Rhom Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 10 hours ago, James Arryn said: The Niners leadership quest is actually garnering positive feedback and seeming 'professional' and 'patient' and all kinds of words nit normally associated with Jed York, et al. And, too, the dominoes seem to be falling our way re: our choice of the three offensive wonderkinds and, though denied our top choice, the shelves seem to be pretty full of potential GM talent. So of course I'm really nervous that they are about to make a spectacular error, like Cable and Gamble (the latter of who I actually think might make a decent GM, just not in this situation) or w/e. How would you guys rank the young Turk coaches, ie Shannahan, McDaniels and McVay? 9 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: I'm all in for Elliot Wolf at GM and McDaniels as HC. It's amazing that all the dominoes are falling to leave my top candidates still available. Which probably means we're getting Gamble/Cable... (You guys see the sadly all too typical internet response to SoCaliSteph from Niners Nation when she tweeted that she had a source in the organization that said Jed was leaning that way?) I think at this point I'm team Wolf/McD as well. Which is hilarious to me because I had a Facebook memory pop up the other day making fun of Browns fans a year ago when they were considering McDaniels! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanteGabriel Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 So the Chargers are moving to Los Angeles, where people will care even less about them than San Diego-ans do. I saw a Deadspin comment that Mark Davis is the least shitty NFL owner in California, and he's actively trying to move to Nevada. I could not dispute the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince of the North Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 20 hours ago, DanteGabriel said: I have vague memories of discussing that proposal, in this thread, some time in the last year or so. I do think it's a fun idea, especially in those years when a "woke up in the last few weeks of the season" team gets the sixth seed and is scarier than some mediocre division winner. This year I'm pretty sure the Pats would still have picked the Texans. Who would the Cowboys pick? Green Bay or Seattle is a tough one. I think they'd probably rather take on a Thomas-less Seahawks. Could the first seed choose the second seed if they thought that was their best chance? Like say Matt Ryan broke his arm during the bye week, could the Cowboys pick the Falcons? Take away a home playoff game from a strong division winner? You'd probably just have to restrict the choice to the two teams coming out of the wild card round. I think it could be interesting as well. Thus, it will probably never happen 11 hours ago, Jaime L said: Yeah I brought it up a few years ago after seeing it in a Simmons mailbag IIRC. I see no downside to it. It's fun, it enhances the reward for being the #1 seed, it creates rivalries and generates all kinds of storylines. I mean if you're Dallas you pretty much would have to take Seattle...except could you imagine how much this would infuriate the Seahawks? The atmosphere would be off the charts. I would pay money to watch it. I also love it because coaches would hate it. If you choose the team that beats you, that's every coach's nightmare.. and high comedy. Fun story most likely of interest only to me: We do this sort of thing in a fantasy league I play in. It's a 12 team league with two divisions but 8 teams make the playoffs (so there are no byes). The two division winners, as reward, get to pick the team they will play in the first round. I have been the lowly patsy team picked by one of the two highest seeded teams only to knock them off on multiple occasions. And, let me tell you, I much prefer that underdog role than having to be the team to pick (as I had to this year). I agree with you, picking the team that then beats you really, really sucks and it's only fantasy football. I can only imagine how insane the hype of something like that would be in the actual NFL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbunting Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 11 hours ago, Jaime L said: Yeah I brought it up a few years ago after seeing it in a Simmons mailbag IIRC. I see no downside to it. It's fun, it enhances the reward for being the #1 seed, it creates rivalries and generates all kinds of storylines. I mean if you're Dallas you pretty much would have to take Seattle...except could you imagine how much this would infuriate the Seahawks? The atmosphere would be off the charts. I would pay money to watch it. I also love it because coaches would hate it. If you choose the team that beats you, that's every coach's nightmare.. and high comedy. This is exactly why the NFL would never do it. Say Dallas chose Seattle, well Seattle now has the chip on their shoulders, why would Dallas want to piss off their opponent? It basically would pit one NFL team saying or acknowledging another NFL playoff team is weaker, which tarnishes the "shield" and the NFL tries not to do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Week Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 1 hour ago, DanteGabriel said: So the Chargers are moving to Los Angeles, where people will care even less about them than San Diego-ans do. I saw a Deadspin comment that Mark Davis is the least shitty NFL owner in California, and he's actively trying to move to Nevada. I could not dispute the point. I would think that blackouts would be a real concern at this point. http://thebiglead.com/2016/12/11/los-angeles-rams-already-cant-fill-their-stadium/ Quote And here’s the thing, people in Los Angeles actually wanted the Rams back. A team like the San Diego Chargers may be moving to LA and literally no one in the city wants them there. How are they going to draw anyone if they’re even mediocre? The NFL moving one team to LA might eventually prove itself to be a solid decision. But for that to happen the Rams are going to have to start contending as early as next season. Moving a second team to the city would be an absolute disaster for that franchise. How people within the NFL can’t see that is beyond me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted January 12, 2017 Author Share Posted January 12, 2017 1 minute ago, Week said: I would think that blackouts would be a real concern at this point. http://thebiglead.com/2016/12/11/los-angeles-rams-already-cant-fill-their-stadium/ Having one franchise in LA makes sense, it is kind of ridiculous that the second largest city in the country didn't have a football team. Even if the Rams were struggling to sell seats in LA, that would go away as soon as they got to be a decent team, and assuming they could put together even a brief period of success (nothing crazy, just a few playoff appearances), that would solidify their popularity more or less indefinitely. Moving a second team there...very risky. Neither team is established and whichever is worse on the field is going to really suffer. I don't see how moving from SD to LA makes any sense at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 4 hours ago, Rhom said: It's amazing that all the dominoes are falling to leave my top candidates still available. Which probably means we're getting Gamble/Cable... (You guys see the sadly all too typical internet response to SoCaliSteph from Niners Nation when she tweeted that she had a source in the organization that said Jed was