Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

bucsbaby

Members
  • Content Count

    1,640
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

35 Excellent

About bucsbaby

  • Rank
    Footballguy
  1. People on here forgetting just how good LT was, for years. He's been out of the league long enough for people to forget, but not long enough for the nostalgia factor to kick in, in his favour I guess At any rate, a lot of HoF worthy RBs in the last couple decades. Except for AP, not very many of those around the NFL these days...
  2. Adrian Peterson to the Bucs. At his age, might only be a one year rental, but if they had an aggressive stud RB like that to set up the play action pass to the receiving targets they have, they would have a pretty nasty offense I think. Martin is good, but he's not "consistently take over the game" great.
  3. I'm not necessarily opposed to the pick. A TON of games are decided by 7 points are less. Making or missing 1-2 long FGs per game can easily be the difference between winning and losing (of course, as long as the Bucs aren't getting blown out by 30+ points, which does happen :bag:). The critical question becomes the relative value of this guy vs. some other K drafted later in the draft or not drafted, especially in comparison to a defender or skill position player they may have otherwise taken. The Bucs have a lot of holes still on both sides of the ball. To pass up a second round talent at D or O to take a K, that K has got to be a LOT better than an undrafted FA K. That being said, if this guy DOES perform a good % higher than an undrafted FA then he could absolutely be worth the pick. Will be interesting to see how it plays out.
  4. Taking a kicker that high is ... trading up to take a kicker that high is ... ... ... here's to hoping he is awesome for many years
  5. Risk-reward guy in round 2? Two small possibly at DE? LB? Possible off the field issues?
  6. I'm a big Peyton admirer, but the defense won that game and Peyton did very little. Shouldn't change the historical narrative around his performance in big games, but, of course, it will. One of the greatest to ever play the game. Candidate for GOAT.
  7. They got rid of Revis becasue of the cap. That wasn't sustainable. Gholston was an overpriced safety who just racked up penalties. And Mark Barron couldn't cover worth a crap. He ended up changing positions in Stl to LB. I definitely wouldn't call him a good secondary player. He might be a decent LB, but woukd you of started him over Lavonte David?They didn't get rid of Revis because of the cap. That's not true at all.A 16mil per year CB didn't fit in the plans for a team that was rebuilding. Did they absolutely have to cut him to get under? No, but that was a long term play that had to be done. There is no guarantee he would have resigned anyways, so at the most he would of had a better D in 2014. A year with no OC.They cut him to sign McCown, Verner, Collins and Michael Johnson. Lovie's hand picked guys. That's the only reason.
  8. It was a bad move by the Glazers to hire Lovie, but at some point it is a sunk cost and you have to move on. Jettisoning 3 good players from the secondary and ending up with a garbage secondary isn't the way to win football games, especially in today's NFL.
  9. How many of those games where Peyton's D didn't hold the opponent to less than 17 points were due to Peyton throwing picks at inopportune times, etc.? You can't separate an offense from a defense any more than you can separate a QB from his surrounding cast, coaching, etc. Yes, some defenses are better than others, but points against aren't entirely on the defense (also a product of the position the offense puts them in), and points scored aren't entirely due to the offense (Dilfer being the oft-referred to example). These guys are both HOF QBs, all time greats. In their prime, I'd take whomever I could sign for less money, so that I could invest the difference in OLine/DLine.
  10. Rodgers is crazy talented. However, no QB, no matter how good, can do it all himself. His supporting cast has regressed and, therefore, so has the offense.
  11. In terms of the team's chances to win next year Koetter > Lovie. It's not like Lovie was going to be getting calls from around the league for job offers -- even if that were possible/the norm. You can talk about the lack of talent on the defensive side of the ball, but the coaching was also horrendous.
  12. How was his season this year? We could definitely use an edge rusher, no doubt about that.
  13. Bottom line is Lovie is terrible and is playing a defense that is porous at best. I understand the financial implications. However, if they keep Lovie for 3 more years (of mediocrity) and then have to transition to a new scheme, they could end up wasting a lot of Winston's prime years. Lovie is never going to take this team to the playoffs. He is a bottom 5-10 coach in the league. The issue isn't personnel. The personnel that they do have, have underachieved relative to their potential.