Thurman#1

Agreed.

Yes, this. https://www.si.com/nfl/chiefs/news/are-the-chiefs-blocking-downfield-illegally-on-rpo-plays-andy-reid-says-no-uN91b01mVUi1ZIqlF3p2rg "While the NFL rules state lineman can move no more than 1 yard downfield before the pass, officials often permit some leeway, usually no more than 3 to 5 yards downfield."

Stephen Colbert called. They want you on ZOOM. Phillips was a force, but on very few plays. He was bad against the run and had very few pressures outside of his sacks, which is kind of weird, but true. I liked his personality, but he was more lucky than very good. And his record shows the same this year.

Cox will receive $16 and $17 mill the next two years. Do you really want him as a one-year rental? And Philly wouldn't get rid of him anyway, it would be a huge dead cap hit. Ertz is affordable but will miss the next four to six weeks.

See, that is what we call an opinion. A fact is quite different. And again, a Pro Bowl in his second year says few agree with you, and that when healthy and in a working defense, he's a damn good player. Dude, he's killing you. You're looking like one of those fraternity recruits saying, "Thank you, sir, may I have another." There are things you can say about Edmunds that are real. You can say he's regressed this year, for instance, as it's clear he has. But that he's never had a game-changing play? Ridiculous. As he says, though, your choice. The first and most obvious one I come up with is the one against the Fins last year near the end of the year. Miami had beaten us with Allen QBing earlier in the season. In the first game we score on the first game. On their first they start to move, Edmunds intercepts and runs it back inside the 20. The crowd is now going nuts and on 1st and ten Miami is on their heels and Allen hits Zay Jones for a TD, we're up 14 - 0, and the rout is on. That was a huge play. Gonna say something sensible, "Well, yeah, good point, but this year he hasn't been playing as well"? I won't hold my breath.

Yes, his injury and lack of a 1-tech. And probably also the fact that our whole DL isn't playing as well as we'd hoped. And yeah, you could say he needs a good space eater to flourish, correct. Which is true of any MLB in this scheme and plenty of others. Except at 1-tech we're small and athletic on the DL. The 1-tech is a desperate need in this scheme. Again, Ray frickin' Lewis didn't thrive without a space eater in front of him in the middle of his career. I totally agree that he's regressed, and that the reason is what matters. But IMO except for the injury there's not too much we can do to fix things beyond hoping McD finds a way to scheme around the problems of this defensive roster. We'll see. Pro Bowl in his second year says you're wrong. Healthy, with a space eater in front of him, he's absolutely a stud. Not elite so far or anything, don't get me wrong. But yes, very very good. You didn't upset me. Your poor, evasive OP did certainly seem worthy of being called a poor, evasive, OP, though. Your post gave only a small part of the picture and then didn't put a link in so people could see what you'd done. Thankfully, the Mods stepped in and put a link in, which helped at least a bit.

He hasn't even lost his Jets job, much less his career. He came in in Buffalo using air horns to wake guys up at training camp like they were misbehaving 12 year olds. But he learned, got better. Like many or most Bills coaches since Jim Kelly retired, Greggo's problem involved bad quarterbacking and also a bad OL. They drafted Mike Williams at LT to work on their OL woes and he turned out to be a wildly unmotivated guy, couldn't even get to meetings on time, much less practice hard. The D was kicking butt and taking names by the end of his time here but the offense was bad. They had Rob Johnson as his QB first year, followed by Bledsoe as his legs calcified and nobody else to speak of. The OL had Ruben Brown, Jonas Jennings, and two guys who just weren't good enough and Williams, so the left side was very good, but the right was poor. Good D which steadily improved, no O, and bad drafting, although the draft his first year was really good. But after that, nada. He was paired here with a poor GM, Donahoe.

$6 mill isn't all that cheap for a TE. Considering the money we have under the cap next year, to me it"s too expensive.

Bledsoe: 764 rushing yards in 14 years. Nope.

Yeah, you don't want an MLB who runs well or wraps up with his arms. Oh, wait, you probably do. Or closes from depth. Oh, wait, you actually do. Or sees it and goes and gets it. Yeah, it's totally clear, these are all major negatives for an MLB ... in Bizarro Land.

And I repeat, if this were your defense, what you're saying there would matter. It's McDermott's. I do indeed see player rotating in and out. Do you see Milano or Edmunds rotating in and out? Exactly. Do you want them to? Fine. Buy the Bills and get yourself installed as DC. Frankly, though, I'm glad you don't have the money. Please, the problem isn't that they can see him. Any RB with even decent vision sees the LBs just fine about 95% of the time. The problem appears to be run fits, and gaps left open and it doesn't seem to be Edmunds who's especially the problem. There's plenty of blame to go around.

