top dawg

Anderson didn't falter, Bridgewater's inability to play to Robbie's strengths was what slowed Robbie down. I saw it too many times! Romo even mentioned it one game: Teddy threw the ball to Robbie too late in the route! If he could have timed his throws better, Robbie would have been open for more scores and more YAC.

If we can keep people healthy, get a corner, safety & MLB that are worth a damn, our defense starts looking championship worthy. That's my opinion.

That too!

Yeah, that's a pretty blatant omission. But...¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I think that officiating will prove to be an excuse only on message boards.

I saw bad defense on one side, and outstanding defense on the other. On an off note, I saw the Chiefs get away with several obvious holds. Blaming the refs in this game is weak! It takes away from an extraordinary defensive performance. That's just the way I see it.

The more complete team wins championships! It just so happens that the one with great defenses usually wins!

They really didn't though. Nate Burleson was sounding like a hater.

Not you too Scot? Come on, man.

Defense wins championships!

This is poo! More like a popularity contest!

My comment is based on human nature, plain and simple.

We're on the same wavelength! But, let's say that come draft night, we still have Teddy and both TL's, Wilson and Fields are gone and we're on the clock, would you consider trading that 1st for Tua? Just asking.

I suspect that try as he might, Tepper is probably getting a little impatient. Rhule and Fit will hopefully keep things in perspective though. It's a process! This is really the second season of the rebuild.

He should have said "season 4", and furthermore you really can't even count the first season, unless you're trying to be a bit disingenuous (which he probably is).

But he's wrong. This is more like year three, and we haven't even gotten there yet!

Meh! Argue with multiple reports to your hearts content! And, try to make something about analysis that's not about analysis as much as it's a reporting of a done deal. Our pick was nowhere as good as LA's, and there's still reason for someone to believe that Goff has some upside and more value than Bridgewater.

@stbugs, don't believe the LA Times? Here's the Athletic: Burke: Goff's contract is a bit of a sticking point, but the Lions have to be thrilled otherwise with the return. And the fact that they'll pick up $27.5 million of Goff's salary this year plus some guaranteed money next year is probably why they were able to land an extra first-round pick. https://www.google.com/amp/s/theathletic.com/news/matthew-stafford-rams-jared-goff-lions-trade/oZKFvAx6VulK%3famp=1

It isn't my thesis. Not that this reported story in the Los Angeles Times is the only place I've read this (because it's not), but here you go: "By trading Goff, the Rams will incur a $22.2-million dead-cap hit. And by including the draft picks, they essentially paid the Lions to take him off their hands." https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.latimes.com/sports/rams/story/2021-01-30/rams-nfl-jared-goff-traded-matthew-stafford-lions%3f_amp=true

Honestly, Teddy and that same fifth (in the Stafford proposal) for Minshew would be an acceptable deal. I wouldn't go higher than a fourth.

That is a more conservative approach. I don't know that it's worth it to just cut Teddy. He does make for a high quality backup. Of course there would be a little drama surrounding our QB situation, but Rhule says that he believes in competition.

I think so too. It's all relative. His contract was bad, but it's not prohibitively awful I don't think!

Upset there? If the shoe fits, wear it! Otherwise, the post is not meant for you.

You know that some of these people aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer...

I had to consider the best case scenario.