The ten worst moves of the offseason

[cdumler7]

hold on.....I bitched about the Denver fan always talking about the QB play being the worst and insinuating butt fumble won't be as bad. I give a rats ass how many times he says it.

I responded to the list about.... Browns rolling into 2016 with RG III as the presumptive starter at QB
I added that if Cleveland makes this list then Denver belongs cause they are doing the same.

as to Denver....I woulda brought in two vets to compete. Pick a name but why would you roll with just Sanchez?

So...you say RG3, Fitz and the Kap types are a piles of shit but Sanchez isn't? That's funny to me.

BOY....Lynch better be all that and not the QB I saw in his bowl game. This could get ugly.

I actually asked Money about 3 times to respond to what they should have done since he keeps saying the Broncos really screwed this up. I wasn't directing that at you at all.

 

[PDay8810]

I actually asked Money about 3 times to respond to what they should have done since he keeps saying the Broncos really screwed this up. I wasn't directing that at you at all.

It's all good....my post was directed to the Cards fan.

 

[cdumler7]

hold on.....I bitched about the Denver fan always talking about the QB play being the worst and insinuating butt fumble won't be as bad. I give a rats ass how many times he says it.

I responded to the list about.... Browns rolling into 2016 with RG III as the presumptive starter at QB
I added that if Cleveland makes this list then Denver belongs cause they are doing the same.

as to Denver....I woulda brought in two vets to compete. Pick a name but why would you roll with just Sanchez?

So...you say RG3, Fitz and the Kap types are a piles of shit but Sanchez isn't? That's funny to me.

BOY....Lynch better be all that and not the QB I saw in his bowl game. This could get ugly.

Also just a quick note on those other guys you listed. Have to remember with each of them they carry a much higher cap hit than that of Sanchez. So at least if I am going to pick a pile of crap I would rather pick the cheapest one as long as it is comparable to the others which I think any of them would be a risk.

And yes Sanchez is never the ideal answer at QB. I think he can be ok but nothing better than average in this league. Again the options were limited for the Broncos on how much they could really improve at the QB position unless our rookie or draft pick from last year just show up beyond what anybody thinks they could be year 1 of starting. With having a Cap this is what teams have to do is pick and choose where best to spend the money. Is it worth signing say Fitzpatrick to a 3-year deal around maybe $12-15 million a year when he is nothing better than average? Is RG3 with his injuries and well performance issues really worth $15 million like he got with Cleveland? Is Kaep worth the $15.9 million cap hit that he is taking this year in San Fran? Again not great options.

 

[Clayton]

That said, I really don't agree with PFF on Cleveland or Seattle's Ifedi. Ifedi wont even start at RT where he needs work. He's a fine prospect at guard given his size and technical limitation and Seattle traded down while spending a late 1st on him, which is entirely appropriate for a guard.

I think the idea of PFF's list is to base it on PFF's player opinions. They think Ifedi is hot garbage at guard.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

I think the idea of PFF's list is to base it on PFF's player opinions. They think Ifedi is hot garbage at guard.

True, but here's what they said about him:

Many experts expected the Seahawks to address their offensive line and Ifedi will step into one of their offensive tackle spots. His awkward technique led to some ugly plays and a -1.9 pass block grade that ranks 67th in the draft class, as he gave up five sacks, three QB hits and 18 hurries. He was much better in the run game at +7.8 (23rd in the class), but there’s a lot of work to do before he becomes a worthwhile first-round pick. Seattle is banking on his athleticism shining through as he develops, but there are parts of his game — particularly in pass protection — that need to be overhauled.

Except... he wont and that was stated on the same weekend of the draft during a Cable/Schneider press conference so I'm not sure what the F PFF is posting about. I usually go to PFF for quite a bit of in depth analysis but I didn't understand this one.

ESPN, Walter Football, NFL.COM, various other sports sites all gave Ifedi/Seattle a high grade. I'd give it a B- or so just because Seattle needs help ASAP (A- if I'm grading the trade down + overall player... project but if fixed can become a pro bowl caliber tackle/guard), but don't get how it was top 10 let alone the worst day 1 pick.

Meanwhile they gave Wentz/Goff A- and A... LMAO WUT!? Give me a break.

PFF is great at collecting the stats and developing a ranking system based on those stats. That said, they should stick to NFL analysis, because their college to NFL analysis is fairly mediocre.

College utilizes strange schemes and you're often playing next to inferior non-NFL ready talent. Chip Kelly is walking proof that athleticism trumps scheme in the NFL. I don't care how technically proficient a guy is, if he can't stay on the field, doesn't have the athleticism to bully other lineman, get separation, make the deep/fade throws, quick cuts to hit holes, fluid hips to shift direction quickly and cover routes, etc. it's more than likely going to fail.

