23 minutes ago, D-Shiznit said:

Huge loss for the Bucs.

Von Miller is gonna wreck some ish today. This may be his last true chance at a second ring. 

Just now, Original Sin said:

Or just just zip it   , if the post hurts your feelings  so much , remember you’re not forced to respond to all  the post here  .

Why would you equate my confusion with hurt feelings?

Since Press Conference God Jonathan Gannon seems likely to get a HC job, I've begun reading a little about the DB coach Dennard Wilson, seemingly the top internal choice to become DC. Cut his coaching teeth under Gregg Williams. That style of defense seems much more appealing to fans. I wonder where his tendencies would lean and how much of the scheme he'd change up.

20 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

I can envision an offseason where the Eagles trade for Wilson, sign Allen Robinson, add a pass rusher and a safety somewhere. Probably not elite level, but for depth.

I think an Eagles team with Wilson, another high quality WR like Robinson, and adding depth elsewhere could compete with anyone in the NFC. The Eagles roster isn't that bad. Especially on offense. They really have no big needs on offense outside of QB and one more WR.

If you sign Wilson and a top receiver, that's it. That's all your cap space and top draft picks. So our offense gets better, but by how much? We scored 444 points this year. The best Wilson has ever done in his career is 459. The Chiefs scored 480 points. Does adding Wilson make us better than Mahomes and the Chiefs? Probably not, but let's say Wilson has a career year and we do score an extra 36 points. Is that enough?

This year we gave up 385 points, which was 18th in the league. And we did that being largely healthy with an aging roster. If we don't add a serious amount of young talent, that number is likely to get worse. How many points will we give up? 420 is not an unreasonable guess. We gave up that many in 2020, and we will have many of the same guys on the defense, but two years older.

So what did your trade get us? 36 more points on offense, and 35 more points conceded on defense. And that's probably a best case scenario. That's assuming Wilson has a career year and can put up points with the best teams in the league.

Or we could just be happy scoring 444 points again (which could hardly be considered a fluke), and we could use our draft picks to boost the defense and try to give up fewer points, which is the biggest actual problem that we have, and will continue to have if we don't do something about it.  

 

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

Why would you equate my confusion with hurt feelings?

If you’re so easily confused , I can’t help you  .

Just now, Original Sin said:

If you’re so easily confused , I can’t help you  .

Then allow me to assist in your confusion.  

https://www.reddit.com/r/buccaneers/

4 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

If you sign Wilson and a top receiver, that's it. That's all your cap space and top draft picks. So our offense gets better, but by how much? We scored 444 points this year. The best Wilson has ever done in his career is 459. The Chiefs scored 480 points. Does adding Wilson make us better than Mahomes and the Chiefs? Probably not, but let's say Wilson has a career year and we do score an extra 36 points. Is that enough?

This year we gave up 385 points, which was 18th in the league. And we did that being largely healthy with an aging roster. If we don't add a serious amount of young talent, that number is likely to get worse. How many points will we give up? 420 is not an unreasonable guess. We gave up that many in 2020, and we will have many of the same guys on the defense, but two years older.

So what did your trade get us? 36 more points on offense, and 35 more points conceded on defense. And that's probably a best case scenario. That's assuming Wilson has a career year and can put up points with the best teams in the league.

Or we could just be happy scoring 444 points again (which could hardly be considered a fluke), and we could use our draft picks to boost the defense and try to give up fewer points, which is the biggest actual problem that we have, and will continue to have if we don't do something about it.  

 

 

 

 

16 and -1.  Those are my numbers for the offense.

I’d like 16 more points in the wild card round and 1 fewer video clip of the opposing coaches laughing at our QB.

Ideally, a different QB could help with those numbers.

1 minute ago, jsb235 said:

If you sign Wilson and a top receiver, that's it. That's all your cap space and top draft picks. So our offense gets better, but by how much? We scored 444 points this year. The best Wilson has ever done in his career is 459. The Chiefs scored 480 points. Does adding Wilson make us better than Mahomes and the Chiefs? Probably not, but let's say Wilson has a career year and we do score an extra 36 points. Is that enough?

This year we gave up 385 points, which was 18th in the league. And we did that being largely healthy with an aging roster. If we don't add a serious amount of young talent, that number is likely to get worse. How many points will we give up? 420 is not an unreasonable guess. We gave up that many in 2020, and we will have many of the same guys on the defense, but two years older.

