Dukes on McDaniels (...Cutler related)

[madlithuanian]

Jamie Dukes: McDaniels can't be trusted

Posted by Aaron Wilson on July 16, 2009 10:15 PM ET

Former NFL offensive lineman Jamie Dukes came out swinging in his blog today, and he delivered a few uppercuts to Denver Broncos rookie coach Josh McDaniels.

 

The NFL Network analyst hammered McDaniels for having a "problem with honesty," adding that other players besides former Broncos quarterback Jay Cutler have "privately expressed concern."

 

Considering a lot of players, including disgruntled Broncos wide receiver Brandon Marshall, pass through the NFL Network studio in Los Angeles, that's an intriguing comment.

 

Dukes referenced how Cutler said that the reason he asked to be traded stemmed from McDaniels repeatedly refusing to admit that he had tried to acquire quarterback Matt Cassel via a prospective trade.

 

Dukes also pointed out that McDaniels told Denver reporters earlier this year that he had met with Marshall following the wide receiver's meeting with Broncos owner Pat Bowlen.

 

Days later, though, McDaniels acknowledged to KDVR-TV that he hadn't actually met with Marshall.

 

 

In conclusion, Dukes delivered a verbal forearm shiver to McDaniels.

 

"As a former NFL player, I can tell you that trust is the foundation between the player and the coach," Dukes wrote. "When players trust their coach, they play at another level. Unfortunately, truthfulness seems to be a character trait that Bill Belichick didn't pass down to young McDaniels."

 

Ouch.

 

Of course, it's worth nothing that a lot of NFL people don't always tell the truth for strategic reasons and other purposes.

 

It's also fair to say that Dukes might not be getting a Christmas card from McDaniels

[nfoligno]

Yea, I read that yesterday too and agree. While many questioned how Cutler handled the situation, at the same time, not nearly so many felt he had reason to be upset. The reality is, a franchise player, much less a franchise QB, is held in a different standard as the rest of the team. According to Cutler, he was told the OC would be kept, then he was canned. I get that changes can be made at anytime, but if there is a chance of letting the coach go, why lie to your franchise QB? As for the trade talk, I just don't really see the upside in lying to Cutler.

 

I think McDaniels will prove a short term HC. I think he has really screwed up that team, and feel it will only get worse.

 

Jamie Dukes: McDaniels can't be trusted

Posted by Aaron Wilson on July 16, 2009 10:15 PM ET

Former NFL offensive lineman Jamie Dukes came out swinging in his blog today, and he delivered a few uppercuts to Denver Broncos rookie coach Josh McDaniels.

 

The NFL Network analyst hammered McDaniels for having a "problem with honesty," adding that other players besides former Broncos quarterback Jay Cutler have "privately expressed concern."

 

Considering a lot of players, including disgruntled Broncos wide receiver Brandon Marshall, pass through the NFL Network studio in Los Angeles, that's an intriguing comment.

 

Dukes referenced how Cutler said that the reason he asked to be traded stemmed from McDaniels repeatedly refusing to admit that he had tried to acquire quarterback Matt Cassel via a prospective trade.

 

Dukes also pointed out that McDaniels told Denver reporters earlier this year that he had met with Marshall following the wide receiver's meeting with Broncos owner Pat Bowlen.

 

Days later, though, McDaniels acknowledged to KDVR-TV that he hadn't actually met with Marshall.

 

 

In conclusion, Dukes delivered a verbal forearm shiver to McDaniels.

 

"As a former NFL player, I can tell you that trust is the foundation between the player and the coach," Dukes wrote. "When players trust their coach, they play at another level. Unfortunately, truthfulness seems to be a character trait that Bill Belichick didn't pass down to young McDaniels."

 

Ouch.

 

Of course, it's worth nothing that a lot of NFL people don't always tell the truth for strategic reasons and other purposes.

 

It's also fair to say that Dukes might not be getting a Christmas card from McDaniels

 

[madlithuanian]

I hear ya...

 

He looks to be like Crennell, Weiss, and probably Mangini...good coordinators w/ Big Bad Bill, but lousy on their own.

