2024-2025 NFL Season - Dak Prescott's MVP Tour Part 2

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Merrith

Merrith

Golden Baronet of the Realm
18,414
7,126
Skylancer81 said:
So here is why the Redskins need to NOT DRAFT a QB at #2 and trade back. (FYI trading Sam Howell was the stupidest move they have made yet this year, but trust me it will not be the last one)

Super Bowl-winning quarterbacks who were taken with the #2 pick in the NFL Draft.
  1. Eli Manning: Eli was selected as the #2 pick in the 2004 NFL Draft by the San Diego Chargers (although he was later traded to the New York Giants). Eli Manning achieved Super Bowl glory twice, leading the Giants to victories in Super Bowls XLII and XLVI as the starting quarterback1.

So, in total, one quarterbacks taken with the #2 pick have won Super Bowls as starter. Stupid Ai said Peyton was taken #2 in 1998, but no he was number 1 and Ryan Leaf was #2 to San Diego.

Since no Quarterback named Eli Manning is in this draft, and the last QB they drafted at #2 cost them 12 years of being shit... Trade back or take an O Tackle. But again this new ownership group is about to be as dumb as the last one and take a QB with no offensive line again, and will destroy another player setting the team back again for 10+ years.
Click to expand...

Others have already corrected Eli part...but the idea no one/barely anyone has done it from #2 is just silly logic to use. I would have liked to see what Howell could still be, and he's a very cheap backup option, but the problem is you can't have last year's guy in the room still when you draft someone else at #2 who is supposed to be THE guy. So it just made sense to move him.

Is it likely we find a stud at #2? Maybe not, but you don't get to pick this high often to get a potential franchise QB, so when you get the chance, take a swing if you don't have that QB already on the roster.

The last time we picked #2, we tooke Chase Young over potentially Tua or Herbert. Not that those two have had massive success or anything, but they've been better than anyone we've had for awhile at QB.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user
Skylancer81

Skylancer81

Molten Core Raider
746
974
DickTrickle said:
Making your whole argument based on the actual draft number (instead of maybe something like nth QB taken or team quality) is dumb as fuck.

Do you think if Terry Bradshaw or Peyton Manning had been drafted to the same team but one pick lower their entire career trajectory would have changed?
Click to expand...
Absolutely. The team each was drafted by in their days, 1970 and 1998, had dominate running games and superior offensive lines. Would a later team had the same? Maybe, probably not. Who drafts you is more important than what pick. That's why virtually every high pick fails when the team they go to has a crap offensive line. And that's my point we had the worst offensive line last year and have done nothing to change that. Until that is addressed you will kill whoever you put behind it. At least Howell lived one year behind and would have been worlds better with new stud linemen. But they are going in the complete wrong direction, because that's what every other new head coach with a low draft pick does. It works almost never, yet they still think it's the best route. Just sick of seeing history repeat itself with my team.
 
Merrith

Merrith

Golden Baronet of the Realm
18,414
7,126
Skylancer81 said:
Absolutely. The team each was drafted by in their days, 1970 and 1998, had dominate running games and superior offensive lines. Would a later team had the same? Maybe, probably not. Who drafts you is more important than what pick. That's why virtually every high pick fails when the team they go to has a crap offensive line. And that's my point we had the worst offensive line last year and have done nothing to change that. Until that is addressed you will kill whoever you put behind it. At least Howell lived one year behind and would have been worlds better with new stud linemen. But they are going in the complete wrong direction, because that's what every other new head coach with a low draft pick does. It works almost never, yet they still think it's the best route. Just sick of seeing history repeat itself with my team.
Click to expand...

We had a bad O line, not the absolute worst. Frankly Howell had just as much responsibility for his sack total as the O line did (if not more). We've already signed a good vet center, a potential new starter for LG. This O line draft class is deep, even into Day 2. We have 6 picks in the top 100.

you're not wrong that picking that QB high works almost never...but hoping your 5th round "gem" who led the league in sacks and interceptions last year turns into "the guy" works even less of the time. Much, much less. Granted, if you told me we were going to trade down to lower in the top 10 and get a LT and roll with Howell for another year...I wouldn't have been upset. Although all the other picks we would have added as a part of that would be a big reason. But at some point, you have to find the QB. A guy we pick at 2 still has a better chance of being franchise caliber than what Howell looked like to end the season (and that's even giving him some leeway for having it rough a lot of the year).
 