So what did your trade get us? 36 more points on offense, and 35 more points conceded on defense. And that's probably a best case scenario. That's assuming Wilson has a career year and can put up points with the best teams in the league.

Or we could just be happy scoring 444 points again (which could hardly be considered a fluke), and we could use our draft picks to boost the defense and try to give up fewer points, which is the biggest actual problem that we have, and will continue to have if we don't do something about it.  

 

 

 

 

That may not be it. Howie would figure out a way to move numbers around to get them enough cap space to do whatever. The Eagles were like 30+ million over the cap last offseason and somehow wound up like 20 million under.

As for the offense, I think it would be elite with Wilson, and I think the main issue with the defense was scheme, not personnel. I don't think better scheme would have made the defense elite, but it would've been more respectable.

27 minutes ago, Original Sin said:

As big a loss , is Bucs without 2 of their top 4 WOs , Perriman and Grayson out , they are WO 2 and 3 after Evans

need the young guys to step up , Johnson, Miller and Darden 

You don't need a space before a comma, sir. This post almost gave me a headache.

1 hour ago, greend said:

That said, no I don't want Jimmy G

I was fine with him as a stopgap but last night changed my mind. He had some really stupid decisions 

50 minutes ago, MillerTime said:

My fault

 

Why would he consider retirement? Unless he's getting bored or wants to do something else

46 minutes ago, RLC said:

The Packers might have to outright cut Rodgers too, especially if they have to hold onto Adams on the franchise tag. With Adams on the tag, they're 60M over the cap. If they cut both Smiths, Cobb, Amos and Turner...that's only 45M of savings. They'd still have to clear 15M with extensions/restructures after losing all those players. Of course, they could give massive extensions to Smith, Smith, Amos, etc. to lower the cap number...but then they don't have more $ to help out Love.

Packers are in the same spot as us last year...but without a SB ring.

Adams has given off vibes from interviews that he'd follow Rodgers

Not sure if a team could afford both of them though

54 minutes ago, MillerTime said:

My fault

 

He'll be back....especially if he doesnt win a SB.  He wants to go out on top.

Looking forward to Stafford-Brady battling it out. Both teams itching to host the NFCCG. Should be epic.

'If you don't give a Ram, we don't give a Buc!'

7 minutes ago, 315Eagles said:

He'll be back....especially if he doesnt win a SB.  He wants to go out on top.

I think he will be back just because the NFC landscape. If Rogers is traded they’re gonna do it and send him off to an AFC team. Then if Russell Wilson is also treated I’m guessing it’s likely going to be to an AFC team. If you take both of those guys out of the NFC that leaves you with the next three best quarterbacks of Matt Stafford, Kyler Murray and Dak Prescott. The rams would likely be the biggest competition. Could argue they’re not gonna be as good next year cause Odell Beckham and Von Miller might not be back. And whitworth might also retire. If i am Brady with the team I could have returning to the Bucs I’m coming back because I think I can win another at least NFC championship and get to another super bowl. 

10 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

I was fine with him as a stopgap but last night changed my mind. He had some really stupid decisions 

Why would he consider retirement? Unless he's getting bored or wants to do something else

Adams has given off vibes from interviews that he'd follow Rodgers

Not sure if a team could afford both of them though

More time to be home plowing Giselle. 

1 hour ago, ManuManu said:

 

If he really "wowed" these teams he would have been hired already. 

I'm starting to think the Eagles FO is putting out these rumors hoping he lands a job so they dont have to fire him.

1 minute ago, DeathByEagle said:

If he really "wowed" these teams he would have been hired already. 

I'm starting to think the Eagles FO is putting out these rumors hoping he lands a job so they dont have to fire him.

That is some Howie-level diabolical thinking. I love it. 

2 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

That may not be it. Howie would figure out a way to move numbers around to get them enough cap space to do whatever. The Eagles were like 30+ million over the cap last offseason and somehow wound up like 20 million under.

As for the offense, I think it would be elite with Wilson, and I think the main issue with the defense was scheme, not personnel. I don't think better scheme would have made the defense elite, but it would've been more respectable.

