Koufax

Definite joke. We all know after watching college and then the NFL, that Tebow does not do anything football related on Sundays, so flying in tonight wouldn't make any sense.

1-0 as we beat the Patriots! I will worry about the other sixteen weeks one at a time after that! I see us as a 9-7 team that might be pushed back to 7-9 because of the injuries. Going through game by game is fun but silly because we don't have a clear idea on opponents, and imagine what they were the last couple years, and not what they are going to be this year.

Do you want to sit him because of: 1) It would be a health risk to rush back? I don't think this is remotely the case, but we don't have enough info. If that is your reason, fine. 2) You think there is another QB who is more prepared to win that game? (clearly not because they are better, so the option would be Tuel because he has been practicing). I don't think this is the case if the knee is okay and he practices leading up to the game, and the last couple weeks are close to meaningless in giving Tuel an advantage in actual chance to beat the Patriots. 3) You think that rookie QBs need to be eased in and avoid becoming Tim Couch? I think the Luck/Newton/Wilson/million others logic disagrees with you and Kurt Warner pretty heavily here, and he is a big boy who won't fold if he can't beat New England. Also a New England team that has been very mediocre on defense and against the pass and in terms of sacking the QB in recent years. If his knee is at a point where he can outperform Tuel and not be an unusual risk in re-injuring it then he plays. This threshold is lower than "100%" and doesn't involve him practicing later this week or not.

Mix and match however you want, but Adrian Peterson (or Barry Sanders), Ray Lewis, Deion Sanders, and Jerry Rice beat anything you can get from any other grouping including QB, and I think by a large enough margin that it isn't really close.

I still think the draft is largely about adding total value, and not value over current depth chart, with a couple exceptions. We had two good running backs, and adding another meant getting rid of one, and that played out well, especially considering how dynamic CJ has become. Most positions don't share touches as specifically, and beyond QB I think best player available is the best scenario. RB is the only other position that sort of comes close, but even then only if you have 2 good ones. People often want to draft or not draft based on what has gone right or wrong with other picks. No Gilmore because of McKelvin. But if you find a way to get the best five year contributing football player you can at each and every pick, you don't usually regret it. Our regrets come from inferior football players, not position and scheme and the previous drafts. We all wanted Ngata over Whitner, because he was the superior football player then, and still clearly is. We wanted Orakpo (and others) over Maybin. Troup and Hardy were both second round picks wasted on inferior football players because of what the front office thought we needed. If you take the best expected five year contributor, (QB excepted which you don't take high if you have one, and reach if you don't), weighted towards the impact of the position (fungible guards, impact pass rushers and tackles and skill players), you won't look up five years later and be disappointed with your choices. A draft doesn't fix a football team, and everyone tries to rate them after year 1, but I want the draft to infuse the roster with as much talent as possible. For me this is measured against a zero baseline, not the guy you have on your 53 at that spot.

And the Arizona Cardinals manhandled the '85 Bears in preseason as well I believe.

Last year 25th in yards, 29th in passing yards, 15th in sacks. (2011: 31st/31st/14th, 2010: 25th/30th/14th). They are good at some stuff and play smart, but I don't think that our concern is the Pat's D stifling and confusing and overwhelming our rookie. I think we are more concerned about their dimple chined QB scoring too many points for us to match against our new system defense. I don't think Tuel is even close to Kolb in terms of playing real football in September against a real defense with all first stringers. Maybe he is the next Kurt Warner and his bright spots in his first camp are for real, but I haven't seen enough to really think that he is going to beat someone with some pretty decent NFL wins in his belt when healthy (in addition to the Pats, etc, he also six times has won a game with a 100+ QB rating). I don't think Kolb should live on his resume, but I think there is a reason that Marrone has him higher than Tuel on the depth chart, and even when asked if Tuel had a shot had to phrase it in "everybody need to dream and set their goals high" talk and not "Yes, he realistically is going to have a shot to win the job". Week 1 our best chance at winning is EJ, our second is Kolb, our third is Tuel. I hope whichever of them ends up out there wins, but know better than to consider second half preseason plays by a UDFA as an accurate indicator of expected regular season results.

I don't even know if it was really a good season. Turned a dozen college plays and a quick first step into millions.

I'm quite happy to have Byrd back. I hate hold outs in general, but being back before the third preseason game is plenty of time to be healthy, up on the playbook, and in game shape for week 1 which it is all about. I hope they get a long term deal next off season, but for now I'm glad he will be there 16 times ready to increase our chances of winning each time.