They do need a rusher. But the idea that because we need a rusher, Edmunds should be the one who rushes is logically flawed. In several ways. McDermott's defense isn't built around LBs consistently rushing. Occasionally, yes. Consistently, no. He's proven last year he's a very good MLB. Yeah, he's having problems now, and if it was your defense that we were running, maybe it would be a great idea to move him. But it's McDermott's.

He's not 19 now. But he was when that was written. And a guy who was a Pro Bowler last year isn't learning how to play. He might still be improving. Or he might be dealing with an injury. But he's not playing like a 19 year old anymore. Edmunds is well past that point, though something is clearly wrong. But those blaming it all on him are kidding themselves. Problems look easier when you find a scapegoat and yell at him because you can pretend everything will get better all at once if only that one thing changed. But it's a misrepresentation of reality. I've made this argument before, because it's the best example, but there was a huge number of people arguing that Ray Lewis had passed his prime at around age 26 or 27. His play visibly declined. He simply wasn't as effective as he had been back in the old days, the days when he had had a space-eater named Siragusa in front of him. But no, for many people that wasn't the problem. It was that Lewis wasn't any good anymore. Yet miraculously when they brought in Ngata to play in front of him he coincidentally picked that same moment to once again start playing like the best LB in the game. Circumstances and surrounding players have effects. As do injuries and other things.

Yeah, "what to focus on is up to the person posting." Of course. But he didn't just "not focus" on the positive. He didn't indicate there was any, and tried to hide it by not linking. It was intellectually dishonest. Evasive. It was a post to make fair minds queasy. I say this as a non-mod, obviously. Any argument based on hiding most of the information has maggots eating away at it from the inside, it's flawed and built on quicksand. Hiding that is why the information is hidden in the first place.

Yeah, and I agree the Titanic had a few flaws, but the dinners were great. It was truly a horrible post. He was much much better last year. He was a Pro Bowler. He's regressed. It's likely the surroundings and the injury. If not it will come out over time. No reason to think otherwise. As for your idea that the D regressing pointing to coaching when there are injured players playing, players out from injury like Milano (without whom this defense always seems totally different) and four different starters, that's ridiculous. Coaching might be a part of it, but much more than that we can't really say with reason.

Um, no. I'm the one who called him out, and I took great pains to - twice - tell everyone they should read the whole thing. Gave the link, twice. (Mods later found another link which is somewhat different, but has overall the same slant.) Whereas he didn't give the link at all, or indicate that he was only giving a small, biased part of the story. That's why the mods went to his OP and put in the link themselves. And you're cherrypicking just as much as him. Again picking one or two of the few negative things and pretending that it's "the rest of the report, " which is just flat-out wrong. The rest of the report does indeed say the things you say, but also things like this: "Explosive when working downhill, especially in the run game. Sets a good, hard edge against the run, especially in goal line and short yardage.Tackling is strong, especially for such a young player and particulary in space. Closes nicely from depth and hits his targets. Scrapes down the line, keeps his balance and can shed blocks on the move. Wraps up and closes the deal with his condor wingspan and good burst. Rarely whiffs, and at the very worst he can slow down ballcarriers for others to finish off the play." The thing to do is give both sides of the story. When you give only one, you're saying more about yourself and your prejudices than you are about the guy you're writing about.

Yeah, free agency. Under Beane, the OL sucked in 2017, improved the slightest little bit in 2018 but then came the FA influx and Ford and they've been solidly good since. I wish we could say it was better than solidly good, but we have guys at every position who are legit starters in the NFL. Not so many teams have that these days. Free agency threw a monkey wrench in OL consistency, which has made a major difference in performance. It's almost impossible to put together a group like the Electric Company these days. Look how quickly that Dallas group that looked like it was set for the future fell apart.

I didn't think that was a quote. Looks to me like Salguero's guess as to what Fitzy was thinking. But you aren't the only one who read it as a Fitz quote, so maybe I'm wrong.

Nonsense. All three posts.

Yes, the schedule was soft last year. But against the good teams you mention, the Pats, Cowboys, Titans and Ravens, they weren't "exposed" at all, actually the defense performed very very well indeed last year. In those five games they averaged 17.2 PPG (which if compared to all NFL defenses would have had them rank , lemme see, cross the t, carry the one, oh yeah, first in the league), 314.6 YPG (4th) and 1 turnover per game (1st). The D played really well last year against good offenses. DVOA compensates for strength of schedule and it had the D last year as 6th or 7th. They were very very good. They deserved being thought of as an excellent NFL defense the last two years, though it's certainly true they aren't living up to that this year by any means.

