Thursday, August 23, 2007
Kendall leaving the Jets?
Story. It will be tough to tell just how much this will affect the Jets run game, since they're changing their running back as well. Kendall may have been whiny, but the Jets should have anted up. Continuity on the offensive line is important, especially with young second-year D'Brickashaw Ferguson still developing next to Kendall.
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Mosley's thought on Trotter and Manning
I'm posting both the Trotter story and the Manning story because I talked about both yesterday, but the one to pay attention to is the Trotter one. Matt Mosley has some personal connection (and a day to gather information), and lays out exactly why Trotter was cut. Some things that stood out to me:
- The split was amicable. The initial story I linked to had a cold, adversarial tone to it.
- Trotter had, in fact, been declining against the pass in recent years. Mosley points a finger at his knees slowly giving out.
- Andy Reid views linebackers in his defense as "replaceable parts." So maybe losing a declining linebacker (and replacing him with a young one) won't be so bad.
- I just realized that the original Trotter story I linked to was written by Len Pasquarelli. I just took another look at it and saw that it now has quotes from players and coaches that bring the tone closer to what Mosley wrote, but I'm disappointed that the initial story threw me off by so much. I'm sure it was initially written in 10 minutes just to get something out, but still.
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Eli hits back
This is a positive development. Not only is Eli showing he has a pair, but it may also rally the offense (even if only slightly) around Eli and his progress as a franchise QB.
I didn't follow Tiki Barber's career until a couple years ago, but he came off to me as a loudmouth. A gracious loudmouth, but a loudmouth all the same. As one of the leaders of his team, he should had a bit more tact in (a) criticizing the head coach (you do that behind closed doors; I don't think Shockey pops off if Barber keeps quiet), and (b) announcing his retirement. Tiki never received the media criticism (that I thought) he deserved.
I didn't follow Tiki Barber's career until a couple years ago, but he came off to me as a loudmouth. A gracious loudmouth, but a loudmouth all the same. As one of the leaders of his team, he should had a bit more tact in (a) criticizing the head coach (you do that behind closed doors; I don't think Shockey pops off if Barber keeps quiet), and (b) announcing his retirement. Tiki never received the media criticism (that I thought) he deserved.
Trotter released - What does this do to Eagles expectations?
The Philadelphia Eagles have released Jeremiah Trotter, leaving a hole in the middle of the Eagles (supposed) vaunted defense. Len Pasquarelli projects Takeo Spikes as the one to fill that hole.
So, how does this affect the general perception of the Eagles for 2007, and how will their defense ultimately perform? To start, I would label myself as somewhat skeptical of the Eagles as a potential NFC champion. I certainly consider them a playoff contender (possible favorite to win their division), but I have trouble with putting them in the same sentence as Chicago and New Orleans (I'm stepping back on Seattle for a moment after reading about the horrific game in Green Bay). Popular wisdom is that if the Eagles are great, it will be because of Donovan McNabb, their tough veteran defense, and Brian Westbrook plus their offensive line, roughly in that order. I have my questions about McNabb and Westbrook's health (and more-so their ability to stay healthy), but that's for another conversation. What I'm interested in now is how this affects their overall defense.
A quick look at Trotter's career stats seems to indicate that Trotter hasn't fallen off significantly (unlike, say, Simeon Rice). The article doesn't mention a decline in recent years, nor does it cite injuries as the reason Trotter was cut. This wasn't a salary cap cut either, quoting: "His release was not a salary cap move, however, since the Eagles are comfortably under the $109 million ceiling." The tone of the article is that this was an unexpected release.
So, the Eagles lose a two-time pro-bowler at the so-called 'defensive quarterback' position, just three weeks before the start of the regular season. This hurts the Eagles depth at linebacker. It also may affect overall defensive communication (I'm not familiar with all of the responsibility the Eagles place on their Mike, but the 'defensive quarterback' label is there for a reason). Take a look at the Eagles current depth chart. After Takeo Spikes, the Eagles most experienced linebackers are entering their third season. Yikes.
The Eagles need to start searching the waiver wires for some veteran salary-cap cuts, otherwise they could have linebacker, and ultimately defensive, problems that hold them back from (NFC) elite status.
So, how does this affect the general perception of the Eagles for 2007, and how will their defense ultimately perform? To start, I would label myself as somewhat skeptical of the Eagles as a potential NFC champion. I certainly consider them a playoff contender (possible favorite to win their division), but I have trouble with putting them in the same sentence as Chicago and New Orleans (I'm stepping back on Seattle for a moment after reading about the horrific game in Green Bay). Popular wisdom is that if the Eagles are great, it will be because of Donovan McNabb, their tough veteran defense, and Brian Westbrook plus their offensive line, roughly in that order. I have my questions about McNabb and Westbrook's health (and more-so their ability to stay healthy), but that's for another conversation. What I'm interested in now is how this affects their overall defense.
A quick look at Trotter's career stats seems to indicate that Trotter hasn't fallen off significantly (unlike, say, Simeon Rice). The article doesn't mention a decline in recent years, nor does it cite injuries as the reason Trotter was cut. This wasn't a salary cap cut either, quoting: "His release was not a salary cap move, however, since the Eagles are comfortably under the $109 million ceiling." The tone of the article is that this was an unexpected release.
So, the Eagles lose a two-time pro-bowler at the so-called 'defensive quarterback' position, just three weeks before the start of the regular season. This hurts the Eagles depth at linebacker. It also may affect overall defensive communication (I'm not familiar with all of the responsibility the Eagles place on their Mike, but the 'defensive quarterback' label is there for a reason). Take a look at the Eagles current depth chart. After Takeo Spikes, the Eagles most experienced linebackers are entering their third season. Yikes.
The Eagles need to start searching the waiver wires for some veteran salary-cap cuts, otherwise they could have linebacker, and ultimately defensive, problems that hold them back from (NFC) elite status.
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Back on Thursday (hopefully)
I moved over the weekend, and had only about three free hours, with which I of course watched the Seahawks on Sunday night. Moving is hectic, so I'm going to spend another couple of days letting things settle down, and get back to posting Thursday.
