NFL Offseason 2014: Buildup to the Draft

[sperry]

So, did anyone watch Draft Day? It surprisingly got not horrible reviews.

[Mexal]

So, did anyone watch Draft Day? It surprisingly got not horrible reviews.

It was entertaining. If you're looking for an NFL fix, it itches it somewhat, but it's very unrealistic and if that bothers you, I wouldn't really recommend seeing it. There are some clear liberties taken to be dramatic (serious lack of due dilligence on prospects that would never happen) but I did have fun with it.

[fuseprime]

So..the NFL schedules were released tonight. Surprisingly, the Seahawks are not going to play the Niners on TNF. They have the honor of playing the Packers. I really thought that would have been the game people were looking most forward to get back into football with. They are playing the Niners on TNF week 13 so I'm guessing the NFL, with their endless "storylines" and what-not, are hoping that the two teams will be undefeated, or damn near it, around then.

Speaking of storylines, the Broncos have the pleasure of hosting the Colts on the opening SNF game.

Annnnd the Lions host the Giants on MNF as well as the Cardinals hosting the Chargers for the later game. :thumbsdown: I'm trying to find the "storyline" in those two games, but I can't. I'm sure the NFL will find it for me.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

So..the NFL schedules were released tonight. Surprisingly, the Seahawks are not going to play the Niners on TNF. They have the honor of playing the Packers. I really thought that would have been the game people were looking most forward to get back into football with. They are playing the Niners on TNF week 13 so I'm guessing the NFL, with their endless "storylines" and what-not, are hoping that the two teams will be undefeated, or damn near it, around then.

Speaking of storylines, the Broncos have the pleasure of hosting the Colts on the opening SNF game.

Annnnd the Lions host the Giants on MNF as well as the Cardinals hosting the Chargers for the later game. :thumbsdown: I'm trying to find the "storyline" in those two games, but I can't. I'm sure the NFL will find it for me.

The Niners and Seahawks play each other on Thanksgiving, and then again two weeks later. Kind of odd spacing there.

[DanteGabriel]

The Niners and Seahawks play each other on Thanksgiving, and then again two weeks later. Kind of odd spacing there.

The league's been doing this more and more -- pushing division games towards the back of the schedule to create playoff suspense. I think it's not a bad idea.

[Mexal]

The league's been doing this more and more -- pushing division games towards the back of the schedule to create playoff suspense. I think it's not a bad idea.

It's a great idea though for the Bengals, it makes it a pain in the ass given we play Pitt twice within the last 4 weeks. For some divisions, especially in the NFC, it'll be a blast. For divisions in the AFC, might be what they need to make it to the playoffs while others falter.

[matt b]

The league's been doing this more and more -- pushing division games towards the back of the schedule to create playoff suspense. I think it's not a bad idea.

I like having division games at the end, I just don't like having to play a team twice in the space of 3 weeks. I always liked the idea of getting the first round of divisional games done in the first few weeks of the season (let's say, 6 weeks) and the last round in the last few weeks.

[Jaime L]

I was mocking the schedule release a major event because the second the prior season ends you know everyone you're going to play the next year. And yet when I saw the Skins schedule laid out yesterday I pulled a full on Jessie Spano (I'm so excited, I'm so...scared).

I like that we ease into the season with Houston and Jacksonville to start. Though, like many, I expect Houston to be much improved this year. I had similar concerns about opening with Philly last year and we all saw what happened. Now I'm especially curious who they draft. I really don't want to see Clowney and Watt tag-teaming a now fully healthy RG3.

But I fucking forgot we play the NFC West this year. Sweet Jesus. This is the wrong freaking year to play that division. The 4 best defenses in the NFC could all be NFC West teams. That's a helluva gauntlet.

What does excite me though is that RG3 will be matching up with Luck, Wilson, Kaepernick and Bradford this year. Full-on bragging rights at stake. And now he's got the health and the weapons to hopefully be at his best. Can't wait!

[DanteGabriel]

What does excite me though is that RG3 will be matching up with Luck, Wilson, Kaepernick and Bradford this year. Full-on bragging rights at stake. And now he's got the health and the weapons to hopefully be at his best. Can't wait!

Hadn't realized that. That is pretty exciting. And it's nice of you to try and improve young Bradford's confidence by including him with those other QBs...

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

I like having division games at the end, I just don't like having to play a team twice in the space of 3 weeks. I always liked the idea of getting the first round of divisional games done in the first few weeks of the season (let's say, 6 weeks) and the last round in the last few weeks.

THIS. Playing twice in a three weeks span is rather brutal. On the plus side since it's likely that the Niners will be dealing with some suspensions, and having Bowman likely coming back from injury sometime in the midseason, perhaps having the games later plays to their advantage somewhat.

