mav1234

Can't watch but did he really just admit that Reich wanted Stroud and he didn't? fug...

Why not both?

That isn't entirely true. Cam frequently drove us down the field and got us points and the D then gave up the lead. I said offense excelling too, not winning games - very hard to argue Cam was not the biggest reason for offensive succes in 2011.

Cam frequently lost because our defense let him down in his first couple seasons. It is very hard to argue that is what is happening so far for Bryce.

Bryce can be contributing to our offensive woes while also suffering because of them. He isn't making the most of every play, but he also isn't getting much help. Many of us expect a #1 pick to be the reason an offense excels, not need a lot of help. But it doesn't matter anymore where he was drafted... What matters is he needs help on O and he's getting very little.

It really isn't just that Stroud looks so good... Bryce was supposed to elevate this team and instead he needs to be carried by them. Which obviously isn't possible.

Hahaahahaha man you just captured me trying to read wtf is going on in this thread perfectly

honestly, he hasn't shown enough to get much in trades. Incentive laden contract is the best bet.

Really feel for him, but he can't stay healthy. For his career he really needs to make the most of the rest of this season ... Could mean a lot about reversing perceptions.

Sure, but screens limit what a guy like Bryce can do. Yes, Bryce deserves the credit - but we actually had calls that allowed him to work a bit off script. We just don't have playmakers.

Don't forget completely whiffing on tackles in the backfield counting for half of a TFL!!

You and I had numerous posts earlier in the season that this part of his game wasn't seeming to translate from college basically for whatever reason... It's nice to see several plays today where he looks to be finding the playmaking ability he has at Alabama... Hopefully more and more every week

Bryce is playing like the player we drafted from ALA - the play extensions have been remarkable and his off platform "elasticity" was actually on display today, really exciting. Give this guy a bit better OL play and a decent receiver and IMHO he's gonna be very good (is that not positive enough? haha). Bryce is playing better every week, I'm actually excited for his development.

I mean he's our most consistent corner. ...that isn't saying much tbqh but hey, at least he's on the field!

Bryce looking really, really good. Incredibly clear how much better this offense would be with a little more competency at WR. Hard to judge playcalling given this is the Texans D, but still. Looking better than the past weeks so far.

I mean I kinda get it but the dude hasn't made a good decision in a while I feel and if Tepper isn't sure I wouldn't be surprised, especially with how it seems he's already meddling

It's possible he's been told he can't make moves unless they're heavily in our favor. If the owner is as unhappy as some say I bet he's being involved in what marquee players we let go. I think Tepper is delusional and thinks this roster is actually good.

Yeah... What's that somewhat dumb saying? The most important skill is the ability to stay on the field... This isn't like CMC at all, as CMC was widely considered one of the best skill players in the NFL by fans all over. Nobody has heard of Horn outside of Carolina.

Yup. One more year, then start fresh if needed.

What do you mean? The fact they're less valuable is why you never see direct swaps in the early rounds to a subsequent year without other compensation. I did argue it back then, but my point wasn't values are fixed, unlike some here - that's the point. Saying we won't accept anything less than 2 first rounders isn't accurate because the exact deal is more nuanced than that. I understand why you and all of us now would rather have had those picks next year and the year after, but my point was were dealing with a staff that was then and is now trying to win. It doesn't help Fitt to collect draft picks years down the road when the player in theory could contribute to our competitiveness. Or course, we suck, and should trade him, but this team probably thinks it has a shot at the playoffs still, heh.

The bolded is not what the draft value depreciation tables say, rather the value of the pick is halved (not full round loss). It also depends where the teams think a pick is likely to fall, but in general it's a halving of value each year. That is NOT the same as saying a player in 2023 drafted in the 3rd is as valuable as a first rounder in 2025. You're completely wrong that a 2025 first is more valuable to a front office than a 2023 first... I'm sorry... That's just not the NFL. Players also don't compete immediately often, even first rounders get better with time, so those two years mean a lot. I get why as fans you can think that about rookie contracts but teams expect to turn it around quicker than 4-5 years out (when you'd expect a 2025 first to pay the most dividends). Hell, this team thought they had playoff aspirations lol.

Lol you think they would have let us keep the 2024 first and taken out 2025 first instead? If not, you're actually making my point for me. Nothing was debunked, fans just see draft picks different from NFL front offices. I wouldn't be surprised if Burns goes for fewer picks this year but that the relative value in the year of the trade is similar or higher.

I don't get why you keep bringing up DJ Johnson and Matt Corral, lol. In the year 2021, a 2022 3rd round pick has a lot more value than a 2025 3rd round pick. When talking first rounders it isn't that simple since the formulas aren't just a full round depreciation. And the question is if Brian Burns on the Panthers for half of 2022, all of 2023, and 2024 (we will def. tag him) at a minimum is worth more than a first rounder in 2024 and 2025... The Dolphins went from the bottom to the top by having a good coach, hitting on a couple good draft picks, etc. Some of that was trades, some of it was smart FA decisions. First rounders are on average more talented, yes, but a first rounder 2 years away is less useful than a player on your team now. That's basically it. In 2 years, a front office could be totally different, so yeah.

You can feel it is a bad approach if you want, but it doesn't change the way front office value future picks. You're asking coaches and GMs to trade for picks they may never, ever use. The way teams value picks means that the effective value of a Burns trade could be more this year than last if there's a first rounder in this year's draft included, heh. There's no guarantee where teams will be drafting in the first round in 2025 etc... That's a big reason the value changes.

haha I still remember all the moaning about how much we paid CMC. Good times, good times.