But, a couple quick hits about the Seahawks game:
But, a couple quick hits about the Seahawks game:
- That first drive was beautiful, but was helped by some San Diego mistakes (and penalties) and some lucky breaks (Ron Sims' catch).
- Hasselbeck looks to be recovered from his offseason surgeries, and has plenty of options at receiver.
- Ben Obomanu is the new D.J. Hackett. The Seahawks have too much depth at wide receiver. As much as I like Nate Burleson, Hackett and Obomanu have much smaller salaries, and could probably fill the #2 and #4 receiver spots just fine, and Burleson's money could be spent elsewhere...
- The first team defense still has holes to fill. They didn't stop the run and gave up too many first downs on 3rd and long.
- Seneca Wallace is still learning, but that's fine. If Hasselbeck declines in three or four years, Wallace should be ready to step in a la Steve Young.
- Loved seeing Darryl Tapp get a couple of sacks. Same with Leroy Hill. Five sacks total in the game. Like 2005.
- The offensive line looked strong, both first team and second team.
- Leonard Weaver didn't live up to the massive expectations everybody (including me) in Seahawkland is putting on him.
- I was disappointed not to see how good (or bad) David Greene is. Not sure if Holmgren had planned for him to play but kept him out in favor of letting Seneca Wallace redeem himself, or if the plan was to give Wallace (essentially) the entire game.
- I am sooooo ready for the regular season to start.
Wednesday, August 8, 2007
Pasquarelli on the Atlanta Falcons
Feature, Insider
The obvious take on the Falcons is that they're going to fail miserably without Michael Vick this year. I should take a sentence to point out that I liked that Len Pasquarelli didn't take this route, but instead focused on how the Falcons could cope without him.
Still, I think the most interesting question about the Falcons in 2007 still relates to Vick: Just how good was Michael Vick. Or, if you like to phrase things negatively, how much was Michael Vick holding back Atlanta's offense. Falcons receiver Michael Jenkins brilliantly compared Vick to Kobe Bryant and Allen Iverson. The comparison is right on, except that, unlike in basketball, no one player, even a quarterback, can win a game by himself. So, how much did Vick's completion percentage (53.8% career) and proclivity to run hurt his receivers? The only one to consistently catch his passes was pro-bowler Algie Crumpler. Compare that to Tom Brady, who worked with table scraps last year and still put up massive numbers.
The second most interesting question will be about the Falcons' new QB: Does Joey Harrington suck, or did he just play for the Lions for four years? That Lions team was horrible. Harrington has the measurables and a nice college career. Who better to play for than a college coach? Plus he'll have a pair of good running backs to rely on. This whole season reeks of Bill Simmons' Ewing Theory.
The obvious take on the Falcons is that they're going to fail miserably without Michael Vick this year. I should take a sentence to point out that I liked that Len Pasquarelli didn't take this route, but instead focused on how the Falcons could cope without him.
Still, I think the most interesting question about the Falcons in 2007 still relates to Vick: Just how good was Michael Vick. Or, if you like to phrase things negatively, how much was Michael Vick holding back Atlanta's offense. Falcons receiver Michael Jenkins brilliantly compared Vick to Kobe Bryant and Allen Iverson. The comparison is right on, except that, unlike in basketball, no one player, even a quarterback, can win a game by himself. So, how much did Vick's completion percentage (53.8% career) and proclivity to run hurt his receivers? The only one to consistently catch his passes was pro-bowler Algie Crumpler. Compare that to Tom Brady, who worked with table scraps last year and still put up massive numbers.
The second most interesting question will be about the Falcons' new QB: Does Joey Harrington suck, or did he just play for the Lions for four years? That Lions team was horrible. Harrington has the measurables and a nice college career. Who better to play for than a college coach? Plus he'll have a pair of good running backs to rely on. This whole season reeks of Bill Simmons' Ewing Theory.
Tuesday, August 7, 2007
Patriots get help at CB
The Bears use their surplus of defensive backs to acquire draft picks, which will ultimately result in more talent for the bears. It's tough to judge how good this CB is - the Bears have so many good CBs and Safeties that a fourth or fifth CB on the Bears could be a good third CB on most teams.
Update on Left Tackle injuries
Saints LT Brown only has a bone bruise, with no structural damage. That probably means he's back sometime in the first four games.
The Chiefs weren't so lucky. Damion McIntosh's injury is expected to keep him out "a while." Well, that's good and specific. That probably means McIntosh will need to be back by mid-season or he's going on IR.
The Chiefs weren't so lucky. Damion McIntosh's injury is expected to keep him out "a while." Well, that's good and specific. That probably means McIntosh will need to be back by mid-season or he's going on IR.
King on the Seahawks (!!!)
Postcard
This is the first preview of the 'hawks (I've seen) not done by a local guy (i.e. not John Clayton, not Mike Sando). One thing Peter King didn't mention - did he actually drive all the way out to Seattle? He had to have ditched his rental car and flown, right?
As a Seattle sports fan, national previews of Seattle teams rarely give me new insights into my teams - I follow them pretty closely in the Times, P.I., News Tribune, and on KJR. What they are good for, however, is calibrating the information that the national writers are giving out on the rest of the teams they write about. Far too often I find myself taking in what I read nationally as absolute fact, then later come to question the source after they give an uninformed opinion of the Seahawks (or Mariners or Sonics). I'll grant that the 'hawks may get less coverage due to their geography, but that should result in lack of coverage, not incorrect coverage.
So, with that said, how was Peter King's take on the Seahawks? Perfect. I'm not saying he knows exactly how well the Seahawks will do this year. I'm saying that in one day at camp he was able to soak up every detail in the consensus among Seattle's media as to what kind of team the Seahawks will be.
So what does all of this mean? First, my appreciation of Peter King as a football writer just went up even further, as has the credence I place in his opinions and analysis. And second, well, I'll let Peter do the talking:
"I think it's very hard to imagine any of the three other teams in the NFC West (each one having improved itself this offseason) being better than Seattle is right now. I will definitely stick with my June choice of Seattle to win the division."
