Sgt Schultz

I wonder if part of Shaq's problem last year was playing next to Whitehead. I can't imagine Whitehead gave anyone any feeling that they could safely assume the middle was taken care of. I doubt he will ever live up to the future years of his contract, especially with the guaranteed money factored in. My hope is he plays well enough to lessen that concern and make it worth pushing some of that out. If he can make it just expensive and not Hurney-esque, that will be about as good as anybody could hope for. He didn't negotiate with himself on that deal, and it's not his fault our GM reacted to Luke's retirement by thinking if he paid Shaq like he was elite, he would become elite. Then add the "oh by the way, do it playing next to a void in the middle."

I firmly believe this is true. I have a healthy respect (or fear) of shoulder injuries for QBs. Just like MLB pitchers, most often they are career-enders. QBs can labor on for a while with them, but it usually is the end. I'm sure he believes this will be the year he is back to 100%. If you are a betting person, I'm not sure you want to wager against the house on this one. Unfortunately, he came back too early and too often from this hit and the one he cites. I'm just not sure you can undo that. I hope he is correct, but the odds are very much against it.

I thought about mentioning the point that our #1 may be a #2. That remains to be seen. But, compared to our two #3's, at least he was thought to be a budding #1 three years ago, if not more recently. Our staff still thinks he could be. The truth is, where these guys were drafted does not matter in the equation. Being drafted #1 didn't help Jamarcus Russell, and people pretty quickly forgot Brady was a 6th round draft choice (other than the media bringing it up) and Montana was drafted near the end of the 3rd round. Being a high draft choice in the NFL after about 2 or 3 years is about like having a high GPA from a big-name academic school 8 years ago: it is a great conversation piece, but your body of work since is what matters. If Darnold does not live up to the staff's expectations, we could have a new #1, a our #2 and #3 may be on the current roster. The more likely scenario is we would have a new #1, #2, and #3 if that is what shakes out.

I said in another thread, the problem is not PJ Walker or Will Grier, it is PJ Walker AND Will Grier. Darnold will either work out as a starter or he won't. Behind Darnold, or Teddy, or whoever is the starter we basically have two #3 QBs. I hope one of them steps up to be a legitimate #2. If it is either of them, it will more likely than not be Walker, IMO. But I am not convinced our end-state #2 is on the roster. I have no idea how long it will take to have an end-state #2. That could be problematic should Darnold wind up being the end-state #1. That leaves a big drop off should he not get up off the turf at some point,and since our OL is another question mark.........

A lot of people get their hackles up on this kind of stuff, but it is a paper exercise. They are ranking what we look like as a bunch of names, not making a prediction. Let's hope their post-season wrap up has us ranked better than their pre-season prediction. I think they probably had us at 34th or 35th last year, behind every NFL team, Alabama, and Clemson. Maybe Ohio State, too.

I am not worried about them being addicted to the "coach them up" philosophy yet. 15 months ago we had purged the roster of aging and overpaid talent where it made sense. I think we will look aback and say it was where we tore things down completely. Now we are building from near ground level up. We drafted some good defensive talent last year. This year we added a CB,and added a few pieces on offense that are obviously still in front of the jury whether they work out or not. One replaces a WR that we could have gone down the sink hole of overpaying. Almost all of our FA signings have been short-term contracts. That tells me they are on "prove it" deals that are long enough to allow us to find a replacement if needed. Even TB was basically a "prove it" deal. Whose idea it was to pay him $20M as opposed to $12M (if that would have gotten him) is not known for sure, but we have our suspicions. I would be much more comfortable if we had drafted a marquee OL early. Had the Lions not drafted Sewell, he would be in a Panther uniform. I liked Slater apparently more than they did, but I guarantee you they have more analysis behind their decision than I have behind mine. It is a process. Sooner or later we need to address the OL, though. It just looks like a lot of the OL they had on the draft board were either taken before we picked or not worth the next pick we had. Even if Christensen and Brown work out, we are not done there. We went from "help needed, all positions, inquire within" to "help needed, most positions, inquire within" after last year. I am just hoping that changes to "some positions" next year. That would put us back on a par with a lot of teams after having purged the stench. That, alone, would be a significant accomplishment in two years from where we started. Especially given a "pause" in the salary cap growth.

I might try that on ribs that have more fat on them. The wild boar ribs were so lean they probably needed most if not all of the 2 hour steaming period. That made them fall-of-the-bone tender, and in fact one of the bones slid out when I was putting them back in the smoker for the sauce. I wound up using pecan wood. I had reservations about using apple cider vinegar to baste them, but it worked well and my wife like the taste a lot. I might say I would do the wild boar ribs again, but I have to as I have two more slabs in the freezer. The other catch is smoking ribs this time of year is a rite of passage around here. Meanwhile, after halftime of this project we basted ourselves with some Gunpowder gin and tonic.

