TheFunPolice
-
Posts
16,550 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by TheFunPolice
-
-
Just now, Success said:
Reid is a great coach. Just like Brady/Belichick, the success of that team comes down to both.
It's an advantage the Chiefs have over the Bills. I like McDermott, but he's not really in the same league as Reid.
Nobody is. Reid is the GOAT. Unless BBQ and nuggies undo him, he'll surpass Schula for all-time wins, Belichick for all-time post season wins, and likely tie Belichick in SB wins.
So not being as good as Reid is nothing to be ashamed of. But that doesn't mean you can't beat him, which we eventually will.
-
1
-
-
Allen will definitely eventually beat Mahomes in the playoffs and win a Super Bowl.
The games have been too close for it not to go our way eventually, and maybe a few times.
-
Just now, Warriorspikes51 said:
That was such a strong 4 WR set. I hope Beane outdoes himself over the next few months
For sure! No wonder we moved the ball at will. People forget just how good Brown, Sanders and Beasley were as compliments to Diggs. Suddenly Knox was open all the time too.
-
2
-
1
-
-
Every time I watch SF, Kittle does close to nothing.
-
1
-
1
-
3
-
-
Reid is the uncrowned GOAT.
Nuggies and BBQ are the only things that could stop him from holding every single HC wins/titles record by the time he retires.
He's currently 5 playoff wins away from tying Belichick for most playoff wins all-time as a HC. That's 2 playoff runs.
That said, McDermott has definitely shown the desire and ability to adapt and become WAY less conservative. The guy called a fake punt inside his own 30 yard line in a divisional playoff game.
NOW we need McDermott to get behind loading up the offense with weapons.
-
1
-
1
-
-
no...
What Allen needs is Derrick Henry, Diggs, Mike Evans, a 1st or 2nd round rookie WR, Shakir, Kincaid, Knox and Cook on offense this season.
That would do it.
-
I still think he can get back to where he was an be a fairly consistent playmaker.
We NEED more threats at WR. It doesn't have to be Mike Evans, although that would be awesome. Brown and Beasley were sort of mid-level guys and really had some great times here with Allen.
-
1
-
-
a ring for the king!
Everything is feasible. The cap can always be managed, BUT you have to get it right.
Henry and Cook would be an amazing 1-2 punch. This team needs to load up on offense.
If the Saints can field a football team then it shows that the cap is fake.
-
Knox didn't suddenly become unable to make plays.
We lost Beasley, Brown and Sanders and basically didn't replace them until this year with Kincaid. in 2022 we brought Brown and Beasley out of retirement for a playoff run for crying out loud!
Shakir has made some nice plays, and hopefully he continues to develop. But we forget that we had Diggs, Brown, Beasley, Sanders and Knox. We used to have actual deep threats on the team to open up space.
-
2
-
2
-
-
no trades...
I want Diggs and Mike Evans lined up at WR next year for the Bills, with a 1st or 2nd round rookie and Shakir as well, and maybe a proven decent vet guy like Beasley was when we signed him.
-
Baker very nearly led the Bucs to the NFC Title Game.
That's crazy. They'll re-sign him.
-
On 2/16/2024 at 11:01 PM, Ponch said:
Did it?
6 Super Bowl titles and 9 Super Bowl appearances. Yeah, I would say it worked.
-
what team would want to hire a 73 year old Belichick?
Supposedly Dallas reached out to him behind the scenes to gauge interest before sticking with Big Mike this year. So BB doesn't want to go there.
That's the only team I can imagine hiring a 73 year old guy who has only been good with Brady as his QB.
Maybe SF? or Philly? A team that would be good but not good enough and would just want that SB title (in theory) not caring that it's a short term proposition.
-
This year's MVP should have been CMC or Tyreek Hill.
Those guys are both "the most valuable player" because without them those teams go from amazing to just ok.
Ravens strength was running and defense, and with Huntley at QB they can do 90% of what Lamar can do.
There is nobody even close to a Tyreek Hill replacement or CMC replacement.
-
1
-
-
and you made millions of dollars, won multiple Super Bowls, and are viewed as some of the best players and best teams to ever suit up
Sorry it wasn't more "fun"
-
1
-
1
-
-
WR all the way
then another, maybe in round 3 or 4.