Finally, a national writer that isn't gaga over the 49ers, Rams, or Cardinals. I hope he hits some of the other NFC West camps. I'll be eager to read what he has to say.
This is the first preview of the 'hawks (I've seen) not done by a local guy (i.e. not John Clayton, not Mike Sando). One thing Peter King didn't mention - did he actually drive all the way out to Seattle? He had to have ditched his rental car and flown, right?
As a Seattle sports fan, national previews of Seattle teams rarely give me new insights into my teams - I follow them pretty closely in the Times, P.I., News Tribune, and on KJR. What they are good for, however, is calibrating the information that the national writers are giving out on the rest of the teams they write about. Far too often I find myself taking in what I read nationally as absolute fact, then later come to question the source after they give an uninformed opinion of the Seahawks (or Mariners or Sonics). I'll grant that the 'hawks may get less coverage due to their geography, but that should result in lack of coverage, not incorrect coverage.
So, with that said, how was Peter King's take on the Seahawks? Perfect. I'm not saying he knows exactly how well the Seahawks will do this year. I'm saying that in one day at camp he was able to soak up every detail in the consensus among Seattle's media as to what kind of team the Seahawks will be.
- "Seattle seems to be falling love with a fullback/halfback combo guy named Leonard Weaver, a 6-foot, 242-pound backup who is getting more and more carries and impressing the coaches with those carries in training camp." I posted the same thought last week, and I love the King took notice of him.
- "Seahawks prediction of the year: Holmgren has found his long-term replacement for Hutchison. His name is Rob Sims, a fourth-round pick from Ohio State last year, and the man Seattle should have stuck at left guard all along." We all love Rob Sims. This dude is crazy strong - squatting in the 800s, benching in the 500s.
- "I think this team might be significantly better on defense." I left out that he specifically mentioned Deon Grant and Patrick Kearney as key newcomers. I think Seattle's defense is going to be Great. Not good, Great. King doesn't quite go to that extreme, but he definitely noticed improvement.
So what does all of this mean? First, my appreciation of Peter King as a football writer just went up even further, as has the credence I place in his opinions and analysis. And second, well, I'll let Peter do the talking:
"I think it's very hard to imagine any of the three other teams in the NFC West (each one having improved itself this offseason) being better than Seattle is right now. I will definitely stick with my June choice of Seattle to win the division."
Finally, a national writer that isn't gaga over the 49ers, Rams, or Cardinals. I hope he hits some of the other NFC West camps. I'll be eager to read what he has to say.
Clayton on the Green Bay Packers
Feature, Insider
John Clayton did the obligatory Brett Favre article. I understand that Favre is the face of the Packers (and probably the only face on the team recognizable by anybody not a die hard Packers fan), but I'm tired of hearing about him. Let's instead move on to a couple of points that jumped out at me (both from the insider observations):
Apparently Aaron Rodgers is ready to be a starter. Huh. Word is that he made a major leap in development over this offseason. I'll believe it when I see it, which should be in, oh, maybe the 2010 season. Regardless of if the Packers' management is correct in their assessment on Rodgers, sitting another year or three can be good in all cases - think Steve Young sitting behind Joe Montana, or Matt Hasslebeck behind Farve.
The other surprise could have a more immediate impact: last year's young, ineffective offensive line may have matured into a precocious offensive line. This is a bigger surprise than Rodgers' development. If the line can stand tough, their running backs may have a few more holes and Farve might be able to stay in the pocket longer. If the o-line is stable, my projection of the Packers' record will go up.
John Clayton did the obligatory Brett Favre article. I understand that Favre is the face of the Packers (and probably the only face on the team recognizable by anybody not a die hard Packers fan), but I'm tired of hearing about him. Let's instead move on to a couple of points that jumped out at me (both from the insider observations):
Apparently Aaron Rodgers is ready to be a starter. Huh. Word is that he made a major leap in development over this offseason. I'll believe it when I see it, which should be in, oh, maybe the 2010 season. Regardless of if the Packers' management is correct in their assessment on Rodgers, sitting another year or three can be good in all cases - think Steve Young sitting behind Joe Montana, or Matt Hasslebeck behind Farve.
The other surprise could have a more immediate impact: last year's young, ineffective offensive line may have matured into a precocious offensive line. This is a bigger surprise than Rodgers' development. If the line can stand tough, their running backs may have a few more holes and Farve might be able to stay in the pocket longer. If the o-line is stable, my projection of the Packers' record will go up.
News and Links
Bunch of injury news today.
The Saints have lost their Left Tackle to a yet-unknown knee injury. We don't yet know how severe the injury is.
The Chiefs also have lost their Left Tackle for a while. This happened yesterday, so a bit more is known, though the initial diagnosis was vaguely labeled a sprain. The Chiefs were already weak in their offensive line. This will only compound that problem.
Peter King agrees with what I posted yesterday, that the Anthony McFarland injury could be the tipping point for the Colts taking a step back this year.
Lastly, Brady Quinn has finally signed a contract. It's about time. With all of the training camp practice he missed, he'll be lucky to see some game snaps near the end of the season.
The Saints have lost their Left Tackle to a yet-unknown knee injury. We don't yet know how severe the injury is.
The Chiefs also have lost their Left Tackle for a while. This happened yesterday, so a bit more is known, though the initial diagnosis was vaguely labeled a sprain. The Chiefs were already weak in their offensive line. This will only compound that problem.
Peter King agrees with what I posted yesterday, that the Anthony McFarland injury could be the tipping point for the Colts taking a step back this year.
Lastly, Brady Quinn has finally signed a contract. It's about time. With all of the training camp practice he missed, he'll be lucky to see some game snaps near the end of the season.
King on the Kansas City Cheifs
Postcard
I don't get why Brodie Quolye has been anointed as the favorite for the starting QB job in Kansas City. Is it because the Chiefs assume he will be the starter next year, so why not get him started this year? What pedigree does he have to be an NFL quarterback? He went to Alabama.
I should disclose that I'm from Seattle, and thus partial to QB Damon Huard, but didn't Huard prove enough in the games he played last year? He probably should have started over Trent Green in their playoff loss to Indy.
