Jump to content

BringBackFlutie

Members
  • Content Count

    735
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

233 Excellent

About BringBackFlutie

  • Rank
    RFA

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Reston, VA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. More about what could go right. The officiating has gotten so bad that they've elected to put a moat around Goodell.
  2. Um. They'd be in good shape in the future if those draft picks work out, regardless of signing rivers.
  3. He did? I thought he looks to free agency to fill holes. But I suppose that can be seen as upgrading. I always think of it as he looks for big upgrades in the draft and minor upgrades in FA.
  4. To word it a bit differently (but basically the same point), I think it means that you don't constantly turn over and start rookies. You balance your homegrown, experienced talent with new talent and try not to turn over too much, because it's like having to teach everything all over again and you don't make progress that way. I think Beane's management of the salary cap also allows this, where GMs of Bills past (or Gettleman) were not as able to accommodate.
  5. Is redskins really censored? 😅 Nope. So what was censored in that article?
  6. I get that part. I'm just saying, have we had this many players successively posting post operation pics or reports of so many non-trivial injuries being played through?
  7. I think the question is oversimplified. I view a system as a holistic body of processes, culture, concepts, and identity that lasts for years, and sometimes transcends regimes. Sometimes that involves specific schemes, but to be successful, those schemes must be adaptable. That's pretty necessary for sustained success, I think. But if the number 1 posed in the original post is referring to an inflexible scheme that only works with very specific players, then number 2 is obviously way better. It's not even a question. I answered with the assumption of a bit more complexity.
  8. True. And if you want to do that in the first/second year while tinkering- great! But if the focus is not doing the extra work necessary to lay the foundation along the way (building the plane in the air), the success won't be sustained. All that aside, this isn't a great case study. Vrabel's in his second season. This could all be a fluke.
  9. If your goal is one super bowl? Sure. This.
  10. The answer can go so many ways. We don't know much about the Titans or Vrabel at this point. They've been up and down since he became coach just two years ago. Going by what has made them successful so far, I'd say Vrabel is trying to lay the foundation of a defensive team that controls the clock. They clearly haven't found out who they are, offensively, yet, unless they decide to actually keep handing Henry the ball at the start of next season. On that side of the ball, whether that was because they started running Henry, or because they benched Mariota, I think Vrabel was just trying to make any adjustment he could to get that side working. It probably wasn't brilliant, it was tinkering, which is partly 1 and 2.
  11. Didn't we lose a few games in 2018, based on ST ball security, alone?
×
×
  • Create New...