Sgt Schultz

The Titans, Bengals, and Dolphins ownership has not exactly been a model of effectiveness, either. Sometimes they manage to field a team that wins games and looks like they know what they are doing, but it is generally an accident and they eventually find a way to torpedo it.

I think he is good and I am hoping he turns into very good or even elite between his own career progression and a defensive scheme change. I have high hopes our current coaching adapts to put personnel in a position to succeed instead of plugging them in and hoping they succeed.

Oh, you're the poor slob that married my ex-wife! Saying he is on his third coach and second GM is technically true, but his first of each were not "his." He inherited them, they both needed to go, but between the timing of when Tepper took the keys to the place and what seems to be a tendency on his part to take a breath before sending people packing, they stuck around for a while before getting the axe. Rhule is on him, as if Fitts. One failed miserably and one is in front of the jury. Reich is on him. I'm not a "come in with guns ablazing and fire everybody" type. Personally, I would have sent Hurney packing after the season started and then probably done Ron the solid of chopping him about the same time Tepper did, to give him an early shot at finding another job. But, I probably had a stronger opinion of them both at that point than Tepper did. Dumping and replacing Hurney first may have also saved us from hiring The Process. Assuming his replacement was a good hire, they might have sniffed out the snake oil salesman and his wife's meat balls during the interview process. Maybe not, but there is a chance.

What a huge mess on his part. I think he is the first person to ever post something on social media that was undiplomatic and not well thought out. He needs to get off Instagram and post on the Huddle, where this sort of thing happens probably twice a minute.

Just awful. There are no words for how awful.

What I am hoping opponents are concerned about as they prepare for games against us

If it wasn't clear from my response, I absolutely agree with you on that. It has been bad enough that I have been expecting some buffoon to post "Iron Head Heyward was only 5-11."

Let’s change the story a bit. You are a shareholder in a company. The Board hires a new CEO because the company is flailing around, losing money, and the former CEO gets in some hot water with the ladies. It is obvious that the COO and President are in over their heads. The new CEO keeps them around for a year before deciding they can't turn the ship around. He first fires the COO, but then lets the President help him find a new COO. The CEO hires a COO, gives him carte blanche, and an enormous salary. The new COO goes on to hire his cronies. They start off okay, making staff changes, rebuilding the company, and changing the product line. The company is losing money, but the losses are no worse than the previous crew and some changes look like they are positioning the company to turn things around. The CEO finally figures out the company president has no idea what he is doing, cans him, and brings in a new president whose hands are somewhat tied by the COO's carte blanche. In short, the organizational structure is bass-ackwards at that level. Then year two comes, the company shows no progress either on the balance sheet or their market share. The product line has some major holes and weaknesses, and overall is not selling. But, the COO keeps preaching “trust the process.” Rumor has it the president is being given more responsibilities of, well, a president. The CEO gives them a third year and things look just as bad if not worse, and we keep hearing “trust us, we are not as dumb as we look.” Finally, the CEO sends the COO packing, and his cronies are all flushed out shortly thereafter. An interim COO comes in. The president assumes all the duties of a president. The company posts losses in year three, but not as bad as the previous years. The CEO and president hire another COO who hires an experienced staff with some young, up and comers sprinkled in. A new product line is announced. At this point, there are no numbers as production has not yet started. Is that CEO an asset, a liability, or is the jury still out? And are you buying more shares, holding, or selling?

You clearly have not gotten the memo that there is a "new normal" in physics. While we are asking questions, which would you rather do in planning: A) Address a concern about your plan by spinning some numbers or correlating some conditions that don't correlate to dismiss the concern, B) deny it is a concern and use ad hominem arguments against the person who claims it is a concern, or C) acknowledge the concern and devise a plan and take some action(s) to mitigate it? I am not bemoaning the selection of Bryce Young. He's smart, reads defenses well, doesn't do stupid things with the ball, and is everything we have not seen under center in a long time. But, I didn't like it when we didn't mitigate that same situation with 245-lb QB (unless telling him to run for his life, and if that doesn't work, just rub some dirt on it counts), so I'm certainly not going to like it if we don't make sure we are reducing those situations with a QB 50 lbs lighter. The good news is the coaching staff that miserably failed the above quizzes now resides in the Nation's capitol, with a bunch of other people who can't pass a planning test, so there is hope. I don't even want to think how the coaching staff (using that term very loosely) would have answered either of our quizzes.