Chatter is the KC is going to experience a massive drop-off this year. Here's the general idea:
- Larry Johnson was overused last year and will come back to earth this year. If Larry Johnson doesn't have a massive year, how could can the Chiefs be?
- The Quarterback position is in flux.
- I'm not sure of this one, but I think the Chiefs had at least one o-lineman retire, possibly two.
There isn't much in this article about KC's strengths, but maybe there's a reason why for that. The sooner they get back LJ, the better, because they're going to need him.
Pasquarelli on the Ravens
Feature, Insider
Just some thoughts to add onto my post with Banks' column.
- There's a second person in the Baltimore organization that I don't think too highly of: Rick Neuheisel, their offensive coordinator. From what I watched the University of Washington go through with him (and, from a greater distance, the University of Colorado), Neuheisel, as a person, is worthless. He may have a great football mind, but his personality tracks slime wherever he goes.
- Pasquarelli echoed thoughts on Jared Gaither - good thoughts all around. Another steal for the Ravens.
- Pasquarelli is similarly high on McGahee (he points out Baltimore will be a better fit for his personality, and his running style will give Baltimore more flexibility as he won't require a fullback) and on the defense (even with losing Adalius Thomas). Not that those are difficult positions to take or anything.
- In a (somewhat) surprising take, Pasquarelli wonders who their next quarterback will be. Honestly, with that defense, McGahee, and their receivers, a poor-man's Trent Dilfer will work fine.
Monday, August 6, 2007
Banks on the Baltimore Ravens
Postcard
For the past couple of years I have really disliked the Ravens. I loved seeing them fall in 2005, and I hated seeing them win in 2006 (but loved seeing them lose to Indy in the playoffs). The more I read about their team (and organization), the more I come to realize two things:
- This is a really well-run organization with a lot of great players and likable personalities on it.
- Having Ray Lewis on this team completely taints my opinion of them.
Banks raves about supplemental draft pick-up Jared Gaither as a potential replacement for future hall-of-famer Jonathan Ogden. The guys on NFL Live had similar opinions on tonight's show. Sounds like Gaither will be a project, but Odgen has at least a few years left in him, and that should be plenty to develop Gaither. The Ravens score again.
Ironically, the one position the Ravens haven't been able to develop is quarterback. Kyle Boller sounds like a complete bust (as does Aaron Rodgers - I'd be plenty skeptical of the next Cal QB to come out). In this past draft, the Ravens selected Troy Smith. Huh? I don't buy that move. As much as you want to root for the small guy, you have to be either big (JaMarcus Russell) or a short, amazing passer (6' Drew Brees) to make it in the NFL. (When you're big and an amazing passer, you're Peyton Manning). Troy Smith is 6'1", and wasn't exactly a pure passer at Ohio State. I guess the Ravens are hoping to mold another Steve McNair before the real McNair retires. The difference between the two: The real McNair set all kinds of passing records in college, while the imitation McNair was more 'athlete' than 'quarterback' until the end of his junior season. The Ravens have a lot of development to do with their quarterbacks.
Banks on the NY Jets
Postcard
I love this quote:
"... newly acquired running back Thomas Jones is perfect for the Jets offense. I still don't know how Chicago gave him up in (a) trade for the modest price of flopping second-round picks with New York... Jones is going to put up some numbers in New York this season, and the Jets are going to ride his strong shoulders a long way."
Ok, I'll admit that I skimmed the article looking specifically for a quote about Thomas Jones, but it doesn't take away from the fact that Don Banks has exactly the same opinion as me on Jones - he's going to be big for the Jets and, extrapolating some, his loss is going to hurt the Bears. (On a side note, the chatter I've been hearing about the Bears in the national media is completely ignoring the loss of Thomas Jones, instead focusing on Greg Olsen and Devin Hester. Big mistake).
I love the story about Mangini playing classical music at camp. I have yet to hear a quote from players and how they're taking to it.
The only other thing I'll say is that Chad Pennington had better stay healthy.
The Colts lose another player
And this one isn't from free agency. Anthony 'Booger' McFarland is potentially out for the year. How many more losses can the Colts take. In addition to McFarland, the Colts released Cory Simon and didn't resign Montae Reagor - two DTs that McFarland helped offset the losses of last season.
I've already said that I though the loss of Tarik Glenn would be the tipping point for the Colts, though I seem to be in the minority on that one (Peter King's MMQB has a favorable piece about his replacement, Tony Ugoh. I still don't buy it. That offense is so complex, and the NFL is so fast (typically) for rookies that it will take time for Ugoh to adjust. There are definitely benefits to facing Dwight Freeney in practice, though. He's not going to find much more difficult competition).
In other DT news (and a story that's a bit closer to the Seahawks), the Niners have had a setback with the 'centerpiece' to their new 3-4 scheme, losing Abrayo Franklin for the preseason. Honestly, I have no idea how good this guy was. All I know is that Mike Nolan valued him, and that's enough for me to see a positive in a player on a division rival getting hurt.
Chadiha on the Washington Redskins
Feature, Insider
The column focussed on Jason Campell, and for good reason - Mark Brunell appeared to hold back Washington's offense last year, and Cambell is their only hope for tapping into the talent at the skill positions on offense.
I love their receivers - Moss, Randle El, and Brandon Lloyd, in that order. Moss is a definite #1 receiver, and Lloyd and Randle El can both be #2s (even if the are a bit overpaid). I got to watch Lloyd with the 49ers a bit - he always seemed talented to me. Maybe he had some attitude problems.
The running backs are equally stacked, with Clinton Portis and Ladell Betts. (Side note - can you believe Portis is only 25 years old? I thought he was nearly 30. Seems like he's been around forever. He's a September birthday who played as a true freshman at Miami at 18 years old, and left after his junior season. Wow, that's impressive).
The Redskins' left tackle, Chris Samuels, has suffered a knee injury in camp - not a major one, but bad enough for it to be cause for concern. If he can recover in time for the beginning of the regular season, the Redskins are set up to have a nice offense... if Cambell can come through.