I don't really have much doubt he should be expected to practice the week leading up to the opener. My real question which we haven't gotten clear answers on yet is how much will he be able to practice next week? Getting non-contact reps the week of our preseason finale would really help get him back and on target to start the opener, even if he clearly won't play in the meaningless finale. I don't think anybody knows yet, and I haven't heard anything to indicate one way or another, but wearing a red jersey in 11 on 11s next Wednesday I don't think has been ruled out.

No. Go scan through "drafts" that year for teams, and show me how many have a star, a good starter, and a couple role players. http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft?teamId=0200&type=team You always want perfection with a draft, and want to know it is perfection a year or two in, but what you are looking at is how much five year contributions you get, and if some players become cornerstones who are around well past that five year window. I am fine with this draft, and it has the potential to brighten even further before the five year window is up.

Never a big leg, but always a big clutch kicker. Best of luck to you Rian, and thanks for your service. I think this makes us a better football team, but it is sad to see past solid performers go.

I'm still not clear why Tuel and Brad Smith are higher on people's "STARTING QB WHEN EJ ISN'T" list. Is that because you think they really give a better chance to win games? I definitely like Kolb as the veteran clipboard holder with EJ starting 19 times and winning a new Chevrolet in February, but in the event that there is a game he doesn't start, right now I would much rather have Kolb start it than either of the other guys, and I think his track record is getting thrown out based on some preseason play (insert Iverson quote now). Last year he beat the Patriots, Eagles, and Dolphins in consecutive weeks scoring 20+ each time. In previous years when not hurt he has another 6 wins with 100+ QB rating. I know he isn't what the Cardinals had hoped for, and I know he has a track record of being fragile, but I think he clearly gives us the best chance to win any individual game not started by EJ, and I want to try to win each game this year regardless of QB or our place in standings or draft. I'm not sure how Kolb got so deep in our doghouse...probably just the excitement over our franchise QB of the future and the Fitzpatrick like guy who stands in the way of that era starting, but he isn't standing in EJ's way, and is our best backup option. I'm pretty sure that at this point in his career he is aware he probably isn't one of the top 32 QBs in the league and being the best backup QB, clipboard holder, and mentor he can be is something he can handle without controversy, and if so, I think he is a better option to do so than our undrafted rookie, our WR, and than anybody currently on the waiver wire.

Sounds pretty crazy to want a new stadium that soon after getting a new stadium, and I am not a defender of Snyder at all, but a couple mitigating factors that make this more reasonable: 1) Dan Snyder was not the owner when the stadium was built, so inherited it with his purchase, and therefor isn't just looking for another handout and shiny new toy, but probably looking to have a stadium that fits his own ego, like that other guy in that other city in Texas. 2) The stadium is not in DC, but is in Maryland, and having it in DC (or Virginia) could be a priority, as well as give room for getting sides negotiating against each other. 3) The stadium isn't pure awesomeness on a number of fronts, and as such sort of falls into the Comiskey Park situation (the last new stadium before Camden changed the perspective). 4) With a 30 year or so wait on season tickets, going significantly larger could make a lot of sense, generate a lot of additional revenue, etc. So despite the fact that it is still so new, and was even newer when he started talking about it, it is more reasonable an idea for a super franchise and super owner than it might seem on the surface.

I still think this is getting blown up. Here are some observations: 1) EJ has clearly separated himself to be our starting QB on the depth chart. 2) Starting QBs barely play if at all in the 4th preseason game. 3) EJ had a minor injury that means they will keep him out of the third game coming up, which makes sense with a very minor procedure not being back to practice during the week and in game shape in less than a week. 4) Could EJ play in two weeks if the 4th preseason game if it mattered? Probably. That is the least important game, and any player a little dinged up would normally sit. 5) Has there been any indication that he will not practice next week? I'm not sure on this, but it wouldn't surprise me for him to be riding a stationary bike and in meetings right away, and running around in non-contact sooner than people think, unrelated to the fact that they will be holding him out from two preseason game. Marrone continued to stress that this was very minor. My conclusion is that he can't play this weekend without it being a risk, so this weekend is what we lose (and not an insignificant thing for a rookie QB), but everything else is unknown and we expect him to jump back in much sooner than the Tuesday before the opener.

I might be missing something that will come out today, but there is no evidence that EJ is going to miss two weeks of practice. My expectation is he had fluid drained and will miss this week's game. Then playing scrub ball the final week doesn't make any sense in his preparation, but he will sit out the final game while practicing and be our week 1 QB. So while they will help pd him out of the final preseason game, that doesn't mean he won't be practicing in a red jersey that week as well as the week of the opener.