  • 3Like
Reactions: 2 users
Skylancer81

Skylancer81

Molten Core Raider
746
974
Howell's bad year was more on Eric Bieniemy, and his "I do not know how to run the ball" play calling. The games we won we had 28, 23, 22, and 29 rushes, which I call too few as is. The losses we ran 13, 28, 10, 19, 16, 14, 28, 27, 28*, 21, 22, 14, 17. The only games we were not blown out in we ran over 20 times, except for the Miami game with *28 attempts. Running the ball is a lost art to Offensive Coordinators.

You run 30+ times you almost always win, and it's not just to finish the game it's to control the clock, slow down the pass rush and rest your defense. It's that simple and Bieniemy could not grasp that in his first year calling plays. Even with this passing league winning teams run way more than we did last year. The NFL wants us to pass so we need to pass... BS do what helps you win, not try to invent the wheel ffs.

Years we had good offensive lines we always ran 30+ averages per game and had winning records, the few ones we have had over the past 30+ years. But they always go for the shinny new toy to throw or throw to and let the offensive line degrade and wonder why they lose. It is that simple, and most teams refuse to see it.
 
Gavinmad

Gavinmad

Mr. Poopybutthole
43,737
52,284
Skylancer81 said:
Absolutely. The team each was drafted by in their days, 1970 and 1998, had dominate running games and superior offensive lines. Would a later team had the same? Maybe, probably not. Who drafts you is more important than what pick.
Click to expand...
wut? The Steelers had a slightly better than average running game and a mediocre offensive line, Bradshaw got sacked a lot his first couple years (well beyond rookie learning numbers). Colts had a shit tier running game but Peyton was either well protected or had exceptional pocket awareness for a rookie.
 
Skylancer81

Skylancer81

Molten Core Raider
746
974
Marshal Faulk was shit teir>?

324 attempts 1319 yards 6 TDs 86 receptions 908 yards 4 TDs in 1998. He was 2nd team all pro this season too.

Then after that he had Edgerrin James 1999+

Oh and Manning set the rookie record for Interceptions of 28, still stands today and would have led the league last year. For reference Sam Howell led the league last year with...21

Peyton in 16 games 1998 3739 Yards 26 TDs 28 INTs
Howell in 17 games 2023 3946 Yards 21 TDS 21 INTs

Just saying
 
Last edited:
Gavinmad

Gavinmad

Mr. Poopybutthole
43,737
52,284
Skylancer81 said:
Marshal Faulk was shit teir>?

324 attempts 1319 yards 6 TDs 86 receptions 908 yards 4 TDs in 1998
Click to expand...
The best example of shit tier in this thread is your reading comprehension. The Colts put up a grand total of 1486 rushing yards in 1998, putting them at 26th out of 30. So yes, shit tier is a pretty good description of their overall rushing game, either way it sure as shit wasn't dominant.
 
Skylancer81

Skylancer81

Molten Core Raider
746
974
Excuse me?
Does not change my point that he went to a team built to succeed with him. By having a dominate running game and an excellent offensive line.
Your definition of their running game and mine are clearly different. The fact the team did not rush much more than what Faulk ran for does not change his performance.
Marshall Faulk's 1319 yards in 16 games, those are dominate running back numbers. For comparison ONLY Christian McCaffrey at 1459 had more last year.
Team rushing number wise the Colts in 1998 is lower than anyone last year. But a Dominate back is a dominate rushing attack. The threat of the run sets up the pass etc. Him just being on the field makes a difference.

Anyway
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user
DickTrickle

DickTrickle

Definitely NOT Furor Planedefiler
13,404
15,564
Skylancer81 said:
Absolutely. The team each was drafted by in their days, 1970 and 1998, had dominate running games and superior offensive lines. Would a later team had the same? Maybe, probably not. Who drafts you is more important than what pick. That's why virtually every high pick fails when the team they go to has a crap offensive line. And that's my point we had the worst offensive line last year and have done nothing to change that. Until that is addressed you will kill whoever you put behind it. At least Howell lived one year behind and would have been worlds better with new stud linemen. But they are going in the complete wrong direction, because that's what every other new head coach with a low draft pick does. It works almost never, yet they still think it's the best route. Just sick of seeing history repeat itself with my team.
Click to expand...
I think you missed my "if they were drafted by the same team." You actually made my point for me. Who drafts you is more important than what pick -- I absolutely agree! That's why saying something like "no #2 QB pick has ever gone to the Super Bowl so drafting a QB at #2 is wrong" is just nonsense.

