rayzor

same. we've got to see a few situations where his presence is not seen or heard before we know if he's learned and changed.

no doubt, burns was a stud. the problem was we just didn't see much evidence of it. it could be blamed on several factors, but what we saw more consistently than him being a force was him not giving a complete effort. the result of that was his production last year was below what it should have been. some might get caught up in the mindset that we need to replace what Burns was capable of. That would be nice and we might pull that off in the draft. the truth is, Burns supposedly half-assing it resulted in 8 sacks. but then you look at his career. only one year has he lived up to his supposed potential...2022 where he got 12.5 sacks. the rest of his career (in reverse) it's been 9, 9, and 7.5 Are there other contributing factors? yeah....sure. but he's never been a top 5 rusher. he's only been a top 10 rusher once, and there were 2 others with 12.5 and 7 others who had more than him. and he's supposed to be a sack specialist. there's all kinds of excuses we can give why he didn't do more, but others who show up in the top five or ten have reasons for not showing up there as well, but they do. basically it boils down to this, we aren't replacing what burns is capable of. we're going to replacing an ok edge with another ok edge.

And we're making the team better because of it

Lol ok

Interesting angle. Hopefully it plays a role.

He'd come right back.

10 hours late in a thread they started because they didn't see the other 5 that were already there in the front page.

Some kind of hot take he's got there. I wonder why no one thought of that?

Huh?

Stare would be more appropriate. Dudes like a bulky cobra.

I think this is the beginning of phase 2 in FA with more bodies moving around but less $$. Hope so anyway.

I'd like to see that compared to burns

Now get clowney and fuller

Giddyup

Linky?

Same. Doesn't bother me he left without a contract. Saints can have him eating up their salary cap for 10% effort. That said, I'd be surprised if they put much effort into making it happen there either.

I'd be happy with Fuller and clowney. Add wonnum and we're winnun. Any chance we would be able to get both clowney and wonnum or is that too unrealistic?

He probably wants more money and less questions about being a slacker.

Didn't see that coming. Interesting....

Past 40 made it difficult prior to us having #39. I think we could go down to 45-50, depending on the haul. i would rather go with fewer earlier picks than a ton of late round guys. if i can get the picks to be no later than 4th round i'm ok, but the first pick i get would have to be no more than 10 picks out from the original pick. 5-8 is the sweet spot, i think.

what i find myself drawn to, and i really hope Morgan & co. are these guys with a lot of fire and fight in them. i think where we fugged up the past half dozen years is this analytics poo where we looked for guys with certain measurables and RAS scores thinking we could outsmart everyone and field a team of top notch athletes. just because you're a great athlete, though, doesn't mean you're a tough football guy. Fitt was an analytics guy. rhule sat on the couch with a bag of cheetos watching moneyball and ted lasso and considered that training for coaching. i think reich was just a nice likeable old guy who tried to make everyone happy but didn't have a clue what he was doing. now we've got a GM who knows what a real football player is and has the freedom to build with player he knows will make an impact, not guys we take a huge gamble on because of their RAS scores thinking that we might find a way to make use of their talent if we can ever figure it out (Chinn). This we are seeing in action. Lots of things remain to be seen in Canales, but if Morgan is as right about his pick of HC as he seems to be with his picks of players, i think we might be on to something good.