Play to win each and every game. Never think the draft crap shoot is worth not trying to be a one win better football team. Even when it is week 17 and an Andrew Luck is there. Recent drafts: 2007: Russell #1, Adrian Peterson #7, Patrick Willis #10 2008: Jake Long #1, Matt Ryan #3, Chris Johnson #24 2009: Stafford #1, Orakpo #13, Cushing #15 2010: Bradford #1, Spiller #8 2011: Newton #1, Watt #11 2012: Who judges a draft after one year? But that Luck guy seems pretty good. Picking #1 can be nice, but it is never worth trying to lose for, and there are always great players available later, especially now that we won't be picking a first round QB (which is where there tends to be a difference even if hit or miss). I hope we are picking #32, but if we hit week 15 with something in the 5-15 range, I will still be rooting for us to win out the final games even as it "hurts" our draft position.

Don't bother blocking blindside Mario...he's just a decoy.

I think we are making a lot of fuss about what Allan Iverson would refer to as one "Not a game" [i might be paraphrasing incorrectly, because I can't remember his exact word choice]. Glenn is our LT, and I sure hope he excels at that. As has been mentioned now, seeing him briefly in another position can give our coaching staff some insight into what our strategy might be in case of injuries and/or Glenn not excelling over the course of the season. 1) If he struggles but is our best LT, we can consider moving him in to LG next year and getting a replacement LT (draft or otherwise). 2) If he struggles, and another LT option emerges and leapfrogs him on the depth chart, they can have an idea if moving him to LG in the season would work out. 3) If there is an injury or two at guard, and another Glenn struggles enough that he is on even footing with another LT (or pretty close even if Glenn is ahead), it is likely that our line would be slightly improved with Glenn sliding in to LG, and the similar and maybe a little inferior tackle playing LT. 4) Glenn does great, and this was just an afternoon of informational cross training and he stays as our LT of the future. All things point to having him play LT, but working him a little at LG letting our O-Line experienced head coach have more information to make decisions in the best interest if our team based on various unknown future outcomes.

I wouldn't get this. He is way ahead of Tuel both in his ability to step in and play, and in his ability to be a mentor/clipboard guy. This would surprise me and be a dumb move.

Not sure I follow but here are two things that are not true: A) Glenn is moving to guard so we can draft a LT B) That guard is our #1 priority in the 2014 draft. We have a good player at a key position, and some uncertainty on the single most fungible and replaceable position in the game. Don't sit back and hope we sign the next Dockery...the position can be easily filled in other ways and not be a problem. I would love to have Levitre still, but not at big dollars for a less important position.

Was it Dockery? If so did you offer him a $50M contract?

I'm disappointed the Byrd was not signed to an extension, but I think that not overpaying is important. Now that we are past that point, I don't think he helps himself or us by staying gone long, and I expect him to come pretty soon, play a great season, and sign an extension after the season. But that is the best case scenario, and he could go the Peters route instead, which would be a great disappointment.

Stature: Doug Flutie Pocket Presence: Drew Bledsoe Arm Strength: Chad Pennington Accuracy: Derek Anderson Scramble Ability: Dan Marino Decision Making: JP Losman Leadership: Jeff George I like to root for an underdog.

Potential franchise QBs go in the top 10 when the chances are viewed as high (even if the outcome isn't) and in the later first round to early second when there are some concerns on ceiling or probability of success. There are three parts of any reach calculation: 1) Was the guy you got the best player you could have drafted in that spot? 2) Was there near certainty you could have gotten him with the next pick? 3) If not in second round, with a pick in between by trading back/up? Some accuse of us reaching based on positional need, because they think there were more valuable players (at the same position or otherwise) available at #16. I am doubtful that there was or that a good chance at a franchise QB isn't worth the #16 pick. The second part of near certainty of getting him in round two, I think there should have been CONSIDERABLE doubts about him lasting until #41, with Philly and the Jets both being possibilities. We will never really know, but sitting at #41 and watching the QB you want go off the board would be silly if he is significantly higher on your board than the other QBs. The third part is the one where there are some reasonable arguments. Unless another team jumped up to get him after we traded back, it was unlikely he was going anywhere in picks 17-25. That is still a big if, and unless you think no other team values him at 25 or so your risks in moving back/up to take him later are significant. But I tend to think he would have been there still in the low 20s, and maybe that would have been a poker hand worth playing to maximize draft value. Looks great if the poker hand plays out well after finding a trade partner, but looks terrible if you push your luck and get burnt. What we would have added for a trade down just isn't worth getting the QB you think will be the best. Until he performs or the Eagles say they were interested, there will be those calling him a reach. But if he becomes our starter and performs well this will be really silly. We got our extra 2nd in the process, and used a #16 pick. Way lower than the Whitner, McKelvin, and Maybin picks to finally try to fix a huge long lasting void at the QB position.