PuddinheadSr

...sometimes makes me wonder where some of the posters go to bitch and moan about everything and everyone in the world other than themselves for the 1 hour out of 24 that they're not doing it here.

Fire away.

quote:

---

His name is AT Perry.

---

Don't know that Perry has any experience at running slot routes.

quote:

---

Didn't ole man Marv murder someone over a carwash?

---

To be fair, I heard it was a really crappy carwash.

quote:

---

The Saints will do just enough to have a sh!tty pick

---

There are no sh!tty picks. Only sh!tty choices made with picks.

Because in the NFL rebuilds are for suckers?

People act like getting rid of talent you already have and striving for a crappy W-L record to get somewhat higher draft picks is a strategy that actually works. I really think it has something to do with the widespread prevalence of the gambling culture now that sports gambling has been embraced by the league and is no longer just something your degenerate uncle does with the bookie at the corner bar. Meaning that, like gamblers, lots of fans now have no problem convincing themselves that a "system" or a "plan" is THE key to success whether it plays out to work more often than fail or not.

All those teams that tear everything down to rebuild, then find themselves in three or four seasons tearing down to rebuild again? They just don't "do it right". I mean, the simple fact that there are more franchises that wallow in non relevance with occasional peaks of mediocrity while there are others that remain relevant for decades without ever charting a really crappy record should illustrate that the "you need to suck to get better" idea is a fallacy.

The only "advantage" the shitty record ensures is a draft pick in a little higher position. Go back and check how many of even first round picks become "stars" or even just above-average contributors as opposed to JAGs (or worse). Not encouraging. I've posted that a deep-dive piece I read before the season showed that when comparing two players of the same position (say, the first WR taken and the next WR selected in the same draft) even when the second guy is taken a half round later, the first player selected DOES end up outperforming the second...exactly 52% of the time. HUGE advantage to having that crappy record and earlier pick, right?

The simple truth is that the path to consistent relevance isn't some "trick" like dumping all of your talent to gamble on that guaranteeing you all fresh new talent. It's having a front office that's competent and confident enough to consistently identify and correctly value and retain the talent currently on the roster, pare away the insufficiently effective or over priced, and target and acquire replacement upgrades via free agency while fleshing out the roster's depth and adding (hopefully) future starters.

Again...rebuilds/roster teardowns are for suckers.

I always laugh at the theory that you win by losing in the NFL. You know, cuz you'll pick five spots higher in the draft.

An in-depth survey of Super Bowl era drafts (no, I don't have the link anymore from right before the season started) compared the statistical output of the first player drafted at a particular position with that of the second at the same position, whether it was 5 picks later, 10 picks later, whatever. Know what percentage of the time the first player chosen outperforms the guy selected sometimes a third of a round or more later?

52%. Slightly more than a coin toss. I mean, yeah, over time that 2% margin can be counted on to produce a better outcome...over like 25 or 30 drafts, since that's how such slight differences in probability play out.

(Edited for clarification.)

The dude's a flat statue on the defensive end.

Juan Kinkade (local WWL-TV) was onfield reporting he was a go.

Ugh. Leotards.

quote:

---

Does anyone think we'll ever go back to using the screens as effectively as when we had Thomas, Reggie etc?

---

With so many teams playing so much "big nickle" as their base, which puts an additional defender who specializes in tackling in space on the field, I'm not sure that the screen game can be quite as big a part of an offense as it was then.