dave mcbride

I thought it was this year's. My bad.

PS - goodnight 26; i've gotta go to bed (exhausted from watching my hs senior son pitch a one-hit shutout late this afternoon in central park in a 2-0 game-public school athletic league). I'll pick it up tomorrow!

A guy who is always good in the playoffs should be starting for a lot of teams. Have you read about the Fisher offensive system? It was ridiculous. It hurt Foles's career, and it may have destroyed Goff's if it had persisted.

Oh please. He may or may not be traded, but you don't know the price they're asking for or what teams think of him. And maybe philly is one of those rare smart teams that realizes the value in keeping him. (Clearly, that now seems to be the case.) Please engage beyond one sentence quips. Tell me: what do you actually think of his playoff game performances against NO, Atl, Minn, and NE? Playoff football is put up or shut up time, and I''m curious to know your views on each of these performances. I watched all of them, as i suspect you did. Fair enough. These are arguable. I don't know enough about mahomes, but my point isn't who their guy is; it's who is better. Foles is far better than manning at this point, who is now borderline bad.

Dude, engage. Four word sentences aren't arguments, they're the lack thereof. But since you asked: miami, Buffalo, nyj, cleveland, cincy (yes), jax, tenn (yes), kc, denver, nyg, minn (certainly arguable), chicago, tampa, arizona. That's 14.

And you still aren't engaging the argument beyond surface-level quips. You're better than this. Engage.

Oh come on. Right now, he'd be starting for over half the teams in the league. He's far better than three of the four current afc east starters, to start.

PS - I said this before, but I saw an interview with Foles after the Atlanta playoff game in which he said that after he was traded to the rams, everyone coached him into being a pro-style qb and tried to move him away from what he was good at in that great season with kelly -- playing qb like a point guard (which he was actually recruited for out of HS, along with football). After the end of the season, pederson told him to play the game like he had before - as a point guard - and to forget all of that other stuff. Clearly, it worked. It also indicates how bad Fisher was at conceptualizing a modern offense. See above. I don't buy it. There is no context to your argument beyond surface stats.

Look, if you're not going to factor in the three playoff games to his overall performance last season, I don't know what to say. It's like Bills fans saying Hogan only had 38 catches in 2016 and neglecting his crazy postseason stats against better competition in more meaningful games. The dallas game was utterly meaningless, but he stepped it up against better teams over the the next 3 games in a big way.

See edit above. I fundamentally don't buy your argument and i actually watched the games .

Deal with the Fisher problem if you are going to make this argument. The Rams were a qb graveyard under him. As for last season, he was excellent subbing for wentz against LA (i watched the game, forget the stats) and struggled in a meaningless game against dallas. He was excellent against a good atlanta team after an opening-throw duck (just like ryan) in bad conditions, and then shredded Minn and NE.

Prediction: 4 of the the top 5 picks are qbs.

Don't get me wrong -- I think he'll be a good pro and perhaps the best of the lot.

Not sure I understand your point. It's pretty clear that with the Rams, he ended up being asked to run an antiquated Coryell system, which was the opposite of what he is good at (modified RPO system which is entirely legit at this point). Outside of the Rams, he has been pretty darn good overall, and we now have enough playoff games (4) to conclude that he is basically elite in the postseason -- 113.2 rating. I'm eliminating his rookie season from consideration - Philly was a mess in 2012 and Reid was on his way out.

He won't end up on the Bills, but he is so much better than so many people here think.

Seriously, not unimportant. The Giants are back down to 5 picks, and they are currently a team that needs picks.

Good line: "Too many snaps with his head working side-to-side indicating he saw everything and saw nothing."

I feel that if you truly think that the qb is a likely franchise qb - a dozen+-year starter - the picks you give up to get him aren't all that important. I'm thinking 4-5 years down the road at this point, not about 2019. I believe Darnold is that guy. I suggest you list all of the great UCLA qbs not named Troy Aikman. And all of the great Oklahoma QBs. I did research on this, and the only two schools that stand out since the 1970 merger are Stanford and to a lesser extent Cal.

I actually think Darnold is better now. And as a UCLA alum, I like Rosen and would be happy to have him.

pretty interesting 7-round mock: https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/news/seven-round-nfl-mock-draft-21-trades-256-picks-and-draft-class-analysis-for-all-32-teams/

Agreed. The Cleveland receiving corps is a lot more talented than Buffalo's was last season.

I did watch the game live. UCLA was really lucky because when it was 34-17, Rosen threw an easy pick but it went right through the defender's hands into the arms of a UCLA receiver who was behind him. What should have been a sure INT ended up being a TD for UCLA. Also, A & M's qb got hurt and their backup went 3 for 17 on his throws (26 total yards). Great game though!

I have been getting the NY Times delivered to my house for over 20 years and I generally do not read the sports section except for some of their baseball analysis (Tyler Kepner is good). It is the only paper I get, but the sports section is terrible. It's about as good as their comics section.

Mayfield's Oklahoma team put up 45 points in regulation in the semifinal against one of the best defenses in CFB last season! It's a team game.

I think Tannehill was on an upward path until he got hurt in 2016. This is his make or break year, and I expect him to be pretty good (at least).