Author Topic: 2014-15 NFC North/NFL Thread (Read 588884 times)

GGGG · « **Reply #2100 on:** January 15, 2015, 01:41:17 PM »

Quote from: MU B2002 on January 15, 2015, 12:15:14 PM

I wouldn't think it is done, as Twitter is really quiet. Only seems to be one "BleacherReporter" pushing the story. Also, if done, why did they let him leave Chicago. Unless it was to go get Gase.

The Score is pretty much saying it is done and going back to Denver was to ask staff to come with him.

ChicosBailBonds · « **Reply #2101 on:** January 15, 2015, 02:09:34 PM »

Congrats Packers fan on win. I've been a bit tied up. Good game. We had our chances, I hate it when people think one play or one call decides a game. It doesn't. I hate the rule, thought the refs got the call right by the letter of the rule. Besides, we had plenty of other opportunities. 3rd youngest team, so hoping we are around a few years.

Best of luck against Seattle

wadesworld · « **Reply #2102 on:** January 15, 2015, 03:42:22 PM »

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 15, 2015, 02:09:34 PM

Congrats Packers fan on win. I've been a bit tied up. Good game. We had our chances, I hate it when people think one play or one call decides a game. It doesn't. I hate the rule, thought the refs got the call right by the letter of the rule. Besides, we had plenty of other opportunities. 3rd youngest team, so hoping we are around a few years.

Best of luck against Seattle

Who is younger? I would assume the Packers given that Rodgers is the 3rd oldest player on the roster at 31. And who else?

MerrittsMustache · « **Reply #2103 on:** January 15, 2015, 03:51:55 PM »

Quote from: wadesworld on January 15, 2015, 03:42:22 PM

Who is younger? I would assume the Packers given that Rodgers is the 3rd oldest player on the roster at 31. And who else?

Coming into the season (avg age)...

1. STL (25.09)
2. KC
3. Jax
4. Dallas
5. Min
6. GB
.
.
.
30. Bears
31. Giants
32. Raiders (27.0)

The Rams have actually been the youngest team 3 years in a row. In the NFL, being a "young team" doesn't matter nearly as much as "having a top-tier QB."

GGGG · « **Reply #2104 on:** January 16, 2015, 09:12:34 AM »

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 15, 2015, 02:09:34 PM

Congrats Packers fan on win. I've been a bit tied up. Good game. We had our chances, I hate it when people think one play or one call decides a game. It doesn't. I hate the rule, thought the refs got the call right by the letter of the rule. Besides, we had plenty of other opportunities. 3rd youngest team, so hoping we are around a few years.

Best of luck against Seattle

Dallas finally got out of the "signing big name free agents and working out the cap stuff later" line of thinking and started to understand how to build a team. They can win with this year's Romo. Sign Dez, let Murray walk, and they will be in great shape next year too.

🏀 · « **Reply #2105 on:** January 16, 2015, 09:49:14 AM »

Except when Jerry cashes his boner with Adrian Peterson this offseason, right?

MU B2002 · « **Reply #2106 on:** January 16, 2015, 09:49:57 AM »

Quote from: PandTandMand... on January 16, 2015, 09:49:14 AM

Except when Jerry cashes his boner with Adrian Peterson this offseason, right?

Was just typing a similar comment. It seems to be a likely scenario.

Vikings(although Asiata is intriguing), Cardinals, and or Colts should go hard after Murray.

Benny B · « **Reply #2107 on:** January 16, 2015, 09:51:10 AM »

Quote from: PandTandMand... on January 16, 2015, 09:49:14 AM

Except when Jerry cashes his boner with Adrian Peterson this offseason, right?

AP is going to be a dirt-cheap deal (in relative terms) for whoever signs him. Seems like a perfect fit for the Cowboys.

Spotcheck Billy · « **Reply #2108 on:** January 16, 2015, 11:28:51 AM »

AP has indicated he doesn't want less money, I know, good luck with that

JuniorCardigan · « **Reply #2109 on:** January 16, 2015, 11:59:42 AM »

If I was Jerry I wouldn't shell out much for Murray

This was the only season where he didn't look to be totally made of glass, plus those 400+ touches he racked up definitely didn't do his already injury prone body any favors.

Dez on the other hand....pay that man.

GGGG · « **Reply #2110 on:** January 16, 2015, 12:06:48 PM »

Quote from: JuniorCardigan on January 16, 2015, 11:59:42 AM

If I was Jerry I wouldn't shell out much for Murray

This was the only season where he didn't look to be totally made of glass, plus those 400+ touches he racked up definitely didn't do his already injury prone body any favors.

Dez on the other hand....pay that man.

Plus I think the credit for the running game goes more to the offensive line than it does to Murray. And I wouldn't sign Peterson if I were Jones either.

MerrittsMustache · « **Reply #2111 on:** January 16, 2015, 12:14:40 PM »

Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on January 16, 2015, 12:06:48 PM

Plus I think the credit for the running game goes more to the offensive line than it does to Murray. And I wouldn't sign Peterson if I were Jones either.

Exactly. Joseph Randle averaged 6.7 yards per carry behind that line. There's no reason to give a RB big money.

Jerry resisted the urge to draft Manziel so maybe he can restrain himself on AP too.