Good stuff, especially the above, and you're exactly on target when you say there isn't one thing you can point to. IMO, Star, injuries and Milano are big parts of it, but yeah, how come Hughes doesn't have a sack and what was up with those two unsportsmanlike penalties at times when we had a real, legitimate shot at the win? It is indeed a myriad. I thought it looked like something they were going to get on top of. But they haven't, and six games is long enough for that to happen, even with the lack of offseason reps. Frustrating.

So, basically, you're full of it. It's not even remotely fair what you did there, cherry-picking the worst small bits from an overall excellent report ... ... and then not posting the link because you didn't want people to be able to check your extremely shoddy, biased, petty work. Again, for those who want to see the whole report, it's very positive, but definitely does have some warnings. I didn't repost the negatives since the OP had already done it. Best is to look at the whole thing. Here it is: https://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl-draft/190028-tremaine-edmunds-virginia-tech/page64/

To continue, funny how you left out this part of the same report: " The Way We See It: A true junior, Edmunds is a unique prospect -- it's not often that we see inside linebackers who are close to 6-foot-5. Very productive college player, but he is more of a reactor than an anticipator. In the NFL, instincts matter at the LB position. He can get tall at times, but Edmunds still uses his hands well to shed. He's better in pursuit than defending runs right at him. Needs to make a few more plays at or near the LOS (line of scrimmage). Very good coverage guy who gets depth with his drop and can play man. Plants and closes on the ball quickly. Not used a lot as a blitzer/pass rusher and needs to develop his pass rush technique. Overall, Edmunds is a very good prospect who is not quite there yet. With his frame, he might be better off outside, but if he plays there he needs to improve his pass rush skills. Has a lot of upside. He will be graded differently by each club depending on their profile for the position. With his size and athleticism, he has some Brian Urlacher to him -- but he's not Urlacher. He can control the middle of the field in zone similarly to what Urlacher was able to do. I'm not as high as others on Edmunds because he doesn't have top instincts, but at his age they will get better. Could be a top-10 guy. Upside: Long, massive and rangy defender — great arm length, explosiveness, athletic profile and size-speed combination. Can't draw them up too much better for the position. Great athleticism on display at combine shows up on tape too. Natural strength is impressive, and he's got a lot of room to develop and get stronger. Keeps his feet moving and can pivot and change directions with ease. Closes on the ball in a hurry. Will break extremely fast on underneath passes thrown in his area. Watch this film-study play where Edmunds reads the eyes of Miami (Fla.) QB Malik Rosier and breaks on the drag route to break up the pass nicely: https://giphy.com/gifs/ZcbIem1AaGDlSTwCaV Can pinball off blockers and keep his momentum going toward the ball. Squares his shoulders nicely and plays with a downhill thump and purpose. Effective rusher who can scream off the edge, arrive quickly on a green-dog blitz or loop around on stunts. Explosive when working downhill, especially in the run game. Sets a good, hard edge against the run, especially in goal line and short yardage. Tackling is strong, especially for such a young player and particulary in space. Closes nicely from depth and hits his targets. Scrapes down the line, keeps his balance and can shed blocks on the move. Wraps up and closes the deal with his condor wingspan and good burst. Rarely whiffs, and at the very worst he can slow down ballcarriers for others to finish off the play. Has template to be a good coverage player. Rare that a 250-pound player can check backs and tight ends in man coverage, but he can carry them past the second level. Even occasionally matched up with receivers. Has the athleticism to be a Tampa-2 "Mike" and drop into deep zones. Loose hips — can turn and run in a flash. Will read quarterbacks' eyes for tells. Tries to bait them into throwing to his man, knowing he can make up the distance in a jiffy. Highly productive player. Always seems to make 2-3 disruptive plays per game. Clean medical history — no known injuries at Tech. Strong character marks from NFL teams.

Know what I thought when I saw this? That you'd loaded the dice. That there was a reason that you hadn't given the link, and that the reason was that you had extracted the exact worst little excerpts and left out the good bits. And Golly gee whiz, turns out I was right, and you were cherry-picking the worst stuff https://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl-draft/190028-tremaine-edmunds-virginia-tech/page64/

Fair enough. Right now it looks like you were a bit overoptimistic. Before the season I thought it most likely that they'd make the playoffs, probably win the division (though when the Pats got Cam, I thought the odds of that dropped) but not be a serious SB contender. If pinned down I might have guessed #4 - 6 in the AFC. I didn't expect Allen to be nearly as good as he is, or for the defense to be this bad.