[Jaime L]

Hadn't realized that. That is pretty exciting. And it's nice of you to try and improve young Bradford's confidence by including him with those other QBs...

Hah, well I mention him because he'll forever be compared with RG3 because St. Louis effectively chose him over Griffin. Considering the (still accumulating) haul they got for that choice, can't fault them. RG3 has a ton of pressure on him for everything the Skins gave up to get him. He has to not only justify that but become a franchise savior. But the pressure on Bradford this year is probably equal to that considering all the QBs the Rams will have had a shot after this year. RG3 plus the entire 2014 QB class. If Bradford doesn't start delivering tangible results, I could see fans getting restless over what else they could have had.

[Maithanet]

It's not that elite precision passing offenses can't win Superbowls. It's that you can't win a Superbowl if that's the only thing your team has going. Arizona admittedly came closest. That was an insane playoff run by a team that was by any statistical measure one of the worst we've ever seen make a Superbowl. If Santonio Holmes doesn't make that amazing toe touch catch, the Cardinals would instantly become the exception to this, and just about every rule of what gets you rings.

But the last decade, over and over again, has shown us the inability of one dimensional pass heavy teams to win Superbowls. They may kill it from every statistical standpoint from point differential to advanced stats and they may be one of the best teams in the league yet someone always ends up beating them.

I just think it's a reminder you can't shortcut it with one elite guy or an elite scheme. You need balance, versatility and the ability to attack teams multiple ways because someone will always find a way to take away what you do best. It's funny when it comes to the playoffs I'm seeing more and more similarities between the NFL and the NBA.

I agree. And I think that because Elite quarterbacks are so good at winning games that GMs are always tempted to go all-in on offense and give them a ton of weapons there. The Rams, Colts, Patriots (post 2006) and Saints all took this approach. That will win a lot of regular season games against defenses that are just utterly outclassed. The problem is that moving your offense from really good to great is not going to make up for a mediocre defense when to going really gets tough in the playoffs. Doubly so if the defense is built around always having the lead, and the offense gets out of rhythm and sputters.

And yeah, it doesn't invalidate my point that the Saints had an easy road to the superbowl. That's sort of my point - that in that year, the Saints made it because they had a good coaching staff, had great matchups in the playoffs that they could capitalize well on, had a very good offense and a defense that wasn't a major liability and got lucky at times. There's no one rule that says 'they won because of x'.

Easy road to the Super Bowl? I don't see that at all. They had the best record in the NFC, and beat the team with the second best record (the 12-4 Vikings), and then the AFC team with the best record (the 14-2 Colts). The Vikings were a strong, balanced team, and would have won if they hadn't had 6 fumbles (three lost) and 2 interceptions in the NFCCG. I mean, if we are looking for examples of "but who did they beat?" in the playoffs, it seems like the 2008 Steelers would be a much better choice, as they only had to play the 8-8 Chargers, the 11-5 Ravens and the 9-7 Cardinals, thus avoiding the 13-3 Titans, the 12-4 Panthers and the 12-4 Giants.

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

I don't the 2007 Patriots are good example of a one dimensional team. They had a very good, possibly just short of great, defense. The 2006 Colts might be a better example, except their defense stepped it up for 4-6 at the end of the season. They were also playing against Rex Grossman in the Superbowl, which made up for Manning's subpar game.

I think the only thing that absolutely every Superbowl winner has in common is a good amount of luck.

[Reposado]

I agree. And I think that because Elite quarterbacks are so good at winning games that GMs are always tempted to go all-in on offense and give them a ton of weapons there. The Rams, Colts, Patriots (post 2006) and Saints all took this approach. That will win a lot of regular season games against defenses that are just utterly outclassed. The problem is that moving your offense from really good to great is not going to make up for a mediocre defense when to going really gets tough in the playoffs. Doubly so if the defense is built around always having the lead, and the offense gets out of rhythm and sputters.

well the other thing that it does is last a long time. you build a great defense and it lasts 2 or 3 years for the most part.

build a precision passing offense around one of those qbs and you will be competitive every year for a long time. even if you dont win it all, consistently making the playoffs is really what its about for gms. it keeps giving them a chance. more important for gms, it maintains their jobs and makes teams profitable.

everyone wants to win a championship but a gm that wins a title and then bottoms out a few years later isnt going to be as well paid and secure as one that makes the playoffs for 6 or more years straight

[Maithanet]

well the other thing that it does is last a long time. you build a great defense and it lasts 2 or 3 years for the most part.

build a precision passing offense around one of those qbs and you will be competitive every year for a long time. even if you dont win it all, consistently making the playoffs is really what its about for gms. it keeps giving them a chance. more important for gms, it maintains their jobs and makes teams profitable.

everyone wants to win a championship but a gm that wins a title and then bottoms out a few years later isnt going to be as well paid and secure as one that makes the playoffs for 6 or more years straight

You're right that GMs really want to build a team that can make the playoffs every year. The ultimate goal is to win the Super Bowl, of course, but most of the time it is easy to blame playoff failures on poor coaching and bad luck.