 

[cdumler7]

True, but here's what they said about him:

Many experts expected the Seahawks to address their offensive line and Ifedi will step into one of their offensive tackle spots. His awkward technique led to some ugly plays and a -1.9 pass block grade that ranks 67th in the draft class, as he gave up five sacks, three QB hits and 18 hurries. He was much better in the run game at +7.8 (23rd in the class), but there’s a lot of work to do before he becomes a worthwhile first-round pick. Seattle is banking on his athleticism shining through as he develops, but there are parts of his game — particularly in pass protection — that need to be overhauled.

Except... he wont and that was stated on the same weekend of the draft during a Cable/Schneider press conference so I'm not sure what the F PFF is posting about. I usually go to PFF for quite a bit of in depth analysis but I didn't understand this one.

ESPN, Walter Football, NFL.COM, various other sports sites all gave Ifedi/Seattle a high grade. I'd give it a B- or so just because Seattle needs help ASAP (A- if I'm grading the trade down + overall player... project but if fixed can become a pro bowl caliber tackle/guard), but don't get how it was top 10 let alone the worst day 1 pick.

Meanwhile they gave Wentz/Goff A- and A... LMAO WUT!? Give me a break.

PFF is great at collecting the stats and developing a ranking system based on those stats. That said, they should stick to NFL analysis, because their college to NFL analysis is fairly mediocre.

College utilizes strange schemes and you're often playing next to inferior non-NFL ready talent. Chip Kelly is walking proof that athleticism trumps scheme in the NFL. I don't care how technically proficient a guy is, if he can't stay on the field, doesn't have the athleticism to bully other lineman, get separation, make the deep/fade throws, quick cuts to hit holes, fluid hips to shift direction quickly and cover routes, etc. it's more than likely going to fail.

I would agree with this. I also do think that PFF's worst work in the NFL is on the OL. I've listened to quite a few past OL guys talk about the site and they say it is a joke when it comes to them understanding what an OL player is doing on any given play. Just because an OT gets beat doesn't mean they were actually beat by the guy they were supposed to be blocking. Maybe a guy runs by them with the OT expecting the RB to pick up the player but the RB got confused. Or when they see blitz they know that the QB is supposed to roll right so leave that guy coming off the edge on the left alone but then all of a sudden the QB doesn't actually move with the OL to the right and takes a bad sack. That is on the QB not the OL player but many times they will give the OL players a bad grade on such a play.

PFF has some value but people need to remember that a lot of the people working there are nothing more than coach GM's just like many of us on here.

 

[Clayton]

True, but here's what they said about him:

Many experts expected the Seahawks to address their offensive line and Ifedi will step into one of their offensive tackle spots. His awkward technique led to some ugly plays and a -1.9 pass block grade that ranks 67th in the draft class, as he gave up five sacks, three QB hits and 18 hurries. He was much better in the run game at +7.8 (23rd in the class), but there’s a lot of work to do before he becomes a worthwhile first-round pick. Seattle is banking on his athleticism shining through as he develops, but there are parts of his game — particularly in pass protection — that need to be overhauled.

Except... he wont and that was stated on the same weekend of the draft during a Cable/Schneider press conference so I'm not sure what the F PFF is posting about. I usually go to PFF for quite a bit of in depth analysis but I didn't understand this one.

ESPN, Walter Football, NFL.COM, various other sports sites all gave Ifedi/Seattle a high grade. I'd give it a B- or so just because Seattle needs help ASAP (A- if I'm grading the trade down + overall player... project but if fixed can become a pro bowl caliber tackle/guard), but don't get how it was top 10 let alone the worst day 1 pick.

Meanwhile they gave Wentz/Goff A- and A... LMAO WUT!? Give me a break.

PFF is great at collecting the stats and developing a ranking system based on those stats. That said, they should stick to NFL analysis, because their college to NFL analysis is fairly mediocre.

College utilizes strange schemes and you're often playing next to inferior non-NFL ready talent. Chip Kelly is walking proof that athleticism trumps scheme in the NFL. I don't care how technically proficient a guy is, if he can't stay on the field, doesn't have the athleticism to bully other lineman, get separation, make the deep/fade throws, quick cuts to hit holes, fluid hips to shift direction quickly and cover routes, etc. it's more than likely going to fail.

I don't put too much stock into PFF's college rankings at all. There is so much of a jump from college to NFL that its all moot.

They did seem to consistently say he is a faux tackle prospect and comp'd him to Donovan Smith. I do think its all pretty impossible to predict what is going to happen from the Guard spot PFF or not so I can see the inclusion on this list being pretty dubious from Seattle's perspective. A Seattle Guard still has to block people like Aaron Donald so he'll get tested one way or another.

