Sgt Schultz

I meant Scott Norwood. Sam Norwood was a former supervisor of mine. Great guy, and I don't he ever missed wide right.

One of my best friends is a Lions fan. It is very tempting to settle on "this year is different." And this Lions team does look different than the ones in the past who entered the year to "this year is different." Unfortunately, I have over 50 years of experience telling me I need to actually see it first. But, if my Blues can win a Stanley Cup, and the Red Sox and Cubs win the World Series, the Lions can go on a run and make some noise in the NFC. I do not expect to live long enough to think that about the Browns.

I think the Lions love is just as much due to the NFCN being rather slim, unless Love is the next Packers franchise leading QB. The Bears will probably be better, but otherwise the division is in a holding pattern. I've been watching the NFL since 1969, and every time the Lions were supposed to break out, they found a way to eff it up. It is a rare constant in a continually changing universe.

I think that is about right, except in game 3 I would make it gauge it on how he has looked in the first two and camp. If his timing and anticipation with his receivers and OL is good, then a series to a quarter in game 3.

It is a little like people blaming Sam Norwood for the loss when he missed the potential game-winning FG for the Bills against the Giants in Owl XXV in 1991. Nevermind the fact that the league average in 1990 for FGs from 40-49 yards was about 62%, in many minds he missed a chip shot.

It is a tough time for a sports forum in anything other than MLB. If there is a golf forum, maybe that. I'm on an NHL forum, and the topics and discussion on the general board make the topics and discussion here look the final 10 minutes of this year's Super Bowl. In terms of snarkiness and people making and taking every thing personal, that is a problem beyond this board. People seem to have some insane desire to cubby-hole everything and everybody into a name or category they can understand, rather than trying to expand their understanding. I guess it is a convenient way to go through life, although pretty limiting, IMO.

I'll cut him some slack on that, because I think I bollixed it in another thread earlier about several factors leading to the Pats championships (and how they could have easily gone the other way). Hell, that may have been the post that set him off, but if so, he has a thin skin on the subject. Who knows what happens if that kickoff stays inbounds? The only guess we have is that if they had gone to OT, it would have probably gone to two since nobody could score in odd-numbered periods and nobody could stop anybody in even-numbered ones. I guess whoever got the ball first in OT#2 would have been the winner.

I agree with that. Plus, for both Hoodie and Brady, if Marshawn Lynch gets one more carry and/or Atlanta decides extending the lead back to two scores and draining the Pats of timeouts with 4:00 left and the ball on the Pat 22, the narrative gets a lot different. The road from 6-3 in Owls to 4-5 is pretty short. And we haven't even mentioned what happens if Kasey's kickoff does not go out of bounds (and we will never know how that might have ended). What was arguably their most talented team was shut down by the Giants. I'm not diminishing where they sit in NFL history, with nine Owl appearances in 18 years and six wins, but those wins are a combination of great game plans, clutch QB performances, some solid defensive performances, buffoonery on the opposing sidelines, a little luck, and some sidestepping the rules. The tenure alone is impressive in the salary cap era, because there is a lot of retooling involved while maintaining that level of play.

It is rather shocking how many players wind up broke a few years after they hang up their cleats. We hear about the big names (and some of them manage to go broke later in life), but the average NFL player whose career statistically lasts about 3 years is a different story. Some have other things they can fall back on, most don't and become guys who go from day to day like everybody else, just with a windfall up front that isn't going to put them on easy street. I guess it is about like the track record of lottery winners. They suddenly have friends that they didn't know they had, and most don't realize almost any sum of money can be "managed" to $0. Sounds like you thought that through in your situation. I'd venture to say most people would get that sum and go on a spending spree, not realizing that while it can last your lifetime, between economic ups and downs and a lot of other IFs, it is not a safe bet. My only concern about what players make is how it counts against the cap. Like everybody else, there are some that I don't think are worth the money, but that is between them and their team. I don't begrudge them of it at all. Hell, I'm not sure I am worth what they pay me, until something happens and I suddenly am. But I am not giving any of the money back, either!

No joke. They are among the paper champions every year. I saw some ranking of NFL GMs the other day that had Jerrah Jones ranked in the top 5 (maybe 2nd, I don't remember). If the benchmark was assembling a group of players that look great on paper but can't function as a cohesive unit when the chips are down, he is great. But 27 years of teams that look good on paper and then fizzle out well shy of the goal is not the trademark of a good GM.

We had a dog that was terrified of thunderstorms as he got older, and tried a thing called Rescue Remedy that seemed to work for him. The original formula is a blend of flower remedies and alcohol. They also have a non-alcohol version. The drawback is that you really need to give it to them before the chaos starts for it to be effective. The problem with all these things is every dog reacts differently, it seems.

Not that I take what CBS Sports says to be any better than anybody else, but they have us ranked in Tier 3 (Wild Card Wanderers) of the NFC with what seems to be a reasonable quick-take. That tier includes the Saints, Falcons, Vikings, and Packers. I think they are being optimistic about the Packers, but if their quick-take proves correct who knows? Beyond Tier 3, they like the Lions more than anybody else in the NFCN, which I get because of their run in the second half of last year. If you read the Cowboys quick-take (Tier 1), they acknowledge the ranking is "on paper" and the problems in their way of moving that to reality, as well as their futility in doing so in the past. https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/ranking-2023-nfl-contenders-by-tiers-nfc-headlined-by-eagles-cowboys-49ers-entering-new-season/ The Panthers figure to endure the hiccups of a reset, lacking elite weapons, but with a growing "D" and the poised pairing of Bryce Young and Frank Reich at QB and head coach, they may have the moxie to make noise in the NFC South. Offered as something to help pass the time until we can start talking about actual game results.