Between the rumblings that Levis was going in the top 10, some saying top 5, the rumblings that Stroud was going to drop out of the top 10, and the rumblings last year about QBs going in the top 10 vs. the reality of all those, what we have learned is what we knew: don't believe anything you hear between the Superb Owl and the draft. It is basically all noise, with just enough truth (some of which is like the proverbial blind squirrel) to make the believers yell "see, see, that was right." Just looking at team needs/QB situations vs. the prospects left, I would be surprised if Levis lasts beyond Tennessee in round two, unless they like Hooker better. The Raidahs could also grab one of those two a few picks earlier. The Foreskins and Atlanta are also supposedly looking for a QB longer-term (I am less convinced about Atlanta). Once we get past Levis and Hooker, there is another dropoff to the next level. Maybe McKee is interesting to somebody as above the rest, but that's about it. Teams looking for somebody that they might work into a starting roll in a year or two probably have to focus on Levis, Hooker, and maybe McKee. That list probably ought to include the Jets, but I doubt if it does.

I'm surprised by the number of players still on the board that were thought to be mid to lower first rounders. I guess all it took was a couple of teams to draft players thought to be second or even third rounders in round one to put us here. Mayer is one of those, as is Porter. I'm less surprised about Levis still being on the board than those. When Myles Murphy was still on the board at 28 I was wondering WTF? I thought Darnell Washington could be gone by the time we pick again, and who knows, he may still be but the fact Mayer is also on the board as we turn into round two provides some hope. We certainly need an Edge, but I think we also need to look at the biggest "bang for the buck" available. I am also not opposed to trading down a bit and picking up another pick today.

You may need to wear one of these..... Any idea what the Huddle half-life is if we draft Levis?

Geez, I can see why they made him GM with a revolutionary thought like that!

I'll be sitting by my phone, waiting for the call that some team sees the wisdom in drafting a 61-year old, slow, out of shape prospect. Of course, when it rings, it will be some recording trying to sell me an extended car warranty. I doubt that I even watch it, although I will have a draft site on my computer to see who is going where. Jeopardy is on at that same time out here, and I'm sure my wife would rather watch that. Just a hunch, though.

Before we traded up I was a proponent of picking two QBs. That was also before we signed Dalton, but I assumed we would sign somebody of that ilk. We had one QB on the roster at that point, and for all intents and purposes it was a guy we had not seen (thanks to The Process). At that point, we were looking at Richardson or Levis at #9 (or maybe only one of them), and I would have liked to add Hooker to that mix. It was sort of throwing the dung against the wall to see what sticks. Picking at #1 (or even 2 or 3) changed that equation, and now the answer is no. The expectation is our QB pick will start, if not immediately, sooner rather than later. That is a lot different than seeing what sticks. If we had an abundance of lower round picks, I wouldn't be as hard-over on no. But, we need other positions, too.

I had to look that up. He is a long snapper for the Seattle Sea Dragons of the XFL.

He just further proved Schultz's theory of human intelligence: The species has always had the same amount of aggregate intelligence. We are now just splitting it up among 8 billion people.

Agree. Sad thing is it was true when the song was released in 1982. Today, it is an understatement.

It happens every year. As Don Henley once sung, "We got the bubble headed bleached blonde comes on at five. She can tell you 'bout the plane crash with a gleam in her eye." That describes this process.

39 is an awkward spot in this draft. I think it is right about where the the seam is between the likely day one starters and higher-ceiling guys that need work. That seam exists in every draft, just our luck we have found it this year with our second round pick. Moving up or down from that position seems like a good play this year. Otherwise, like you said, we might wind up with little more value than we would have had moving down a bit, not to mention whatever else we would get for moving down.

This seems to happen every year with a QB. Last year it happened with the entire class. Honestly, I can't even interpret what it means given the track records of teams drafting QBs. For example, two years ago Fields skied down the slope of the first round due to growing concerns, to the point he was drafted as the fourth QB taken. Now Fields has not shown anything to indicate that he is the second coming of Patrick Mahomes. But, if you were to buy the Jets and Niners a few beers, do you think they might wish they had taken him and bucked the free fall instead of their respective choices? At least the jury is still out on Fields and asking for lunch. From all indications they returned their verdict on Wilson and Lance prior to breakfast wearing off. Then, I suppose we have to differentiate between lying, stupidity, and plain bad judgement.

That is true, sir. At least 5 or 6 years, perhaps longer.