 

Yea, I read that yesterday too and agree. While many questioned how Cutler handled the situation, at the same time, not nearly so many felt he had reason to be upset. The reality is, a franchise player, much less a franchise QB, is held in a different standard as the rest of the team. According to Cutler, he was told the OC would be kept, then he was canned. I get that changes can be made at anytime, but if there is a chance of letting the coach go, why lie to your franchise QB? As for the trade talk, I just don't really see the upside in lying to Cutler.

 

I think McDaniels will prove a short term HC. I think he has really screwed up that team, and feel it will only get worse.

 

[nfoligno]

I think it is simply more a matter of maturity. While each of the three you mention didn't have the same success as a HC as they did in coordinator positions, I am not sure I would say they showed a lack of maturity.

 

I hear ya...

 

He looks to be like Crennell, Weiss, and probably Mangini...good coordinators w/ Big Bad Bill, but lousy on their own.

 

[madlithuanian]

Point well made!

 

However, I did sense a ton of arrogance from Weiss...kind of similar w/ McDaniels.

 

I think it is simply more a matter of maturity. While each of the three you mention didn't have the same success as a HC as they did in coordinator positions, I am not sure I would say they showed a lack of maturity.

 

[adam]

If you had to pick what type of season Denver will have this year (trainwreck or surprising success), I would have to go with the trainwreck. If McDaniels has lost trust in numerous players on that roster, it could be an ugly year.

[DaBearSox]

I love living in the middle of this...this year will be interesting indeed

 

Broncs fans are some of the most passionate i have seen.

[BearFan2000]

Point well made!

 

However, I did sense a ton of arrogance from Weiss...kind of similar w/ McDaniels.

 

You are right on Weiss. I live near South Bend, so whether your an Irish Fan or not during the season that about all you hear about. All home games are televised 2 to 3 times... once live and two times shortened broadcasts. As an Irish fan Weiss' arrogance, self importance, and know it all attitude has run it's course and I've grown tired of it especially given the less than stellar results on the field and the excuses. This year is likely his put up or shut up year. If Notre Dame has another bad season he will be gone. As clueless as ND"s AD is they are smart enough to realize that they will be lynched if they retain him after yet another disappointing season.

 

Just because they studied under a successful Coach does not make them capable of leading a team as a head coach. Rod Marinelli was and is a hell of a defensive position coach he sucked as a head coach. While it doesn't hurt their chances it doesn't grantee they will be good on their own. McDaniels could very well ruin that team for the forceable future the longer he's there. Once you loose your team, look out.. everyone starts heading for the life boats and the ss titanic is left to sink. Whether he realizes it or not Josh has knocked over the first few dominos and the longer he keeps it up the more damage he'll do. Too bad it is an AFC team that we rarely face and not a bitter NFC rival. That could make it far more entertaining. Though we do have Detroit which is perennially melting down and will have to do for cheep entertainment.

[Boston Boxer]

I hear ya...

 

He looks to be like Crennell, Weiss, and probably Mangini...good coordinators w/ Big Bad Bill, but lousy on their own.

 

ok, i have to defend my boys...Crennel was coaching a horrible Browns team, so no way he could turn that turd organization around. Mangini was in the same boat. The Jets are terrible and only until now with Ryan have they went out and spent the money on so good players. Now Mangini is stuck with the Browns. Does not bode well for him again. Weis is doing a great job at Notre Dame and i dont know why people cant see that.

 

The only fault McDaniels has is he is too young and not ready to be a HC.

[balta1701-A]

ok, i have to defend my boys...Crennel was coaching a horrible Browns team, so no way he could turn that turd organization around. Mangini was in the same boat. The Jets are terrible and only until now with Ryan have they went out and spent the money on so good players. Now Mangini is stuck with the Browns. Does not bode well for him again. Weis is doing a great job at Notre Dame and i dont know why people cant see that.

 

The only fault McDaniels has is he is too young and not ready to be a HC.

The questions are though...how much of the fact that those teams were horrible was because of the organization and how much was because the guy wasn't that skilled in getting the most out of his players or putting them in a position to succeed. Mangini...yeah, I think the Jets kind of screwed him, but without being behind the scenes it's always hard to comment on these things. Also never know how much input guys have in who their teams draft.

 

Weis may be doing decently with his rebuilding project, but that team has been really bad the last couple years.

[bowlingtwig]

I love living in the middle of this...this year will be interesting indeed

 

Broncs fans are some of the most passionate i have seen.

