AFC West Roundup

[58crash]

Shanahan wanted a Pocket passer

 

[iknowftbll]

As if we needed another reason to dislike the Chiefs!

Some reasons Kap makes sense for the Chiefs

 

[Fountain City Blues]

As if we needed another reason to dislike the Chiefs!

Some reasons Kap makes sense for the Chiefs

Just say no to Kaepernick.

Wrong team. Wrong time.

 

[iknowftbll]

With training camp approaching it's time to give an early installation of this thread. The AFC West teams all play what looks like a very tough slate for 2017, though we all know that's based off 2016 finishes and that doesn't always translate from one season to the next. Still, it's tough to see this division repeat last year's pair of 12-4 teams in the playoffs and a 9-7 team narrowly outside the playoffs.

With that said, all four teams have something to be excited about going into 2017, with some elements of uncertainty ahead for each team as well. Consider:

The Kansas City Chiefs have thrived under Andy Reid, especially considering how bad they were prior to his arrival. Alongside Reid has been QB Alex Smith who despite leading the team to 4 consecutive winning seasons, 3 playoff appearances in the last 4 seasons and the team's sole playoff win in a 24 year span, seems to be vastly unappreciated by Chiefs fans. Perhaps some of that is fair: every fan wants to believe his team can contend for a SB win, especially if your team has had a more than solid run the way the Chiefs have the last few years. The critique on Smith is he can't get the team over the hump. Coming off a 12-4 season and division title, the expectations for the Chiefs are high once again. But there's some uncertainty just beneath the surface too. Under Reid, the sum has been greater than the parts. The Chiefs have won a lot of games despite lacking eye popping play on either side of the ball. They also traded up to grab QB Patrick Mahommes. Already the calls for him to supplant Smith are beginning and they'll grow is Smith doesn't lead the Chiefs to a fast start in 2017. But going with a rookie is no sure thing, and even if the Chiefs are able to keep him on the bench for a season or two there's still no way in knowing how he'll adjust to the league. With a new GM the team is going to have to continue to draft well to stay relevant and while expectations for this year may be high, it's hard to assume this team will remain a contender in the coming years.

The Oakland Raiders were a trendy pick to reach the playoffs last year and some consider them a SB contender behind only the Patriots for 2017. Their season was handicapped by an injury to their QB but he's back and that offense should be one of the best in the business in 2017. One of the bigger issues here though is that defense. Good as the Raiders offense was in 2016, they cumulatively out scored opponents by less than 2 PPG. Before you counter with the argument that figure is skewed by the season finale sans Carr where the Raiders were outscored 24-6, take a look at their 11 one-score games they played: WITH CARR. They posted a 9-2 record in those games, and you can't take that away from them. But you can also assert that as good as their offense is, they were in most of their games one score away from being a 7-9/8-8 team again last year. And that's on the defense for the most part. Now this is a unit that does have some bright spots, but as a whole is going to need to be significantly improved if the Raiders are going to be a true contender. And that's not even the biggest issue here. HC Jack Del Rio has never coached a team to back to back playoff appearances, and has only once coached his team to consecutive winning seasons (Jaguars 9-7 in 2004, 12-4 in 2005). Now the Raiders are not the Jaguars and now is the perfect time for JDR to expand his accomplishments as a HC. But it does look like it'll be an uphill battle for him with a tough slate in 2017. As for the team's pending move to Las Vegas, that carries some uncertainty down the road but I believe the team and players remain very focused on the task at hand. I also give GM Reggie Mackenzie a lot of credit for the job he's done building that team from the dumpster fire Al Davis left behind.

The Denver Broncos are coming off their first non-playoff season since John Elway arrived at the front office. Going into 2917 they have a lot of questions with a new coaching staff, the QB position, the offensive line, and the run stopping abilities. What's worth noting though is despite these uncertainties looming large over the immediate season, Elway has proven his prowess at building this team into a contender and as long as he's calling the shots it's probably safe to say the Broncos will be fine in the long run. And even some of the short term questions surrounding this team may not undermine their season to the extent many suspect it will. First year HC Vance Joseph has assembled a stellar coaching staff. Gone is Wade Phillips, whose defense in 2015 won the SB pretty much without the aid of the offense. In his place is Joe Woods, who coached under Phillips as the secondary coach and promises to not overhaul the defensive philosophy. On offense Mike McCoy returns. McCoy is known for maximizing the talents of his players, coaxing a playoff win out of a Tebow-led offense in 2011, then turning around and ringing up the league to over 30 PPG with Manning the very next year. Regardless of who emerges as the starting QB, he will be in a favorable position with McCoy calling the plays. Ironically enough, major sports media hones in on these questions around the Broncos without really considering the "yeah, but..." angle I've outlined. Meanwhile they've ignored the single biggest factor that will undermine their season this year, and that's the offensive line. Another year of wholesale changes to this unit, and despite the bar not being set too high (or high at all) by the 2016 unit, it takes some real orange colored glasses to assume this unit will be without its struggles again this year. The biggest question now is can a new coaching staff and young QBs overcome those struggles?

