T1B

Posted: **Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:21 am**

KC Scott wrote: The teams get way too caught up in what the book says an NFL starter should measure, run and throw

From the mock drafts, a person could think that the Ravens are desperate for a starting QB.

While he's a little bit small by current standards, Troy Heisman looked pretty darn good at the end of the year, what little could be judged in his limited role.

How about some O-linemen to keep the QBs you have from getting killed? Rookie QBs rarely have an impact, rookie franchise-quality first round O-linemen do. Just comes down whether you want to win now or later, I suppose. I'd rather go into battle with Troy Smith and a solid O-line than Matt Ryan and an aging/bad O-line with one gimped-up falling star.

Posted: **Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:26 am**

Along those same lines, in a spread offense Chase Danial could do pretty well in the NFL. He reminds me a lot of Brees

Posted: **Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:33 am**

KC Scott wrote:Along those same lines, in a spread offense Chase Danial could do pretty well in the NFL.

OK.

Remind me which NFL team employs a college style spread?

Let me think hard here and fire up the memory banks... oh, that's right... none of them.

But I agree -- if an NFL team did implement the current rage-in-college-offenses, Daniel would rack up some impressive numbers in those 12 minutes before he got killed. Not nearly as impressive as Dennis Dixon would in his 1/4th of an NFL spread game, but impressive nonetheless.

When everyone has 250 pound linebackers that run 4.50, that whole "spread" thing goes out the window with a quickness.

If someone does figure out a way to make the spread work, he'll be hailed as a genius for a loooooong time.

He reminds me a lot of Brees

Oh, does Daniel have a nasty precancerous growth on his face too?

Posted: **Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:08 am**

Right off the Top - the Saints & Lions (though they will drop it now that Martz is gone) both ran variations of the spread.
Hell, the Patriots run it with Moss, Stallworth, Gaffney and Welker

Posted: **Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:28 am**

KC Scott wrote:Right off the Top - the Saints & Lions (though they will drop it now that Martz is gone) both ran variations of the spread.
Hell, the Patriots run it with Moss, Stallworth, Gaffney and Welker

Dude -- please think with your own brain, and don't let the announcers do your thinking for you. We'll all be better off.

None of those teams run anything that even vaguely resembles a "spread."

While it gives the shithead announcers a catch-word to run with, it certainly isn't accurate. Anyone who compares what RR ran at WVU, or Oregon's or Florida's offenses run (which are different versions of the spread) to NE or the Saints probably doesn't have posession of two working eyeballs... or one working eyeball, for that matter.

Not even in the same universe.

For one, the modern/current college spread system, in most programs, is an option. When was the last time an NFL team ran an option? 1958 or something?

And there's a reason for that... NFL Option = Death of Backs

Which, oddly enough, is why NFL teams don't use option plays as their main focus.

Posted: **Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:41 am**

Dinsdale wrote:
KC Scott wrote:Right off the Top - the Saints & Lions (though they will drop it now that Martz is gone) both ran variations of the spread.
Hell, the Patriots run it with Moss, Stallworth, Gaffney and Welker

Dude -- please think with your own brain, and don't let the announcers do your thinking for you. We'll all be better off.

None of those teams run anything that even vaguely resembles a "spread."

Have you been watching the same Patriots' offense as the rest of us????

Posted: **Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:42 am**

Dinsdale wrote:
KC Scott wrote:Right off the Top - the Saints & Lions (though they will drop it now that Martz is gone) both ran variations of the spread.
Hell, the Patriots run it with Moss, Stallworth, Gaffney and Welker
Dude -- please think with your own brain, and don't let the announcers do your thinking for you. We'll all be better off.

None of those teams run anything that even vaguely resembles a "spread."

While it gives the shithead announcers a catch-word to run with, it certainly isn't accurate. Anyone who compares what RR ran at WVU, or Oregon's or Florida's offenses run (which are different versions of the spread) to NE or the Saints probably doesn't have posession of two working eyeballs... or one working eyeball, for that matter.

Not even in the same universe.

For one, the modern/current college spread system, in most programs, is an option. When was the last time an NFL team ran an option? 1958 or something?

And there's a reason for that... NFL Option = Death of Backs

Which, oddly enough, is why NFL teams don't use option plays as their main focus.

