Jump to content


Pure Football
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Kayoh

  1. trade Julio - rebuild keep Ryan and draft Pitts = win now idk why you conflated drafting an elite offensive weapon with "rebuild" when there were multiple top notch QB prospects available that we passed on to get him
  2. Cordarrelle Patterson at RB is a huge W.
  3. "competitive" as in "playoff contender"? Could be as early as this year, believe it or not. "Competitive" as in Super Bowl contender? Not until the entire current staff is cleared out and more of an emphasis is put on analytics.
  4. Corral is my 2022 QB1 so this thread (and his performance tonight) was nice to see.
  5. it's a pretty bad class after Pitts. Grant is a really good football player but he's not anything special as an athlete, which could make deep midfielding difficult for him in the NFL. The rest of the dudes are just JAGs in my eyes.
  6. I personally think Zaccheaus is more talented as a WR than Gage. I think if he got a fair shot, he'd be the #2.
  7. wasn't J'Mon Moore one of the 3 WRs the Packers drafted a few years ago alongside MVS and St Brown?
  8. can't believe nobody's mentioned him yet. Olamide Zaccheaus.
  9. a la Brandon Brooks. But that might just be the rarest type of player in the NFL.
  10. bigger is only better when it translates to improved strength and doesn't detract from mobility
  11. I feel like this line of thinking is just as (if not more) delusional as the people who thought we'd draft a QB this year. This QB class was actually really good. Lawrence is as close to a sure thing QB as I've ever seen. I think Fields is extremely likely to succeed too, and Trey Lance is in a situation where it'd be extremely difficult for him to outright fail. Zach Wilson has a really nice supporting cast to work with, although I do think he was the worst QB drafted on day 1, and Mac Jones is learning under Bill freaking Bilichick. Don't get me wrong, I don't think all 5 of them succeed, but I'd be very surprised if at least 3 didn't. I also think there's a very good chance Kyle Trask and Ian Book end up being good in a year or two.
  12. y'all know I can be pretty antagonistic with my takes but how in the world could somebody believe so strongly in something as absurd as "the falcons are going to draft matt ryan's replacement even though they can't reasonably cut him for another 2 years" that they get confrontational about it
  13. this Ravens draft is actually insane
  14. pass rushers don't care about play action, coverage players do, which is what matters. If you just don't block Anthony Barr you're gonna have a bad time regardless of the play call.
  15. yes it did, it gave us a 28-3 lead. The entire team (and most specifically, Jake Matthews) fell apart in the 4th quarter. You'll recall it was 39 and 27 yard passes to Freeman and Julio that put us in NE territory up 28-20 with 4:40 left in the game in the first place, and then Shanahan called a run play on 1st down, which got -1 yard and put us in a 2nd & obvious passing situation, which allowed NE to pin their ears back and sack Matt, leading to 3rd & 23, another obvious passing situation where Matthews had to hold to prevent another sack. It was brutal to watch.
  16. he didn't have a QB but neither did DJ Chark who still managed to actually crank out almost 900 yards. Not saying Gage is trash but when he was on a team with a super productive receiver it's giving him way too much benefit of the doubt to blame his lack of production on the QB.
  17. also provably false. The defense will bite on play action on the first play of the game, regardless of how effective your run game is, and they won't stop biting on it no matter how many times you use it. We've literally never seen an NFL team use play action so much that the defense stopped biting on it, so if there is a limit to how many times they're gullible to it, we can't know what it is. It's not lower than like 14 though.
  18. this is literally provably false. You win by passing in the NFL.
  19. there's kind of a consistent tone in your message that I feel undervalues depth too. WR and CB aren't positions that 2-3 dudes are enough at. You need a strong 5. You need 5-6 WRs that can consistently beat man and you need 5-6 good CBs, with ideally 2-3 GREAT ones mixed in there. I also have no reason to believe we'll be trading back, much less drafting both Farley and Moehrig. And frankly even if we did, AJ Terrell himself might end up being decent but he was a mediocre prospect and had a mediocre rookie season, so I have no reason to actually believe that he's overly likely to be. And having a "pair of WRs" is a start, but nowhere near enough. We could draft Pitts at 4 and then a good WR prospect like Terrace Marshall or Elijah Moore in the 2nd and I'd be ecstatic. I don't actually expect that to happen, but this entire draft could consist of nothing but offensive weapons and DBs and the fanbase would complain but that'd be the type of draft that would improve this team the most.
  20. you need a good (pass) defense to win a super bowl, but the problem with that lies in the inconsistency year to year of defenses as a unit defense (and especially coverage, which is also the most important unit on defense) varies wildly from year to year. If a team is top 5 in sacks or interceptions one year, you can usually bet money on them regressing to (or even past) the mean the following year. Teams generally aren't able to sustain good defense over multiple years in a row, ESPECIALLY pass defense, which again, matters more. Variance is very real and defense is basically a slave to it. Offense on the other hand, is far more consistent year to year, and much more likely to be sustainable over a longer period of time. at the end of the day, the "correct" (optimal/ideal, whatever you want to call it) way to build a Super Bowl winning team in the NFL is to get a progressive offensive mind locked down at HC, get a QB that can consistently beat zone coverage and isn't a sack liability, get a group of receivers that can consistently beat man coverage, and once all that is in place, THEN you worry about filling out the rest, ideally starting with a strong core of young DBs. The reason here is that your offensive core - the offensive minded HC, the QB, the receivers - those are the guys who will be consistent from one year to the next. Those are the guys who'll show up and deliver every season. Then you just need to have the talent in place and hit the positive side of variance (AKA luck) on defense and bam, you've got a legitimate super bowl contender.
  21. I don't think "balance" is really the best goal either. I'd rather commit 50% of our resources to passing offenses, 30% to passing defense, and 10% each to run O & D than 25% to each.
  22. Rattler & Howell are better prospects than any QB in this class other than Lawrence & Fields imo
  23. is that David Pollack, former UGA LB? Dude knows what he's talking about regardless. Trying to "transform" your team into a run heavy defensive team is a great way to make the playoffs and lose, because at the end of the day in today's NFL passing and stopping the pass are what win games.
  24. since this is your final draft, what would you do with the top 3 picks if trading down wasn't an option?
  • Create New...