Do you mind the high turnover of players on NFL rosters?

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

03-16-2017, 01:37 PM
hoosier

Quote:

Originally Posted by pbmax

1970 football was terrible, only I was young so it was hard to know how terrible until the NFL put in the 1978 rules changes.

1970 football was ruled by hoary cliches and a lack of risk taking. Unless your idea of innovation was run, run, then long pass on 3rd and 7.

I could see arguing that the 1960s were better. For every Lombardi then there was the AFL.

But better passing AND player movement means that teams are not stuck in the same track for nearly as long as they were back in the day. Now teams that bounce around from mediocre to terrible and back again are truly poorly run (see Rams, Los Angeles, or Jets, New York).

Nonsense, you had plenty of innovation. See, the Chiefs and Oilers would run on 3rd and long, and the Raiders would throw long on 1st and 2nd downs. Ok, so the 70s wasn't a good time for offensive innovation. But that is just because it was the defenses' turn to shine.

When I say I liked the NFL of the 70s better I'm not speaking of offensive schemes (although the modern paradigm for offensive innovation was forged in the 70s with Coryell) but of being a fan, of following a team.
03-16-2017, 01:40 PM
woodbuck27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harlan Huckleby

Amen. I don't do nothing for free. Madtown pays me a nickle a word to post here. And if lots of people get pissed off, I see a little extra something in my check.

I am happy that Mad is treating you so well.
03-16-2017, 01:51 PM
Pugger

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harlan Huckleby

What is a team if not the players on the roster? The team colors? Would it matter if last year's Bears players became this year's Packers?

Justin Harrell and other hardcore packer fans often speculate about, say, the offensive line of the future. Or who will be the WRs of the future. But there is no future beyond the initial rookie contract. The team is mostly new faces every 3 years.

I get that people just go along with it. I think fans had a more fun experience back when there was a real local team to follow; you could develop loyalty to players and track their development.

When the Lombardi era ended fans didn't stop being fans.
03-16-2017, 01:54 PM
Pugger

Quote:

Originally Posted by woodbuck27

The Green Bay Packers have lost a lot of their Offensive 2016 Roster Players in this FA period to date. It sure appears to me that FA is about players making the very best deal they can for themselves. It also appears to me that TT has decided to make some hard decisions based on a players real value to the teams future.

Offense:

As it has gone down the Packer OL will look remarkably different in terms of Roster spots as the team trains for the 2017 season. The Packers have lost more than Josh Sitton as we can now add Free Agency losses T. J. Lang ( TT and Ball reportedly low balled him) and J.C. Tretter has left Green Bay to play Center on the Cleveland Browns OL.

OL Don Barclay remains with Packers on a one-year deal that was relatively cheap.

It is of utmost importance to keep Aaron Rodgers on his feet so I have some concern as to how these losses may end up as a threat to Aaron Rodgers health.

TT has made moves at TE to upgrade that position (acquiring Martellus Bennett and Lance Kendricks) so there is no concern there and the draft; TT can now direct his attention to another position with a pick. It appears that nice guy and former 3rd Rd. pick Richard Rodgers time in Green Bay may soon expire.

TT it appears, either (depended on the accuracy of conflicting reports) lost out on a solid bid to retain Eddie Lacy (or a conflicting report says TT and Ball low balled Lacy as well as T. J. Lang) Whatever, Lacy accepted a incentive laden offer from the Arch Rival Seattle Seahawks. That will be an interesting watch for me. We know at least that Lacy left the Packers Organization with class and no bad feelings.

TT has to find help at the RB position.

Defense:

TT opened the vault and locked up OLB Nick Perry (a five year $59 million deal that includes an $18.5 million signing bonus. A nice deal for Nick Perry. Nice deals often go South for the Team.

Former Packers CB Davon House is returning to Green Bay. That cannot hurt the team as it is really hurting at the CB position. He will make a decent Nickleback.TT still needs more assurance for a legit NO. 1 CB.

TT needs so much more to bolster the teams defense. As I write this we are now watching for a possible signing of former Eagle Connar Barwin.

Really? I don't think it is as dire as you suggest. We lost a RB who can be replaced in this upcoming draft. RB is one position where a rookie can come in a contribute significantly right away. We upgraded our TE position. The only position we are noticeably weaker on offense is RG with Lang gone. Perhaps we have a player ready to step into his shoes just like Taylor did when Sitton was waived.

We do need to bolster our defense. I'm glad Perry is back and having House won't hurt. We still need help on the DL, LB and CB. The FA period isn't over yet and next month we have the draft which from all accounts seems to be one of the deeper classes in recent years.
03-16-2017, 02:13 PM
woodbuck27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pugger

Really? I don't think it is as dire as you suggest. We lost a RB who can be replaced in this upcoming draft. RB is one position where a rookie can come in a contribute significantly right away. We upgraded our TE position. The only position we are noticeably weaker on offense is RG with Lang gone. Perhaps we have a player ready to step into his shoes just like Taylor did when Sitton was waived.

We do need to bolster our defense. I'm glad Perry is back and having House won't hurt. We still need help on the DL, LB and CB. The FA period isn't over yet and next month we have the draft which from all accounts seems to be one of the deeper classes in recent years.

It is a fact that we have lost a lot off the 2016 Roster. I will be explicit now:

My concern is mostly focused on the losses on the OL.

I will be even more explicit. TT has still a lot of CAP Money available to him and bringing in an impact player and there are still options available to him. I would suggest he stays in the game and signs that high potential impact player.

If his focus in this FA period was to get rid of the Deadwood; he still needs to replace that Deadwood with Roster players that will help the team get to next season's Super Bowl.

An upgrade at the TE position is hardly getting that job done.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page