On top of that, when are PI and Personal Fouls going to be reviewable, those penalties are just as impactful, if not more so, than catches, fumbles, etc.
NFL 2014 Season - Page 13
| Forum Index > Sports |
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On top of that, when are PI and Personal Fouls going to be reviewable, those penalties are just as impactful, if not more so, than catches, fumbles, etc. | ||
|
jrwh
United States37 Posts
On March 19 2014 06:08 AgentW wrote: That and you don't give away a first rounder for a guy who scored a lot of touchdowns, which may be the most meaningless statistic in the world when that same guy never had a 20 yard rush and averaged 3.6 YPC. It's the same reason I don't see why people think Le'Veon Bell is a stud, fantasy or otherwise. Dude rushes for 3.5 YPC with a terrible offensive line. That's not terrible, but it's leaps and bounds from good. I disagree on the point about touchdowns, being able to punch the ball in from the redzone always > fieldgoal, and some team have a surprising amount of trouble with it. Also, the fact that he never had a 20+ yard rush only means that he was consistent, and one 80yd run from being over 4.0ypc, which is what Arian Foster/Marshawn Lynch/other top RBs put up. And again, he did this with the Browns, who had a rookie qb in Weeden throwing to mediocre receivers (some of whom developed into phenomenal receivers last year). It's not like any of his opponents had to respect the pass. Speaking of Lynch, I don't remember what the Seahawks gave the Bills for him but I doubt it involved a first rounder. If they knew exactly what they were going to get, though, I'm sure they wouldn't have hesitated to send a first round pick for him. Lynch was like 20 when he came into the league, he just took some time to bloom. Richardson will turn 23 a few months before the season starts, so he has time to bloom like Beast Mode did. For clarity's sake, I'm not a Colts fan. I hated the move from a personal standpoint cuz I had Bradshaw in fantasy and the Colts other RB (Ballard I think?) had just gone down for the season to a knee injury. I had about one day to rejoice in already having my Lamar Miller replacement sitting on my bench before the Richardson deal broke. I shopped my WRs and TEs galore all season long but never did get a deal done for a better RB2. | ||
|
AgentW
United States7725 Posts
On March 20 2014 08:25 jrwh wrote: I disagree on the point about touchdowns, being able to punch the ball in from the redzone always > fieldgoal, and some team have a surprising amount of trouble with it. Also, the fact that he never had a 20+ yard rush only means that he was consistent, and one 80yd run from being over 4.0ypc, which is what Arian Foster/Marshawn Lynch/other top RBs put up. And again, he did this with the Browns, who had a rookie qb in Weeden throwing to mediocre receivers (some of whom developed into phenomenal receivers last year). It's not like any of his opponents had to respect the pass. Speaking of Lynch, I don't remember what the Seahawks gave the Bills for him but I doubt it involved a first rounder. If they knew exactly what they were going to get, though, I'm sure they wouldn't have hesitated to send a first round pick for him. Lynch was like 20 when he came into the league, he just took some time to bloom. Richardson will turn 23 a few months before the season starts, so he has time to bloom like Beast Mode did. For clarity's sake, I'm not a Colts fan. I hated the move from a personal standpoint cuz I had Bradshaw in fantasy and the Colts other RB (Ballard I think?) had just gone down for the season to a knee injury. I had about one day to rejoice in already having my Lamar Miller replacement sitting on my bench before the Richardson deal broke. I shopped my WRs and TEs galore all season long but never did get a deal done for a better RB2. Agreed with the touchdown being so much better than a FG sentiment, but I just think it's too situation based to be useful in comparing RBs. The point about Richardson's YPC is that he's slow and makes bad decisions reading the hole, and it's not like he had a bad offensive line in Cleveland. Mediocre at worst, good at best. Lynch argument isn't valid because he forced his way out of Buffalo. Lynch was nearly as good as he is now while in Buffalo running behind the measly lines we used to field in the mid 2000s. | ||
|
jrwh
United States37 Posts