It is true that often you can have a great offense with an elite quarterback and a few holes elsewhere, whereas a great defense typically requires very good talent at all three levels, which requires good drafting to attain and can be very expensive to maintain year after year. Once their rookie contracts are up, it will be very difficult for the Seahawks to pay Chancellor, Sherman and Thomas, and that's just the secondary.

BUT, I feel like the fact that good defenses are expensive to maintain sort of ought to work to the advantage of teams with Elite QBs. If you have a true top 5 quarterback, then other than his salary (~15% of your cap), you ought to be able to scrimp a bit on offensive talent and still have a very good offense. But I've never actually seen a team with a great quarterback make the plan be "build a great defense, our quarterback will score enough to win". The closest to this I can come up with is the 2006 Patriots that lost the AFCCG.

[Reposado]

You're right that GMs really want to build a team that can make the playoffs every year. The ultimate goal is to win the Super Bowl, of course, but most of the time it is easy to blame playoff failures on poor coaching and bad luck.

It is true that often you can have a great offense with an elite quarterback and a few holes elsewhere, whereas a great defense typically requires very good talent at all three levels, which requires good drafting to attain and can be very expensive to maintain year after year. Once their rookie contracts are up, it will be very difficult for the Seahawks to pay Chancellor, Sherman and Thomas, and that's just the secondary.

BUT, I feel like the fact that good defenses are expensive to maintain sort of ought to work to the advantage of teams with Elite QBs. If you have a true top 5 quarterback, then other than his salary (~15% of your cap), you ought to be able to scrimp a bit on offensive talent and still have a very good offense. But I've never actually seen a team with a great quarterback make the plan be "build a great defense, our quarterback will score enough to win". The closest to this I can come up with is the 2006 Patriots that lost the AFCCG.

i think also, that it's not just quarterbacks, but offenses in general that are more consistent from a year to year basis. offensive linemen and receivers typically have longer peaks and longer periods in which they can play at a high level(and running backs are mostly fungible anyways)

so if you have that quarterback, you can put other pieces around him that will also last, and you can build an offense that will get you to the playoffs every year.

and as opposed to defenses, offensive lines are relatively small. they function as a unit like a d does, but if you can keep a core four or so and limit the amount of change on the line. limiting the amount of change for a defense has to be a nightmare for front offices. and losing/gaining key pieces can be huge. (houston's recent yoyo)

also, defenses (especially top ones) are more dependent on their coordinator than an offense if you have one of those quarterbacks. regardless of how the play is drawn up, the qb is making decisions. if the pats or broncos lose an o coordinator, they probably are fine.

but if a defense is successful, their coordinator gets a head job elsewhere, and the new one might not have the smae understanding of the players and what schemes fit them, etc

which in total, is why the idea you raised at the end doesnt really happen. the more likely thought process is, we have an elite qb, lets protect him, and give him tools.

although isnt that what the bears tried to do with cutler. maybe the initial thought process of gms who end up with an elite precision qb is. "we must keep him healthy at all costs." and those who dont do that, find that their elite qb didnt last as long as they thought he would, (and us fans in retrospect dont consider him elite, even if was talent-wise to begin with"

[Rhom]

The Niners and Seahawks play each other on Thanksgiving, and then again two weeks later. Kind of odd spacing there.

They also play the Rams 2x in four weeks.

I'm also one that likes the division games late in the year, but think the first round of them could certainly be played earlier.

[sperry]

So the draft should be tonight. But it's not, because who the fuck knows? Stupid NFL. They really are a hateable company, albeit with a great product.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

So the draft should be tonight. But it's not, because who the fuck knows? Stupid NFL. They really are a hateable company, albeit with a great product.

If memory serves their BS excuse was they couldn't get Radio City Music Hall for the normal dates. :rolleyes:

[Mexal]

I'm really starting to despise Goddell and the league. They're doing everything they can to oversaturate the NFL and it's really pissing me off. The latest below:

Jeff Darlington ‏@JeffDarlington 5m

You thought @NFL Draft was already a big event? Roger Goodell told me today league will consider stretching it to 4 days (still 7 rounds).

3 days is already too much. Extending it to 4 days, especially where the last day is rounds 6-7 is fucking stupid on every level.