SetfreexX

OLB aka EDGE defenders still line up vs the OT's the difference is gap responsibilities,and the fact he'd be in a 2 point stance vs 3. The new alignment IMO has a chance help tap into Barnos athleticism as his physique camp is Brian. DB, Roy, and McCall are the only IDL over 315. Shy and DeShawn size wise are 3-4 DEs, as they're both listed right at / under 300 pounds. I think we see a body or two added via the draft,or latter free agency. Considering we'll be in nickel personnel the majority of the time, I'd say that personnel group should be what people really key into as that is roughly the defense you're in 65% of the time or more depending on the opponent. I think it's why we went heavy with the investment in Bell and Rowe. Playing Chinn next to Shaq as the 2nd LB, Rowe as the big nickel, with Woods, and Bell at Safety. This would give us the best mix of pass / run defense when facing 11 personnel, and being flexible enough to handle 12 from an offense.

I don't understand the infatuation with Young. If he's on USF none of you would care, it's the ALA ties. Is he intellectual sure, but his arm is just above average, which is documented by evaluators, he's not a field stretcher, and his speed is mid. There's no physical trait that pops like with Kyler's speed, he's just a really good college QB. But once he takes a few NFL licks at 190'ish pounds y'all gonna be sick knowing his build which is slim + the lack of weight were a BIG risk.

Some of the ways y'all look at positions makes me question a lot. This isn't the 90s where guys way less at some of today's positions. We're likely looking at: DL - Brown, McCall, Tuttle ILB - Shaq, Smith Edge - Burns, Luvu

300 lbs is not a traditional NT, he's more likely the DE opposite DB, NT right now defaults to MCCall originally listed at 380, but now listed at 345.

I'd be fine with AR, gotta keep in mind that we're forecasting a bit, Stroud and CJ ''are what they are'' accurate QBs primarily one with traditional size. In three years what could they ''add'' to their game to be possibly generational franchise type QB's? More accuracy, Young is going to gain much more weight, and they are both ''mobile'' but they are not 11 on 11 run threats. If we look at BAL, and PHI success it makes sense to consider AR as mechanics, etc. can be worked on over time, but AR already comes in a TOP athlete in the NFL and has that to lean on while developing. With that in mind in three years IF he's dedicated he would bring more to the table than either Young or Stroud. Him (AR), plus our OL, and a competent run game could be scary. I'd be ok with Stroud or AR, I don't want a QB that's 5'10 who has a ''playing'' weight in the 190s. That's basically Steve Smith at QB.

10M

He was drafted to replace TD, and Ron pandered to vets so Shaq was rotational, aside from health Luke would still be playing most likely. Shaq came in as a will LBer. Not a Mike.

I'd say cut him for the full savings 13M'ish, look to sign Okereke who has history with Reich. He's younger, more athletic and would pair well with Smith as the iff ball LBs.

Carr isn't signing to be a bridge, or for bridge money. He's going to sign somewhere where there is no immediate threat to his position as ''the guy''. NO / TB make the most immediate sense, neither has a 1st round pick, and are likely to spend to attain his services. The Raiders seem to be the Jimmy G destination, it just kinda makes to much sense. Jordan Love has a 20M+ 5th year option value, so if they pick that up it stands to reason Rodgers is as good as gone, and he already said no to SF, so you'd think NYJ was the answer, as the Packers said they won't send him to a NFC team.

360° would return you to the dame direction He pulled a 180°

Young expected to be sub 6' sub 200 Stroud 6'3 218... Not even close.

No one's saying NOT to take a swing, in your own example you say, "it means you simply have to buy the lotto ticket and keep scratching until one hits"... So I pose this....how do you keep getting lotto tickets without future 1st rounders....? The point is that the bust rate is so high, it makes VERY LITTLE sense to mortgage multiple 1sts for a QB. There's no generational QB in this class. Not one that most folks would agree on, there's a couple "good ones" and a couple "boom or bust" ones. None worth multiple firsts.

I'm not saying to draft one in those rounds, I'm specifically referring to giving up multiple firsts vs taking the QB that is available at 9. Same way we should've taken Fields at 8.

