A Reminder That It's Not 2022. It's A Whole New Season and League.

[Varking]

9 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

I understand we looked like the worst team in the league during our first preseason game.  The main reason I am not concerned YET is the biggest issue from Saturday (our offensive line) has already been league tested and proven last year with plenty of potential for growth.  All 5 starters (yeah Corbet may miss a little time) and our OL coach all played solid last year and are now proven/tested in the league.  It's not crazy to think they are going to get their issues corrected and get back to the form they had towards the last half of the year last year.  Our other big issue (Corral) is probably not playing this year if he even makes the team.  Our defense looked vanilla like many other preseason defenses and was missing several starters with others barely playing so I am not really concerned there.  The good news is Bryce looked calm and comfortable even with our OL struggles.  Once we correct those issues (and it's easy to believe we will) Young should look pretty good.  Let's see what Campen and his OL do to look better Friday and hopefully it will be a more enjoyable game.  

I’m also confident the line will be fine at the start of the season. These guys aren’t unknown quantities. 

[CRA]

1 hour ago, 4Corners said:

Yeah this rebuild a couple years mindset is complete garbage and a loser mentality. NFL is a proven pro sports league that u can turn it around almost overnight. We got rid of the loser head coach in Ruhle, time will tell if Reich is better, and we have a young QB who many think is a prodigy. 
 

 

Name a team?  That didn't have an established top tier D or HOF skill talent that inserted a rookie QB and was instantly able to contend? 

Rebuilds take time.  QBs have to develop.   To contend with a rookie, you largely need a roster that can make up for the fact you got a rookie QB. 

[ForJimmy]

15 minutes ago, Varking said:

I’m also confident the line will be fine at the start of the season. These guys aren’t unknown quantities. 

That alone is going to make for a MUCH better product on the field.  Should make Young look even better.  Now give him Sanders who can actually catch from the backfield plus a wide open playbook and hopefully we will be forgetting about what we saw on Saturday.  

[Sgt Schultz]

7 minutes ago, CRA said:

Name a team?  That didn't have an established top tier D or HOF skill talent that inserted a rookie QB and was instantly able to contend? 

Rebuilds take time.  QBs have to develop.   To contend with a rookie, you largely need a roster that can make up for the fact you got a rookie QB. 

The closest I can think of is the 2004 Steelers with Roethlisberger in his rookie year.  He started the season as #3 on the depth chart, moved to #2 when Batch got hurt, and then got the starting job in their second game when Maddux got hurt (and had been ineffective). 

They had a top-tier D, though, and that team could and did run the football.  Basically, Big Ben only needed to not make bonehead plays. 

That team had six regular season games where they had more rushing yards than passing yards, a few others where the split was close, and a defense that only gave up 300 yards four times while holding opponents to under 250 yards seven times.

Pretty much a "welcome aboard, enjoy the ride, rookie" type situation.

[CRA]

6 minutes ago, Sgt Schultz said:

The closest I can think of is the 2004 Steelers with Roethlisberger in his rookie year.  He started the season as #3 on the depth chart, moved to #2 when Batch got hurt, and then got the starting job in their second game when Maddux got hurt (and had been ineffective). 

They had a top-tier D, though, and that team could and did run the football.  Basically, Big Ben only needed to not make bonehead plays. 

That team had six regular season games where they had more rushing yards than passing yards, a few others where the split was close, and a defense that only gave up 300 yards four times while holding opponents to under 250 yards seven times.

Pretty much a "welcome aboard, enjoy the ride, rookie" type situation.

The Steelers had the #1 D in the NFL his rookie season.   Multiple Pro Bowlers on offense. 

Which again, is how you can make it work.   

 

 

[Varking]

5 minutes ago, Sgt Schultz said:

The closest I can think of is the 2004 Steelers with Roethlisberger in his rookie year.  He started the season as #3 on the depth chart, moved to #2 when Batch got hurt, and then got the starting job in their second game when Maddux got hurt (and had been ineffective). 

They had a top-tier D, though, and that team could and did run the football.  Basically, Big Ben only needed to not make bonehead plays. 

