Thorolf

Well, if he told that to ESPN/the AP, then it MUST be true. HAHAHAHAHAHA! Jackson, on numerous occasions over the last few years, criticized Sherman and made a big stink about his contract. He won't mind playing for Sherman... as long as he gets PAID. Make no mistake... a sound byte expressing support does not mean that he will follow him around like a lost puppy dog. Grady's a good player, but he's not going to give a discount for the privilege of playing for Sherman, no matter what ESPN says. And you can take your "know-it-all" comment and shove it. You think a sentence in some article trumps the last three years of comments, milked injuries, threatened holdouts, and actions from Grady? Brilliant! Believe what you want. Good luck to you.

So I watched the video of Sherman walking through the airport... enthralling stuff. Anyway, it reminded me of something that I really like about Sherman that I think you will, too. Sherman is a FAN'S coach. He would do things like take some side roads on his way to Lambeau and start to pull into someone's yard where people were pulling in to park and just joke around with them for a minute. After games (wins) he would stay in the parking lot to join with fans in the post-game tailgating. I sort of doubt you would get that sort of thing from Jauron... FWIW. I hope you land him, and that he does well for you.

Two quick notes... 1) There is ZERO chance the Giants give a first for Clements without ALSO taking your second or third round pick, and likely a later pick or so - assuming Clements is still a Bill come April. 2) Grady Jackson doesn't particularly like Mike Sherman, and is not going to follow him to Buffalo without a top-end paycheck. In fact, Grady isn't going anywhere that doesn't pay him. Well.

Why do I feel like you're trying to get rid of the guy?

True, Favre had a horrible season interception-wise. However, a lot of those "up for grabs" balls were big receptions with better receivers. Robert Ferguson's refusals to go after a catchable ball were the cause of at least 4 or 5, all by himself. Some of those were touchdowns if Javon Walker was still on the field. Losman's numbers are relevant because Favre would be a huge upgrade - and wouldn't have had anywhere near 30 INTs if he was throwing at Evans and Moulds. Glass houses...

Perhaps. Or maybe he'll just stick with the 3880 yards, 20+ TDs and 62% completion rate without an actual receiving corps.... What were Losman's numbers again?

Favre still has some stuff left... but he will never play for another team.

Bill Belichick was horrible in Cleveland. He learned some things and applied them when he got to New England. Sherman's success or failure in the AFC East would depend on what, if anything, he adjusts heading into his next job. I think Sherman deserves a head coaching job and can be competitive. Heck, even at 4-12 I think only a fool would say the Packers weren't at least competitive this year. Far too many games were too close to call until the end of the fourth quarter to say otherwise. He just needs to address a few issues...

CaliforniaCheez likes Sherman, but more importantly he hates Ted Thompson. The long and short of it is, Sherman is not a stud coach that will flat-out outcoach the guy on the other sideline. He is good at a lot of things, and has some significant flaws. Many of the good things have been mentioned. He's a tireless worker. He knows, and loves, the game. The players, particularly the "team players" love him, and he loves them. One of the "good" things that I think was not mentioned is one you all should like - I believe that Larry Beightol stands a pretty good chance of following Sherman to his next job. Under Beightol, the Packer offensive line was one of the most dominant in the league - at least until this year when it was torn up by injuries and free agency and the personnel was simply not up to the task. But, Sherman does have a problem with micromanagement and he is not a great gameday coach. Don't let anyone gloss those things over - they're pretty important aspects. The team has also rarely started the season fast. The Packers under Sherman were always much better for the second 2/3s of the year than the first 1/3. That said, I always prefer to finish strong then to finish weak - but it rarely seemed to help all that much come the playoffs. Incidentally, this past year third quarter defensive performance was better than the other quarters (Points Allowed: Q1-88 Q2-100 Q3-59 Q4-97), but was putrid offensively (Points Scored: Q1-77 Q2-100 Q3-36 Q4-82). I think people forget that Sherman has been on the hotseat for the last few years and gloss over his faults because it helps them in their criticism of our GM - which I have seen from fans of several organizations. Sherman is definitely a solid coach, and could be very good. But make no mistake - I think he has some pretty glaring flaws to work through.

Nothing that was public knowledge, but I never got the impression that they became great friends or anything like that. In fact, I saw Bates show affection toward his defensive players, and several offensive players, but I don't recall even seeing the two of them TALK on the sideline, much less exchange friendly embraces, etc... Plus, Bates is jonesin' for a head coaching job himself. I can't imagine him agreeing to join the staff of a new coach with a likely 3-5 years minimum before a job opens up there...

I strongly suspect that Bates will not be going anywhere with Sherman. Bates, however, is an excellent defensive coordinator. He got close to everything possible from the marginal talent we had this year and a lot of people wanted him to be the next head coach. And yes, I believe the entire coaching staff has now been cleared out. Oh, and the weight room assistant was fired, too.