 

[Rockinkuwait]

I actually asked Money about 3 times to respond to what they should have done since he keeps saying the Broncos really screwed this up. I wasn't directing that at you at all.

That is a good flip side. Just because the options were weak doesn't mean they should like what they ended up stuck with either.

I agree on the bits about ranking players as a whole. It's tough when I see a blind side tackle who sucks at pass protection but rocks in the run game get a great score. Or a Right guard who's the opposite. Or a corner with great run support but can't cover really help his grade. Those grades are the weakest part of their stats IMO.

I like their positional stats (as with everything take with a grain of salt).

But that is one of the things I dislike about the Bronco's off-season, taking a couple of tackles who really in pass protection struggled badly. I was hoping they'd get a better looking replacement than something that looks like more of the same, but just be happy it's a different name.

And you are dead on with the QB being so important to the sack and pressure numbers for a line. They drive if oftentimes more than the line play itself.

 

[PDay8810]

Also just a quick note on those other guys you listed. Have to remember with each of them they carry a much higher cap hit than that of Sanchez. So at least if I am going to pick a pile of crap I would rather pick the cheapest one as long as it is comparable to the others which I think any of them would be a risk.

the cap problems played well for you guys. It's been an all in for a championship and it worked.

could be wrong, but I don't think Denver is a player for the championship this year.

 

[PDay8810]

A Seattle Guard still has to block people like Aaron Donald so he'll get tested one way or another.

shoot....their all professional players, Donald is just the cream. He'll be pretty darn good if he blocks all but Donald

 

[cdumler7]

That is a good flip side. Just because the options were weak doesn't mean they should like what they ended up stuck with either.

I agree on the bits about ranking players as a whole. It's tough when I see a blind side tackle who sucks at pass protection but rocks in the run game get a great score. Or a Right guard who's the opposite. Or a corner with great run support but can't cover really help his grade. Those grades are the weakest part of their stats IMO.

I like their positional stats (as with everything take with a grain of salt).

But that is one of the things I dislike about the Bronco's off-season, taking a couple of tackles who really in pass protection struggled badly. I was hoping they'd get a better looking replacement than something that looks like more of the same, but just be happy it's a different name.

And you are dead on with the QB being so important to the sack and pressure numbers for a line. They drive if oftentimes more than the line play itself.

At this point for the Broncos I think just about anybody could be an upgrade over what we had at the Tackle positions last year. I mean Schofield gave up something like 5 sacks in one game alone to one player. Almost every player that went up against him had a career game that week. So even if the player replacing him is bad it should still be an upgrade on the spot.

I also think they went for Tackles more geared towards run blocking which both Okung and Stephenson are more known for their run blocking than pass blocking. Because of the unknown at the QB position I do think the Broncos are gearing up to try and be one of the best running teams in the league hoping that because of this it will also help in the pass blocking department with DL players having to pause thinking the run game is coming. Look at Carolina this past year. They honestly didn't have great OT's in my opinion. Their pass blocking shortcomings though were covered up most of the year because teams were much more worried about the run game getting a big play on them. They had to pause for a second. The problem with this style of OL play is that if you fall behind early and are forced to pass it can really show a huge weakness.

 

[cdumler7]

the cap problems played well for you guys. It's been an all in for a championship and it worked.

could be wrong, but I don't think Denver is a player for the championship this year.

I would agree with this. I think we can fight for a playoff spot but I doubt we repeat. Now given most teams that win don't repeat so that isn't saying much. This is a bit of a rebuilding year. I will admit that. They still have a strong core of players though that could keep them from going from Championship winner to top-10 pick.

 

[Cave_Johnson]

I don't know what the author of this article's deal is. Ifedi sounds like a real Tom Cable kinda guy.

 

[The Q]

Again I just want to know what was the better option the Broncos had that they could have done?

From my rudimentary understanding they could've afforded Kaep on a deal if they got rid of sanchez. Or at least gotten close enough to do some restructuring of other deals to make the cap work.

That would've been better and actually could've gotten a first round talent with their first round pick.

 

[The Q]

I'd also rather have RG3 than Sanchize.

RG3 could probably do something serious with Kubiak as his coach.

 

[Rockinkuwait]

At this point for the Broncos I think just about anybody could be an upgrade over what we had at the Tackle positions last year. I mean Schofield gave up something like 5 sacks in one game alone to one player. Almost every player that went up against him had a career game that week. So even if the player replacing him is bad it should still be an upgrade on the spot.