The Los Angeles Chargers are a trendy pick by some to reach the playoffs with a 10-6 or so record. They have a highly rated defensive line and an offense that can be as good as any in the league. In their past two seasons they were on the wrong end of a lot of close games. Between players returning from injury and improvements on defense a lot of people see this team as being able to get over the hump in those close games. The NFL's hisory is full of teams that have done so, so it wouldn't be out of the ordinary if the Chargers had a run at the playoffs this year. Still, they just relocated. While the players will remain focused on the tasks at hand, this is different from the Raiders pending move because the players will be working out in new facilities and have to adjust game day routines. Add in a new coaching staff and a new dynamic with their new temporary stadium and it's easy to see why some are not believers in this team. In the long run they just moved to a market where there is arguably no demand for the Chargers or their brand, and they won't be shacking up with the Rams in their new stadium until 2020. With Rivers in the twilight of his career but a plethora of young talent coming up, the Chargers could have a very small window where they are contenders. Or it can fail to materialize altogether.

More on these teams through camp and the pre-season, and of course the regular season beyond that. Meanwhile I welcome your thoughts.

 

[Mingo]

Thanks again - Iko - your analysis is thoughtful and well laid out.

The Chiefs - Neither Smith or Andy Reid have any decent history in the playoffs - Smith is moving into a more injured age group at QB - they are worthy opponents, but play at their ceiling. Please bring on Mahomes - he has a cannon of an arm, but managed (IMO) only to be an above average QB in a QB friendly offense. He needs training up - and still there is the question of his cool under fire.

The Raiders - they have just as much a chance at regression in the WL record - as they do advancing from last year's finish. I question their depth - for long term success. I do like hating Del Rio.

Chargers. - Rivers is also likely to get injured. Interesting to see what they do post McCoy. The Charges LA start may have an epic fail.

 

[CEH]

With training camp approaching it's time to give an early installation of this thread. The AFC West teams all play what looks like a very tough slate for 2017, though we all know that's based off 2016 finishes and that doesn't always translate from one season to the next. Still, it's tough to see this division repeat last year's pair of 12-4 teams in the playoffs and a 9-7 team narrowly outside the playoffs.

With that said, all four teams have something to be excited about going into 2017, with some elements of uncertainty ahead for each team as well. Consider:

The Kansas City Chiefs have thrived under Andy Reid, especially considering how bad they were prior to his arrival. Alongside Reid has been QB Alex Smith who despite leading the team to 4 consecutive winning seasons, 3 playoff appearances in the last 4 seasons and the team's sole playoff win in a 24 year span, seems to be vastly unappreciated by Chiefs fans. Perhaps some of that is fair: every fan wants to believe his team can contend for a SB win, especially if your team has had a more than solid run the way the Chiefs have the last few years. The critique on Smith is he can't get the team over the hump. Coming off a 12-4 season and division title, the expectations for the Chiefs are high once again. But there's some uncertainty just beneath the surface too. Under Reid, the sum has been greater than the parts. The Chiefs have won a lot of games despite lacking eye popping play on either side of the ball. They also traded up to grab QB Patrick Mahommes. Already the calls for him to supplant Smith are beginning and they'll grow is Smith doesn't lead the Chiefs to a fast start in 2017. But going with a rookie is no sure thing, and even if the Chiefs are able to keep him on the bench for a season or two there's still no way in knowing how he'll adjust to the league. With a new GM the team is going to have to continue to draft well to stay relevant and while expectations for this year may be high, it's hard to assume this team will remain a contender in the coming years.