The defense is another story. Chadiha makes it sound like they have two great young safeties, and not much else. It doesn't help that the Redskins have let their draft strategy slip in favor of (expensive) free agents, a number of whom haven't lived up to expectations, including some outright busts (Adam Archuleta). But, if the defense can find some way to slow down opposing offenses, the Redskins could win some high-scoring games.
Friday, August 3, 2007
Drafting Quarterbacks
ESPN.com has done a series of articles this week on 'The Evolution of Quarterbacks'. I didn't notice it until today, so I'm going to have to go back and see what other articles are written. Len Pasquarelli has two today, one on the crapshoot in drafting QBs, and the other focussed on how Marc Bulger (recently the recipient of a $65 million contract) was overlooked.
The art of finding a quarterback fascinates me. Many positions have similar bust potentials, but quarterbacks seem to do so with a higher profile, as Pasquarelli points out. What's amazing is that quarterbacks will have more game film of them than any other position, simply because they're responsible for executing every play. You'd think that with such evidence of their skill NFL scouts would have a higher hit-rate.
But no, plenty of first-round quarterbacks bust within a few years. Some thoughts on why this happens:
JaMarcus Russell - I know this guy is an amazing physical specimen, possibly the most athletically-gifted quarterback since, say, Elway. Russell has "Akili Smith 2" written all over his football card. He wasn't even in the discussion of 'best college QB' until the end of the season. He wasn't in the top 10 in the 2006 Heisman voting. How could he be unnoticed while playing at LSU, one of the top teams in the SEC, and possibly in the nation? His stock went up like crazy following his (admittedly impressive) 2007 Sugar Bowl performance. Actually, after looking at his college stats, I may have to back off the Akili Smith comment a little - he has a bit more of a record of success. Still, Russell's potential started out as a snowball and ended as an avalanche. I think the Raiders made a mistake in passing on Calvin Johnson.
Brady Quinn - I don't know about this guy. What's with the contract hold-out? From what I heard around draft day, maybe half of the teams had you as a mid-first-round pick at best. Just because it was your goal to be drafted first overall doesn't mean you proved yourself worthy. The biggest complaint I've heard about Quinn - poor accuracy. That will doom a quarterback (see: Rex Grossman). I don't care that he learned under Charlie Weiss for two years. Notre Dame plays a joke of a schedule, and their best 'win' of the last two years was a close loss to USC in '05. Sorry for the negativity, but I'm really turned off by this guy's hold-out. I'm not sure how I'd project him. I saw him manage some clutch drives (beating UCLA in '06) and stink up the field (Sugar Bowl '07). I think for Quinn his future is all about his coaching and how much he learns.
And on that point, I think most quarterback development will be more nurture than nature. If I were a coach/GM, I'd look for a quarterback with physical tools that also keeps a sleeping bag in the film room. I'd want a guy that is a good, quick, passionate learner, that passes on his knowledge to make teammates better, that has a history of leadership and performing under pressure (especially off the football field).
In short - I'd want Peyton Manning. Yeah, I'm a genius.
The art of finding a quarterback fascinates me. Many positions have similar bust potentials, but quarterbacks seem to do so with a higher profile, as Pasquarelli points out. What's amazing is that quarterbacks will have more game film of them than any other position, simply because they're responsible for executing every play. You'd think that with such evidence of their skill NFL scouts would have a higher hit-rate.
But no, plenty of first-round quarterbacks bust within a few years. Some thoughts on why this happens:
- The money is so great with first round picks, especially top-10 picks, that coaches (and GMs) feel pressured to play their new franchise player immediately. Quarterbacks need time to learn their new offense as well as adjust to the speed of the NFL. Also, a team with a top-10 pick often has that pick because they didn't have a competent-enough quarterback to keep them from being so bad, thus the new QB has no veteran to learn from.
- Scouts pay too much attention to 'measurables' and don't bother taking the time (or at least enough time) to learn about supposed 'immeasurable intangibles', such as leadership, asperation, self-motivation, book-smarts, etc. I can't remember where I heard this, but a great way to measure such things would be to talk to a quarterback's teammates, both college and high school, and get their take on what kind of person their quarterback was. If the Chargers had done their homework, they would have found out that Ryan Leaf was largely disliked at his high school, and we all know how that turned out. I may not be being fair to NFL scouts - they probably average three hours of sleep in the months leading up to the draft - but I've got to believe they're doing something wrong. Maybe quarterbacks should be scouted differently than every other position on the team.
JaMarcus Russell - I know this guy is an amazing physical specimen, possibly the most athletically-gifted quarterback since, say, Elway. Russell has "Akili Smith 2" written all over his football card. He wasn't even in the discussion of 'best college QB' until the end of the season. He wasn't in the top 10 in the 2006 Heisman voting. How could he be unnoticed while playing at LSU, one of the top teams in the SEC, and possibly in the nation? His stock went up like crazy following his (admittedly impressive) 2007 Sugar Bowl performance. Actually, after looking at his college stats, I may have to back off the Akili Smith comment a little - he has a bit more of a record of success. Still, Russell's potential started out as a snowball and ended as an avalanche. I think the Raiders made a mistake in passing on Calvin Johnson.
Brady Quinn - I don't know about this guy. What's with the contract hold-out? From what I heard around draft day, maybe half of the teams had you as a mid-first-round pick at best. Just because it was your goal to be drafted first overall doesn't mean you proved yourself worthy. The biggest complaint I've heard about Quinn - poor accuracy. That will doom a quarterback (see: Rex Grossman). I don't care that he learned under Charlie Weiss for two years. Notre Dame plays a joke of a schedule, and their best 'win' of the last two years was a close loss to USC in '05. Sorry for the negativity, but I'm really turned off by this guy's hold-out. I'm not sure how I'd project him. I saw him manage some clutch drives (beating UCLA in '06) and stink up the field (Sugar Bowl '07). I think for Quinn his future is all about his coaching and how much he learns.
And on that point, I think most quarterback development will be more nurture than nature. If I were a coach/GM, I'd look for a quarterback with physical tools that also keeps a sleeping bag in the film room. I'd want a guy that is a good, quick, passionate learner, that passes on his knowledge to make teammates better, that has a history of leadership and performing under pressure (especially off the football field).