The definition of the spread is shotgun snap with 4 or more in the pattern. I've been around football, palying or coaching for 30 yrs., so I'm gonna say I know a spread when I see it. And yea, variations of the spread are run from Pop Warner all the way to the Pros

And you're veering off course with your option rant.

Posted: **Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:00 am**

Dinsdale wrote:Remind me which NFL team employs a college style spread?

I certainly could have been more clear (sometimes I give you people WAY too much credit), and for this I apologize.

But to compare what NE runs to what the all-the-rage current college spread is would be not only inaccurate, but dumb.

But since you're familiar with the game/terms, I OBVIOUSLY don't need to explain that to you, right... because you're not that dumb.

PSSSST! 2 WRs and 2 TEs makes for 4 in the set. 3WRs and 1 TE is 4 in the set. Pretty much describes every single play run in the NFL these days, don't it? Add a shotgun snap, and that makes it a "spread"?

Dude -- sorry, but your terminology is stuck in 1950. The game has changed, bud.

P.S.: No one in the NFL runs a wishbone anymore. Please update your notes accordingly. TIA. Same goes for the power-I.

Posted: **Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:37 am**

Dinsdale wrote:
But to compare what NE runs to what the all-the-rage current college spread is would be not only inaccurate, but dumb.

Texas Tech, Mizzou and WVU all ran Spreads - so thats youre frame of reference.
You're equating spread with a running QB - but it's not.
Jim Kelly wasn't Michael Vick and he ran the spread... or as you may know it the K-Gun
Same with Warner when he was with the Rams and there's another variation of it with Manning and the Colts, even though they don't run it every series.

PSSSST! 2 WRs and 2 TEs makes for 4 in the set. 3WRs and 1 TE is 4 in the set. Pretty much describes every single play run in the NFL these days, don't it? Add a shotgun snap, and that makes it a "spread"?

Pssst! Yea it does!

Mizzou ran a spread with 2 TE Rucker and Coffman running out of slots. The term Spread describes spreading the field vertically and horizontaly to open running lanes and the middle of the field for the slot receivers. Just beacuse the receivers may be TE or RBs doesn't mean they're not spread or they're not receivers. As long as they know the Q, X, Y, Z patterns and they know the read on the coverage, it doesn't matter what number they wear.

Posted: **Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:45 am**

I see my "the game has changed, your terminology hasn't" thing didn't quite hit home.

And if this was 1950, you'd be soooooo right, dude.

You seem to be confusing yesteryear's "spread formation" with today's "spread offense."

Not the same, although I'll always appreciate old-scooledness.

Posted: **Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:16 pm**

KC Scott wrote:Right off the Top - the Saints & Lions (though they will drop it now that Martz is gone) both ran variations of the spread.

If that was a variation of a spread...it was a very sad attempt at it.

With Jim Colletto now as the offensive coordinator, it'll be more 2 receiver, 2 back, 1 TE sets. Very rare will they go 4 wide other than in 3 and long...which happens quite frequently for the Lions.

Posted: **Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:58 pm**

Dinsdale wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:Actually, if you look at the top 10 rushers in the league this year, exactly five of them were more than 220. Ray Rice is listed at 5-9, 205. He can easily add 10-15 pounds in the weight room.

You need to start sitting next to smarter people at the bar.

My bad. "For the most part" should have read "220-ish," or something like that. The point being, besides Westbrook, they're all within an extra bowl of Wheaties in the morning of 220.

Whatever you were trying to say, it basically came out as a lie. Oh, by the way, when Emmitt Smith was drafted he was 5-9 and 207. In the NFL he wound up at 5-9 and 221. He didn't do too bad with his "offensive lineman speed" and all.

Posted: **Wed Jan 23, 2008 5:25 pm**

KC Scott wrote: Mizzou ran a spread with 2 TE Rucker and Coffman running out of slots. The term Spread describes spreading the field vertically and horizontaly to open running lanes and the middle of the field for the slot receivers.

When one hears the term "spread offense" one is led to believe that it primarily refers to the vertical passing game, no?

Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but doesn't the spread also include having your O-lineman spread as well? That's exactly what Mizzou did, and against Arkansas, those gaps allowed Tony Temple to rush for 281 yds.