The Oakland Raiders were a trendy pick to reach the playoffs last year and some consider them a SB contender behind only the Patriots for 2017. Their season was handicapped by an injury to their QB but he's back and that offense should be one of the best in the business in 2017. One of the bigger issues here though is that defense. Good as the Raiders offense was in 2016, they cumulatively out scored opponents by less than 2 PPG. Before you counter with the argument that figure is skewed by the season finale sans Carr where the Raiders were outscored 24-6, take a look at their 11 one-score games they played: WITH CARR. They posted a 9-2 record in those games, and you can't take that away from them. But you can also assert that as good as their offense is, they were in most of their games one score away from being a 7-9/8-8 team again last year. And that's on the defense for the most part. Now this is a unit that does have some bright spots, but as a whole is going to need to be significantly improved if the Raiders are going to be a true contender. And that's not even the biggest issue here. HC Jack Del Rio has never coached a team to back to back playoff appearances, and has only once coached his team to consecutive winning seasons (Jaguars 9-7 in 2004, 12-4 in 2005). Now the Raiders are not the Jaguars and now is the perfect time for JDR to expand his accomplishments as a HC. But it does look like it'll be an uphill battle for him with a tough slate in 2017. As for the team's pending move to Las Vegas, that carries some uncertainty down the road but I believe the team and players remain very focused on the task at hand. I also give GM Reggie Mackenzie a lot of credit for the job he's done building that team from the dumpster fire Al Davis left behind.

The Denver Broncos are coming off their first non-playoff season since John Elway arrived at the front office. Going into 2917 they have a lot of questions with a new coaching staff, the QB position, the offensive line, and the run stopping abilities. What's worth noting though is despite these uncertainties looming large over the immediate season, Elway has proven his prowess at building this team into a contender and as long as he's calling the shots it's probably safe to say the Broncos will be fine in the long run. And even some of the short term questions surrounding this team may not undermine their season to the extent many suspect it will. First year HC Vance Joseph has assembled a stellar coaching staff. Gone is Wade Phillips, whose defense in 2015 won the SB pretty much without the aid of the offense. In his place is Joe Woods, who coached under Phillips as the secondary coach and promises to not overhaul the defensive philosophy. On offense Mike McCoy returns. McCoy is known for maximizing the talents of his players, coaxing a playoff win out of a Tebow-led offense in 2011, then turning around and ringing up the league to over 30 PPG with Manning the very next year. Regardless of who emerges as the starting QB, he will be in a favorable position with McCoy calling the plays. Ironically enough, major sports media hones in on these questions around the Broncos without really considering the "yeah, but..." angle I've outlined. Meanwhile they've ignored the single biggest factor that will undermine their season this year, and that's the offensive line. Another year of wholesale changes to this unit, and despite the bar not being set too high (or high at all) by the 2016 unit, it takes some real orange colored glasses to assume this unit will be without its struggles again this year. The biggest question now is can a new coaching staff and young QBs overcome those struggles?

The Los Angeles Chargers are a trendy pick by some to reach the playoffs with a 10-6 or so record. They have a highly rated defensive line and an offense that can be as good as any in the league. In their past two seasons they were on the wrong end of a lot of close games. Between players returning from injury and improvements on defense a lot of people see this team as being able to get over the hump in those close games. The NFL's hisory is full of teams that have done so, so it wouldn't be out of the ordinary if the Chargers had a run at the playoffs this year. Still, they just relocated. While the players will remain focused on the tasks at hand, this is different from the Raiders pending move because the players will be working out in new facilities and have to adjust game day routines. Add in a new coaching staff and a new dynamic with their new temporary stadium and it's easy to see why some are not believers in this team. In the long run they just moved to a market where there is arguably no demand for the Chargers or their brand, and they won't be shacking up with the Rams in their new stadium until 2020. With Rivers in the twilight of his career but a plethora of young talent coming up, the Chargers could have a very small window where they are contenders. Or it can fail to materialize altogether.

More on these teams through camp and the pre-season, and of course the regular season beyond that. Meanwhile I welcome your thoughts.

Awesome writeup. I think your analysis of OAK is spot on. Point differential is a great stat to predict success and Oak played too many close games last year to say they can repeat that success unless their D steps up.

I think Denver can be an 11 win team with just 2 more points per game on offense which equates to an extra FG in 10 of the 16 games. A 80% Jamal Charles for 16 games could provide that himself. He's that good as a pass receiver out of the backfield.

 

[iknowftbll]

Awesome writeup. I think your analysis of OAK is spot on. Point differential is a great stat to predict success and Oak played too many close games last year to say they can repeat that success unless their D steps up.

