NFL - Random Opinions

You get rid of the bue week in the playoffs and a lot more teams are resting players in the last 2 weeks of the season. Plus if you want to eliminate the bye drop it to 6 teams to many damn teams make the playoffs now anyways you up it and half the teams in the nfl are making the playoffs.

 

Top 16 make the playoffs, bottom 16 get to start the home work for the draft. The NFL is about making money, so more airtime equals more profit.

 

I like Chips!

 

And more teams (Steelers fans especially) crying we made the playoffs it was a sucsesfull season when it really wasnt.

 

6 teams wouldn't eliminate the bye week. It would go back to a bye week for 2 teams instead of 1 like this year. It's either 8 teams (4 games of revenue) or 4 teams (2 games of revenue)... NFL isn't giving up money, that's for sure.

 

With 6 teams you could make them all play week 1 then give a bye to the highest remaining seed. It would make for better football then letting in an 8th team. 7th seed teams are 0-6 so far with most of the games being one sided (average margin of victory is 12.5)

 

#2020Bears

 

Half the teams in the NFL making the playoffs would be a terrible idea. I still don't like 7.

 

Then you aren’t eliminating the bye… you are just moving it to a more advantageous spot in the playoffs.

Which team do you give the bye to after two games have been played?

I think you are just fucking with me now…

 

100%

 

32 team single elimination playoffs.

 

Having the bye after the first week is why I like the way the Australian Football League ("footy" or Aussie rules) does their postseason. In their system you have 8 seeds, but the first weekend is the Qualifying and Elimination round.

Picture the four division champs playing each other in the first weekend. The two winners get the bye the next weekend and then host the games the following weekend. Meanwhile the 5-8 seeds play each other for the two wild card spots. The losers of those games are out.

As weird as it sounds, it would take us back to our "traditional" playoff format in that after that first weekend, we'd have six remaining seeds per conference with two teams getting byes and the other two division winners hosting the wild card games.

 

Random Thought of today:

Caught up on the Angry Run award last night. Always a good segment tho whatshisname Bears fan oversold it imo(i know i know, angry, but still). Anyway thats a random thought, its not the random thought.

No disrespect to Pierce, it was a great run, but how in the hell does that guy Pacheco not win that award?? Is it he cos he's not the biggest guy and doesn't deliver stiff arms from space? How about volume of work? I'm not sure i've ever seen him run not looking pissed off at the world! That guy runs like his feet are having a fight with his shoes.

Dude needs his own category, the furious award.

 

Call me crazy but if I'm a team looking at the free agent QBs (starting) Carr is at the top of my list. No he isn't as talented as Rodgers but I don't want any part of that three ring circus. Garapolo has proven he has that it factor as a leader but he cannot stay healthy. Wouldn't mind him as a back up but doubtful he is looking to go that route. Jamies is intriguing if healthy. Yes you have to limit his interceptions but the way he acted last year shows he has matured which could lead to better play on the field. Baker is also interesting but it has to be the right team. He might be a good fit with the Jets they have talent on both sides of the ball and I think his often time arrogant chip on the shoulder mentality he often plays with would work well in New York

Now if I'm KC and looking for a backup Bridgewater might be worth a look.

 

Ok crazy…

Not because of your post though. Carr was more of a cap casualty, rather than trying to upgrade in Vegas imho. But after the Daniel Jones contract information, I’m starting to think the Raiders just made a terrible business decision in general.

Carr isn’t Tom Brady or Patrick Mahomes, but no one else is either… I think running a franchise should come down to drafting a QB EVERY year, no matter what your starter looks like. It’s the most important position on the team, yet they are always trying and mostly failing to upgrade players like Carr. I don’t understand getting rid of a player like him, unless you already have a plan in place to upgrade him. I know it ruffles feathers for players like Baker Mayfield, but if you set a precedent that you are ALWAYS attempting to improve the position regardless of who is under center, it becomes the norm.

JUST DON’T MOVE ON FROM A PLAYER YOU'RE MOST LIKELY GOING TO BE DOWNGRADING DUE TO THE MARKET.

 

I’ve been saying something similar for years, and it goes beyond just stacking for the future. It’s also one of the better chips to have on your side of the table in any trade negotiations.

Drafting a passer at BPA, regardless of positional needs, may be one of the easier ways to increase your draft capital every offseason, which would offset the capital spent in that passer.

It also would put that idea in the teams that are drafting around you that, you never know, they could be going after that passer we have targeted this round. Forcing someone to consider jumping you for a position that you are always in consideration for isn’t necessarily a bad thing.

The only downside would be possibly missing out on a position of need, but if you have another position rated higher and your reaching to fill that need, you’re likely fucking up in the first place.

 

I got an Opinion on the Derek Carr thing...

I blame Josh McDaniels and the Steelers defense for this strange/weird situation.

McDaniels was kinda the opposite of Gruden when it came to QB relations with Carr, Carr and Gruden were on the same page and communicated very well with each other. Things went to shit with McDaniels and I blame Carrs poor performances for bringing that out of McDaniels. It was obvious with that lucrative contract given Carr that he was their man at QB, but the wheels fell off their dream when Carr started completing more passes to the defense, lol. Carr also, imo, didnt get the right coaching or support from the higher-ups to right the ship and he was forced to try and make plays do to a siv of a defense also. It was admittedly Carrs worst season since his rookie year and the Steelers game where he threw 3 INT's sealed his fate, along with McDaniels having a prime excuse to dump/bench him and his $40M fully guaranteed 2023 contract. Leading up to the Steelers game, in spite of the INT's, Carr was 4-1 as the starter, beating some real good teams too and I thought winning was the only thing that mattered even if its ugly? The no-trade clause was a deal breaker also, but that was known since Carr signed the thing with the Raiders blessings.

Going into the 2022 season, I had the Raiders making the playoffs and that was expected by McDaniels and crew also (obviously), especially with the signing of Adams. So when things looked bleak, they panicked and benched Carr and put in Stidham down the stretch who went through 3 games, 0-3, 4 TD's and 3 INT's... not exactly what they should have done to make the playoffs, but hindsight is 20-20.

I guess the point of my opinionatedrantification is... well hell, i forgot now.

 

A true BPA general manager would have already filled the key needs in free agency anyway, rather than depending on the draft.

And if you take a BPA approach, the other aspect of it that usually gets overlooked is that trading down/out to future years is always an option for every pick. If teams get the idea that you might take the QB they want regardless of immediate need, trading with you to get that QB gains traction.

 

I'll blame Mark Davis and Dave Ziegler, followed by Reggie McKenzie, Mike Mayock, and every head coach and defensive coordinator the Raiders have had over the last nine seasons.



I've also read that the Raiders are dead last in grand total EPA for defense and special teams from the time Carr was drafted to now.

 

Random opinion: the run and shoot doesn't deserve the bad reputation that it got.

The biggest knock against it in the mid-1990s was that it gave up the in-line tight end in favor of an extra WR. But in today's game, that's normal - so many TEs line up as WRs that this isn't a big deal anymore. Four verticals and spread formations are common. Lots of teams play "chuck and duck", just not in the run and shoot system.