In short - I'd want Peyton Manning. Yeah, I'm a genius.
Lions' (non-existent) QB Depth
Lions QB of the future Drew Stanton is out for the year.
I'm not sure how much this will hurt Stanton's development, since he wouldn't get first-team reps this year, and (if he's smart) he'll still be around to learn the offense. For the immediate future, however, the Lions had better hope Kitna's knee doesn't get rolled-up on.
Looking back now, trading Josh McCown to the Raiders looks bad for both teams - the Raiders have too many veterans, while the Lions don't have enough.
I'm not sure how much this will hurt Stanton's development, since he wouldn't get first-team reps this year, and (if he's smart) he'll still be around to learn the offense. For the immediate future, however, the Lions had better hope Kitna's knee doesn't get rolled-up on.
Looking back now, trading Josh McCown to the Raiders looks bad for both teams - the Raiders have too many veterans, while the Lions don't have enough.
Wednesday, August 1, 2007
The Seahawks biggest (fantasy) sleeper
Not D.J. Hackett. He may end up as the most productive, but at least people around the league have heard of him, and some are predicting a big year from him. Leonard Weaver, on the other hand, isn't known by anybody who doesn't follow the Seahawks closely. And this guy is going to explode.
Good news for Bears fans, bad news for Grossman haters
Rex Grossman's new QB coach is the one that helped Alex Smith progress last year.
As someone who finds joy in watching Rex Grossman doom the Bears, this is not a positive development. I still say you can't (drastically) improve decision-making ability in a single season (maybe in three seasons, and still, it's Grossman we're talking about), but you can definitely improve fundamentals and overall accuracy. This is definitely no good.
As someone who finds joy in watching Rex Grossman doom the Bears, this is not a positive development. I still say you can't (drastically) improve decision-making ability in a single season (maybe in three seasons, and still, it's Grossman we're talking about), but you can definitely improve fundamentals and overall accuracy. This is definitely no good.
Raiders get Culpepper
Story
Wasn't there talk that the Raiders wanted to get Culpepper so that they could draft Calvin Johnson?
This potentially gives the Raiders a veteran starter that can throw the ball deep (which Al Davis covets so much). The real question: Does Culpepper have enough of his old ability to scrammble to evade the pass rushers that break through his swiss-cheese o-line?
Wasn't there talk that the Raiders wanted to get Culpepper so that they could draft Calvin Johnson?
This potentially gives the Raiders a veteran starter that can throw the ball deep (which Al Davis covets so much). The real question: Does Culpepper have enough of his old ability to scrammble to evade the pass rushers that break through his swiss-cheese o-line?
Banks on the New York Giants
Article
Top point: Eli Manning has a new QB coach, and his old QB coach has been promoted to offensive coordinator. Apparently the two coaches have a good working relationship, both with each other and with Tom Coughlin, which can only make Manning's continuing education easier. In much the same way that I think losing Norv Turner will hurt Alex Smith this year, getting a new QB coach could definitely help Manning.
Somehow I missed that (the other, USC) Steve Smith was picked by the Giants. That's a great pick. In my opinion, it's really tough to get a bad player at a skill/speed position from USC. (I'd put Miami in that class as well, though you have to check out the player's character as well (*ahem* Brandon Meriweather)). Smith should fit in great as a third receiver, and could have great rookie season if defenses concentrate more on veterans Plaxico Burress and Amani Toomer.
Coughlin thinks they'll be able to replace Tiki Barber's production just fine. Right. In addition to rushing for 1662 yards last season (4th in the NFL), Barber caught 58 passes for 465 yards (8th in the NFL). The Giants will be lucky to get 1200 yards rushing and 200 yards receiving out of Brandon Jacobs.
Lastly, Mike Sando did a great job analyzing relative effects Michael Strahan and Simeon Rice had on their respective teams. My only complaint about the comparison is that it looks at the last three years for Strahan, but only the previous year for Rice. The reason is that Rice played 16 and 15 games in 2005 and 2006, respectively, so there's no data to take from those season. However, Rice did have 12 and 14 sacks in said years, is the difference between the two players over those three years isn't quite as drastic as Sando's comparison may seem to show. However, it is obvious that Rice declined greatly in 2006, and I wouldn't expect him to get much better in 2007, nevermind the chance he may decline. The point: Strahan is incredibly important to the Giants' defense, and Rice, although a big name, won't be an equal replacement.
Top point: Eli Manning has a new QB coach, and his old QB coach has been promoted to offensive coordinator. Apparently the two coaches have a good working relationship, both with each other and with Tom Coughlin, which can only make Manning's continuing education easier. In much the same way that I think losing Norv Turner will hurt Alex Smith this year, getting a new QB coach could definitely help Manning.
Somehow I missed that (the other, USC) Steve Smith was picked by the Giants. That's a great pick. In my opinion, it's really tough to get a bad player at a skill/speed position from USC. (I'd put Miami in that class as well, though you have to check out the player's character as well (*ahem* Brandon Meriweather)). Smith should fit in great as a third receiver, and could have great rookie season if defenses concentrate more on veterans Plaxico Burress and Amani Toomer.
Coughlin thinks they'll be able to replace Tiki Barber's production just fine. Right. In addition to rushing for 1662 yards last season (4th in the NFL), Barber caught 58 passes for 465 yards (8th in the NFL). The Giants will be lucky to get 1200 yards rushing and 200 yards receiving out of Brandon Jacobs.
Lastly, Mike Sando did a great job analyzing relative effects Michael Strahan and Simeon Rice had on their respective teams. My only complaint about the comparison is that it looks at the last three years for Strahan, but only the previous year for Rice. The reason is that Rice played 16 and 15 games in 2005 and 2006, respectively, so there's no data to take from those season. However, Rice did have 12 and 14 sacks in said years, is the difference between the two players over those three years isn't quite as drastic as Sando's comparison may seem to show. However, it is obvious that Rice declined greatly in 2006, and I wouldn't expect him to get much better in 2007, nevermind the chance he may decline. The point: Strahan is incredibly important to the Giants' defense, and Rice, although a big name, won't be an equal replacement.
