Jump to content

Oldskooler

Forum Members
  • Content Count

    2,963
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Oldskooler

  • Rank
    Starting Lineup

Recent Profile Visitors

2,868 profile views
  1. So adding a broken down LB we already got rid of once, and a DE whose only noteworthy action was getting suspended for a bar fight is good enough for you, as far as our defense goes?
  2. And then hired a nutritionist to help him back down to 238 pounds. Too small. Too light. When the rules allow for bench-pressing of opposing players, let me know. THEN I'll care about bench pressing. IS the QB 40 yards away with no obstacles in between? But if he is a liability against the run, teams can audible to run right at him. Worse, it limits our #8 overall draft pick to a third-down specialist. This is something I genuinely appreciate. I also appreciate the off-field charity work I have seen mentioned. Ultimately, being a grea
  3. So you're happy with having a defense that generates no pressure, no pass rush, and lost its best run-plugging DT?
  4. I actually said that an extra sack or two is not real improvement. I have never limited "pass rush" to just sack totals. Here's something for YOU to consider. Our numbers last year were against how many rookie quarterbacks? How many backup quarterbacks? Look at what BLAINE FREAKING GABBERT did against us!!! We were a mediocre defense against Sam Bradford, Brandon Weeden, Brian Hoyer, Zack Mettenberger, rookie crab-leg thief/probable rapist Jamies Winston (twice), the aforementioned Blaine Gabbert, and ancient Matt Hasselbeck, The draft is still to come, certainly, but I don't see any
  5. This is a passing league. Our pass rush WAS complete and utter garbage. Proof: Blaine Gabbert. We HAVEN'T done a thing to effectively upgrade our pass rush or pressure generation. We lost our best run-stuffing defensive tackle. One or two more sacks would technically be an upgrade, but I am talking about a REAL upgrade, where our defense can actually contribute to wins by not allowing rookie and career back up quarterbacks to shred us. Apparently, you do not.
  6. If true, we are in for a race with Cleveland for the #1 overall pick in next year's draft.
  7. It's a good thing I specified NOT bulking up to that degree: just to about 250 lean muscle mass. Because teams never audible to a run to take advantage of a favorable match up. Further, spending the #8 overall pick on a player you claim is only in on third downs is a good plan? I watched every game. Beasley was a liability against the run, and was a non-factor in many games, run OR pass. Go back and look at how many threads there were about Beasley's seeming lack of effort or his "motor" there were. Even you admit he was "hardly as bad". By no reasonable estima
  8. THIS I will support. Beasley does seem to be a good and decent guy. I believe that is more important than on-field production. I am happy to see things like this.
  9. To be honest, if he can help the offense extend drives and keep the defense off the field, he will help limit the defense's potential to give away games. Kinda. Maybe. But agreed: he doesn't help our defensive unit's ability to actually play defense.
  10. Not me. I just want to see some actual effective, consistent production. So we get to tell the offense when and where to run? "No fair running at our safety-sized DE, because he's just here to rush the passer! If we have Beasley in, you have to pass, or run to the middle!!!" Also, what "personal" was added? A personal what? A personal trainer? A personal nutritionist? He has one.
  11. A good spot? We have one proven lazy under-achiever who has squandered a ton of ability by just not caring. We have one DT I very much want to see blossom into what we need him to be as much because of his father as for the team itself. Every other DT is a waste of space. We have stick-man at one DE spot. We have absolutely nothing at other DE roster spots. Linebacker is collectively a huge sucking chest wound. Other than Trufant, our only proven defensive stud, it is impossible to see how good our other DB's are or can be because the front 7 gives absolutely no
  12. I disagree. An NFL team has an image, a brand in the community. Miko Grimes is not reflective of that. She attracts headlines for the wrong reasons, creates dissension in the locker room by running her mouth about things she either made up or was told by Brent. Her behavior is extreme enough, detrimental enough, to warrant the Dolphins' reaction. Further, his age makes him decreasingly worth the headaches she brings.
  13. First, "quotant" isn't a word. Second, even though "quotient" actually IS a word, that is what the "Q" in "IQ" stands for. While "IQ quotient" is a failure in and of itself, you failed to even fail properly. People who lack the intelligence to use the English language properly shouldn't talk crap about other people's intellect. I clearly said "from Free Agency", meaning I am not talking about the draft yet. I later say that I do not believe that the players available at #17 will be sufficient upgrades to make a difference in our overall defensive effectiveness. But that is a
  14. Show me where I referenced sack totals.
×
×
  • Create New...