I think Denver can be an 11 win team with just 2 more points per game on offense which equates to an extra FG in 10 of the 16 games. A 80% Jamal Charles for 16 games could provide that himself. He's that good as a pass receiver out of the backfield.

There's a few reasons to believe the Broncos can be 11-5 or 10-6 (which may be good enough to win the AFC West). Like you said, one more FG in 10 of 16 games is one way. But what about run defense that isn't bottom tier? If you think about the Broncos overall defensive ranking from last year it's mind blowing when you consider the run D ranked 28th overall! The ranking of 18th in yards per carry is somewhat encouraging though because it tells me even in a "bad" year the run D wasn't totally broken. This is why I think they can return to a top-10 unit overall against the run and combining that with our pass rush and secondary you have the makings of the league's best defense.

You combine that with even a marginal improvement on offense from woeful to adequate and it is really easy to see this team at 11-5.

 

[randymon]

Funny how when a team can't win the " close " games it's deemed as a weakness and a lack of confidence/ inexperience,etc. But when they do come up with W's instead of L's, their criticized for only winning those games by a few points. Once you start ending up on the " good " side of those close games, a winning culture has an opportunity to emerge. I don't deem any of the Raiders " close " wins as anything but positive for organization. IMHO of course.

 

[randymon]

There's a few reasons to believe the Broncos can be 11-5 or 10-6 (which may be good enough to win the AFC West). Like you said, one more FG in 10 of 16 games is one way. But what about run defense that isn't bottom tier? If you think about the Broncos overall defensive ranking from last year it's mind blowing when you consider the run D ranked 28th overall! The ranking of 18th in yards per carry is somewhat encouraging though because it tells me even in a "bad" year the run D wasn't totally broken. This is why I think they can return to a top-10 unit overall against the run and combining that with our pass rush and secondary you have the makings of the league's best defense.

You combine that with even a marginal improvement on offense from woeful to adequate and it is really easy to see this team at 11-5.

Like I have posted before, I bet if you can find stats, a majority of yards given up by front happened from middle of 3rd qtr and beyond. The offences lust for 3-outs had a big impact I believe anyway in that category as well as others. I could be wrong.

 

[cdumler7]

Like I have posted before, I bet if you can find stats, a majority of yards given up by front happened from middle of 3rd qtr and beyond. The offences lust for 3-outs had a big impact I believe anyway in that category as well as others. I could be wrong.

Actually the biggest point of the game the Broncos gave up yards was on the 1st drive of games. They were the worst in the NFL last year in points given up on 1st drives. Teams ran it down our throats early on then the defense would adjust and do well from there on out for the most part.

 

[cdumler7]

Funny how when a team can't win the " close " games it's deemed as a weakness and a lack of confidence/ inexperience,etc. But when they do come up with W's instead of L's, their criticized for only winning those games by a few points. Once you start ending up on the " good " side of those close games, a winning culture has an opportunity to emerge. I don't deem any of the Raiders " close " wins as anything but positive for organization. IMHO of course.

I get what you are saying. There is a difference though between winning the close games and winning them at the rate the Raiders did last year. Even the best teams in the league have not sustained such a level. Patriots for example in such games went 7-4 in the last 11 games decided by a touchdown or less. They have a QB deemed the most clutch QB in NFL history and maybe the best coach in NFL history. I would say the same thing about our 2015 season. We won a lot of close games. It should have been expected that the pace we were winning those close games was not sustainable. No team has had a better winning culture over the last what 40 years than the Broncos but like I said there is having a winning culture and then catching some breaks that a team cannot continue to count on from year to year.

One of those stats that is very difficult to repeat is that of turnovers. The Chiefs and Raiders finished 1st and 2nd in the NFL in that stat if I remember right. 3 seasons ago for the Chiefs they were 2nd to last in that stat. Just goes to show how much that stat can change from one year to the next for any given team. A great showing of this stat is that only 2 teams that finished in the top-5 from the year before finished in the top-5 the season before that. We go back another season and no team in the league has finished top-5 in turnovers all 3 seasons. In fact none of them finished top-10 all 3 seasons. Carolina and Denver were the only team to finish top-15 all 3 seasons. Some regression in that department for both KC and Oakland should lead to a tougher path to winning in those close games.

 

[iknowftbll]

@randymon, CD spelled it out pretty well for me but I will add that pointing out the Raiders were in a lot of close wins doesn't mean I think they were a bad team. It's just a realistic expectation that they regress to the mean to some extent in this area and that's based on years of observing teams. Good teams find ways to win the close games and the Raiders did that in 2016. But if that defense doesn't get better it's not unrealistic to expect a drop off even if Carr is full strength all year.