I hear you there. I live in Denver during the entire '99 season. Those fans are nuts. I think it goes further than just Bronco fans though, as I noticed that there sports fans are nuts. Regardless of what sport it is and they will have no problem throwing McDaniels under the bus quite literally if this becomes a trainwreck season. I blame McDaniels in this entire situation. I maybe young but I can't remember anytime before about a team even attempting to trade a franchise QB.

 

[Pixote]

For what they paid Cassell I assume KC thinks they signed a franchise QB. I think whoever made the decision to pay him the huge contract they came up with may be in serious trouble because I think he will flop and at best be an average but grossly overpaid QB on a bad team.

[Mongo3451]

For what they paid Cassell I assume KC thinks they signed a franchise QB. I think whoever made the decision to pay him the huge contract they came up with may be in serious trouble because I think he will flop and at best be an average but grossly overpaid QB on a bad team.

I agree.

[BearFan2000]

I agree.

 

 

couldn't agree more. A mediocre to average QB would have flourished in that offense. They have weapons coming out their arse. If anyone's a product of a system it's was Cassell benefiting from the talent around him. Put him on a bad team and I'd be willing to bet he won't fare well. I'd even be willing to bet that Brady wouldn't be so great on a crappy team.

[nfoligno]

Disagree.

 

Personally, i would have made him prove himself one more season before giving him a contract such as KC did. I have said this before, but when you give a player a new contract early, I think the deal should basically be a "deal" for the franchise. While this contract may not be equal to Brady or Manning, I think it is way too close. Even if he were to look very good this year, I do not believe the different would be "that" substantial. Thus, I would have made him prove himself for another season before giving him a huge contract.

 

With that said, I actually think he will prove to be a good QB, and further, believe KC has an offense that is on the up, though it may take another year or so to fully realize that.

 

KC has been working hard to build their OL, and I love what they have done. They have a nice mix of age and youth, w/ some depth in development. The OL was a weak spot last year, but I think it is an area that we will see evolve sooner, rather than later.

 

Larry Johnson may not be what he once was, but is still solid, and Jamal Charles proved a capable young RB last year as well. Further, both RBs are solid pass catchers.

 

Bowe is an upper tier WR, who could push into the elite category. Bradley could be interesting, if he could stay healthy. I love that they signed Engram, who gives them a damn good 3rd down slot receiver. Huge hole w/ Tony G departed, and I am surprised they didn't do more to address TE.

 

At the end of the day though, I think they will have a solid OL and solid run game, which will make the QBs job easier. And while I am not sure how many weapons they have, they do have an upper tier WR in Bowe who could push into the elite category this year.

 

The question, at least for me, w/ Kc is more about their D than their offense. They have drafted a lot of defense over the last two years, but can they develop? I do believe Cassel was in an ideal situation last year, but also believe he made the most of it. While he has a lot of thanks to throw Moss and Welkers way, I just do not think you can totally take away the credit, as he played like a veteran well beyond his experience. He may not have the weapons now that he did, but he may have a better OL and run game, and has experience now which he didn't a year ago. I also like their coaching and how Cassel would seem to fit within such.

 

I agree.

 

[Soxbadger]

Weis is doing a great job at Notre Dame and i dont know why people cant see that.

 

I guess it depends on your definition of "great."

 

Since 1964 Notre Dame has had 7 coaches (not counting O'Leary or Kent Baer)

 

In terms of winning pct they rank:

 

1) 1964–74 Ara Parseghian 11 95–17–4 .836

2) 1986–96 Lou Holtz 11 100–30–2 .765

3) 1975–80 Dan Devine 6 53–16–1 .764

4) 1997–2001 Bob Davie 5 35–25 .583

5) 2002–2004 Tyrone Willingham 3 21-15 .583

6) 2005–present Charlie Weis 4 29–21 .580

7) 1981–85 Gerry Faust 5 30–26–1 .535

 

To me it seems Weis has been pretty average, both Davie and Willingham were considered "failures" and they have slightly better winning percentages.

 

He may turn it around, but if you are the head coach of ND and you have any skill you should be winning an average of 70% of your games.

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

I guess it depends on your definition of "great."