On March 20 2014 09:20 AgentW wrote: Agreed with the touchdown being so much better than a FG sentiment, but I just think it's too situation based to be useful in comparing RBs. The point about Richardson's YPC is that he's slow and makes bad decisions reading the hole, and it's not like he had a bad offensive line in Cleveland. Mediocre at worst, good at best. Lynch argument isn't valid because he forced his way out of Buffalo. Lynch was nearly as good as he is now while in Buffalo running behind the measly lines we used to field in the mid 2000s. IDK. YPC seems to be potentially as misleading as TDs to me. I just went through last season's stats and there were 27 guys with 4.0 or more ypc, but only 15 of them had 200+ carries. Of the 7 who topped 5.0 ypc, only Murray, McCoy, and Charles had 200+ carries. Andre Ellington led the league with 5.5 ypc, Cam Newton and Donald Brown tied for second with 5.3. I also don't know how we can call Richardson "slow" within 2 years of him going top 3 in the draft. The Browns and a whole lot of analysts didn't think he was slow when he ran a 4.4something at the combine, and that's not something that changes drastically without a serious injury or several years' aging. I can't comment on the "bad decisions reading the hole" bit cuz I don't have the expertise to judge that sort of thing, but again, having Weeden as your QB means no one has to respect the pass. Also, having to play the Steelers, Ravens, and Bengals for over a third of your games doesn't help anyone's ypc; those teams were ranked 3, 8, and 12 against the run respectively in 2012. None of this, of course, explains why he sucked so badly last year. Maybe the transition to a new team and having to learn a new playbook mid-season? In addition to the value of giving up next year's 26 for last year's 3, what I really liked about the trade was how Richardson fits in with what the Colts already were/are. Franchise QB? Check. Solid Receiving Corps (even post-Wayne injury)? Check. Workhorse back? I believe Richardson will fill that role, and put up top 10 numbers doing so. Already targeting him as a mid-round steal for this year's fantasy drafts. Then again, last year I sold myself on Case Keenum after he replaced Shaub, and ditched Matty Ice for him with the quickness. Didn't take long to see I was wrong about that, and fortunately I was able to cash in a bit on Josh McCown towards the end of the season. We shall see about Richardson. | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
| ||
|
AgentW
United States7725 Posts
On March 20 2014 10:09 jrwh wrote: IDK. YPC seems to be potentially as misleading as TDs to me. I just went through last season's stats and there were 27 guys with 4.0 or more ypc, but only 15 of them had 200+ carries. Of the 7 who topped 5.0 ypc, only Murray, McCoy, and Charles had 200+ carries. Andre Ellington led the league with 5.5 ypc, Cam Newton and Donald Brown tied for second with 5.3. I also don't know how we can call Richardson "slow" within 2 years of him going top 3 in the draft. The Browns and a whole lot of analysts didn't think he was slow when he ran a 4.4something at the combine, and that's not something that changes drastically without a serious injury or several years' aging. I can't comment on the "bad decisions reading the hole" bit cuz I don't have the expertise to judge that sort of thing, but again, having Weeden as your QB means no one has to respect the pass. Also, having to play the Steelers, Ravens, and Bengals for over a third of your games doesn't help anyone's ypc; those teams were ranked 3, 8, and 12 against the run respectively in 2012. None of this, of course, explains why he sucked so badly last year. Maybe the transition to a new team and having to learn a new playbook mid-season? In addition to the value of giving up next year's 26 for last year's 3, what I really liked about the trade was how Richardson fits in with what the Colts already were/are. Franchise QB? Check. Solid Receiving Corps (even post-Wayne injury)? Check. Workhorse back? I believe Richardson will fill that role, and put up top 10 numbers doing so. Already targeting him as a mid-round steal for this year's fantasy drafts. Then again, last year I sold myself on Case Keenum after he replaced Shaub, and ditched Matty Ice for him with the quickness. Didn't take long to see I was wrong about that, and fortunately I was able to cash in a bit on Josh McCown towards the end of the season. We shall see about Richardson. Hah, that's funny you bring up Keenum. This is totally unrelated, but my cousin and I have this crazy theory going that the Texans should draft someone that isn't a QB with the first pick and roll the dice with Keenum because we like him. I believe that with most young players in all sports (see the NBA for prime examples), it takes at least three years to truly evaluate their abilities. Richardson's looked so bad to this point (I forgot to mention that he can't hold onto the ball as of the last few weeks of the season) that I think we're getting into "this guy's going to be a bust" range. I thought that it was a good trade for the Colts at the time because of the points you mentioned (18 months earlier he was regarded as the best back since Peterson coming out of college) but I'm starting to doubt it. The one point in his favor, besides my general position about reserving judgement, is that it can't be easy to just get up and change teams in the middle of a week and learn an entire new offense. Overall, I think he deserves another year before we rip him and the Colts a new one for his poor overall performance, but we're getting there. | ||
