Rob's House

You take him for the same reason we took Marcellus Wiley. You have aging pass rushers, you plan to compete every year, and you can't do that without being able to pressure the QB. Had his successor not traded him he would have probably become a valuable asset for them.

Maybe he's coming out of the closet.

"... early and often."

I think the OT they just gave a monster contract to was a Polian pick also.

"If you listen to the fans, youll find yourself sitting with them" - Joe Kuharich "You got any excuses tonight, Roy?" - Antonio Tarver "You're an idiot" - DC Tom

"Team x with...unanswered points," when the other team hasn't even had the opportunity to answer yet.

This is pretty much how I feel. I don't think he's done a bad job, I just think he's vastly overrated by the fans. Most arguments for his greatness look only at one side of the ledger while ignoring the other and/or they compare him to prior GMs who both oversaw the NFL's longest active playoff drought AND who did not have nearly the resources available to them that he does. It's not an apples to apples comparison. It takes no great skill to acquire and retain more talent than your predecessors when you have a much larger budget than they did. Acquiring talented players is great, and I suppose an argument can be made to occasionally overpay for talent in the right situation, but it's been a pretty consistent trend. At some point the overspending in some areas will limit your ability to effectively address others. That said, I'm glad he's getting a little more time. I think we should give him and Rex the opportunity to fully implement their plan and see if it works before pulling the plug. Even though the defensive personnel wasn't a great fit for the scheme, the acquisitions of Darby and TT indicate there might be something to these guys being on the same page and finishing each other's sentences. If he'd picked Ebron it would have been a great pick because a lot of fans and pundits said he'd be good, and those of us who thought Ebron was a risky pick to begin with would be using the benefit of hindsight.

I don't like the premise that somebody needs to be fired. First you have to determine why it didn't work. If the problem is the inability of a coach to do his job properly then replace him. But if that's not the problem it seems stupid to fire someone just to say you did.

That's a great article and the account by Brendan is not too far removed from my theory of events befire reading it. I'll lose no sleep for Steven Avery. I thought the whole time that anyone who gets his kicks by burning an animal alive (especially as a grown man) is a POS. Regardless, the idea of cops with such an obvious conflict of interest taking lead roles in the investigation and mysteriously finding key pieces of evidence is nearly as disturbing as the crime itself. The ends don't justify the means, IMO. The greater end is the use of proper means.

The Tomsula thing is interesting to me. They grab a position coach and promote him to Captain of a sinking ship, then fire him after one season. I know 5-11 isn't good under normal circumstances, but given the mass exodus of talent from that team I think they outperformed expectation. All I can figure is they didn't want to make a long term move last year and put him in as a place holder for a year with no intention from the start of keeping him beyond this year. It may have even been ownership's attempt at tanking.

Redskins over Chefs

We didn't give them up, we swapped them.

I derive no pleasure from Futz's misfortunes.

No way. This guy was insensitive to Jonathan Martin.

Horse ****. You and others have made comments I haven't agreed with and I discussed them logically with no condescension. When someone throws out conjecture as fact and then refuses to support said conjecture after being asked multiple times, and consistently does so with the purpose of defending the same person, it appears to me that the person is a fanboy who is not interested in the truth or the discussion thereof, but rather to defend his fanboy crush. If you can't grasp the distinction that's your problem, not mine.

I agree with the PPG concern, because I do think ypg alone has its limitations. I assume that TOs may have contributed the last couple of years, but I don't know that for sure. In any case, even with its limitations, I think being consistently top 10 in ypg shows he's at least competent and not the clueless boob many here make him out to be.

Condescension when addressing a flimsy and obnoxiously presented argument with facts and logic is not remotely similar to condescendingly deflecting to evade and avoid a substantive argument for which you have no answer. Your logic game is weak, son.

You've offered nothing that anyone who even casually follows the team didn't already know. When pressed for specifics you deflect. And condescending deflection is almost as pathetic as a grown man with a fanboy crush on a football exec. If you have no factual basis to support your assertions I'll take your "study up, son" retorts as defiantly waving the white flag.

Filing this one in the spank bank?

So the evidence supporting your assertion that the Pegula's forced Rex on Whaley is that they wanted their next coach to have NFL experience? That's it? Two words: Fan Boy

Do you have ANY evidence at all to support this theory that Whaley didn't want Rex? Because it seems that by ALL accounts that Whaley, at a minimum, recommended Rex on his short list of candidates. Yet you and others keep repeating this seemingly baseless allegation as accepted fact. So where are you getting this?

I think the more important take away is the blatant misconduct by the police and prosecution at every turn. Even if Steven Avery is guilty as can be it doesn't excuse their behavior. What's scary is that we can't really say with any confidence that he wasn't framed. Half those cops and the prosecutor should have been fired at a minimum. Instead they received awards.

So, did Whaley deliberately set out to build a wide 9 defense? Because that's not what they ran under Pettine. Is it possible that he got a little lucky that his personnel for Schwartz's D and a little unlucky that it didn't fit Rex's? And why does a GM take no responsibility for recommending a coach whose scheme doesn't fit his personnel? And why do we ignore the fact that Rex has a pretty consistent history of fielding good defenses? If this were his first or second year I could see why we treat this year's defensive regression as the only relevant evidence, but since we know he's coached good defenses for years isn't it possible, even likely, that the answer is a little more complicated than scapegoating Ryan?

The idea of bringing Schwartz back to run his defense under Rex is pretty absurd. If you're hiring Rex Ryan you're running Rex Ryan's defense. Period. The idea that Ryan would run a wide 9 is just as ridiculous as Greg Roman running Mike Martz's offense. I understand the concept of tailoring your defense to your personnel, and that's fine to a point, but most of these guys have a particular philosophy that they've had success with and that's what they do. If you want to run wide 9 don't hire a HC whose signature is a 46 defense.

Making a Murderer is outstanding. Should be required viewing for everyone. It really exposes the potential for corruption within the criminal justice system. Best series ever, IMO. Great characters, great storylines, and never jumped the shark.