PBF81

So the last catch that he made here, for example, is a routine catch as you imply? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axzo6SP7hSE I also thought that his first TD catch, the negated one, was an exceptional non-routine catch as well, and one that not every WR makes. I'd like to find a video clip of that "drop," particularly since it wasn't catalogued as a drop by the league.

And to think, if we could simply have put up 26 points against a team featuring the 12th ranked scoring defense ...

Wasn't Ford signed for that reason?

Again, my question was ... Your response above. OK then, from what I'm reading, to date, the answer to the question is zero, barring the K, right? As to Groot, had his play over the first four games last season continued he'd have been not only a 1st-team, but All-Pro as well, and would have finished tied for 2nd in sacks a mere 2.5 sacks behind Bosa, 2nd in TFLs and tied for 14th in QBHits. But he waned and went the opposite direction over the last dozen games, even in his next four before his injury. AKA, ... didn't even approach happening. If Oliver continues his play linearly, then he'll have exceeded Aaron Donald's 2nd best season, and logged more TFLs than Donald ever logged, by 5, and will have exceeded Donald's QBHits numbers in all but 3 seasons. Are you truly optimistic that that even comes close to occurring? While I'd be as excited as you to see this, the reality is that it's very unlikely to occur. Oliver's had four seasons to post elite numbers and he's never come close. Both players have been plagued with significant inconsistency in their game-to-game play. In fairness Groot is only in his second season and did suffer an injury last season, but having said that, the phrase "injury prone" shouldn't be not of a concern re: him. And frankly, if they do, then that takes care of your hesitation regarding the requisite "elite players required to win the Super Bowl," right? In fact, given their level of play to date, why do concerns even exist then if they're both playing at elite levels? I mean to date an "elite DT" and an "elite DE"? That's what the going opinion here is now. So you'd give a GM 8 seasons, AFTER drafting a generational talent like Allen, who would then be 30 going into that next season, with an entirely new GM? "Starters in the NFL" isn't the standard here, by your definition it's "elite players." Moss is a starter. Zay Jones is a starter. Brown is a starter. Cook's a starter. Davis is a starter and he's persona non grata here. LOL We definitely have two different standards. I would never even consider keeping a GM beyond five years if he hasn't produced a single elite player, the likes of which you state that we need 4-5 of to win a Super Bowl, particularly with a generational talent like Allen then merely rotting on the vine. To wit, if 4-5 elite players are needed, and if you want to avoid serious cap issues, you'll need to draft at least 3 of them. One every 7 or 8 seasons will never see more than 2 on the field at the same time. You said this; Since our discussion revolves around his drafts, how so? I include his peers as the GMs of the teams that have been the most uniformly competitive over the past several seasons, not the GM of the Falcons, Texans, or Broncos. He's produced absolutely zero "elite players" in his drafts after his very first pick of Allen, which was a successful poke-n-hope for Allen, pending Groot & Oliver. Which GMs havent produced more than a single elite player in the last five drafts of theirs from '18 to '22? And for peers," again, let's consider the teams that have been our primary rivals over the past three seasons, namely KC, Philly, the Rams, Bengals, Niners for example. AKA, teams that we'd need to beat if we want our elusive Lombardi. OK, but not fair to Davis to credit it as a drop then either given the stigma that exists for him, and in that game, particularly given his very significant contributions to 2 TD drives. Just sayin'.

