he would, but at least give him the option to do so before we condemn him

WOW we had exactly the same thoughts Stine-WILD lol

On 11/18/2020 at 2:19 AM, GreenbleedinNC said:

21: R1 P21 DL Jaylen Twyman - Pittsburgh

53: R2 P21 LB Chazz Surratt - North Carolina

84: R3 P20 WR Terrace Marshall Jr. - LSU

145: R5 P4 CB Jaycee Horn - South Carolina

162: R5 P21 S James Wiggins - Cincinnati

199: R6 P20 RB Rakeem Boyd - Arkansas

215: R6 P36 G Kevin Jarvis - Michigan State

219: R6 P40 C Drake Jackson - Kentucky

222: R6 P43 WR Corey Sutton - Appalachian State

243: R7 P21 TE Jack Stolls - Nebraska

Here was my last mock. FWIW(Joe LOVES THESE!!!!!) lmfao. The round 6's are up for discussion,but if I had my way, I would be fine with the first 5 (I need more research on Wiggins). BTW I feel there is NO way we pick at 21(we aren't that good),so these players should be around or at least be gettable. I think Twyman goes well before 21 though,so that could be an issue

4 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

JSB,love most of your analytics/stats and the effort your put in for them. I am no good at that. I tend to approach things differently. So,I will put you on the hot seat for your opinion. There is no right or wrong. Everyone here wants the best for this team. So discounting THIS year,you are the main man. WHO,right now is on your team NEXT year for sure(aka locks). No rush, but I would be interested in your commentary. I mean besides the obvious guys like Wentz and Sanders. No rush,but I would appreciate your views

I think the offense is pretty much set. Subtract Peters, Jeffery and Djax. But everyone else is going to come back and compete for jobs. I can see developmental guys at RB, TE and QB. The big question is whether or not Ertz comes back or Kelce retires. But their replacements are likely on the roster. I think we have a good group of young guys, and we will see an improvement from this year to next.

Defense is where it gets tricky. They have decisions to make on Graham, Malik Jackson, Barnett and Mills. Cox, Slay, McLeod and Hargrave are here due to their contracts. To me, those are the only four starters set in stone. My guess is Graham will be back. After that, it's hard to say. I like Singleton and Edwards, but if they went after two new linebackers, it wouldn't surprise me. I could see three new starters in the secondary. Or they could bring everyone back.

A lot depends on if they bring Schwartz back, which I don't think will happen. And if he goes, we could have a vastly different look on defense next year. But if he stays, I think it will look pretty much the same.

 

 

5 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

I think the offense is pretty much set. Subtract Peters, Jeffery and Djax. But everyone else is going to come back and compete for jobs. I can see developmental guys at RB, TE and QB. The big question is whether or not Ertz comes back or Kelce retires. But their replacements are likely on the roster. I think we have a good group of young guys, and we will see an improvement from this year to next.

Defense is where it gets tricky. They have decisions to make on Graham, Malik Jackson, Barnett and Mills. Cox, Slay, McLeod and Hargrave are here due to their contracts. To me, those are the only four starters set in stone. My guess is Graham will be back. After that, it's hard to say. I like Singleton and Edwards, but if they went after two new linebackers, it wouldn't surprise me. I could see three new starters in the secondary. Or they could bring everyone back.

A lot depends on if they bring Schwartz back, which I don't think will happen. And if he goes, we could have a vastly different look on defense next year. But if he stays, I think it will look pretty much the same.

 

 

Who are your starting O linemen? (Besides Lane) We ran a 43,then changed to the 34 (Barwin). He became immaterial when we went back to the 43. I'm wondering which D is better for us going forward. With a 34 of course you'd need top notch rushers, but some teams are very effective with it

16 minutes ago, stine said:

It may be that the reason we don't use our Linebackers like that is because the linebackers we have cannot do that..... Just imagine if we did. Maybe Swartz would be able to scheme more. Not saying he would, but at least give him the option to do so before we condemn him

We had Kendricks, whose strength was blitzing, and we never blitzed him. So I don't think it was the player, but rather Schwartz.

His style has been pretty much the same over the years, which is to generate pressure using the wide 9. The one big change he and many other coordinators have made is to use nickel as the base defense and let the SS cover the primary tight end. So in a lot of ways LB has been devalued across the league.

4 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Who are your starting O linemen? (Besides Lane) We ran a 43,then changed to the 34 (Barwin). He became immaterial when we went back to the 43. I'm wondering which D is better for us going forward. With a 34 of course you'd need top notch rushers, but some teams are very effective with it

Starting oline would be Mailata/Dillard-Herbig-Seumalo-Brooks-Lane (assuming Kelce retires.) Opeta, Driscoll, Pryor and the loser of the Mailata/Dillard battle for LT would be the reserves.

I don't see us changing to a 3-4. We have too much invested in the dline to change things. Plus, we weren't great at a 3-4 when we tried it, so I don't think the owner would go for it. 

2 hours ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

I think we need to check out everything. How long has it been since the turf was changed at the Linc? Alot of injuries happen with inferior turf(ankles and what have you). It just seems we suffer more than most,and we need to figure this out pronto 

Oh I agree. I mean didn't they change the medical team? But have they changed the S&C team recently?

1 hour ago, jsb235 said:

Starting oline would be Mailata/Dillard-Herbig-Seumalo-Brooks-Lane (assuming Kelce retires.) Opeta, Driscoll, Pryor and the loser of the Mailata/Dillard battle for LT would be the reserves.

I don't see us changing to a 3-4. We have too much invested in the dline to change things. Plus, we weren't great at a 3-4 when we tried it, so I don't think the owner would go for it. 

I mean honestly speak I agree with most of this OL for sure and I don’t see us making a switch to a 34 from the 43 but if we were going to overhaul our D and make changes think this is the off-season to do so.

Reason we could go 34 though if we fired Schwartz.
Signed a NT this off-season in Hargrave 

Cox/Malik would make great 34 DEs

Barnett/Graham could both be on there way out in the off-season. Sweat could be a serviceable 34 OLB

Edwards/Singletary likely better suited as 34 ILBs over LBs in a 43. 

Also just to add two names I’d look strongly into if they got fired.

A. Zimmer from the Vikings good chance he gets fired be jumping up and down to land him as our DC if we moved on from Schwartz
 

B. If we look to add a legit OC I’d consider Anthony Lynn Chargers HC could be on the hot seat on his way out but I’ve really enjoyed his O and the things he has been doing with Herbert(who I think is very similar to Wentz)

2 hours ago, jsb235 said:

We had Kendricks, whose strength was blitzing, and we never blitzed him. So I don't think it was the player, but rather Schwartz.

His style has been pretty much the same over the years, which is to generate pressure using the wide 9. The one big change he and many other coordinators have made is to use nickel as the base defense and let the SS cover the primary tight end. So in a lot of ways LB has been devalued across the league.

Although I agree that he does not tend to blitz, We have not been generating as much pressure as he likes, so he has been blitzing more this year. To have an all around LB such as parsons adds to the options is all I am saying. The dude could play every down and is fast enough to cover RB's and TE's. Plus he has instincts that our LB's lack. Maybe he would not be used right, or maybe Swartz would love to have the options to use him as needed. I don't know for sure. But you just don't draft a guy if you know he will upgrade that position..... Swartz may be gone after this year anyway.....

3 hours ago, stine said:

Problem is we don't know for sure. Was he even offered 7.5 mil per year for 3-4 years? Yes he signed for 9 AFTER we released him. If we offered him a contract before he was released/ or hit FA (not sure which), There is no reason to think he wouldn't sign. After all, he was hurt most of the time he was here.....

He hit FA