leaning that way?) I think at this point I'm team Wolf/McD as well. Which is hilarious to me because I had a Facebook memory pop up the other day making fun of Browns fans a year ago when they were considering McDaniels! Yeah, I've had a change of heart regarding McDaniels as well. As an inveterate Pats hater, I've never passed up a chance to make fun of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 41 minutes ago, Maithanet said: Having one franchise in LA makes sense, it is kind of ridiculous that the second largest city in the country didn't have a football team. Even if the Rams were struggling to sell seats in LA, that would go away as soon as they got to be a decent team, and assuming they could put together even a brief period of success (nothing crazy, just a few playoff appearances), that would solidify their popularity more or less indefinitely. Moving a second team there...very risky. Neither team is established and whichever is worse on the field is going to really suffer. I don't see how moving from SD to LA makes any sense at all. Especially since one of the teams will definitely be second banana to the other (and it'll probably be the Chargers, since at least the Rams already have some fans), and whichever team that is will never be as popular or profitable as the top team. There's the Jets compared to Giants, the Clippers compared to the Lakers, the Mets compared to the Yankees, the Islanders compared to the Rangers, and the Nets compared to the Knicks. All those second bananas, except the Islanders, are still in the upper half on the list most valuable teams for their sports, but a lot of that is by virtue of owning valuable entertainment and parking space in NY or LA, their actual revenues aren't necessarily very high. Plus, they all have the benefit of having been in their locations for a long time and have built up their fanbases (the Islanders and Nets' moves don't count, it was from NYC suburbs to Brooklyn). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leofric Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 1 hour ago, Maithanet said: Having one franchise in LA makes sense, it is kind of ridiculous that the second largest city in the country didn't have a football team. Even if the Rams were struggling to sell seats in LA, that would go away as soon as they got to be a decent team, and assuming they could put together even a brief period of success (nothing crazy, just a few playoff appearances), that would solidify their popularity more or less indefinitely. Moving a second team there...very risky. Neither team is established and whichever is worse on the field is going to really suffer. I don't see how moving from SD to LA makes any sense at all. You also have a large Raiders fan base in LA who certainly aren't going to switch allegiance to the Chargers, especially now that Raiders are promising to do well for the next few years and will be a bit closer if they move from Oakland to Las Vegas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Week Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 WTF http://deadspin.com/los-angeles-chargers-unveil-new-logo-1791118192 Looks very blah. Color scheme seems like it'll be similar to the TB Lightning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted January 12, 2017 Author Share Posted January 12, 2017 1 minute ago, Week said: WTF http://deadspin.com/los-angeles-chargers-unveil-new-logo-1791118192 Looks very blah. Color scheme seems like it'll be similar to the TB Lightning. Saw that. Chargers seem determined to be a bottom-tier team for years to come. Being the worst team in a strong division won't help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 1 hour ago, Week said: I would think that blackouts would be a real concern at this point. http://thebiglead.com/2016/12/11/los-angeles-rams-already-cant-fill-their-stadium/ Turns out they've solved that problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 13 minutes ago, Fez said: Turns out they've solved that problem. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanteGabriel Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 52 minutes ago, Maithanet said: Saw that. Chargers seem determined to be a bottom-tier team for years to come. Being the worst team in a strong division won't help. "Let's use the Dodgers logo, except, since we're the Chargers... Let's make the font look electric." Won't it be fun for Chargers fans to watch their team get curb-stomped by the Raiders while being massively out-numbered in their "home" stadium? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 Lulz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted January 12, 2017 Author Share Posted January 12, 2017 Rams hire Redskins OC Sean McVay. Quote McVay, 30, will become the youngest head coach in NFL history. I'll admit I'm surprised, and kind of irritated. This is the first time I can remember that the Redskins have had enough success that another team would want to poach their talent. I'm sure it has happened in the past, but it has been a long time. So it looks like we're replacing our OC and DC in the same offseason. Not exactly the kind of stability you are looking for to turn a playoff contender into a champion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 2 minutes ago, Maithanet said: Rams hire Redskins OC Sean McVay. I'll admit I'm surprised, and kind of irritated. This is the first time I can remember that the Redskins have had enough success that another team would want to poach their talent. I'm sure it has happened in the past, but it has been a long time. So it looks like we're replacing our OC and DC in the same offseason. Not exactly the kind of stability you are looking for to turn a playoff contender into a champion. One word. TOMSULA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhom Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 Another domino falls and my preferred McDaniels or Shannahan the Younger are still out there... Yeap. That seals it. We're definitely getting Cable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 14 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: One word. TOMSULA. That's like 4 words. Jaime...I think I agree with your order, might subconsciously be why they went that way. All 3 are intriguing though; this is miles apart from the last couple years. McVay's off the board, but I also like(d) his and Shanahan's prior contact with the organization, though I think it's a mixed blessing as far as the Yorks are concerned....it's always weird watching them do the 2-step with the DeBartolo legacy, trying to ride it and at the same time keeping it at arm's length. Honestly, if it weren't my team it would be fascinating to watch. Agree on McDaniels...Hoodie is like the polar opposite of Bill Walsh when it comes to branching, but he just might be the exception. Obviously it's all about people skills, kinda mirroring his mentor's path. Shannahan seems destined to at least be good, high floor type without the usual low ceiling. McVay tbh I only know the bits I've read, but there seems to be a glowing buzz. If his age is detrimental, I guess you'll find out soon enough, but if not you've got a potential gem with open fields stretching out ahead of you. Gimmie a minute and I'll mix more metaphors. Something about sailing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhom Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 27 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: One word. TOMSULA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.