That will make the weekend worth it. If nothing else, the last 15 months have taught people time is precious. I had to run to the store earlier, and I saw two gentlemen talking. One was up in years, the other my age or maybe a bit older. I ran into the younger one as we were checking out. He said the guy he was talking to was the teacher who tried to teach him math 49 years earlier. He recognized him by his walk. I told him if I ran into the teacher who tried to teach me math 49 years ago, she would probably sit me in the corner!

The ribs have hit halftime. From here, they get drenched in apple cider vinegar, wrapped in foil, and go back in the smoker for two more hours. Then the get unwrapped, sauced, and smoked for another hour.

Those are some good looking spreads. It looks like you are ready!

He may be another Schiano. He doesn't know the rules, doesn't listen to anybody trying to tell him what they are, and thinks he somehow has discovered ways to get an edge that no coach before him in the history of the NFL ever thought of. All he needs to do is get desperate enough to start having his defense attack the V formation after stinking the place up for 59 minute so he can say "we give it all until the end." Schiano lasted about two years, so we'll see how this goes. It will likely be another example of Jerry Glanville's statement that the NFL stands for Not For Long. Unlike Schiano, Meyer will feel the water getting hot and bail out.

I'm not sure what people expect on this subject. Had we drafted Sewell or Slater I'm sure we would be ranked higher. Instead, we drafted some non-marquee players later in the draft, and they probably are not even on these guy's Radar other than the odds are against them working out. Our FA sigsnings at the position are relatively unremarkable. That said, most OL rankings are close to useless, anyway. And these are based on pure speculation. Let's put it this way: I don't think our OL last year was as good as they had them ranked with their scoring system (KungFoo, I believe, mentioned the impact on Teddy's quick release time and Brady's offense), and I don't think they are as bad as they speculate now. But my thoughts are also speculation, and assume that we knew what we were going with the people we selected in the draft.

What? Have a legitimate backup on the roster? The Panthers? My problem isn't with Walker or Grier, it is with Walker AND Grier. Essentially we have a starter and two #3 QBs on the roster. The #2 should either be the heir apparent or a vet who isn't good enough to be a starter (maybe never, maybe not anymore) over 17 games, but is good enough to be a starter for 4-6 of them, if needed. The idea would be the #3 would grow into that role, replace him, and then you find a new #3. It was not critical for us last year since expectations were at whale dung levels. It may not be critical this year, although the expectations are a little higher and having a vet to help Darnold would be a plus, but not many are expecting great things that could be derailed by a QB injury. But sooner or later......

I think pecan is actually my favorite for red meat or pork. Mesquite can be overbearing on the smoke for some people. I like working with it, once it gets started and I don't mind the heavy smoke, but it is a bit much for some. I've also taken a liking to peach when I want a fruit wood. Nothing against apple or cherry, both of which I have had good luck with.

Most of the smoking I've done lately has been with bison or elk, so the concern about drying things out is something I've grown used to. In fact, I smoked a bison brisket over Memorial Day and marinated it for a day which is something I would not do with beef. The bacon idea is a good one. I got this from a place that I normally buy bison or elk from. They had some sort of special that caused me to want to give it a try. The recipe I found from some guy that has smoked them was rub them, smoke them for 3 hours, then wrap them in foil with apple cider vinegar and smoke that for 2 hours more, then remove the foil, sauce them, and give them another hour. The theory seemed good and even I can remember 3-2-1. Now the great debate: mesquite, hickory, or pecan. I have smoking logs or all three.

For us, I am smoking some wild boar ribs. I have no idea what we will be having with them. I've never made wild boar before, so this is a six-hour experiment. The weather is forecast to be 79, so it is "a beautiful day to be smoking ribs." As for drinks, it could be hard cider, beer, gin, or even wine. We've become gin fans (I always have been) since we tried some barrel-aged craft gin on a trip to Colorado last fall. That may be round one.

"Let's see, I am almost done with this article about the Panthers starting lineup, but I have no idea who their LT will be." "Hey, wasn't Hurney GM there for a million years? Call him, I'll bet he'll give you some insight." "Great idea, I'll jump right on that." The rest is history.

That conjures us the saying, "Three Stooges, no waiting."

The frustration with Gano was due to a couple of things. I think people turned on him when he nailed the upright after the first drive of the second half in that dreaded game against Denver. Of course, the fact that one of the end rushers was very offsides and it was not called didn't help, but I don't know if he actually saw that. The second was his contract. Shaq, meet Graham. Graham, Shaq.