Nobody is denying Gettleman was the north end of a southbound horse. That's not the question. The issue here is whether Edwards' version is the truth, or skewed. Both Gettleman being an arse and Edwards' version being skewed can be true at the same time. This is not an either/or situation. Not many things are.

You were quoting me, so I didn't have any idea who you were talking about other than my comment. And I'm pretty chill right now, but thanks for the concern. Now if you want to classify me as a "hater," try approaching the topic of the good things The Process did or would have done had he only had four more years. Although, I don't even think his mother could find much ammunition there, at least as it pertains to the NFL.

But again, who is hating anybody? As I said earlier, if you bothered to read it, I was in favor of trading Burns to the Rams because we spent almost his entire time up until then trying to wedge a guy that looks like a 3-4 OLB into a 4-3 DE. Now we are playing a base 3-4, so the equation is different. It sounds like you are making another classic ad hominem argument here. Essentially, if you have concerns or anything negative to say, you can't be a Panthers fan, so you are a hater? Try again. The #CamWhoaaCamTipOfTheDay should be to avoid that kind of fallacy.

Terms like "hater" are just poor attempts to put a veil over the ad hominem fallacy. The idea that somebody can like a player overall while acknowledging area(s) they can improve on is unthinkable to a lot of people these days. The idea that somebody can like a player and still not be opposed to trading them is even more unthinkable. Essentially, if you are not all-in, you are a hater. On the bright side, I guess it makes the world simple.

People were going beyond ignoring where those Ram picks would have been, they were trying to sell the idea that they were going to be at bottom quarter of the respective first rounds. That made me wonder what Rams team they were looking at. The Rams team that made that offer was desperately trying to cling to one more run despite the fact that they were sliding fast. Burns would have made them a little better, but he alone was not going to stop the slide, let alone vault them to Chiefs-Bengals-Bills-Eagles-Niners level. Like the Bucs, the Rams went all-in to win an Owl, they did it, but the piper needs to be paid for the effort. I was all for taking that deal, too. At the time we were trying to shoe-horn a guy that looks like a 3-4 OLB into a 4-3 DE position. The less than stellar results at stopping the run make that an awkward fit. Now we are a base 3-4 team, which alters that equation quite a bit. I think he has a chance to showcase what he does well while the system minimizes his weaknesses.

Gettleman and Hoodie (Belichick) would be a great pair to invite to your holiday party this year.

For me, it is certainly NOT alcohol on Sundays.

On paper, the Cowboys are the NFC Superb Owl representative almost every year.....until they are not.....which happens when we move from paper to results. They almost always perform like a collection of players rather than a team.

2010 was a complete waste. Fox was a dead man walking, everybody and their brothers knew that, so nothing happened to develop anybody. Whatever chance Matt Moore had to become a viable starter was pretty much torpedoed by Fox's malpractice that year......and the malpractice was just as much Richardson's fault as his. Edwards was drafted in the middle of that fiasco. That was aggravated by the fact he was over-drafted. That was the most irritating part of it. Teams draft a "home town" guy pretty often, but usually late in the draft. I say we over-drafted him because, regardless of what anybody thinks of Edwards potential as a WR, we drafted LaFell earlier in the third round. And let's face it: over-drafting was a Hurney trademark. Trading up to take a guy who is a QB with the idea they would turn him into a WR and gadget QB is not exactly a great value or risk. So, Edwards walked into a perfect storm and still almost survived it, anyway. Before I pass judgement on how his release was handled, I'd want to hear someone else around the team when it happened speak up. The danger is jumping on the bandwagon based on the recollection of the guy who was released is about the same as jumping on the bandwagon based on The Process' account of his dismissal. Even though I don't feel like I need a shower after reading what Edwards says, his view is biased. He may be right, but I can't conclude that based solely on his account.

I'm not a Jets believer, either. I would also have the Falcons ahead of the Bucs, but we are probably splitting hairs. Not for nothing, but the Lions write up says they will carry their energy over to the 2024 season. Given their history, that may be true as an outlook for 2023, who knows?

That is the battle Nebraska faces, and your last sentence is about the top of what I see them achieving. The problem is, I don't think that will be good enough for Cornhusker faithful after two or three seasons of it. That was when I started to turn on The Process. The deflection and tap dancing only got worse from there. The answer was that "WE" need to do better in order to move forward. But that would mean The Process was owning the ultimate accountability, and he wasn't going to do that.

I thought Nebraska was one of the worst places for him, or maybe anybody. They still have visions of success from over 20 years ago. Regardless of what I think of The Process, anybody taking that job is set up for failure against that standard. His "rebound relationship" would have probably been better off at Colorado or Arizona State. The expectations are lower, and if he is able to produce 8-10 wins a year at those schools, he would be a hero. I'm not sure Saban could restore Nebraska to its past glory.

I hate to tell you, it was not a comp. It was a statement about teams that develop a chemistry and turn it into a run. The 2015 team was great on defense, okay on offense, had a playmaker for a QB, and then something happened. It came together. The OL gelled as a group, at least until Wade Phillips watched what Atlanta did and used Von Miller to create havoc. Until then, the OL outperforming itself had a huge impact on that team's wild ride. The 2015 team just had a moxie it about on top of the defensive talent and Cam. That's how they almost ran the table. Plenty of talented teams don't develop that cohesiveness. I was in no way comparing that team to this one. Just saying that if the team can somehow gel together into a cohesive group, it could lead to some unexpected wins. Your imagination did the rest.