A 45 to 50% success rate on 1st round QBs is not a smart bet. Who was the last QB that got drafted via a trade up ransom that worked out long term... Wentz, Lance are the two most recent off the top of my head that teams jumped into the top 3 for. Who else? I believe history is on the side of taking who is available versus mortgaging multiple firsts.

We only have 7 picks - 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 5 The extra 5th from SF is in 2024. The seven picks we have for 2023 as of today is the same number of total picks we'd normally have. The good thing is we can double up in rounds 2 & 3 this year if we're able to sit tight and get a guy like AR15 at no. 9.

Norv was the best OC we'd had, and had Cam on pace for career best numbers in completion percentage -- people forget, we were 6-2 and this was with a LT off the damn street. I appreciate the time Ron spent here, but I cannot forgive the fact that we IGNORED outfitting a generational talent at QB with the most effective skill players / OL to maximize his talent. I think the issue with defensive minded coaches is that even WITH a talent like Cam, they THINK I need the best defense I can field and my QB is good enough. When to me it's yes you need a good defense, but when you have THAT at QB, you need to field a GREAT offense. Not just a GREAT QB.

If you go back and watch Wilks' post game, he actually advises that it was 2 man under, which means help was supposed to be over the top in regard to AT LEAST one of those. This was in response to the CJ Henderson one.

Biting the bullet doesn't mean trading three first round picks either. I think we should see how the combine / pro-days / etc. begin to align. I think we will have AR or Stroud there at #9. HOU and IND seem to be the initial threats. Bryce & Stroud, or Bryce and Levis are likely the combo for first two QB's taken. After free agency it will show us who else is serious about a draft QB.

Wilks did that already

How do you win big games regularly without a ''big game'' QB. Name a team that wins big games regularly and consistently without one of the better QBs... Literally we were working with some of the worst options. What kind of unrealistic expectations did you guys have for Baker, or Sam...? I mean damn, he went .500 with essentially no QB, and a limited defense.

Andy Reid or not, the coach he cut his teeth under was Rivera. He was fired in PHI... That's not coaching tree success, that came here in CAR and most of the talk about him getting HC considerations was after a few years here. Had nothing to do with ''Andy Reid'' ties.

So you're unfamiliar with Ron's success in San Diego and Chicago as the DC, or early in McD career when Ron had to handle play calling - https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/01/17/sean-mcdermott-lands-on-his-feet-in-carolina/ Either y'all young or just don't care to keep up with how things actually happened here over the years. Rivera groomed McD and helped him become who he is as a coach. You can't take that away because "Ron was too conservative".

Those guys are taken, in MIA if you have Hill / Waddle / Gisecki / theose HBs / Armstead and that OL, plus that defense I'd wonder about the coach not to mention a top pick at QB. Daboll, furthest thing from young, was a proven NFL Coordinator was not a ''young up and coming OC'' -- inherited Andrew Thomas, and they draft the tackle from ALA who's name escapes me atm, and two picks before him got Thibodeaux. He also had a lot to work with and is closer to my alternates of -- Reich / Caldwell than that of they young, unproven OC's. Taylor inherited the #1 overall QB in one of the few occurrences where it worked out. __________________________________ You're going to need to do a little better than that. What are those coaches doing in 2022 with what we had to work with. That would be the question I'd ask myself in your shoes. Not faulting them you coach what you get, but are any of them doing more with less is a better question.

Did McDermott do this, also Ken Dorsey OC for HC interview...will he also do this since it's ''who he been with and learned from''? Or does being an OC absolve his from this blanket comparison...why isn't McD Rivera 2.0, he was the first Rivera tree hire....

What other coaches....I already said I'd be on board with a proven NFL coach (Reich / Caldwell / Wilks) of the young up and comers who's going to come in and have players respect day one? Dorsey might be the only one due to his time here, would he be a Rivera re-tread since he was on that staff, or since he eventually became an OC would he be ''an outside the box'' modern NFL guy who goes for 4th and short all the time, and is brash, etc. Also Wilks is not Rivera, anyone with eyes / football acumen could see there was only ONE way for this team to win games in 2022 with this roster. This years plan doesn't' apply to 2023. Maybe some should consider that.