2013-2014 NFL Thread

[iamshack]

Well, you wouldn't retain McCown and dump Cutler unless you had a rookie/other young QB in the fold who you hoped to pass things off to after one or two seasons.

Of course...the problem is we were never able to develop that franchise qb before...I wouldn't be opposed to trying it...but with our luck, we'd sign McCown and let Cutler walk, and then Josh would get hurt in week 2 and we'd have this young guy starting.

[GoSox05]

So I didnt get any NFL coverage during the weather issues yesterday, but I am hearing that Jim Schwartz pulled a Jim Schwartz yesterday, and then got ornery about it during the press conference after the game. LOL

 

They just totally blew that game. They faked like a 30 yard field goal that would have put them up 7 in the 4th. The punter took the ball and tried to run into the end zone, but got blasted and fumbled. The Steelers drove 97 yards to take the lead.

 

Edited November 18, 2013 by GoSox05

[Jenksismyhero]

Of course...the problem is we were never able to develop that franchise qb before...I wouldn't be opposed to trying it...but with our luck, we'd sign McCown and let Cutler walk, and then Josh would get hurt in week 2 and we'd have this young guy starting.

 

Yep, that's why you gotta franchise him and then draft a QB and try to mold him. If Cutler is amazing next year, pay him and you've hopefully got a decent back-up with the pick. If not, get rid of him, and have McCown and the Bears future QB waiting in the wings.

 

 

[iamshack]

Yep, that's why you gotta franchise him and then draft a QB and try to mold him. If Cutler is amazing next year, pay him and you've hopefully got a decent back-up with the pick. If not, get rid of him, and have McCown and the Bears future QB waiting in the wings.

I wouldn't mind drafting Aaron Murray if we can get him with a 3rd round pick or something.

Edited November 18, 2013 by iamshack

[Steve9347]

[StrangeSox]

I can't even imagine how awful that feels.

[Kyyle23]

Yea, his neck stretched an extra 5 inches on that hit.

 

 

However, I still think the PF was wrong. It wasnt a blow to the head or the neck, it was across the chest and just made it look like a hit to the neck because of how cartoonish Brees looked when he took the hit

[iamshack]

Yea, his neck stretched an extra 5 inches on that hit.

 

 

However, I still think the PF was wrong. It wasnt a blow to the head or the neck, it was across the chest and just made it look like a hit to the neck because of how cartoonish Brees looked when he took the hit

His hand raked across his face pretty good there on the follow through...I think the timing of it stunk, but it was the right call.

 

 

[Steve9347]

Yea, his neck stretched an extra 5 inches on that hit.

 

 

However, I still think the PF was wrong. It wasnt a blow to the head or the neck, it was across the chest and just made it look like a hit to the neck because of how cartoonish Brees looked when he took the hit

It was definitely a hit to the neck.

[DrunkBomber]

I think it would be a mistake letting Cutler walk. A lot of it obviously depends on what his contract demands are but I have a feeling that he would be willing to sign more of a team friendly deal allowing them to make improvements elsewhere. If Cutler is gone I dont think its long before Marshall becomes unhappy and wants out.

 

Id like to see them either renegotiate Peppers deal or release him, then resign Jennings and let Peanut walk, unless he is willing to give a significant hometown discount. Id be curious what Meltons demands are now but if theyre more reasonable than last offseason I wouldnt be opposed to bringing him back. That would leave them with a healthy amount of cap to bring in some new blood on defense. Obviously they need to have a defensive heavy draft. IMO, they need 2 new safeties, a replacement for Tillman and some dline help. It wont be a finished product, but they can make some strides defensively in one offseason, similar to how quickly they improved the offense. Sign a big name or two defensively, then bring in some depth and solid role players and then see what you can do in the draft.

[clyons]

McCown to start again this week vs. Rams:

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...0,3998874.story

[Harry Chappas]

This makes pretty solid sense to me and explains why I will never be an NFL head coach, among many reasons,

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...0,7332934.story

[iamshack]

This makes pretty solid sense to me and explains why I will never be an NFL head coach, among many reasons,

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...0,7332934.story

 

So really only the first time where I considered really calling a timeout was after Ray Rice had the 11-yard run to the 5-yard line. And he took that ball, probably, I think it was about at 1:16 when he had that ball. That was the first time. I was down there with the official. That was the first time. But when you put ... the numbers all together, if you call three timeouts right there in succession, you’re still only getting the ball back at 18 seconds,

 

I don't follow this explanation. This presumes you take a timeout after they gained the first down, then between first and second down, and then between 2nd and third down. Only if they run the ball on third down and don't score the td (at which point your concern is mightily lessened because this presumed they did not score the td, otherwise the clock would have stopped) would there be 18-19 seconds remaining.