That team had six regular season games where they had more rushing yards than passing yards, a few others where the split was close, and a defense that only gave up 300 yards four times while holding opponents to under 250 yards seven times.

Pretty much a "welcome aboard, enjoy the ride, rookie" type situation.

The Colts with Andrew Luck is the only one I can think of off the top of my head who were contenders as soon as he got there. 

[4Corners]

30 minutes ago, CRA said:

Name a team?  That didn't have an established top tier D or HOF skill talent that inserted a rookie QB and was instantly able to contend? 

Rebuilds take time.  QBs have to develop.   To contend with a rookie, you largely need a roster that can make up for the fact you got a rookie QB. 

Every year there are teams that make the playoffs and are successful that weren’t the year before. But I agree that it starts with a QB and a coach who knows what he is doing hopefully we have that now. 

[CRA]

7 minutes ago, Varking said:

The Colts with Andrew Luck is the only one I can think of off the top of my head who were contenders as soon as he got there. 

Luck had a HOF caliber WR when he walked in the door.  Who was an already established All Pro/Pro Bowl WR.  

and Luck targeted Wayne a mind boggling 194 times his rookie season.  

 

[Varking]

1 minute ago, CRA said:

Luck had a HOF caliber WR when he walked in the door.  Who Luck was able to target a mind boggling 194 times his rookie season. 

 

But they had him the year before too, right? And won like two games. Every year Luck was healthy the Colts were playoff contenders. 

[CRA]

7 minutes ago, Varking said:

But they had him the year before too, right? And won like two games. Every year Luck was healthy the Colts were playoff contenders. 

I mean Payton Manning sat out.  They played some undrafted kid if I recall the year prior to Luck's arrival.   No one is saying a HOF caliber WR can make a horrible QB good.   Rookie QBs that contend generally have elite D or great skill talent to mask the growing pains.  Luck is an example of it.  So was Ben. 

But yeah, part of Luck's rookie success was being able to throw nearly 200 times at an All Pro/Pro Bowl WR that will go to the HOF......and aided his overall development his first couple seasons.   Whose Bryce's playmaker? 

 

[Varking]

2 minutes ago, CRA said:

I mean Payton Manning sat out.  They played some undrafted kid if I recall the year prior to Luck's arrival.   No one is saying a HOF caliber WR can make a horrible QB good.   Rookie QBs that contend generally have elite D or great skill talent to mask the growing pains.  Luck is an example of it.  So was Ben. 

But yeah, part of Luck's rookie success was being able to throw nearly 200 times at an All Pro/Pro Bowl WR that will go to the HOF......and aided his overall development his first couple seasons.   Whose Bryce's playmaker? 

 

Miles Sanders, Hurst, Chark and Theilen are going to put the theory to the test of what is better? A high end #1 and then a big drop in talent at the other positions, or a bunch of good players to spread it out to. 

[ForJimmy]

13 minutes ago, Varking said:

Miles Sanders, Hurst, Chark and Theilen are going to put the theory to the test of what is better? A high end #1 and then a big drop in talent at the other positions, or a bunch of good players to spread it out to. 

If you have the right QB (and I think Young fits this mold) a bunch of solid weapons seems like the better approach.  Defenses can try to scheme away 1 top player but it will be difficult to know where the ball is going to go if you can execute with a bunch of solid weapons.  Brady won several with an elite weapon (I know he got Gronk later).  

[CRA]

42 minutes ago, Varking said:

Miles Sanders, Hurst, Chark and Theilen are going to put the theory to the test of what is better? A high end #1 and then a big drop in talent at the other positions, or a bunch of good players to spread it out to. 

Well, that’s the difference.  Those are roleplayers.  Luck and Ben had those types too…..in addition to pro bowl/all pro talent and them.  

Im not bashing our guys.  But those aren’t they type that will bail a rookie out and do it on their own

 

[CRA]

28 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

If you have the right QB (and I think Young fits this mold) a bunch of solid weapons seems like the better approach.  Defenses can try to scheme away 1 top player but it will be difficult to know where the ball is going to go if you can execute with a bunch of solid weapons.  Brady won several with an elite weapon (I know he got Gronk later).  

But that’s basically a formula for the elite QB.  And you basically are settling on that.  Not because you want it.