Jump to content

Nastradamus

Offseason thread 2016

Recommended Posts

Does anyone see quin starting to draft for a 3-4 defense.

New England has typically run a lot of 3-4/or a hybrid 4-3. Plus Austin is very familiar with the 3-4.

It might be done in a year but maybe take two for a full transition. Have some good players for it in anash(think Chandler Jones). Taylor is a bigger end and some of the linebackers could switch easily as well (Whitehead and maybe even get something out of Van Noy)

No reason for going to a 3-4 when the Lions have been pretty successful with the 4-3, especially with Ziggy. I think the 3-4 is outdated a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No reason for going to a 3-4 when the Lions have been pretty successful with the 4-3, especially with Ziggy. I think the 3-4 is outdated a bit.

So outdated 4 of the top 5 defenses in the NFL run it

Not saying it's for sure the way to go but a valid option, especially considering the amount of turnover we will have in the front seven. If ever a time to switch, it is now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, yah the 3-4 is not in any way outdated. People said the same about the 4-3 a few years ago. The truth is, its simply a matter of maximizing the talent you are able to acquire. Most teams mix up their fronts anyways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Does anyone see quin starting to draft for a 3-4 defense.

New England has typically run a lot of 3-4/or a hybrid 4-3. Plus Austin is very familiar with the 3-4.

It might be done in a year but maybe take two for a full transition. Have some good players for it in anash(think Chandler Jones). Taylor is a bigger end and some of the linebackers could switch easily as well (Whitehead and maybe even get something out of Van Noy)

Maybe I'm wrong, but I doubt Quinn will dictate defensive schemes. He seems more likely to work with the coaching staff to identify players with the skills to fit into multiple roles, so that the roster is versatile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yah. The one thing I would look for, is guys who do more than one thing or play more than one position. The Patriots constantly reference looking for guys who can be "multiple". Especially on the defensive front

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mayhew wasn't in charge of the cap, that was Lewand's job.

I think that's splitting hairs. While I agree that cap was Lewand's job primarily, Mayhew should have been intimately involved with it as well. Cap plays a HUGE role in building a team. Managing that cap so that they can afford good FA and afford to retain their star players is critical. It Mayhew wasn't involved in cap discussion than Lewand clearly screwed up majorly. I have a hard time believing that Mayhew didn't have significant input in regards to cap questions/discussion/calculations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never had an issue with our cap management. We were usually able to sign FAs if we so chose and keep our own guys. The SUh situation was obviously the exception, but his deal was the the last of its kind also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure where to put this, but there is a lot of talk about the NFL overtime rules in the wake of the Packers cardinals game.

I'm not sure how I feel about them. I think it's better than it was before. But I also think it would be clearly better to just play another full quarter (at least in the playoffs).

I wouldn't be opposed to getting rid of OT in the regular season and just going with a tie game.

I think in both cases you might see some teams go for 2 more often at the end of a game where they score a touchdown to tie.

Maybe something will get changed in the future.

I wouldn't be opposed to a college style OT either. Maybe have them start on the 50 instead of the 30 or whatever it is in college.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like it how it is, but changes wouldn't be a huge issue for me either. The teams that lose will always ***** about the set up. That's the main point to it all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I like it how it is, but changes wouldn't be a huge issue for me either. The teams that lose will always ***** about the set up. That's the main point to it all

I don't dislike how it is. It's definitely better than the previous iteration. I have no problem with the concept that if you give up an opening drive touchdown that you lose. Football is more than just offense, and a touchdown drive is almost always an unlikely occurrence. Simply having a good a defensive stand out of the gate puts you in great position to mount a short drive and a game winning field goal. So I don't think it's grossly unfair or anything.

The only thing that gives me pause is that it is so unlike how ties are broken in the other sports. Basketball and hockey are not overly possession based where the value of a possession is all that large. That's obviously different, but they don't play a sudden death.

Baseball is very "possession" based, but both teams are given equal chances.

Football is different of course, but a timed period, whether it's a 10 or 15 minute one, would be kind of cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure where to put this, but there is a lot of talk about the NFL overtime rules in the wake of the Packers cardinals game......

Speaking of the Packers, they had some pretty good luck this season.

Did anyone see their Hail Mary pass against the Cardinals? I didn't think Janis "completed the process" for the TD. I thought the ball hit the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Speaking of the Packers, they had some pretty good luck this season.

Did anyone see their Hail Mary pass against the Cardinals? I didn't think Janis "completed the process" for the TD. I thought the ball hit the ground.

Defender poked it out after the process was done

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't dislike how it is. It's definitely better than the previous iteration. I have no problem with the concept that if you give up an opening drive touchdown that you lose. Football is more than just offense, and a touchdown drive is almost always an unlikely occurrence. Simply having a good a defensive stand out of the gate puts you in great position to mount a short drive and a game winning field goal. So I don't think it's grossly unfair or anything.

The only thing that gives me pause is that it is so unlike how ties are broken in the other sports. Basketball and hockey are not overly possession based where the value of a possession is all that large. That's obviously different, but they don't play a sudden death.

Baseball is very "possession" based, but both teams are given equal chances.

Football is different of course, but a timed period, whether it's a 10 or 15 minute one, would be kind of cool.

Its not horrible as an idea or anything. I just think the current system promotes the idea that D is equally valuable to O . Plus you'd have more ties with a timed format and/or have overly long playoff games. I think this promotes aggression nicely.

Edited by Nastradamus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Defender poked it out after the process was done

Can you please clear the following up for me:

When does the process end in the end zone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Defender poked it out after the process was done

Unless his name was Calvin Johnson, in which case it definitely wouldn't have counted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can you please clear the following up for me:

When does the process end in the end zone?

When his motion resulting from going to the ground has stopped and he has control of the football. That's the way I understand it at least.

I watched the Janis catch again. Its pretty damn close, but I'd give him the catch. I see the argument though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When his motion resulting from going to the ground has stopped and he has control of the football. That's the way I understand it at least.

I watched the Janis catch again. Its pretty damn close, but I'd give him the catch. I see the argument though.

I didn't really think it was all that debatable. He was on his back in the middle of the end zone and while lying there was able to control the ball. A split second later it got knocked loose.

There was some ball movement as he went to the ground but it never touched the ground. It was the second grasp as he was lying there that made it clear to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unless his name was Calvin Johnson, in which case it definitely wouldn't have counted

By the rule, that one was the right call. Bad rule? maybe. I don't care that much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I didn't really think it was all that debatable. He was on his back in the middle of the end zone and while lying there was able to control the ball. A split second later it got knocked loose.

There was some ball movement as he went to the ground but it never touched the ground. It was the second grasp as he was lying there that made it clear to me.

I pretty much agree, but like you said, it was a split second, so that's why I gave benefit of the doubt to a differing perspective

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the video:

It will not let me post it because it says it contains NFL content.

Pause it at around 1:29. Does the ball hit the ground? If it hits the ground, I thought it means incomplete pass due to not completing the process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here is the video:

It will not let me post it because it says it contains NFL content.

Pause it at around 1:29. Does the ball hit the ground? If it hits the ground, I thought it means incomplete pass due to not completing the process.

doesn't look like it hits the ground to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
doesn't look like it hits the ground to me.

Yeah, this was the issue in my mind. It may have just touched the ground but you couldn't tell for sure, plus he had his hand underneath so he might have had control as it touched the ground anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...