 

Since 1964 Notre Dame has had 7 coaches (not counting O'Leary or Kent Baer)

 

In terms of winning pct they rank:

 

1) 1964–74 Ara Parseghian 11 95–17–4 .836

2) 1986–96 Lou Holtz 11 100–30–2 .765

3) 1975–80 Dan Devine 6 53–16–1 .764

4) 1997–2001 Bob Davie 5 35–25 .583

5) 2002–2004 Tyrone Willingham 3 21-15 .583

6) 2005–present Charlie Weis 4 29–21 .580

7) 1981–85 Gerry Faust 5 30–26–1 .535

 

To me it seems Weis has been pretty average, both Davie and Willingham were considered "failures" and they have slightly better winning percentages.

 

He may turn it around, but if you are the head coach of ND and you have any skill you should be winning an average of 70% of your games.

Yeah, I'm not sure how he's doing a great job. He recruited the best QB talent in Clausen coming out of high school and got him a few years back and he's been medicore. Tate and Floyd are good but nobody can get them the ball. Going to a bowl game and beating Hawaii doesn't show me that Weis is doing a great job at all, but losing to Navy in South Bend shows me how average he's been.

[defiantgiant]

Nfo, I agree with you on Cassel. I think if KC plays to his strengths (meaning they use a 3-receiver set as their base and spend a fair amount of time in the shotgun, like the Pats did toward the end of 2008) they'll have at LEAST a competent starter on their hands. In fact, I think that Cassel could potentially be better for the Chiefs than he was for the Pats.

 

For one thing, the Pats' offensive line is not actually all that good. Brady takes very few sacks (thanks to great pocket awareness and timing) but in the 2006-2007 seasons, he got hit a whopping 82 times, more often than any other QB in the NFL. The Bengals' and Cardinals' offensive lines (neither of which is very good) both kept their QBs cleaner than the Pats' line did for Brady.

 

Basically, the Pats' line looks better than it is because Brady gets hit a lot but always manages to get the ball out just in time, so those hits don't turn into sacks. Cassel isn't as good at that as Brady is: consequently, he took an enormous number of sacks (47 in 15 games) as a starter for the Pats. The Chiefs' pass protection should be at least above-average with Branden Albert and Brian Waters on the blind side, and even an above-average line would be a HUGE upgrade for Cassel.

 

Also, like Nfoligno said, the Chiefs have the pieces in place for a better running game than the Patriots had last season. In fact, on a per-attempt basis, the Chiefs were the better rushing team last season. They ran the ball 379 times for 1810 yards, or 4.8 yards per attempt. The Pats got 2278 yards, but that was on a staggering 513 attempts (fourth-most in the league behind the Ravens, Falcons, and Vikings,) which gives them a YPA of just 4.4.

 

A lot's been made of the Pats' receiver corps making Cassel look better, but I don't think the dropoff will be that steep, necessarily. Obviously Moss and Welker are both phenomenal, but Gaffney was barely OK. His stat line was virtually identical to Rashied Davis' in 2008:

 

Gaffney: 65 targets, 38 catches, 468 yards, 2 TDs

Davis: 67 targets, 35 catches, 445 yards, 2 TDs

 

Mark Bradley should have no problem beating that mark: if he'd played 16 games for Kansas City in 2008, he would have had 40 catches for 507 yards and 4 TDs. That said, Bobby Engram is no Wes Welker by a long shot, but he should be serviceable in the slot, and I think Dwayne Bowe can pick up some of the load there, especially with a better QB than he's had before and some more consistent threats around him. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Bowe put up 1200 yards receiving in 2009. All in all, I think Cassel will be just fine with the Chief's receivers, and he'll benefit from better protection and a stronger run game.

[LT2_3]

For what they paid Cassell I assume KC thinks they signed a franchise QB. I think whoever made the decision to pay him the huge contract they came up with may be in serious trouble because I think he will flop and at best be an average but grossly overpaid QB on a bad team.

 

I find it funny that Bears fans are suggesting that another team overpaid a QB.

 

While I question Cassel's future prospects for success, obviously the Chiefs at least have a very good idea of what they have in him.

 

Now let's look at the situation in detail.

 

Once he was franchised, they were guaranteeing him $14.65 million under the franchise tag. The following year's franchise tag would cost at least $17.58 million.

 

They only guaranteed him $28 million in his new 6 year contract - $4.23 million less than 2 franchise tags in a row.

 

So, this gives the Chiefs his rights for 6 years for less guaranteed money than 2 years on the franchise tag - and they can release him at any time.