There were holes big enough to drive a semi-truck thru. In Mizzou's offense, the spread facilitates the running game as well as the passing game.

Posted: **Wed Jan 23, 2008 5:37 pm**

War Wagon wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but doesn't the spread also include having your O-lineman spread as well? That's exactly what Mizzou did, and against Arkansas, those gaps allowed Tony Temple to rush for 281 yds.

Clap-Clap-Clap.

Wags wins the prize.

Empty NFL backfield /= college spread offense

Then again, I don't watch football anymore, so what the hell do I know.

Posted: **Wed Jan 23, 2008 5:38 pm**

War Wagon wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but doesn't the spread also include having your O-lineman spread as well? That's exactly what Mizzou did, and against Arkansas, those gaps allowed Tony Temple to rush for 281 yds.

Most of the modern college spreads do something right along those lines.

Has nothing to do with spreading things vertically, although that is often a benefit.

And try spacing out linemen or tight ends in the NFL and see what happens. You might be spending your first 5 draft picks on QBs every year.

Posted: **Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:20 am**

Dinsdale wrote: Yvenson Bernard from Oregon State

love watching him play....
he'll do well somewhere....

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2008 6:32 am**

Raydah James wrote:
poptart wrote:Oakland's draft strategy depends on what happens with free agents J. Fargas, J. Porter and T. Kelly.
No, it doesnt.

Fargas is a nice backup, but, like you said, the zone blocking system proved that you can plug ANY RB into it and have them be succesfull. Jordan led the league in rush yards the first 4 games until he got hurt.....enter Fargas, who surpassed 1000 yards and got hurt with 2 games left.....enter Rhodes who amassed over 230 yards in the last 2 games.

Sorry, but the health of Micheal Bush and how Kiff feels about him succeeding in the scheme will determine how we'll draft more than anything. Kiff even came out and said on Sirius satellite radio that if McFadden was there, we'd take him. He thinks very highly of DMac and Jake Long and has said as much.

Oakland re-signed Fargas today.

EXCELLENT news!

Tough, if unspectacular, runner who's a solid citizen.
We need many more just like him.

I think this ups the chances we steer away from McFadden ..... if he's even available to us.

Watching the Giant D-Line this post-season gave me penis envy.

Dorsey, Son of Howie, ..... or Ellis.

It's one of those fellas to us at #4, IMO.

It would appear the water has settled on the Kiffin-Davis 'problems' a couple o' weeks ago.

Hmmmmmm ......

Ok.

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2008 3:54 pm**

poptart wrote:Watching the Giant D-Line this post-season gave me penis envy.

I didn’t really notice. Were their pants that tight?

Posted: **Wed Feb 20, 2008 7:39 pm**

poptart wrote:
Oakland re-signed Fargas today.

RACK Huggy's boy.

Posted: **Mon Apr 28, 2008 3:37 pm**

Dinsdale wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:Actually, if you look at the top 10 rushers in the league this year, exactly five of them were more than 220. Ray Rice is listed at 5-9, 205. He can easily add 10-15 pounds in the weight room.

You need to start sitting next to smarter people at the bar.

My bad. "For the most part" should have read "220-ish," or something like that. The point being, besides Westbrook, they're all within an extra bowl of Wheaties in the morning of 220.

But it's easy to see why you shouldn't quit your day job for an NFL front office.

Ray Rice is pretty bulky already. At 5-9, if he adds 15 pounds, what sort of speed does he figure to have? Having offensive lineman speed at the RB position usually isn't strategically sound... really.

If you're going to draft RBs based upon the chance they might be able to bulk-up, better save that shit for the 5-6th round. If Felix Jones can bulk-up, he'd certainly make everyone forget who Ray Rice even was. No comparison -- yet I don't see Felix Jones going in the top 10... because he's too damn small to blow a high pick on. He might go late in the 1st as a gamble-pick, but he's a great deal less of a gamble than Rice.

Rice may well turn out to be a very good player. I just wouldn't bet the farm on it. Or a 1-3rd round pick. If you're going to gamble on guys that size, Yvenson Bernard is a MUCH better/NFL-ready player than Rice (not that I wasn't a Rice fan in CFB -- I was. And it pains me to give a Cunt credit for anything). I'd take Bernard over Slaton, too, but that might be crazy-talk.