OK, then let's take this discussion a little further. You originally said, leading to my post above, that a team typically needs 4-5 elite players to win a Super Bowl. Given that neither Milano nor White were drafted by Beane, and those are the two players that everyone's crying about the most, and given that Jones wasn't a Beane draftee either, who then are the players that Beane has drafted, apart from Allen of course, that are elite and that therefore we'd need to win a Super Bowl? Because if one looks through our list of draftees by Beane, none match your description of being "elite." So the follow-on question is then, at what point does one suggest that Beane simply isn't cutting it in that way and that perhaps it's time for a change? You are not entirely loathe to criticize Beane, you should know me well enough to recognize sarcasm, but I've also never heard you suggest that perhaps he's not up to the task at hand. What many people see is a team that is in fact succeeding largely due to the very high-risk/high-reward drafting of Allen, an expensive market-priced WR as a free agent, and draftees that were here upon Beane's arrival. I'm curious what your answers to those questions are, without hedging. ... in all sincerety. And by all means, if you think that he's drafted an elite player since his very first selection upon arriving, who is that player? The most successful teams in the league are drafting them. Why aren't we. (rhetorical) It seems like an obvious answer to me. Gotta be another, that one didn't end the drive though.

Which drive was it that ended on a Davis drop, I can't find it? Was just looking. He's got one drop this season, I'm assuming, per this, that it was in this game.

Disagree as you may, they allowed their 4th most 1st-Downs, 4th most total yards, and 5th most passing yards that they did all season in the Super Bowl. The Eagles were also in the game due to offense. The total for that game was 73. Not sure how any one claims that defense won it. Three of the Chiefs' scoring drives were 75 yards, another was 66 yards. The Eagles had three 75s, a 68, and a 60. Without that defensive TD, which was one play, the Eagles win it, ... because of their Offense.

I piss in my own, it saves time. 😏😉 Hardly angry, I'm one of the least emotional people out there in that way. Simply not afraid to state the obvious, or what should be obvious.

Well, perhaps you're right, we'll see. But it also helps if your coaching staff can make optimal use of the offensive players that you do have. We haven't seen that on McD's watch. Having said that however, Jones isn't elite and neither Milano nor White were drafted by Beane. While you're loathe to criticize Beane, that sounds 100% like #Beanethingz. We can't keep claiming what you just said, then insulating Beane from the discussion about it. That makes zero sense.

We've been both spoiled and unhealthily enamored with having a #1/#2 Defense. Defense isn't what wins Super Bowls in this league now, Offense is! Just look at the last three winners and look at the scores for the winning teams generally speaking. Hell, look at our playoff exits. Having said that, our offense is fine and if there's any question there, it's our ability to, or lack thereof being more accurate, to out coach the opposing DC/HC to be able to capitalize against the better, read playoff caliber, teams. Using the proper personnel, in the right situations, and not routinely calling plays that are blatantly destined to lose yards or fall short in key situations, is requisite. We have the talent to set a new franchise record for scoring, and in no small way! We finally have a solid OL. We can win a Championship with a middle of the road D just like KC did last season. If anything's going to prevent that, apart from injuries on Offense, it's coaching. We have a defensive-minded coach when we need an offensive-minded one. And yes Gunner, I realize you disagree. 🤨😉

And our head coach is apparently too disconnected from anything offensively speaking that he cannot assist.

Norton!! ... It should hardly be worrisome, an OC that apart from two seasons with Allen carrying him, his offenses in going on 8 other seasons as OC and HC have perpetually challenged for league worst.

Yeah, just saw him myself coincidentally. He's 3rd in the league in Rushing Yards, tied for 10th in Rushing TDs, 3rd in Rushing 1st-Downs, 9th among RBs for YPC, and perhaps most importantly 3rd in Carries. Goes to show you what happens if you give a RB 20 carries a game instead of three RBs 4, 5, or 6 apiece in our idiotic keep players fresh garbage MO.

Careful now, one of our wins. It's a real barnburned of a game I see. 180 yards and 3 points by both teams combined through a third of the game. The refs really need to slow things down, it's getting out of control.

Come on now, talk about hyperbole. Rousseau will be back, right? He was questionable this past weekend. If not, then AJE who's coming off of a career game. Ford starts in place of Jones. Von Miller's available. LB, oh well, poor planning has left us with Bernard, Dodson, and the rookie Williams but we have three starters. Our secondary, Poyer and Hyde are fine, ... Benford come back? Dane Jackson. We're playing the Giants which struggle to put up two TDs regularly. The worst scoring team against them was Seattle who put up 24. If this game is a problem then what to even say. And maybe Oliver will just have to play 75% or more of the snaps for once.