For the Commanders this year, sure, you could make a case that they should build up their offensive line instead of going for a QB right away. That still doesn't mean there's some voodoo curse on picking a QB at #2. I'm beginning to think you just phrased things really poorly in your initial post since your expanded explanation at least makes some sense.

That said, I think an offensive line is way more important that a top tier running attack. 13 of the last 16 SB champs did not have a 1000 yard rusher and most of them were middle of the pack as a team. The idea that you need to run the ball 30 times a game to win a SB is not backed up by actual results. That's a pretty small sample size, though. I think just looking at SB wins is myopic but even that narrow view doesn't support your perspective about the running attack.
 
BrutulTM

BrutulTM

Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun.
<Silver Donator>
14,670
2,528
Merrith said:
Then they're still the Bears we know and love. They already fucked up not getting more for Fields by waiting.
Click to expand...
Jay Cutler is still the greatest quarterback in Bears history.
 
  • 2Worf
  • 2Like
Reactions: 3 users
Animosity

Animosity

Silver Baronet of the Realm
7,042
5,937
jooka said:
www.nbcsports.com

49ers got hit harder for "clerical error" than Falcons did for using fake crowd noise

Either 49ers' violation was a bigger deal than the league is saying, or the Falcons' violation should have been punished more harshly.
www.nbcsports.com www.nbcsports.com


I'm also kinda interested to see if the NFL actually does anything about the blatant tampering Cousins admitted to in his introductory press conference.
Click to expand...
Would be pretty shocked if nothing happens considering last season the NFL fined the Dolphins and took away their first round pick for tampering with Brady.
 
Denamian

Denamian

Night Janitor
<Nazi Janitors>
7,464
19,683
BrutulTM said:
Jay Cutler is still the greatest quarterback in Bears history.
Click to expand...

Did you forget someone?

sexy_20rexy_20front.jpg
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users
Alex

Alex

Still a Music Elitist
14,665
7,482
jooka said:
Click to expand...


Very on board with this signing. I still wonder if there's a chance Tee gets traded. But this might be it for the Bengals until the draft.

Still need a proper replacement for Reader. May go DT in the first round.
 
Last edited:
jooka

jooka

marco esquandolas
<Bronze Donator>
14,858
6,391
www.nbcsports.com

Competition Committee proposes making hip-drop tackles a 15-yard penalty

The hip-drop tackle could be banned starting with the 2024 season.
www.nbcsports.com www.nbcsports.com

“ARTICLE 18. HIP-DROP TACKLE. It is a foul if a player uses the following technique to bring a runner to the ground: (a) grabs the runner with both hands or wraps the runner with both arms; and (b) unweights himself by swiveling and dropping his hips and/or lower body, landing on and trapping the runner’s leg(s) at or below the knee. Penalty: For a Hip-Drop Tackle: Loss of 15 yards and an automatic first down.”
Click to expand...


Imagine this is gonna get voted in with the amount of season ending injuries it accounts for.
 
Ameraves

Ameraves

New title pending...
<Bronze Donator>
13,411
14,529
The NFLPA is against it. Not that it means it won't pass, but they don't want it.
1710973517324.png
 
  • 1Worf
Reactions: 1 user
Animosity

Animosity

Silver Baronet of the Realm
7,042
5,937
I would appose it too when the refs openly say "we think we can call this right". Way too much of a grey area like pass interference.
 
  • 4Like
Reactions: 3 users
BrutulTM

BrutulTM

Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun.
<Silver Donator>
14,670
2,528
To tackle now means you have to lift the player up and cradle them in your arms, then gently set them down on the turf, or better yet, carry them to their team's bench. You are not allowed to put any of your body weight on them at any point. New scoring records for everyone!
 
  • 1Worf
  • 1Pathetic
  • 1Like
Reactions: 2 users
You must log in or register to reply here.