Just thought I’d bump this to point out that Ray Rice went in the 2nd round. Yvenson Bernard was not drafted.

Posted: **Mon Apr 28, 2008 4:40 pm**

KC Scott wrote:
Raydah James wrote: and Darren McFadden are going to be ushering in another era
You'll be getting Howie's kid.

Alcula out front should have told ya..........

to James. For once.

Posted: **Mon Apr 28, 2008 5:41 pm**

Draft Guru wrote:1. MIAMI DOLPHINS OT Jake Long, Michigan
2. ST. LOUIS RAMS DE Chris Long, Virginia
3. ATLANTA FALCONS DT Glenn Dorsey, LSU
4. OAKLAND RAIDERS RB Darren McFadden, Arkansas
5. KANSAS CITY CHIEFS OT Ryan Clady, Boise State
6. NEW YORK JETS DE Vernon Gholston, Ohio State
7. NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS (from S.F.) CB Leodis McKelvin, Troy
8. BALTIMORE RAVENS QB Matt Ryan, Boston College
9. CINCINNATI BENGALS LB Keith Rivers, Southern Cal
10. NEW ORLEANS SAINTS DT Sedric Ellis, USC
11. BUFFALO BILLS WR Devin Thomas, Michigan State
12. DENVER BRONCOS OT Branden Albert, Virginia
13. CAROLINA PANTHERS DE Derrick Harvey, Florida
14. CHICAGO BEARS RB Rashard Mendenhall, Illinois
15. DETROIT LIONS RB Jonathan Stewart, Oregon
16. ARIZONA CARDINALS CB Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie, Tenn. St
17. KANSAS CITY CHIEFS CB Mike Jenkins, South Florida
18. HOUSTON TEXANS OT Chris Williams, Vanderbilt
19. PHILADELPHIA EAGLES OT Jeff Otah, Pittsburgh
20. TAMPA BAY BUCCANEERS CB Aqib Talib, Kansas
21. WASHINGTON WR MAlcom Kelly, Okiehoma
22. DALLAS COWBOYS RB Felix Jones, Arkansas
23. PITTSBURGH STEELERS OT Gosder Cherilus, Boston College
24. TENNESSEE TITANS WR Limas Sweed, Texas
25. SEATTLE SEAHAWKS Kentwan Balmer North Carolina
26. JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS DE Phillip Merling, Clemson
27. SAN DIEGO CHARGERS CB CB Antoine Cason, Arizona
28. DALLAS COWBOYS CB Brandon Flowers, Virginia Tech
29. SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS DE Calais Campbell, Miami
30. GREEN BAY PACKERS QB Brian Brohm Louisville
31. NEW YORK GIANTS SS Dajuan Morgan NC State

Martin Rucker goes 79

Props to RJ for calling it 2 months ago

Posted: **Sat May 03, 2008 6:03 pm**

RevLimiter wrote:Where the FUCK have you been, Lames?

...the same place you'd be if your riddled starfish of a team had been punked 8 straight times by the Bolts

Posted: **Tue May 06, 2008 4:29 pm**

ChargerMike wrote:
RevLimiter wrote:Where the FUCK have you been, Lames?

...the same place you'd be if your riddled starfish of a team had been punked 8 straight times by the Bolts

That is pretty embarrassing.

He'll trix his way back in here should the Duhs ever become relevant again.

Posted: **Thu May 08, 2008 1:01 am**

ChargerMike wrote:
RevLimiter wrote:Where the FUCK have you been, Lames?

...the same place you'd be if your riddled starfish of a team had been punked 8 straight times by the Bolts

You think 8 is bad? Try 10...and to cap it off 14 of 15. Now thats a riddled starfish.

Sincerely,

Washington Foreskins

Posted: **Sun Jan 17, 2010 3:28 pm**

Goober McTuber wrote:
Dinsdale wrote:Actually, if you look at the top 10 rushers in the league this year, exactly five of them were more than 220. Ray Rice is listed at 5-9, 205. He can easily add 10-15 pounds in the weight room.

