BearFan PHX

Oh Im not saying that they actually would choose a team because they could dance. Im saying that Nagy is not the disciplinarian that Belichick is. Otherwise, theyd both still want to be in NE. But they want somewhere there is a coach weak enough to push around. That's what Im saying.

I totally agree that doubling down on bad choices is the way to get fired. I see a lot of that in Nagy. I worry that I see it in Pace too, but he is so secretive about this stuff (which is a good thing) that I dont really know what he is thinking.

Yes. I admit this is a stupid thread. Still, the idea is interesting, and worth a January conversation, even if just for fun. Gronk is apparently telling Brady to go to another team. That implies that he might be willing to come out of retirement to join Brady somewhere without Belichick. They'd want a team with a good defense. They'd want a team that needs a QB and a TE. A team that knew that they were getting older and would draft a QB to sit behind Brady for a couple of years. They'd want a team with a "fun" head coach. No winning at any cost like Belichick. Someone who liked to have dance parties when they win regular season games. Someone who was weak enough to dominate and do what they want. They'd want a team in a big media market. CHicago would certainly bring big ad opportunities for Brady and Gronk. They'd want a team that could contend for a Super Bowl, who didnt already have a QB. That's the real kicker. The best teams already have QBs. Now I said this was stupid. I'm not sure Id want them here. Brady is getting older, and it'd feel so mercenary. But maybe Brady would have the balls to reign in the offense in a way Nagy hasn't. Or maybe he'd get a quick PHD in Nagy-world and show us all how the video game offense really can work if you have a master. Anyway, a lot of the pieces fit, so it's worth a discussion since nothing else much is going on at this time of year. What do you think? Would you take Brady and Gronk on a 3 year deal?

agree

I think that after the first couple of rounds, trading down is always a good idea generically. The exception being that someone you have valued highly has fallen and you could snatch them up. In other words, if they arent a 1st or 2nd round talent in your own grading system, trading down is almost always a good idea. Of course that means you need a trading partner who wants to trade up and they know what we've just said is true too, so it's not always so easy to find a good trade down opportunity in later rounds. But yeah, I'd rather have more 3rds and 4ths versus being earlier in those rounds. A second player in the same neighborhood increases your chances of finding a player.

I like this one!

lots of A+ BPA picks, but no early OT?

I dunno if KPL has the "bend" and length you need to play OLB in a 3-4. The Lance Briggs 4-3 OLB type is one of the middle linebackers in a 3-4. The OLB are more akin to a DE in a 4-3, they can be a little lighter, but they have to be tall and have bend.

people hate seeing it, but until we lose a game that we had a big lead in and went into prevent too early, it's hard to complain and know that youre right. I dont know if you can use those scenarios as evidence of how aggressive a coach he is. The book on him is that he would blitz more than Fangio. Obviously, injuries decimated the defense and we were still pretty good. I think Pagano is fine, and the offense needs to score points.

just like the WRs a couple years ago, dont be shocked if Pace brings in more new OL than just a couple.

If Robinson is back (and he should be) it will be Robinson, Miller, Wims, Ridely and Cohen in the slot. There is room for another WR there, and every team can use a burner, but with our issues on OL and at TE, I dont see us investing a lot of capital on WR this year. Even if they choose to replace Robinson's big contract, then I don't see them looking to a rookie to fill that role, so it would be a downgrade via Free Agency at WR to gain cap room to sign OL and TE. And I dont see the letting Robinson go. So yes, Gabriel is gone, but he wasn't a huge part of the offense anyway and it wont be a top pick that replaces him in my opinion.

me either apparently

AHAHAHAHAHAHA YOU FOUND IT!

no I mean it. In the post, I reached new levels of intellectualism never before seen on the planet. And it got erased, and I forgot it all.

I wrote the most brilliant thing I'd ever written. Seriously, if you read it you guys would realize I know so much more about football and life than anyone here - it was pulitzer prize winning stuff. It was full of amazing points that were as much about the secret to life as football. But it got deleted. And I dont remember any of it anymore.

in a game where they ran more than usual.

Hey Mr. 7 running attempts: The 49ers are going to the super bowl, and have only throewn the ball 6 times with 12:50 left int he 4th quarter. 34 points too. RUN. THE. BALL. I mean sure, have your high tech offense too but RUN. THE. BALL. NAGY!

I dont think the NFL fixes games for any reason. Bad calls happen, but there is no overarching strategy to work for or against any team by the league.

tell ya what, you take 2 and under, and Ill take 3 and over! That's probably right on the line anyway, so it's a fair bet.

we heard the same sunk costs argument about Parkey. Theyd have to bring him back because theyre paying him. But the money is already spent. You cant get it back. So the question is Leno or someone else? I believe they will have several new starters on the OL this coming year, no matter what the contract situations are.

for sure!

sadly, yes.

you know what? scratch that. Im not even really making that argument. I'm just saying Montgomery has the skill set to excel at what you ask a running back to do.

do those rushing rankings still hold up in yards per carry? Because I think those are total rushing yards, which doesnt really tell the story of complimentary football as you suggested, and I just clarified above.

Oh I'm not saying to never pass. I'm saying the consistent 4 or 5 yard running play is the most dangerous play in football, not the long pass. And so, the role of the running back isnt to get 80 yard runs, but to move the chains and force the defense to have to move toward the ball, which opens up the passing game and complimentary football like you said. And therefore, Montgomery is great, and we dont need to replace him with a "home run hitter" - lord knows Walter Payton wasn't one. But he was the best back ever. Jim Brown too.