King on the Cincinnati Bengals
Article
Two things stick out from this article:
1. Carson Palmer is fully recovered and is stepping up as the leader of the offense. I love hearing about QBs inviting their receivers to take part in summer workouts. Even without Chris Henry for the first half of the year, Palmer, and the Bengals offense, is going to be massive this year.
2. The Bengal's defense is nowhere near as good as its offense. First-round pick Leon Hall is a nice talent, but CBs often struggle in their first year and they need him now. Losing Odell Thurman for another year really hurts. Check out his rookie year stats: 106 tackles (best on the team by 20%), 5 forced fumbles (again, tops on the team), 5 interceptions (topped only by the 10 of CB Deltha O'Neal). ESPN.com's scouting has him as the 12th best linebacker in the NFL.
I've had a gut feeling that the Bengals were going to bounce back this year. Peter King doesn't think so, largely because he doesn't think their defense is good enough. So, just for kicks, I looked up Bengals-vs-Opponents stats from their 12-4 2005 season and their 8-8 2006 season:
2005:
2006:
Here's what the stats say: 2006 opponents were roughly as effective than 2005 opponents (comparing 2005/2006): 22/21 points/game, 339/355 yards/game, 42.6/41.7 third-down conversion percentage. What actually lagged in 2006 was the offense: 26 points per game dropped to 23 (+3, as compared to -1 for the defense). Third-down conversion percentage dropped 7.1% (42.9 to 35.8). Rushing yards dropped 17/game (119 to 102). I would say this is the case of the defense suffering due to a lagging offense, except that the defense didn't statistically suffer. I stand my prediction of the Bengals bouncing back.
Two things stick out from this article:
1. Carson Palmer is fully recovered and is stepping up as the leader of the offense. I love hearing about QBs inviting their receivers to take part in summer workouts. Even without Chris Henry for the first half of the year, Palmer, and the Bengals offense, is going to be massive this year.
2. The Bengal's defense is nowhere near as good as its offense. First-round pick Leon Hall is a nice talent, but CBs often struggle in their first year and they need him now. Losing Odell Thurman for another year really hurts. Check out his rookie year stats: 106 tackles (best on the team by 20%), 5 forced fumbles (again, tops on the team), 5 interceptions (topped only by the 10 of CB Deltha O'Neal). ESPN.com's scouting has him as the 12th best linebacker in the NFL.
I've had a gut feeling that the Bengals were going to bounce back this year. Peter King doesn't think so, largely because he doesn't think their defense is good enough. So, just for kicks, I looked up Bengals-vs-Opponents stats from their 12-4 2005 season and their 8-8 2006 season:
2005:
| Team Down Stats | 1st Down | 3rd Down | 4th Down | |||||||||||
| YDS | RUSH | PASS | PTS | TOT | RUSH | PASS | PEN | MADE | ATT | PCT | MADE | ATT | PCT | |
| Offensive | 358 | 119 | 239 | 26 | 342 | 109 | 203 | 30 | 84 | 196 | 42.9 | 3 | 10 | 30.0 |
| Opponents | 339 | 116 | 223 | 22 | 321 | 109 | 185 | 27 | 81 | 190 | 42.6 | 6 | 14 | 42.9 |
2006:
| Team Down Stats | 1st Down | 3rd Down | 4th Down | |||||||||||
| YDS | RUSH | PASS | PTS | TOT | RUSH | PASS | PEN | MADE | ATT | PCT | MADE | ATT | PCT | |
| Offensive | 341 | 102 | 240 | 23 | 313 | 88 | 200 | 25 | 72 | 201 | 35.8 | 6 | 9 | 66.7 |
| Opponents | 355 | 116 | 239 | 21 | 337 | 109 | 206 | 22 | 88 | 211 | 41.7 | 11 | 21 | 52.4 |
Here's what the stats say: 2006 opponents were roughly as effective than 2005 opponents (comparing 2005/2006): 22/21 points/game, 339/355 yards/game, 42.6/41.7 third-down conversion percentage. What actually lagged in 2006 was the offense: 26 points per game dropped to 23 (+3, as compared to -1 for the defense). Third-down conversion percentage dropped 7.1% (42.9 to 35.8). Rushing yards dropped 17/game (119 to 102). I would say this is the case of the defense suffering due to a lagging offense, except that the defense didn't statistically suffer. I stand my prediction of the Bengals bouncing back.
King on the Pittsburgh Steelers
Article
Peter King absolutely loves new head coach Mike Tomlin. He'll gush about him every chance he gets, sometimes to the point where I'll find myself thinking, "Ok Peter, I get it, you think Tomlin will be a great coach." Tomlin sounds like an old-school toughness coach, with 15 2-a-days scheduled. He probably needs that much time to install new elements being merged with existing schemes (I'll be interested to see how the 4-3/3-4 hybrid defense works out). He's also trying to build more toughness in the Steelers. Do they really need any more? Didn't they win their way through Superbowl XL basically on their toughness? The players aren't (yet) revolting, but they aren't all completely sold either.
I like what was written about Ben Roethlisberger. Whatever naivety (i.e. invincibility) he lost during the last year has been replaced with wisdom and focus. It also sounds like he'll have more of a chance to throw long this year (and Santonio Holmes, whom I thought was underused last year, might finally get some touches).
Peter King absolutely loves new head coach Mike Tomlin. He'll gush about him every chance he gets, sometimes to the point where I'll find myself thinking, "Ok Peter, I get it, you think Tomlin will be a great coach." Tomlin sounds like an old-school toughness coach, with 15 2-a-days scheduled. He probably needs that much time to install new elements being merged with existing schemes (I'll be interested to see how the 4-3/3-4 hybrid defense works out). He's also trying to build more toughness in the Steelers. Do they really need any more? Didn't they win their way through Superbowl XL basically on their toughness? The players aren't (yet) revolting, but they aren't all completely sold either.
I like what was written about Ben Roethlisberger. Whatever naivety (i.e. invincibility) he lost during the last year has been replaced with wisdom and focus. It also sounds like he'll have more of a chance to throw long this year (and Santonio Holmes, whom I thought was underused last year, might finally get some touches).