You need to start sitting next to smarter people at the bar.

My bad. "For the most part" should have read "220-ish," or something like that. The point being, besides Westbrook, they're all within an extra bowl of Wheaties in the morning of 220.

But it's easy to see why you shouldn't quit your day job for an NFL front office.

Ray Rice is pretty bulky already. At 5-9, if he adds 15 pounds, what sort of speed does he figure to have? Having offensive lineman speed at the RB position usually isn't strategically sound... really.

If you're going to draft RBs based upon the chance they might be able to bulk-up, better save that shit for the 5-6th round. If Felix Jones can bulk-up, he'd certainly make everyone forget who Ray Rice even was. No comparison -- yet I don't see Felix Jones going in the top 10... because he's too damn small to blow a high pick on. He might go late in the 1st as a gamble-pick, but he's a great deal less of a gamble than Rice.

Rice may well turn out to be a very good player. I just wouldn't bet the farm on it. Or a 1-3rd round pick. If you're going to gamble on guys that size, Yvenson Bernard is a MUCH better/NFL-ready player than Rice (not that I wasn't a Rice fan in CFB -- I was. And it pains me to give a Cunt credit for anything). I'd take Bernard over Slaton, too, but that might be crazy-talk.

Well, Dinsdale, Ray Rice only gained 5 lbs. And over 2,000 yards from scrimmage this year. Yeah, that's not worth a third round pick now, is it? Yvenson who?

Posted: **Thu Jan 06, 2011 11:06 pm**

Goober McTuber wrote:
Dinsdale wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:Actually, if you look at the top 10 rushers in the league this year, exactly five of them were more than 220. Ray Rice is listed at 5-9, 205. He can easily add 10-15 pounds in the weight room.

You need to start sitting next to smarter people at the bar.

My bad. "For the most part" should have read "220-ish," or something like that. The point being, besides Westbrook, they're all within an extra bowl of Wheaties in the morning of 220.

But it's easy to see why you shouldn't quit your day job for an NFL front office.

Ray Rice is pretty bulky already. At 5-9, if he adds 15 pounds, what sort of speed does he figure to have? Having offensive lineman speed at the RB position usually isn't strategically sound... really.

If you're going to draft RBs based upon the chance they might be able to bulk-up, better save that shit for the 5-6th round. If Felix Jones can bulk-up, he'd certainly make everyone forget who Ray Rice even was. No comparison -- yet I don't see Felix Jones going in the top 10... because he's too damn small to blow a high pick on. He might go late in the 1st as a gamble-pick, but he's a great deal less of a gamble than Rice.

Rice may well turn out to be a very good player. I just wouldn't bet the farm on it. Or a 1-3rd round pick. If you're going to gamble on guys that size, Yvenson Bernard is a MUCH better/NFL-ready player than Rice (not that I wasn't a Rice fan in CFB -- I was. And it pains me to give a Cunt credit for anything). I'd take Bernard over Slaton, too, but that might be crazy-talk.
Well, Dinsdale, Ray Rice only gained 5 lbs. And over 2,000 yards from scrimmage this year. Yeah, that's not worth a third round pick now, is it? Yvenson who?

Bump to note that Ray Rice is up to 218 lbs and added another 1,700 yards from scrimmage this year. He was a 2nd round pick, BTW. It's easy to see why you shouldn't quit your day job for an NFL front office, Dinsy.

Posted: **Fri Jan 07, 2011 12:36 am**

Goober McTuber wrote:It's easy to see why you shouldn't quit your day job for an NFL front office, Dinsy.

Oh, the fuck I shouldn't.

I think my outfreakingSTANDING record with my Kiss Of Death could be a valuable asset to any NFL team.

And I'd forgotten the NFL honks had made fools of themselves with the whole "spread" thing in years prior...

I mean, some of youz got clowned by Whitey... that's gotta suck.

Posted: **Fri Jan 07, 2011 12:39 am**

Dinsdale wrote:Kiss Of Death could be a valuable asset to any NFL team.

BTW-those NFL front offices should note that Julio Jones is going to be a once-in-a-generation WR, and Green is going to suck.

T1B

I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......

Re: I dont know whats funnier.......