At some point, though, I'm hoping my dream of a stage-shaking, enormous monster of a DT who with NFL training and some work in the WNY restaurants can achieve his destiny of being the next Ted Washington will come true.
-
Josh Allen is so freaking good. The higher the stakes, the better he gets.
What we need is to surround him with weapons, like when Brown, Sanders, Beasley and Diggs were all here. Knox made plays back then too.
We've slowly let the offensive weapons deteriorate little by little, and now we need a serious infusion of talent. Doesn't have to be all superstars, either. Brown and Beasley were nice players when we signed them, but hardly superstars.
-
in the end, it worked
Peyton Manning had mediocre to poor coaches most of his career. Nice guys, though.
The whole Belichick as Darth Vader in a hoodie, devoid of compassion or joy, existing solely to destroy souls and win Super Bowls, is pretty much spot on.
Brady himself talks about how in his 20's he was more like a typical NFL player... in great shape, yes, but actually enjoyed life a bit. Burgers and beers after games. Like a human being.
If he had one of the "aww shucks" good ole ball coaches maybe he never even wins 1 ring.
-
1
-
-
A lot has to do with the commitment too. Rivers has like 10 kids, so I could see him wanting to spend more time with family and not wanting to be on the road all the time.
I've heard both Lamar and Mahomes say their goal is to play well into their 40's, so I think younger guys coming in have that idea early on and are taking the steps early on to try to do what Brady did, which he really didn't start doing until he was 35+ years old.
15 minutes ago, KingBoots8 said:I think we will see QB’s playing longer for sure, so long as their skills don’t dull too much and their pay keeps pace. Location also matters- Megatron retired in his prime because the team was unwilling to either acquire talent to challenge for a title and was not willing to let him go. He was burned out and said he was done.
the right QB, with the right team/ownership, and the right skills will play until the money or skills start to wilt. I expect more QB’s to keep playing, but only at a high enough level.
That's a huge part of it: the team around a guy and how things are going.
If you're 40, are still great, are reasonably healthy, and your long time team seems to have a whole bunch of young up and coming star players and a coach you love, then it's a lot easier to commit to a few more years of winning, going to the playoffs, and having chances at the Super Bowl than if you're on New England and stuck in the basement!
-
14 minutes ago, Process said:
I don't see it. We literally have one example in NFL history of a guy playing at that level into their 40s.
Several examples of guys breaking down before than (Peyton, Ben, Rivers etc)
I think there are some specific reasons in those cases though.
Ben didn't seem to believe in exercise and looked like an OT his last season or 2.
Peyton and Rivers suffered a lot of injuries that piled up, and both started playing in a era that allowed a lot more vicious hits. These guys starting off now never played in that NFL.
It's certainly true that to play into your 40's you first need to be very good, get a little lucky, but also be committed. The younger guys today are in such better hsape physically that I think it's realistic.
Even Brady talks about how in his 20's he was nowhere near in the type of physical shape he was when he was in his late 30's. He ate burgers, drank beer, and had not yet started drinking kitten blood and eating souls. Not sure about the last part, but I think I heard it somewhere...
-
1
-
1
-
-
I think we'll see more and more QBs playing well into their 40's, because a lot of not doing it was mental, and the fact that it didn't happen much.
I was listening to some pre-game coverage of the Super Bowl on Sirius XM, and they were doing the annual Joe Montana interview. He was talking about his time in KC and how he really regrets retiring when he did at age 38. He said he was "stupid" for doing it, and had some good years left.
It made me think about how the game has changed. Back in the day, Montana being 38 was ancient. By then most guys were busted up, crippled versions of themselves.
Yet here's "Joe Cool" saying he wishes he played another few seasons, into his 40's, at a time when that was unthinkable.
Now, 40 is nothing. Brady played in 3 Super Bowls after age 40, winning 2.
Diet is different, training is different, rules are different to protect QBs more and more, the offseason programs are different.
IMO, a QBs prime years are also different. Physically it still might be the years from 27-33 or so, but mentally, which is more important for a QB, it might actually be their mid 30's, when the great ones become like another OC playing the game because they've done it for so long and the plays and reading defenses become second nature.