The defense was bad in 2020 under Schwartz and bad in 2021 under Gannon. So I doubt changing the scheme a third time is suddenly going to make TJ Edwards and Marcus Epps into great players. If anything, having to start players like that is always going to limit what you can do on defense, not expand it.

And, ultimately, that's the decision. Get better on offense or get better on defense. They can't do both because the price of getting better on offense is extremely high. And unless we get better on defense, we are dead in the water. Every team left in the playoffs gave up fewer points than we did this year, and we are trending in the wrong direction.

Aaron Rodgers = NFL's biggest playoff choke artist

31 minutes ago, Saltpeter said:

Since Press Conference God Jonathan Gannon seems likely to get a HC job, I've begun reading a little about the DB coach Dennard Wilson, seemingly the top internal choice to become DC. Cut his coaching teeth under Gregg Williams. That style of defense seems much more appealing to fans. I wonder where his tendencies would lean and how much of the scheme he'd change up.

Would changing the whole D help, it can only get better 

Gannon’s eval is interesting.

Look, our defense doesn’t have much talent.  We don’t have a lot of disruptive players to move around the defense in ways that will confuse QB’s and create problems.  With the experience level of our defense, if you move guys around and try to get too cute, you are going to give up a ton of head scratching, ugly, big plays (think McDermott in his brief stint as our DC).

Fans want to see Gannon do something fun and exotic that puts his signature on things.  Not only does he lack the talent to do that, but in this era of NFL football, there aren’t really any defensive schemes or DCs with the ability to do that.  Gannon just played it conservative and close to the vest all year.

Now, I get it.  He never even bothered to try something different or take a crack with a 5th rusher when we were already helpless.  Things should have been a little more dynamic and creative.

Interestingly…and the cover schemes may be different…but philosophically, Gannon was very similar to Schwartz.  Rush with 4, sit back, prevent big plays, don’t blitz, and try to keep it respectable with minimal explosive talent.  

40 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

The only issue with trading him at this moment is the last two years he’s been injury prone. So you’re not selling him at a peak value. You’re selling him on a decline value because he’s missed so many games the last two years with major injuries. I’m guessing they probably could still get decent value for him because the league is in need of good offensive lineman. But it’s not gonna be as high as some think due to his injury circumstance 

Good points. He missed most of this season. He did play 9 games in 2020.

I still think a reasonable 2 year extension works. We'd have Driscoll/Herbig as backups with that timeline too.

10 minutes ago, T-1000 said:

Aaron Rodgers = NFL's biggest playoff choke artist

False. That would be the Dallas Cowboys. 

13 minutes ago, RLC said:

Good points. He missed most of this season. He did play 9 games in 2020.

I still think a reasonable 2 year extension works. We'd have Driscoll/Herbig as backups with that timeline too.

To be honest I’d rather just give him an extension for two years like you’re saying. And let him just play it out and over that period of time you find yourself a guard to groom to eventually replace him. I think they’re gonna do that at tackle. I said that for a while they would trade Dillard and take a kid in the middle round that stoutland likes and groom him to eventually be try to be the replacement for Johnson. And at worse he could be at least a swing tackle

28 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

More time to be home plowing Giselle. 

He's probably doing that during camp lol

He's been in the league for a long time. How many times in the past 5 years has a defense surprised him with something he hasn't seen already?

In general in sports, not just the NFL, I think "playoff clutchness" is one of the most inexact, unscientific, overrated things in all of sports.

The sample sizes are going to always be smaller for one. You're going to play better teams. So I'd venture to guess that if every player in sports had their playoff sample sizes stretched out, almost all their numbers would be worse than regular season because they're playing better coaches, teams, and defenses.

Now there are some players who don't handle pressure well. But I think when you pop on a game you can see if a guy is nervous, tight, or pressing. Never got that impression from Rodgers in the playoffs. He didn't even have a turnover yesterday. In some of Peyton Manning's big games you'd see him try to force the ball into triple coverage and it come back to bite him.

Did people honestly watch the game and think Rodgers was awful? I just didn't get that impression. Like, I wasn't watching the game going "jesus, he had ____ wide open and freaking missed him, what are you doing, Rodgers?" or him throw up some really dumb pass like Kyler Murray did against the Rams last weekend where he looked overwhelmed. The Packers simply got beat. And sometimes the opportunities just aren't there based on circumstance to carry your team to a win.