FWIW, not all teams who win a lot of close games are created equal. If you read some of my comments from last season you'll learn I never did consider the Raiders a legit contender, even as they were sitting at 12-3 with a chance to reach a 1st round bye. Teams that win a lot of close games on offense tend to stall out in the playoffs whereas teams that win a lot of close games via nasty defense, like the 2015 Broncos, can take it all the way. Teams that are all offense, especially when that offense is barely better than the defense is bad, make for forgettable playoff appearances.

 

[CEH]

Funny how when a team can't win the " close " games it's deemed as a weakness and a lack of confidence/ inexperience,etc. But when they do come up with W's instead of L's, their criticized for only winning those games by a few points. Once you start ending up on the " good " side of those close games, a winning culture has an opportunity to emerge. I don't deem any of the Raiders " close " wins as anything but positive for organization. IMHO of course.

We can figure out how many games a team "should" have won in a given season based off their point differential by calculating their Pythagorean expectation, a metric invented by Bill James for baseball and applied to football by Daryl Morey. The latter figured it out for Stats Inc. before going on to run the Houston Rockets. The formula spits out a winning percentage, which fans can multiply by 16 to get an expected win total. More often than not, teams whose win total outstrips their Pythagorean expectation will decline the following year, as was the case with the 2016 Panthers and Broncos. The opposite is true for teams who underperform their Pythagorean expectation, which helped push the Cowboys, Giants and Titans toward winning records last season.

2017 impact: The Raiders won 12 games but outscored their opponents by only 31 points, producing a Pythagorean expectation of 8.7 wins. That gap -- 3.3 wins -- is the fourth-largest since 1989. They're likely to decline.

 

[WalkerBoh]

Different sport, but the 2013-2014 Colorado Avalanche serves as a near perfect example of CEH's and Iknow's points. They couldn't sustain that success, because that season relied heavily on the performance of the goaltending, instead of having an offense and defense that could dominate. Raiders were in a similar boat, as they relied on factors such as turnovers to win a lot of those close games. That's something that is also usually unsustainable. Those bounces that went in Oakland's favor last season can just as easily bounce the other way this season. They will need to build up and add depth to their defense so that they can win more impressively to have a similar record this season as they did last season.

 

[randymon]

First off like to say all the above posts, Ikf , CD, CeH , etc are all insightful and informative. I respectfully disagree at least as far as presuming or calculating a digression in Raiders upcoming season based on the way they won their games. Rationalizing their upcoming chances of being as good or better than last based on history,stats,etc isn't taking many things into consideration such as.....So far anyway Carr looks like real deal as future franchise Qb, stud O line , offensive fire power potential in both run and pass game, a D that is pretty young but with another year of experience plus additions in FA,etc should be better this year, a HC who has figured his main job is motivation and let the coaches coach, to me anyway, seems like a team on the rise and I would be more surprised ( with healthy Carr ) that they have season you guys predict, than winning division and winning playoff game. Personally,and I hope I'm wrong, Denver has better chance of finishing last in division ( if they haven't significantly fixed O woes ) than Raiders winning division. Since I live in Redding and every Raider game is televised and I haven't got Sunday ticket last couple years, I kinda don't have much choice but to watch a lot of their games and believe me, there's more to this team and future other than game stats, highlights,etc that I'm sure most of you have mostly been privy too. Believe me, Raiders,NE and KC are my most " hated " teams period, but think you guys might just have your hate-on for Raiders and your Bronco fandom winning out on this one. Would love to see Raiders go backwards but think Dallas has better shot

 

[iknowftbll]

Randy, first, I live on the opposite coast from the Raiders but I do have Sunday ticket and saw a lot of their games last year. Second, a regression from last year's win total is not mutually exclusive with the Raiders being a team on the rise. Keep in mind we are talking about a team that going into last season was 3 games behind the Browns in W-L since both teams last made the playoffs in 2002. Yeah, they were that bad. By definition, posting back to back winning seasons, even if it's 9-7 this year, could be considered "on the rise" given 1) how atrocious the Raiders have been in recent NFL history and 2) that their HC has achieved that only once in his coaching career.

Don't assume we're letting our Raider hate cloud our assessment. If you begin to think that, remember a lot of us have levied very realistic critiques toward our own team as well. Also, it's always risky to assume you know more about a team than anyone else. Especially when they go by a name like IKNOWFTBLL.