Take Rodgers for example. He tore his Achilles at age 39 and by his 40th birthday 77 days later he was back at practice slinging the ball and (for some dumb reason) trying to intercept balls on defense. 15 years ago that injury happens to a 39 year old QB and they are done.
A guy like Kirk Cousins who turns 36 this coming season was just at the NFL Honors show doing a comedy dance routine on his newly repaired Achilles and just played some of his best football the past couple seasons. He could sign somewhere and be a very effective to great 7 year starter there, easily.
I could easily see Allen and Mahomes playing into their 40's, barring any major injuries.
QBs retain their arm strength and accuracy, gain the mental edge, and have rules that protect them from the type of shots that guys like Kelly, Montana and Marino took game in and game out.
-
4
-
-
21 minutes ago, Gregg said:
He's 40 going on 41 next season and coming off a serious injury. His last season in GB was his worst statistically. Unless the Jets can improve their OL, it will be hard to keep Rodgers healthy. With that said I expect the games against them to be close especially at MetLife which has become a house of horrors recently.
GB was trying to get away without spending resources on offense because Rodgers would make it work was the thought. Now with Love they suddenly start drafting WR in rounds 1 and 2 to surround the kid with talent.
GB wasted Rodgers prime years. Sure, he's old now but 41 is nothing with the rules these days. He's got the arm and accuracy that he's always had, plus a gigantic chip on his shoulder.
-
1
-
-
Growing up watching football as a kid, a 50 yard FG was long, long distance. Now those are almost like extra points, especially once you get into playoff games with the best teams and best kickers. 60 is new 50, so if you receive at the 25 you only need 35 yard to be in FG range. Sudden death was too heavily weighted on the coin toss.
Kickers are almost automatic now, for the most part anyway. In the past it was much more of a crapshoot. Norwood's FG in the SB was in the 40's in terms of distance and that was considered a tough FG then.
Now, it's debatable whether you kick or take the ball first, which IMO proves it is a better system.
If I end up with the ball first either by choice or because you chose to kick I am using all 4 downs until I'm in sound FG range but overall thinking TD and then go for 2. Sure, if I turn it over on downs I probably lose. If I punt I probably lose too.
Why?
First of all, if I punt, I'm done. You just need a FG and the game ends. So I'm using all 4 downs unless I'm in something crazy like 4th and 10 from your 23 yard line where I'm kind of forced to take the 3 and hope for a defensive stop.
Everyone says if they have the ball 2nd and are down 7 that they would go for 2 to end the game. Reid said that would have been his strategy as well in the SB. So do you want to be on defense for the most consequential 2 point attempt, or offense?
My thought process: go down, score 6 on your tired defense, then tack on 2 if possible.
What if I miss the 2? Then I need to stop you from scoring a TD, which is no different than if I kick the XP because you're going to go for 2 anyways and beat me then, or make the entire game come down to a 2 pointer anyway where all the rules favor the offense.
I'd rather be the one on offense for the big 2 point attempt.
This gives me multiple ways to win. I'm up 8, you not only need the TD but also a successful 2 just to tie me. Then I just need to get a FG on your gassed defense, if you do all of that.
If I'm up 6 I can still stop you on defense and win, because you still need to score a TD. I have all sorts of plays to stop you from doing that. 2 point attempts are slightly above 50/50 anyway, so if I'm up 7 and you score a TD you probably are going to win either way. So I would rather take my own 50/50+ shot at being up 8 and roll the dice that my D keeps you out of the end zone if we don't convert.
We've never seen this play out under the Josh Allen playoff OT rule, but it would be fascinating to see if the first team to score a TD goes for 2.
IMO, being up 7 is the same as being up 6: you're done either way if the other team answers with a TD.
-
no thanks
McDermott has his flaws but he is at least showing the desire and ability to grow.
Bills sign Dawson Knox to 4-year $53.6 mill extension ($31 mill gtd) through 2026
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
we REALLY need some speed at WR.
It feels like we never hit a deep ball anymore, and it used to be a big part of the offense.
I feel like I've never seen Kittle have a big game