 

I like the idea about substitutions and packages, but I think he's wrong about the time.

[iamshack]

Additionally, the 13 % thing really annoys me.

 

I LOVE that he is aware of that data, but I certainly hope he understands that those percentages are constantly changing with each play. It is a misuse of the data to not change your strategy based on events occurring within the drive, rather than to act as if the drive simply operates within a vacuum of a 13% success rate.

[Soxbadger]

And here I thought he was going to argue that by not calling time outs it potentially limited the Ravens play calling because they had to worry about time running out.

 

Odd explanation.

[Dick Allen]

And here I thought he was going to argue that by not calling time outs it potentially limited the Ravens play calling because they had to worry about time running out.

 

Odd explanation.

It did work out that way.

[iamshack]

And here I thought he was going to argue that by not calling time outs it potentially limited the Ravens play calling because they had to worry about time running out.

 

Odd explanation.

That's what he was saying about the pass on third down...he was able to eliminate 50% of the playcalling possibilities.

 

I only quoted part of his explanation.

Edited November 18, 2013 by iamshack

[StrangeSox]

And here I thought he was going to argue that by not calling time outs it potentially limited the Ravens play calling because they had to worry about time running out.

 

Odd explanation.

 

And then by using their two timeouts, we knew what they had to do on third down. They had to throw it because there wasn’t enough time left to do anything else. So we cut the percentages in half from run to pass.

[StrangeSox]

Additionally, the 13 % thing really annoys me.

 

I LOVE that he is aware of that data, but I certainly hope he understands that those percentages are constantly changing with each play. It is a misuse of the data to not change your strategy based on events occurring within the drive, rather than to act as if the drive simply operates within a vacuum of a 13% success rate.

 

Yup, the percentage might be 13% when they're at their own 16 to start the drive, but that probability will change with each and every play.

[Jake]

Yup, the percentage might be 13% when they're at their own 16 to start the drive, but that probability will change with each and every play.

 

He knew that. He's basically just explaining what his beginning state of mind was, which is that there was no expectation of them scoring a TD. By the time that seemed to be a possibility to him, he explained the other things that affected his decisionmaking.

[iamshack]

Yup, the percentage might be 13% when they're at their own 16 to start the drive, but that probability will change with each and every play.

Especially with our defense, and after the PF...i mean come on Trestman...I hope he didn't really believe that and was just trying to give the dumb press something to chew on.

[StrangeSox]

He knew that. He's basically just explaining what his beginning state of mind was, which is that there was no expectation of them scoring a TD. By the time that seemed to be a possibility to him, he explained the other things that affected his decisionmaking.

 

I don't think it's clear, but this line makes me think he was still sticking with the "13%" thing even when they were in the red zone.

 

But if we call three timeouts in a row, we’ve got 19, 18 seconds left at the max. So the percentage of them scoring — it’s a leap of faith. I mean, they went all the way down the field. Three points, yes. Tie the game. Seven points, we’re talking 13 percent.

[iamshack]

I don't think it's clear, but this line makes me think he was still sticking with the "13%" thing even when they were in the red zone.

Yep, he clearly is arguing that he was making decisions based on a 13% probability. Whether he really believed that at the time is a different story, but that is what he is saying here. Otherwise, he shouldn't have mentioned it. It's irrelevant for purposes of this discussion. If he wants to use that for the reason he punted, fine, but not for why he didn't take timeouts here.

 

I would think the Raven's td percentages once they reached the 5 were in the realm of 50-65 percent or more, and against our defense, maybe higher.

[Soxbadger]

Yep, he clearly is arguing that he was making decisions based on a 13% probability. Whether he really believed that at the time is a different story, but that is what he is saying here. Otherwise, he shouldn't have mentioned it. It's irrelevant for purposes of this discussion. If he wants to use that for the reason he punted, fine, but not for why he didn't take timeouts here.

 

I would think the Raven's td percentages once they reached the 5 were in the realm of 50-65 percent or more, and against our defense, maybe higher.

 

Well isnt the real question what is the probability inside the 10 that the other team will score a td or fg?

 

Because part of the reason you save time is so that you have a chance to win in regulation even if the other team kicks a fg.

[IlliniKrush]

Well isnt the real question what is the probability inside the 10 that the other team will score a td or fg?

 

Because part of the reason you save time is so that you have a chance to win in regulation even if the other team kicks a fg.

His explanation doesn't make any sense. The whole 13% is out the window at that point, it makes no difference where the drive started. If he actually thinks it makes a difference and we're reading it correctly, he's pretty stupid.

 

You're wanting to save time there no matter how they score. You really need it if they scored a td because there aren't any outs like there are if they got a fg. My take was that you needed to really protect yourself against the td there.