 

[randymon]

Randy, first, I live on the opposite coast from the Raiders but I do have Sunday ticket and saw a lot of their games last year. Second, a regression from last year's win total is not mutually exclusive with the Raiders being a team on the rise. Keep in mind we are talking about a team that going into last season was 3 games behind the Browns in W-L since both teams last made the playoffs in 2002. Yeah, they were that bad. By definition, posting back to back winning seasons, even if it's 9-7 this year, could be considered "on the rise" given 1) how atrocious the Raiders have been in recent NFL history and 2) that their HC has achieved that only once in his coaching career.

Don't assume we're letting our Raider hate cloud our assessment. If you begin to think that, remember a lot of us have levied very realistic critiques toward our own team as well. Also, it's always risky to assume you know more about a team than anyone else. Especially when they go by a name like IKNOWFTBLL.

I'm going to " assume " if you had Sunday ticket , you had Red zone also and unless Denver was playing AND you play FF, you were strictly on Red zone just like me ( when I had it ) every Sunday.Not buying you sat there and watched a Raider game start to finish. Nice try ; That said, right back at ya.

 

[iknowftbll]

I'm going to " assume " if you had Sunday ticket , you had Red zone also and unless Denver was playing AND you play FF, you were strictly on Red zone just like me ( when I had it ) every Sunday.Not buying you sat there and watched a Raider game start to finish. Nice try ; That said, right back at ya.

First, let me be clear: I loathe FF and don't waste my time on it. I feel it is ruining football fandom and immediately withdraw from football conversations with "fans" who are actually FF fans. When I discern they want to talk only fantasy implications I bail. I also don't do redzone. When the Broncos aren't playing my next go-to is always another AFC West team. If the Broncos top rivals are on at the same time the Broncos are I often record them and watch them later.

If you're not buying I sat there and watched a Raiders game start to finish that's fine with me. I'd be willing to say with extreme confidence I watched as many Raiders snaps as you did. Add in the Chiefs and my snap count on AFC West rivals probably obliterates yours.

Next round's on me.

 

[cdumler7]

I'm going to " assume " if you had Sunday ticket , you had Red zone also and unless Denver was playing AND you play FF, you were strictly on Red zone just like me ( when I had it ) every Sunday.Not buying you sat there and watched a Raider game start to finish. Nice try ; That said, right back at ya.

Well considering for the articles and podcasts that I do I have to watch every team the Broncos play for analysis yeah I'm guessing I've actually watched the Raiders more than you. Most weeks I'm watching the All-22 film to break down opponents such as tendencies, weaknesses, strengths, and so on. Such as for Derek Carr the best way to make him uncomfortable is to play the deep ball and the screen game. His worst ability is in the 1-20 range beyond the LOS. In fact he is one of the 5 worst QB's when asked to throw in such a range. So force him to have to beat you in that area and you got a shot of having him make some mistakes. His mechanics are not great which is why he struggles with accuracy in that range. What makes them difficult to defend though is because they have a run game that makes you commit extra guys to the box to help stop it and WR's that can win one-on-one match ups.

Defensively they are weak up the middle big time. This is where you stated earlier addition in FA to help that defense of theirs. Might want to actually go look what they did in FA before commenting. At this time they have lost Nate Allen, Daren Bates, DJ Hayden, Stacy McGee, Perry Riley, Malcolm Smith, Brynden Trawick, and Dan Williams to FA.

The addition they made was Jelani Jenkins.

So if that defense is to improve for the Raiders it will take the 2nd year guys and the rookies this year stepping up to make that happen. If anything FA hurt their team. They lost 2 of the 3 main guys they used in rotation on the inside of the DL, starting LB, and Nate Allen then at the Safety position. None of them were star players by any means but if nothing else depth will be a huge question mark.

 

[cdumler7]

Also there is this great thing called NFL GamePass. It will let you watch a game with only actually seeing the plays. It cuts out commentary and commercial breaks so you can get through the game in like 45 minutes. Then of course it also gives you the Coaches Film/All-22 film where you get the wider angle that allows you to see what is happening with the WR/Secondary players deeper down the field. It also gives you a better angle of the OL and what they are trying to accomplish.

They also then have a feature where you can look up just an individual player and watch their plays. If you want to take your football watching to another level this is what I recommend you sign up for. Plus they have every preseason game live so you don't have to wait until it comes on NFL Network to see the game.