eSJayDee

I think you've got an oversight/mistake in your compilation. Wasn't Losman taken in the 1st round the same yr Rothleisberger(sp?) was? I'd categorize him as a miss.

Actually, although it sucks, I think it is fair. He was already paid the $, and he performed for that $. The reason for the additional burden is that the cap hit was deferred, ie he was paid but the cap cost was pushed forward. It's just in this case, that cap hit is now paid all at once instead of spread out over the next few yrs.

It indicates we're tied for 1st place w/ zero giveaways on ST. Didn't we fail to cover 2 onside kicks (I distinctly remember at least one)? I would think those count as giveaways.

Actually, a scratch golfer would average 2 or 3 over par on an "average" course. (Handicap is only based on your better rounds, ideally 10 of the last 20, and doesn't significantly penalize you for bad holes.)

Why is this a question? We're not likely his production for ~$4m (projected cap minus - dead $ if cut). As people have said, right now, he's about the only source of production we have on offense. Granted, we've gotten rid of a few other high priced, productive players so far, but I certainly hope that purge is finished.

I think the one thing you have going against you is that the punts were not getting off THAT much slower. Snaps were about the same; punters only slightly slower w/ their approach. I'd say maybe 0.2, 0.3 seconds tops. The rushers ability to accelerate & rush I think would be dramatically slowed. Coupled that w/ the increased likelihood of losing your footing & running into the kicker, don't really think it was worth it. Also, punting isn't the weapon that it usually is. Both punters netted high 30s, which I think was VERY good given the conditions. Normally, not restricted my distance, a good punt you hope to net almost 50.

How many rookie tackles are there? (that qualify for a rating) 6? Maybe 10, tops. He was drafted in the 2nd round. You'd hope he'd be toward the top.

Looks like I'm a little late to the conversation, but I'd like to take the opportunity to ask a pizza related question someone might be able to help answer for me - There was a place, I think like "Nancy's"; I think it was on a East-West road like Sheridan, on the westerly part. It looked like a '50s style diner & was the 1st place I ever encountered where you could buy pizza by the slice. Pretty good if you wanted to eat out for pizza. This would've been the mid '80s. What was it's name & where was it? Thanks. p.s. I was found of Bocce's. I've ordered it a few times half-baked overnight (I live in Albany), but it doesn't seem as good as I remembered.

No. I figure Facebook manages to glean enough info about me as it is w/o me making it easier on them.

Well, on avg, a team probably scores about 25 points. If you play a single putrid team that only is expected to score 15, that decreases your svg over 5 games by 2 pts. That's enough to move a team down several places in the ranking. I'll concede the defenses we played didn't suck, but playing us likely contributed to their high ranking.

I'd think there will still be quite a few early cuts. Both "courtesy" cuts to vets so they have better opportunity to land elsewhere as well as culling the #s so that more coaching & playing time can be devoted to likely future contributors.

That was the game that immediately came to mind for me, too. Awesome!

Off the top of my head, I'll say McKee's KO return :

How is this "sneaky"? Basically, you're letting someone else do the negotiating for you & by doing so, you've eliminated the possibility of getting them for a lesser price either due to "hometown discount" or lack of diligence/effort seeking a better deal. I believe players can present only 1 offer, which their team is allowed to match. Personally, I think tendering Groy at the lowest is a mistake. I think he's worth keeping for the ~$2.4m (we just paid Mills $2m) & for the sake of $1m in cap (& cash), it's likely you lose that player (just like Hogan last yr). The 5th for TD Mike might be enough to scare someone away, or at least if it isn't, chances are they're also willing to give him far more $ than he'd be worth to us as a 2nd string RB.

I would think Kyle would be the best option. He's on the last yr of his contract, w/ a high salary (~$8m?). Extend him a yr or two, give him a ~$6m bonus (I think there's a limit as to how much you can reduce your salary in a renegotiation. He gets his $ & the team gets to defer some of his cap hit forward. Good chance this will be his last yr either cuz he'll want to retire or cuz we won't think he'll be worth his salary/cap hit. Actually, pleasantly surprised he wasn't (or hasn't yet been) released yet this yr. Darius would seem imprudent. His deadcap $ is already so high (~$30m), it's highly impractical to cut or trade him. Extending it would just make the situation worse in the future & he's (arguably) already under performing his contract.