ChicosBailBonds · « **Reply #2112 on:** January 16, 2015, 01:15:07 PM »

Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on January 16, 2015, 09:12:34 AM

Dallas finally got out of the "signing big name free agents and working out the cap stuff later" line of thinking and started to understand how to build a team. They can win with this year's Romo. Sign Dez, let Murray walk, and they will be in great shape next year too.

I sure hope so....Jerrah has been an idiot the last decade plus, but they seem to finally be on the right path. If Murray walks, he walks. Good player, but fumble prone and injuries pop up (though this year he was a horse).

ChicosBailBonds · « **Reply #2113 on:** January 16, 2015, 01:16:05 PM »

Quote from: PandTandMand... on January 16, 2015, 09:49:14 AM

Except when Jerry cashes his boner with Adrian Peterson this offseason, right?

He might, but if he does I think it will be cheap....due to AP's issues, AP is from Texas so there is the discount, and no income taxes in Texas means a contract is worth more in real dollars.

ChicosBailBonds · « **Reply #2114 on:** January 16, 2015, 01:16:52 PM »

Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 16, 2015, 12:14:40 PM

Exactly. Joseph Randle averaged 6.7 yards per carry behind that line. There's no reason to give a RB big money.

Jerry resisted the urge to draft Manziel so maybe he can restrain himself on AP too.

Randle cannot last an entire season, he is too fragile. He's a good change up back, but no way would survive the season as the primary.

MU B2002 · « **Reply #2115 on:** January 16, 2015, 01:20:35 PM »

http://rabbithole.deadspin.com/aint-no-pain-like-a-brett-favre-int-1679964505

JWags85 · « **Reply #2116 on:** January 16, 2015, 01:47:33 PM »

Bears officially agree to terms with John Fox. Like that they went with a proven winner. Other than Lovie, the coordinator route hadn't been working to well for them as of late.

DegenerateDish · « **Reply #2117 on:** January 16, 2015, 01:53:24 PM »

John Fox hire does nothing for me, at all. Seems totally safe, conservative. It's getting difficult for me to enjoy anything that this organization is willing to offer. This was a chance for them to clean house all around, really try to start fresh. I'd have been more than fine with them blowing things up, going 2-14 next season, as long as they were working towards something. All this hire does is mean they'll be somewhere between 4-12 and 9-7 next year, and the year after.

brandx · « **Reply #2118 on:** January 16, 2015, 01:54:21 PM »

Quote from: JWags85 on January 16, 2015, 01:47:33 PM

Bears officially agree to terms with John Fox. Like that they went with a proven winner. Other than Lovie, the coordinator route hadn't been working to well for them as of late.

As a GB fan, I like the hire. As one of the older coaches in the league, I don't see Fox doing to top-to-bottom re-build, which means we will probably see Jay under center (yippee!!!) into the future.

I do think that Fox (along with the new GM) will strengthen the roster long term, but I can't see them being relevant for a while.

I'd like to see what Bears fan here think about the hire.

Edit: Dish, I guess we are seeing the same thing.

wadesworld · « **Reply #2119 on:** January 16, 2015, 02:08:23 PM »

Quote from: MUDish on January 16, 2015, 01:53:24 PM

John Fox hire does nothing for me, at all. Seems totally safe, conservative. It's getting difficult for me to enjoy anything that this organization is willing to offer. This was a chance for them to clean house all around, really try to start fresh. I'd have been more than fine with them blowing things up, going 2-14 next season, as long as they were working towards something. All this hire does is mean they'll be somewhere between 4-12 and 9-7 next year, and the year after.

I do agree with this. I don't think it's a bad hire, but I also don't think this is going to take them to the next level. We know what Fox has/is, and that is a good, but not great, coach. It's certainly better than Trestaman, but I think they could've done better.

LAZER · « **Reply #2120 on:** January 16, 2015, 02:09:57 PM »

Quote from: wadesworld on January 16, 2015, 02:08:23 PM

I do agree with this. I don't think it's a bad hire, but I also don't think this is going to take them to the next level. We know what Fox has/is, and that is a good, but not great, coach. It's certainly better than Trestaman, but I think they could've done better.

Who do you think would've been the better hire?

DegenerateDish · « **Reply #2121 on:** January 16, 2015, 02:12:29 PM »

I would have gone after Sumlin or Shaw.

LAZER · « **Reply #2122 on:** January 16, 2015, 02:14:14 PM »

Quote from: brandx on January 16, 2015, 01:54:21 PM

As a GB fan, I like the hire. As one of the older coaches in the league, I don't see Fox doing to top-to-bottom re-build, which means we will probably see Jay under center (yippee!!!) into the future.

I do think that Fox (along with the new GM) will strengthen the roster long term, but I can't see them being relevant for a while.

I'd like to see what Bears fan here think about the hire.

Edit: Dish, I guess we are seeing the same thing.

You'll probably see Cutler for one more year, but I wouldn't count on anything after that.

LAZER · « **Reply #2123 on:** January 16, 2015, 02:19:08 PM »

Quote from: MUDish on January 16, 2015, 02:12:29 PM

I would have gone after Sumlin or Shaw.

You can make strong arguments for why Fox is a better hire than either of those guys (and any other candidate for that matter)

SaintPaulWarrior · « **Reply #2124 on:** January 16, 2015, 02:21:20 PM »

First time the Bears hired a HC with previous HC experience since 1956.

News:

Recent Posts

Please Register - It's FREE!

Author Topic: 2014-15 NFC North/NFL Thread (Read 588884 times)

brandx