Let's stop panicking. Jumpin' Junipers! On taht list the only ones out more than for a few games are Jones and Milano. We have DL depth. Unfortunately the dropoff w/o Milano is enormous. White hasn't been available in well over a year and the few instances when he has been it's been to below-average standards.

I thought that your name made that all the more funny.

An elite guard and center on D? Hmmm ... Come on now, you know that we were talking about the D here. But for the record, you're saying now that we're incapable of having the #1 Offense because of our OL then? Help me understand.

And McD's of no use, ... which is a clue as to potential future improvement. LOL Given that it's the O that needs to be running optimally, might make sense to get someone that knows how to do that, rather than an OC that doesn't and head coach that, apparently, given how any and all criticism for offensive performance deflects off of him, is incapable of addressing the situation to assist said OC.

Well, everyone grossly overrated Sherfield coming here. Can't speak to Harty, but he's on pace to post his second best season in five seasons, ... not that that's a high bar or anything though. Sherfield's on pace to do about what he's done in four of his five seasons. Meanwhile, in Miami, his replacement, Berrios, is on pace to outperform his numbers from last season. FWIW

If KC can do it with only one player that logged more than 6 sacks and only one player that made the Pro-Bowl on D, and on 11 total team INTs and not one DB that logged more than 3, and a defensive roster of relative mediocrity other than for Chris Jones, ranking DFL in pass D, and with only Kelce, Smith-Shuster, and Pacheco as notable names on offense, besides Mahomes of course, then we can do it with what we have here now. Coaching being equal, I'll take Allen, Diggs, Davis, Kincaid, Knox, Cook, Harris, and Murray any day over what KC had last season. Any day. If we can't put it together with that offensively speaking, then it's well past time to start looking at coaching, and beyond the OC.

I don't agree. We've allowed more points in our first five games than we did last season as well as more yards, LOTS more yards. 65 YPG, over 100 YPG prior to this week. That'd be fine if we had played good offensive teams, but the teams we've beaten up on currently rank after five weeks 17th, 24th, and 31st in Yardage offense. No better in scoring. He still played better against our top-ranked D in weather conditions in a home playoff game very favorable to us in his first playoff game ever and in his third start, than he did in his other starts, once against a 28th ranked D.

Here's what I see, namely that the teams that have won it recently, had the 16th ranked D and DFL ranked passing D, but the #1 Offense. (KC last season) ... and the 15th ranked D in '21 along with the 7th ranked Offense. (Rams) And in '20, the 3rd ranked Offense and 8th ranked Defense featuring the 21st ranked passing D and a 43-year old QB. We should be able to do it with an average D and the #1 offense, a QB in his prime and the most versatile QB in the game today, and I see no reason whatsoever why we shouldn't have the #1 Offense in the league this season given the additions/improvements starting with a solid OL. Now of Torrence, Diggs, and Dawkins go down, then we can talk further. Not expecting you to agree, just saying that's what I see.

We'll see how it unfolds. Interesting to say the least.

Wow, that's interesting! I hadn't realized that this was our worst start since 2018. Here's one thing that I haven't seen anyone mention. In our three victories, we've had a +2, +3, and +4 edge in Turnovers. When you rely on TOs to win games it's not sustainable and is not a great strategy. That's OK if our offense gets and stays hot for four consecutive playoff games. In fact, I think I'd rather try that than going 14-3 and for whatever reasons seeing us slink in the playoffs, which has been the pattern. The worry should be that coaching is the primary issue as many of us see that it is. If that's true, good luck to us. This season is a referendum on that very thing. Let's yield the benefit of the doubt until it's played out. ... not that we have a choice. ... and not that we have a choice after that either. LOL I will say, the teflon nature for McD to be able to insulate himself from #Coachingthingz is remarkable. How far and long does "culture" take us, ... 7 seasons in.