I also think they went for Tackles more geared towards run blocking which both Okung and Stephenson are more known for their run blocking than pass blocking. Because of the unknown at the QB position I do think the Broncos are gearing up to try and be one of the best running teams in the league hoping that because of this it will also help in the pass blocking department with DL players having to pause thinking the run game is coming. Look at Carolina this past year. They honestly didn't have great OT's in my opinion. Their pass blocking shortcomings though were covered up most of the year because teams were much more worried about the run game getting a big play on them. They had to pause for a second. The problem with this style of OL play is that if you fall behind early and are forced to pass it can really show a huge weakness.

Well Stephenson looked like a turnstyle at right tackle in that awful start to last year for KC on a team that did really run the ball very well, got replaced by a journeyman guard who was playing out of position when he was benched, came back when that guy was hurt to just get shredded again late in the year. He was AWESOME in run blocking in that game vs. Denver early in the year.

I just thought with a QB like Sanchez who has really struggled with poor line play in the past and a rookie, they would have tried to help the position more at pass blocking.

And Okung, def would make that move as there is zero commitment on his deal. Great move for the money with potential upside. But he had some big lapses in protection last year and is coming off that shoulder surgery.

It could be an upgrade, but really would have to see it actually work on the field to call it that.

 

[cdumler7]

From my rudimentary understanding they could've afforded Kaep on a deal if they got rid of sanchez. Or at least gotten close enough to do some restructuring of other deals to make the cap work.

That would've been better and actually could've gotten a first round talent with their first round pick.

What you are speaking to though presents a few problems...

1) Pushing money to other years just means it is that much harder to sign the core players you want to keep.

2) Kaepernick is still viewed as just a stop gap guy so you still have to use a draft pick to try and find your future QB

3) Kaepernick is coming off surgery and some very bad years...Is he really a better option than Sanchez?

Here are the stats by the 2 players over the last 16 starts they made

3,028 13 touchdowns 10 interceptions, 464 attempts, 268 completions, QB Rating of 77.8--Kaepernick

3350 yards, 18 touchdowns, 16 interceptions, 454 attempts, 286 completions, QB Rating 83.9--Sanchez

4) The trade cost was going to cost much more to bring in Kaepernick with a higher price tag than what we trade for Sanchez. The trade depending who you listen to was anywhere from a 2nd round pick to that of a 5th round pick.

So while yes they could have afforded Kaepernick I'm not sure you are getting all that much more than what Sanchez has to offer.

 

[cdumler7]

Well Stephenson looked like a turnstyle at right tackle in that awful start to last year for KC on a team that did really run the ball very well, got replaced by a journeyman guard who was playing out of position when he was benched, came back when that guy was hurt to just get shredded again late in the year. He was AWESOME in run blocking in that game vs. Denver early in the year.

I just thought with a QB like Sanchez who has really struggled with poor line play in the past and a rookie, they would have tried to help the position more at pass blocking.

And Okung, def would make that move as there is zero commitment on his deal. Great move for the money with potential upside. But he had some big lapses in protection last year and is coming off that shoulder surgery.

It could be an upgrade, but really would have to see it actually work on the field to call it that.

Stephenson got shredded when he was playing LT for the Chiefs. They put him there because of injuries to that 1st overall pick they made. Different story when a guy is playing RT. I'm not saying Stephenson is some incredible player. I do think he is a bad player but I still would take him over Schofield. Honestly there are very few OL players in the league I wouldn't take over Schofield right now.

 

[Rockinkuwait]

From my rudimentary understanding they could've afforded Kaep on a deal if they got rid of sanchez. Or at least gotten close enough to do some restructuring of other deals to make the cap work.

That would've been better and actually could've gotten a first round talent with their first round pick.

Well from what I kept reading, Kaep wanted no future years on his deal unless they came at the 15 mil price range, and Denver wanted a longer term deal on the cheap. And I know SF had a lot of issues, but that still doesn't explain away Gabbert outplaying Kaep with the same team. Or his regression through 2014.

So Denver would have been putting themselves in a tight spot with Kaep... If he played well, then they'd be stuck in the same situation next year (Kaep or Von), and gave up a good pick to get him. That's a lot to give up for a guy who since he was first named starter seems to be taking steps back every year.

 

[Tharvot]

Not sure how the Browns rolling into the season with RGIII as the presumptive starter is a worse move than the Broncos rolling into the season with Sanchez as the presumptive starter. Nobody expects anything from the Browns regardless of who their starting QB is.

That, and since when is RG3 the presumptive starter? They still have McCown, who I wouldn't be surprised if he is the starter on week 1.

Even if they ARE rolling with RG3 as starter and he turns out to be just as bad as he was in Washington the last few years, so what? They get a great draft pick, which they are likely to get anyhow. It would have been a dumb move to overpay for a has-been mediocre vet and it would have been dumb to draft a QB highly w/o decent weapons around him.

They're playing the long game.