 

It seems like a totally reasonable deal to me and I would suspect that, due to inflation, the same "going rate" deal for a starting QB would cost even more next year.

 

For me, the bottom line is that they are paying him less than the Jets are paying Sanchez. If Cassel were to be included in the draft with a body of work equivalent to what he did last year with the Patriots, he would probably get drafted in the top 7-8 and made even more.

 

 

[Pixote]

I find it funny that Bears fans are suggesting that another team overpaid a QB.

 

 

Why? Have the Bears overpaid a QB?

[LT2_3]

Why? Have the Bears overpaid a QB?

 

Because we have no experience with it. We've never had anyone since the dawn of free agency that would have been worth a top contract.

 

I guess I also find it funny that anyone would think that Cassel's deal is similar at all to what Cutler will eventually sign for. He's easily in the Manning / McNabb / Favre arena that's worth 7 years $100 million with probably $45 million guaranteed.

 

The smartest thing Cutler can do for his next contract is simply wait until Eli signs his and look for something in the same neighborhood.

 

[Pixote]

Because we have no experience with it. We've never had anyone since the dawn of free agency that would have been worth a top contract.

 

I guess I also find it funny that anyone would think that Cassel's deal is similar at all to what Cutler will eventually sign for. He's easily in the Manning / McNabb / Favre arena that's worth 7 years $100 million with probably $45 million guaranteed.

 

The smartest thing Cutler can do for his next contract is simply wait until Eli signs his and look for something in the same neighborhood.

 

Unless he puts up HUGE numbers, I think it would be premature to say he would be worthy of a "Manning" type of contract. I hope Angelo has a wait and see approach with Cutler. If by the time we need to commit money to have it count against this years cap figure, he shows he is what we all hope him to be, then go for it and lock him in if you want and use up this years cap on his contract to make it more affordable in the future. Just MHO.

[LT2_3]

Unless he puts up HUGE numbers, I think it would be premature to say he would be worthy of a "Manning" type of contract. I hope Angelo has a wait and see approach with Cutler. If by the time we need to commit money to have it count against this years cap figure, he shows he is what we all hope him to be, then go for it and lock him in if you want and use up this years cap on his contract to make it more affordable in the future. Just MHO.

 

Pix - I honestly don't buy the argument that Cutler has to do anything spectacular to get a top of the line contract from the Bears. His value as a top QB in the league was established when we gave up 2 1sts, a third, and Orton to get him.

 

I'll tell you some more things about Cutler's new contract.

 

It will account for the years he still has left under contract too. So, if he signs one later this year, it will probably be a 5 year extension to the 2 years that will be left on his current contract, but restructured to the Bears benefit.

 

He has 2 years left that are scheduled to pay him roughly $5.5 million in 2010, and $14.8 million in 2011. So, if they give him another $80 million over the following 5 years (avg of $16 mil per year) then he has a $100 million contract easily.

 

A decent rule of thumb for long term contracts for high end players is to pay them a contract average per year of the current franchise tag at the player's position. If you tack on a few mill this year to use the cap we have, then the average over those 7 years drops to right about what Cassel was scheduled to make on th franchise tag this year.

 

We'll see, but I think the Sun Times was way off by suggesting that Cassel's contract is a starting point for the Cutler negotiations. They should have said that Stafford's contract (6 years $72 mil ($12 mil per yr avg) and $40 million guaranteed) is the baseline.

 

Other contracts for comparison:

 

Peyton Manning: 7 yrs $99 million ($14 mil per yr avg) - signed 3 years ago

 

Carson Palmer: 6 years $118.75 million (19.1 mil per yr avg) - signed last year

 

Ben Roethlisberger: 8 years $102 mil contract (12.75 mil average) - signed last year

 

Now I don't know the details of the incentives for each guy's contract, but I could see giving him a base average of $12-14 mil per year and a million bonus for each level of the playoffs we win each year maxed at $4 mil per year. That puts him in the Carson Palmer range per year if we win the SB, but puts his base closer to the Aaron Rogers / Ben Roethlisberger / Matt Cassel range if we miss the playoffs.

 

Cliff Stein will write a contract that will allow Cutler's agent to crow about the max value, and also protect us a bit on the high end with incentives and escalators.

 

That's at least what sounds reasonable IMHO.

 

[Mongo3451]

Disagree.