WRT Lal, I believe he is well regarded in league circles so in that respect, he would be a good hire/retention. However, when you take into consideration, "continuity", we will have a new OC, very likely a new system and other than Watkins, we may end up w/ an entirely new group of WRs. Woods is worthy of retaining, but I would suspect he would be better served were he to go elsewhere, & based at least on current/previous usage, it would be foolish for us to pay him market value.

HECK NO. I happen to think he does a reasonable (not good) job at "head coaching responsibilities". What is the problem w/ our team is that our defense is lacking. This is precisely his area of expertise and where we most critically need improvement. (One could argue that our passing offense is lacking, too, but IMO it is more than compensated for - largely by design, by minimizing turnovers and doing so well running the ball - We score a lot of points; we unfortunately let up a lot, too & are unable to stop teams at critical times.) Personally, I'd keep him as a HC IF he dismissed the defensive braintrust (Thurman & that fat guy w/ long hair - what's his name? Rob something?) & let someone else bring in a new style/system of defense. But I seriously doubt that will happen.

I'll concede that what TT costs relative to an elite QB is a relative bargain (& is even in line w/ other "lower echelon" starting QBS - Osweller, Fitz) . You're getting a serviceable QB for ~1/2-2/3 the cost. However, when you take into consideration what you get at a BARGAIN price, if you're lucky (Prescott, Siemian, TT last yr) I think that dramatically lessens the mkt (& appeal). He's got elite elusiveness & he's careful w/ the ball. But based on what we've seen, he's not capable of winning by throwing & he's not going to lead a potent passing attack. How many teams are willing to settle for that? We could probably re-sign EJ for ~1/3 of that & not lose much &/or we might even have more in Jones (at FAR less of a cost) if given time to develop.

Not so much a word, but I learned that since we're all so knowledgeable, we're all a bunch of "road scholars".

Why wouldn't he be? What benefit would be firing him w/ 2 games left? Dismissing him at that juncture would be inane.

I think it's (almost) time to give Taylor a lot of rope. We still have a realistic chance at making the playoffs IF we win the last 4 games. Going into the game, IMO, we've got roughly a 50% chance of beating Pitt, so you start the game off status quo. Let him be a game mgr - rely on the run game, let him make the safe throws, protect the ball & just avoid mistakes. But, when/if it's apparent that isn't working, you take the training wheels off & you let/make him "be a QB". Unless Taylor can show he can be a complete, valuable QB, he is not worth even the "modest" contract he would be due for next yr. Looking ahead to next year, he is our most likely option for a good QB. Right now he isn't that good. Once it's apparent we're out of contention, use the last few games for him to (hopefully) improve his skills as well as give us the opportunity to assess him.

One other thing to consider (besides him being a Pat* ) is that it being a 4-game suspension it means it would be his 1st. Henderson's is 10 as he was previously suspended. I think you have more grounds for appeal if you haven't previously been found guilty.

I was somewhat surprised by his speed. Yes, you saw him outrun a (big) safety, but CBs (or even other fast players) are another matter. The fact that he clocked the fastest run isn't too surprising though. Takes someone 40+ yds to reach full speed. Long passes, if you're going to score, you're usually cruising once you catch it. So there really isn't that much competition. Appearance wise, Gilleslee looks faster to me.

Yay! Game televised in Albany. Kinda surprised. This is (sadly) Jest territory. Had we won last week & they lost, I think a good case could be made to televise our game (2 playoff contenders as opposed to 2 bottom teams), but since it was the other way around, I'm pleasantly surprised.

I still don't think we've resolved whether or not is suspension is almost done. FWIW, I found a site that lists all fines. For instance, Dareus' is listed at ~$3m, ie 4 games of his salary forfeited due to suspension. Karlos' is ~$130k, presumably 4 games of minimum wage for a 2 yr player. Lawson's is blank presumably cuz he was earning much more than vet minimum, but what he ends up signing for is unknown. I'm assuming that Karlos doesn't have that sort of cash laying around and presumably hasn't already paid the fine yet ergo would be unable to meet his "obligation" until he signs w/ a new team.