Chadiha on the New England Patriots
Article
Belichick's defense is all about the linebackers, and that core was getting old. Bring in Adalius Thomas, and suddenly they all look a lot younger. Like everybody else, I love the Thomas signing. With the Patriot's system he can probably have an even greater impact than he did in Baltimore.
Insider Observations
Compare a characteristic Patriots' signing (Wes Welker) to an uncharacteristic signing (Randy Moss). Both make the Patriots incredibly interesting. Moss was quoted last week saying that he won't have a problem if he's a decoy. Like Peter King, I'm skeptical that he'll stay with that view after a one-catch loss in November. Maybe the Patriots are counting on winning enough to keep Moss happy. We'll see. Add in Stallworth and Ben Watson and you have an explosive receiving core.
And it's a good thing the Pats have such a receiving core, since their running game could lag a lot this year. Apparently Laurence Maroney is wearing a no-contact red jersey in practice. That's not the best of signs, given he had offseason shoulder surgey and was nicked up last year. The Pats may need to bring in a veteran backup (is there one out there yet?) for insurance.
One of their CBs was just placed on injured reserved for the season. That doesn't help the organization towards signing Asante Samuel at their price. The Bears were smart and brought back Lance Briggs, even if only for a year and with a promise not to franchise him again. There doesn't look to be a ton of depth there, nor youngsters that the Pats are developing. Seems like all of the eggs were placed in the Samual basket. They'd better figure out what they're doing soon.
Belichick's defense is all about the linebackers, and that core was getting old. Bring in Adalius Thomas, and suddenly they all look a lot younger. Like everybody else, I love the Thomas signing. With the Patriot's system he can probably have an even greater impact than he did in Baltimore.
Insider Observations
Compare a characteristic Patriots' signing (Wes Welker) to an uncharacteristic signing (Randy Moss). Both make the Patriots incredibly interesting. Moss was quoted last week saying that he won't have a problem if he's a decoy. Like Peter King, I'm skeptical that he'll stay with that view after a one-catch loss in November. Maybe the Patriots are counting on winning enough to keep Moss happy. We'll see. Add in Stallworth and Ben Watson and you have an explosive receiving core.
And it's a good thing the Pats have such a receiving core, since their running game could lag a lot this year. Apparently Laurence Maroney is wearing a no-contact red jersey in practice. That's not the best of signs, given he had offseason shoulder surgey and was nicked up last year. The Pats may need to bring in a veteran backup (is there one out there yet?) for insurance.
One of their CBs was just placed on injured reserved for the season. That doesn't help the organization towards signing Asante Samuel at their price. The Bears were smart and brought back Lance Briggs, even if only for a year and with a promise not to franchise him again. There doesn't look to be a ton of depth there, nor youngsters that the Pats are developing. Seems like all of the eggs were placed in the Samual basket. They'd better figure out what they're doing soon.
Clayton on the Minnesota Vikings
Article
Clayton focused on anointed Viking's QB of the future, Tarvaris Jackson. I didn't realize that (1) Jackson didn't come from a Div. I-AA school, but (2) got there as a way of avoiding a QB competition at Arkansas with now-NFL receiver Matt Jones. Huh. And this guy is the Vikings' savior? Well, that seems to be the big question. The Vikes have the left side of their O-line set, two nice running backs (though Chester Taylor got nicked in camp), a suspect receiving core, and run the west coast offense. Can Jackson run it? That's the question.
Insider Observations
Funny that Brooks Bollinger's name wasn't brought up in the previous article, because Clayton's top observation is that he could challenge Jackson for the starting spot. Huh. Sounds like the classic case of 'two quarterbacks means no quarterbacks.'
Two quality running backs in a west coast offense - either one (or both) of the backs isn't going to get many carries, or look for a new-look, run-heavy version of the west coast offense. How do you not take advantage of your two best offensive weapons just because your offensive scheme dictates more passes?
Sounds like the Vikings have "two of the most imposing defensive tackles in the game", and some questions at defensive end.
Clayton focused on anointed Viking's QB of the future, Tarvaris Jackson. I didn't realize that (1) Jackson didn't come from a Div. I-AA school, but (2) got there as a way of avoiding a QB competition at Arkansas with now-NFL receiver Matt Jones. Huh. And this guy is the Vikings' savior? Well, that seems to be the big question. The Vikes have the left side of their O-line set, two nice running backs (though Chester Taylor got nicked in camp), a suspect receiving core, and run the west coast offense. Can Jackson run it? That's the question.
Insider Observations
Funny that Brooks Bollinger's name wasn't brought up in the previous article, because Clayton's top observation is that he could challenge Jackson for the starting spot. Huh. Sounds like the classic case of 'two quarterbacks means no quarterbacks.'
Two quality running backs in a west coast offense - either one (or both) of the backs isn't going to get many carries, or look for a new-look, run-heavy version of the west coast offense. How do you not take advantage of your two best offensive weapons just because your offensive scheme dictates more passes?
Sounds like the Vikings have "two of the most imposing defensive tackles in the game", and some questions at defensive end.
Stories from training camp
Oh baby. NFL training camps are getting started. That means the national NFL writers get to make their trips to each team's camp and write up a little preview. I've ignored these in the past, but I'm finding that these are one of the best ways to learn about teams you know little about (and outside of the NFC West, and maybe Chicago (which, if not already obvious, is my current LOSE obsession)), I'm basically at 'headline knowledge'. There's only so much I can read, so I have to pick which writers to read. I'm not saying the following writers are the best (though I enjoy all of their writings), just that reading them all will give a nice survey:
ESPN.com
CNNSI.com
Sportsline.com
There are other good writers at Yahoo! sports, Fox, USA Today, etc, but like I said, I can only read so much. Look for comments on some of these as they are written. Some have already passed (and I won't go back looking for them), but from here on out I'll start.
ESPN.com
CNNSI.com
Sportsline.com
There are other good writers at Yahoo! sports, Fox, USA Today, etc, but like I said, I can only read so much. Look for comments on some of these as they are written. Some have already passed (and I won't go back looking for them), but from here on out I'll start.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)