I hate it when teams pull off the throttle when they get inside the 35 late in a close game. Sure, they may be in FG range, but 50+ yarders are not something I would want to put my hopes on. Even when a FG will be the difference, the goal should be to break the 20. When you break the 20, the goal should be to have the kicker lining up for a PAT, if there is time. Don't be stupid, but don't quit, either. A lot can go wrong with a kick.

As to the original question, am I concerned about the position, the answer is yes. Part of that is still shell shock from watching out LB corps not perform well the last two seasons (Whitehead was a void last year and our flirtation with the 3-4 the prior year and a DL that could not protect the LBs). Am I shaking my head as much as I did late last year? No. Whitehead became addition by subtraction. Shaq looked better as the year progressed, as did the rest of the defense. I think he also was dragged down some by playing next to Whitehead. I think this could well be the weak spot in the defense, but if the line approaches the level we hope and the secondary is as improved as we hope, being the weakest of the three is not exactly an insult. That said, I expect the group will perform better than they did last year.

I'm somewhere between category 1 and 2. I am optimistic, but I am also patient with this process. We spent years with a front office believing we were only one or two players away. We would go out and sign one or two players (or more), but not get over the hump. Meanwhile, we got farther away as time went on and the roster eroded, due to bad evaluations on draft day. We also had a bad habit of awarding contracts based on past performance and not expected future results. Breaking that cycle, purging the roster of overpaid, under-performing, and aging pieces who were past their primes takes time. It is said that the number one cause of disappointment is unrealistic expectations. Last year's Panthers were right about what I expect in wins and losses, maybe even a little better. The on-field product, while frustrating at times, was better than I thought it would be. Snow surprised me. I'm not yet sold on Brady being a genius, in part because I have seen that label attached to a number of offensive coaches that never lived up to it. I'm happy with what I see from Rhule thus far. It seems like he can get players to step up their games. I'm not expecting playoffs this year, and realistically not even expecting 8-8-1 (who thunk of an odd number of games for a season?). I just hope for the next step in an evolutionary improvement. Who knows, it might bring 8-8-1 or better and a glimpse of the playoffs into the discussion, but my expectations do not rely on that.

We had a GM convinced he was good at finding diamonds in the rough when he couldn't tell the difference between the Hope diamond and a lump of coal, picking players for a coach that ordered his depth chart by seniority, so even if the lumps of coal had been diamonds, they would not have played, anyway.

A lot of teams script the first 15 or so plays for a reason. Call it a reconnaissance mission. See what works, how the defense is reacting, what your own offense needs to adjust to, and what may be exploited later. Since we didn't care how the defense reacted, had no intention of adjusting, and no interest in finding out what they are doing that could be exploited later (because that might mean doing something different), there was no point. Our approach on offense was not radically different from what the Broncos did two years earlier, and we saw how that worked. You know, when John Fox was their HC.

Teams have two weeks to prepare for the Superb Owl. What exactly did our coaching staff do with that time? We know what they didn’t do. Our strategy (or stragedy)? Von Miller, no problem. Demarcus Ware, no worries. No need for gadget plays or misdirection, we have Cam. No need to have somebody help the OL, especially against Miller. Do they not know who we are? To your point, the Broncos had the #1 defense by yards allowed and yards per play. They were fourth in points allowed. As good as our defense was, statistically they were slightly better in most categories. That’s not enough to make a difference by itself. But any coaching staff worth its keep would come up with a few plays to give that defense a pause. Just enough to knock them on their heels once in a while, if not produce a home run. But we were much too clever for that. Our defense basically gave up two FGs in that game. The other 18 Broncos points were either directly by the Bronco defense (Von Miller’s sack), when our punt coverage stood around like a bunch of government employees and they returned one to the Panther 14 (and kicked a FG), and the late-game fumble that gave them the ball on the Panther 4. 6 points earned, another 18 coming on 4 yards of offense (actually, 3 yards since they lost a yard on the drive after the punt return). We’ll never really know what wrinkles the Broncos put in on offense to counter our defense because they didn’t need to use them. The scoreboard just never called for them to run any. After the first 8-1/2 minutes, they were in a position that their offense simply needed to not lose the game. That was about all their offense accomplished. Look at the QB ratings in that game: Cam – 55.4, Manning 56.6. If you add them together it is a good performance for one QB. The game was there to be won. Our coaching staff was just insistent on doing what we had done all year until it worked or the clock wound down to :00. It probably was not as bad as the Rams taking plays out of the playbook against the Pats, but even that qualifies as an adjustment! Back in the 90s, a reporter asked Mouse Davis (mastermind of the Run and Shoot) what he did when the Run and Shoot wasn’t working. How did he adjust when the opposing defense had it firing blanks? His response was, “well, you run and shoot.” That was our coaching philosophy, too. Just do the same things and hope they magically work.