|
GTR
51576 Posts
Feels like the Mario Williams/Reggie Bush situation in 2006 all over again. | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
| ||
|
AgentW
United States7725 Posts
| ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
Reminds me of ...really nothing. | ||
|
AgentW
United States7725 Posts
| ||
|
Aveng3r
United States2411 Posts
| ||
|
Aveng3r
United States2411 Posts
| ||
|
jmbthirteen
United States10734 Posts
On March 20 2014 14:11 Aveng3r wrote: also what do you guys think of Manziel? from what I hear hes not really a stand in the pocket, change the protections, read the defense well kinda guy. ESPN still has a lot of analysts that see him going in the top 5. personally I hope the Eagles can snag him. what do you guys think? what? no, we don't need him. Foles is pretty damn good. Need to draft defense defense defense. I think Manziel can be good. Kid has talent. Sure he is undersized, but so are Brees and Wilson. He's got that it factor. But is his head on straight? Can he survive being drafted by the Browns? There are a lot of questions still with him. And pretty much and QB in this draft. | ||
|
Aveng3r
United States2411 Posts
Think they trade up for clowney? I havent heard anyone suggest the idea but they need a pash rusher pretty bad and he could be a special talent, it kinda reeks of a Jerome McDougle situation all over again though | ||
|
Shellshock
United States97276 Posts
On March 20 2014 14:07 Aveng3r wrote: Heard bridgewater didnt look as good as some other guy whos name I cant remember today. Does anybody know who the texans are looking at? Was it Blake Bortles? They were going on about how he had a pretty great pro day. I think they may have mentioned something about Bridgewater not looking very good during the segment I caught on tv | ||
|
LeeDawg
United States1306 Posts
On March 20 2014 16:15 Shellshock wrote: Was it Blake Bortles? They were going on about how he had a pretty great pro day. I think they may have mentioned something about Bridgewater not looking very good during the segment I caught on tv Ron Jaworski said on ESPN that Bortles was very impressive at his pro day and he would be shocked if Bortles wasn't the first QB off the board. I don't think he's going to get past the Texans, honestly. new regimes usually mean new QBs, and with Bill O'Brien being an offensive guy, he will probably want a talented passer to groom. | ||
|
jrwh
United States37 Posts
On March 20 2014 10:20 cLutZ wrote: Why do you keep talking about Richardson's draft pick #? It was widely panned as a reach when it was made. You wouldn't be making this argument if he was a right tackle picked at 15-25 2 years ago who gave up 3 sacks a game would you? Because players get drafted in order of who teams think are the best first, and this early in his NFL career that information is still relevant. He wasn't a reach. Christian Ponder was a reach. And no, I wouldn't make the same argument for Michael Oher. On March 20 2014 10:44 GTR wrote: I really, really think the Texans should take Clowney and grab a McCarron or something in the third. Feels like the Mario Williams/Reggie Bush situation in 2006 all over again. Yes, totally reminded me of that draft! I think they'll take Clowney since it already worked for them once, and none of these QBs come close to what the Reggie Bush hype-level was. On March 20 2014 14:19 Aveng3r wrote: I know but I still have a hunch that chip might go after him. Think they trade up for clowney? I havent heard anyone suggest the idea but they need a pash rusher pretty bad and he could be a special talent, it kinda reeks of a Jerome McDougle situation all over again though Hehe, you must be an Eagles fan. I don't them taking a QB in the early rounds, even if Manziel falls to 22 or the second round. Foles looked too good last season. There's no way that a team with a shot at Clowney would give that up for anything less than way more than the Eagles would/should be willing to part with, either. They'd have to pull an RGIII like deal with multiple future draft picks I'd think. I forget what Atlanta did to move up to 6 and get Julio Jones a few years ago, but they basically viewed him as the absolute last piece needed for a championship puzzle. I don't think, as amazing a prospect as he is, that any team would see Clowney in that same way. | ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4783 Posts
| ||
|
GTR
51576 Posts
| ||
| ||