 

Personally, i would have made him prove himself one more season before giving him a contract such as KC did. I have said this before, but when you give a player a new contract early, I think the deal should basically be a "deal" for the franchise. While this contract may not be equal to Brady or Manning, I think it is way too close. Even if he were to look very good this year, I do not believe the different would be "that" substantial. Thus, I would have made him prove himself for another season before giving him a huge contract.

 

With that said, I actually think he will prove to be a good QB, and further, believe KC has an offense that is on the up, though it may take another year or so to fully realize that.

 

KC has been working hard to build their OL, and I love what they have done. They have a nice mix of age and youth, w/ some depth in development. The OL was a weak spot last year, but I think it is an area that we will see evolve sooner, rather than later.

 

Larry Johnson may not be what he once was, but is still solid, and Jamal Charles proved a capable young RB last year as well. Further, both RBs are solid pass catchers.

 

Bowe is an upper tier WR, who could push into the elite category. Bradley could be interesting, if he could stay healthy. I love that they signed Engram, who gives them a damn good 3rd down slot receiver. Huge hole w/ Tony G departed, and I am surprised they didn't do more to address TE.

 

At the end of the day though, I think they will have a solid OL and solid run game, which will make the QBs job easier. And while I am not sure how many weapons they have, they do have an upper tier WR in Bowe who could push into the elite category this year.

 

The question, at least for me, w/ Kc is more about their D than their offense. They have drafted a lot of defense over the last two years, but can they develop? I do believe Cassel was in an ideal situation last year, but also believe he made the most of it. While he has a lot of thanks to throw Moss and Welkers way, I just do not think you can totally take away the credit, as he played like a veteran well beyond his experience. He may not have the weapons now that he did, but he may have a better OL and run game, and has experience now which he didn't a year ago. I also like their coaching and how Cassel would seem to fit within such.

Actually you agree and disagree. You are agreeing that it is premature to annoint him as a franchise QB. But, are disagreeing with the assessment that he will flop. My main argument on giving out a 60 million contract is to look at the Anderson in Cleveland.(one year wonder) Cassell can be that as well. Heck, at least break the bank mid-season for the guy. As far as him flopping is concerned. Just got a feeling based on watching him play and the superior talent and coaching surrounding him. Taking an undefeated team and almost making the playoffs did not impress me much. I also think their division was a little over-rated last year.

[nfoligno]

You can say agree and disagree. I do think Lt2 made a great point, and frankly, I had forgotten that he was still under the franchise tag contract. As he said, while the contract numbers are big, they are not "that" big when you factor how much they were going to have to pay him this season alone.

 

Still, I too would have held off for a while.

 

I do get your argument, and others, who point to the surrounding talent he had to work w/, but I think some also don't realize that he had some negative surrounding talent as well. While he had great weapons at his disposal, at the same time, he had neither a great OL, nor a great run game, to rely on. Just think about that for a moment. Most any time I can think of a young QB w/o prior experience coming in and looking good, they did it while protected by a damn good OL and had a solid run game to take the pressure off. Having weapons to throw to is great, but w/o the protection, you are still asking a lot of the young QB.

 

Further, while I didn't watch close to all his games, when I did watch, he looked damn good. It is one thing to simply chuck it up there for Moss to go up and catch it, but that isn't what I saw. I saw him solid under pressure, and placing the ball well.

 

More than players, for me, the question is system. While Billichek is a hated man, the guy is also a damn coaching genius. I think he has solid coaching in KC, but regardless, will they be able to replicate? For me, it comes down to KC's OL. I think their OL could/should be solid or better this year. If that is the case, I think Cassel will prove he wasn't a one year wonder, and further, believe Bowe could climb into the elite WR category. If their OL sucks, then Cassel very well could struggle, but I am not sure I would hang it all on him.

 

Actually you agree and disagree. You are agreeing that it is premature to annoint him as a franchise QB. But, are disagreeing with the assessment that he will flop. My main argument on giving out a 60 million contract is to look at the Anderson in Cleveland.(one year wonder) Cassell can be that as well. Heck, at least break the bank mid-season for the guy. As far as him flopping is concerned. Just got a feeling based on watching him play and the superior talent and coaching surrounding him. Taking an undefeated team and almost making the playoffs did not impress me much. I also think their division was a little over-rated last year.