Hi everyone. Mike Sherman is a very GOOD man who cares about his players and is a tireless worker. He loves the game, and puts pretty much everything he has into the job. Sherman is a solid coach that was able to keep the players fighting through some pretty adverse conditions this year. Personally, though, I wanted to bring in a new coach. His playcalling, or rather that of his pal Tom Rossley who he refused to fire, is insanely predictable. Everyone and their mother knew what was going to be called on third down and in a wide variety of situations. The team even bragged (maybe not a great word) that they could move the ball on certain plays, such as the famous U-71 package, despite the fact that the other side knew what was coming. Then, we saw the talent level drop precipitously due to injuries and the loss of our two guards and suddenly those screen plays and sweeps didn't work so well. But his predictability and typically conservative plays were only part of what I perceived as an issue. Many Packer fans would disagree with me about the importance of motivation, but I was constantly frustrated by the fact that the team would come out of the tunnel flat far too often. Even if they came out on fire to start the game, they would be flat after halftime. With all the one-score games we lost this year, I truly believe that was a significant issue. I like Mike Sherman and believe that he will take some lessons learned from this year to his next job. He has the potential to be a very, very good head coach, but is probably a touch overrated at this point due to the talent he had playing for him. He is too loyal to his friends on the coaching staff, and has to make sure the team is ready to play at peak levels every time they step out of the tunnel, but I believe that overall he will do a solid job wherever he lands.

Nope... no typo. The ADP on Manning from most draft sites frequently had him in the third-to-fourth rounds last year. And it's not that I think his numbers will drop dramatically, but that they WILL drop. If he couldn't carry a guy's team last year with a career season being drafted in the third or fourth rounds, where is the logic that says he can more than make up for a stud RB and pushing your RB2 and WR1 back at least a round? Manning is no exception. He's a stud QB, but in most leagues today he simply is not worth a first round pick. The difference in the RB and WR corps for guys who have taken Manning so far this year is often quite painful to look at. One of the guys I work with recently drafted in a CBS Sportsline Experts league, and one of those guys took Manning in the early first round. His RBs and WRs were, frankly, horrible. He's going to NEED Kevan Barlow and Travis Henry to be studs just to be mediocre, IMO. I never like leaving my future entirely to luck or 'deus ex machina'... and these guys who are taking Manning in the first (especially the upper portion of the first) are all too often relying on divine intervention to transform their mid-round RBs into studs... I should note that I'm not just making things up here... I am either in, or familiar with several hundred drafts, and have been for the last few years. There are guys I work with who are in favor of Manning being drafted in the LATE first, and we have some good discussions about it. We will see at the end of the year who is right, but at this point I feel pretty strongly that I am. If you are in a competitive league with guys who generally follow the stud-RB theory, I simply do not believe taking Manning in the first is a wise move. Now, as I alluded to earlier, if you are in a league with guys who do NOT follow the stud-RB theory, or you are drafting with monkeys, then you can afford to take him and stock up on the stud RBs that the other guys did not draft in the first... but I don't play in any of those leagues. So, to sum up... evaluate your leaguemates, and look for any scoring rules that dramatically reduce the value of an RB in comparison to QBs and WRs. If things are fairly standard, then it's gotta be an RB.

In my opinion, the 'madness' is taking Manning in the first round. Think about it... he had a career year last season that he is, quite honestly, VERY unlikely to repeat. But even if he does match last year's numbers - he was typically a third or fourth round pick last year. How many of your league champions had him as their QB? I was in 13 leagues last year. He was the QB on exactly ONE - and that team also had Shaun Alexander, a couple of good receivers, and Antonio Gates. Now, he is being taken in the first, and I am not a fan of the tactic. I see guys who no longer have a first round RB (70-75% chance to be in the top-10), and so must rely on a second-round RB to succeed (about 40% chance to be in the top-10). Then, they will normally have to take an RB in the third round because starters are getting scarce (unlikely to make it to the top-10 or -15). In a league that starts 2 RBs, by this point the team has sacrificed approximately 12-15 points per game in order to gain 5 by locking up Manning. But wait, there's more. Because many people will have a receiver by the end of the third round, our fateful Manning picker now is unable to get a first-tier WR, and will often have a difficult time finding a second-tier WR. Now, other guys start going for QBs, so the draft begins to even out, but it is rarely looking all that good for the guy who took Manning. Maybe I'll be proven wrong and Manning will carry an otherwise weak team on his shoulders - but I doubt it. He may score 5-10 points per game higher than, say, the #10 to #15 QBs, but that isn't enough to make up for the loss of points taken by backing up the skill position players by at least a round each.

Chad Johnson is one of those guys who is on the bubble in most drafts. He is typically the third receiver taken, behind Moss and Owens. Harrison really has slid due to the utter balance of the Colts' passing attack. Manning just doesn't use Harrison as a crutch the way he used to. The result is fewer catches, fewer yards, and fewer touchdowns. He's still solid, and is normally one of the top receivers off the board, but he is no longer mentioned in the same breath with Moss and Owens. Since Owens was asked about, he is usually the second receiver taken. People believe that Moss will still be a stud in Oakland, although he is a little lower than he was last year. Moss was often a first round pick in 2004, but between the failure of the stud WR theory, combined with his injury and move to Oakland, Moss has generally been a second rounder. He is often followed closely (within 5 or 6 picks) by Owens. CJ, AJ, Harrison, Holt, Ward, Horn, and Walker are generally mixed up in the next tier, with Chad Johnson most often going as the third receiver off the board. He's in a very optimistic situation. He's young and brash, but has a track record of delivering on his trash talk. Fantasy owners have been very high on him so far, and it doesn't surprise me at all that he is considered by many to be the #1. After all, receivers who switch teams usually struggle, and Owens is talking holdout (which I don't believe for a second will actually happen).