bulldog Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 one year deal for buckley, who figures to be the nickel back in Tampa. he should fit right in with the other Tampa windbags Keychain and butter Sapp: It's a great opportunity," Buckley said. "I live in Florida, my family is here, and this is a Super Bowl team." Super Bowl team? last time I checked they lost the past 2 years in the wildcard game. But that is like winning the Super Bowl I guess for the players and fans down there. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 I smell the 2000 Skins down there. Lots of talent, a few injuries away from suckin lemons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shamaran Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 I dunno, Bulldog, they look like they'll be in the thick of it. They have an easy schedule and seemingly (on paper), do have a bonafide All-Star roster, as Bufford says, like a former squad we all knew very well. Differnece is, no Deion or Jeff George to spew all that anti-chemistry bunk around. And, of course, Gruden isn't exactly Norvaless Norv either! It would be a gas to see Tampa and Indy in the big show, just because of the irony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurent Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 They DO have their version of Jeff George/Peon Sanders down there. Warren Sapp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirk Diggler Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 Yeah -- That division is cake. Atlanta, NO, and Carolina will all be sub .500 teams. Tampa sure lucked out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brave Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 The regular season might be easy on Tampa Bay, but their problems of late have been once they get into the playoffs anyway. Knocking off creampuffs is no way to prepare the team for the rigors of playing the better teams in January. Maybe things will will click for them and they'll be better in the playoffs. Maybe. Just as likely, if not more so IMHO, is that we'll see a similar result as the last two seasons. Playoffs with a quick exit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One Dollar Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 TBuck is a good pick up and he came cheap. He won't hurt anything and if Smith takes the #2 slot, it would be a nice of a battle between Kelly and TBuck for the nickle. I think TBuck would have that matchup. As far as Tampa being "lucky" with the schedule, I guess you missed the fact that we have been in the top five toughest schedules for the past 5 years and being in the NFC Central during our Culverhouse years was not an easy undertaking. Good things come to those who wait Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One Dollar Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 Originally posted by Brave The regular season might be easy on Tampa Bay, but their problems of late have been once they get into the playoffs anyway. Knocking off creampuffs is no way to prepare the team for the rigors of playing the better teams in January. Valid PAST argument regarding the playoffs, however you can't predict this season will be the same since Dungy is gone, and offense was the problem in those early playoff exits. And your comment about creampuffs, remember the 99 Rams? They had to date the easiest schedule EVER to reach the SB, and for not an anemic offense of Tampa would not have made it with the 11-6 win over the Bucs at thier house. Also the Ravens SB year had an easy schedule and handled the playoffs quite well. There was an article on the ESPN site recently talking about this. Here is the article: Click here They summerized the last few SB's, here is a blurb from that article: The Patriots had the fourth-easiest schedule (115-141, .449) and went 2-3 against winning teams during the regular season last year. The Ravens had the third-easiest schedule (109-147, .426) in 2000. The Rams had the easiest schedule in 1999 (.363). The Broncos had the fifth-easiest schedule (116-140, .453) in 1998 and the ninth-easiest in 1997 (124-132, .484). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brave Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 Of course we don't know what will happen this year, Dollar. It's all predictions and conjecture. But how do you make a prediction without looking at the past? I don't KNOW that Tampa Bay will fail miserably in the playoffs again this year ... I just THINK they might and I said as much. For the record, I like some of their off-season moves, but I'm not putting them at the top of the NFC just yet. All we heard from opposing fans about Washington over the last 2 or 3 years is that it takes time to gel with new players and coaches and "chemistry" won't be there right away, etc. That actually turned out to be pretty accurate. But why is it when other teams make similar changes it is assumed they will all be for the better IMMEDIATELY? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted July 9, 2002 Author Share Posted July 9, 2002 The NFC Central? Give me a break. :laugh: The Central has won 4 Super Bowls in 36 years............. The NFC East has been the real black and blue division. 10 Super Bowl trophies reside with East teams. Except for the '85 Bears the Central didn't do anything from 1969 to the Packers re-emergence in 1996. All that happened in the middle was the Vikings losing 4 Super Bowls and the Bucs being the worst franchise in pro sports for much of that time :laugh: Knowing Tampa, they WILL finally make it to the Super Bowl, only to lose to the AFC Champion 30-7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One Dollar Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 Hmmm... I see you avoided the "top five toughest schedules for the past 5 years" part and commented on the NFC Central only. Typical bulldog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 The fact is you are playing 3 weak sistas from now on and 8 room temperature or better games so if you win 4 games outside of the division you are playoff bound. So like the 9ers of the 80's who didnt have to work hard to come out of the NFC West you guys have no excuse as far as winning the division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted July 10, 2002 Author Share Posted July 10, 2002 toughest schedules? give me a break. :laugh: the Bucs lost in the WILDCARD game the past two years to a good but not great Eagles team and got dismantled BOTH times. :laugh: these games were not even close last year was what, 31-9 with Brad Johnson (whom we told you was a bum but you didn't listen) throwing how many interceptions? the year before the Bucs scored what 6 points? If the Bucs have such hard schedules and manage to persevere and get to 10 wins and make the playoffs then how come they don't seem to acquit themselves ONCE they get in? The Bucs record in the playoffs since 1999 is 1-3. Wow, now that is a real roll you guys are on :laugh: it comes up just a little short of what Dallas did between 1992-95 and what the Steelers did between 1974-79 :laugh: :laugh: but I shouldn't laugh because it IS the most consistent period of solid play from this team in it's 25 year history. :notworthy :notworthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One Dollar Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 Originally posted by NavyDave So like the 9ers of the 80's who didnt have to work hard to come out of the NFC West you guys have no excuse as far as winning the division. You are correct, they have no excuses now and I do expect them to win the division this year. Don't you expect the same of your Skins? bulldog, the discussion was strength of schedule prior to the season, and yes the Bucs have had the top five toughest the last five years according to that. What didn't you understand? Again you use one game to define a player. I guess with your logic Brett Favre who threw SIX interceptions in a playoff loss last year is no good either. bulldog, master of the one sided stat reference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted July 10, 2002 Author Share Posted July 10, 2002 look, you and I both know the Bucs didn't sign Brad Johnson to throw 5 and 6 yard passes to Keychain. The Bucs had trouble scoring points last season, they didn't have much of a downfield passing game and as such their yards per pass attempt was one of the lowest for a playoff team. Brad Johnson completed 65% of his passes but the Bucs were still caught scoring in the teens. In fact the team didn't seem to improve much from when Shaun King was the starter in 2000. you can ignore that if you want to, but look at the records. as far as the schedule goes, I think that is a red herring. The 1982 Redskins had an easy schedule based on their .500 finish in 1981 and went to the Super Bowl. the team came back in 1983 as the defending champ, playing a schedule with all the other division winners and playoff teams on it, and promptly went 14-2 and went back to the Super Bowl. what has sunk the Bucs is the fact they are not a clutch team. you look at their offense and there is no one that wants the ball in his hands with the contest on the line, except Keyshawn and he doesn't have the speed or elusiveness to create much on his own. so, the team is now going to try Rob Johnson, who hasn't been able to stay on the field for more than 5 or 6 games before a cruel wind knocks him down :laugh: I don't see Rob Johnson taking the Bucs anywhere special, but then again Gruden resurrected one qb's career in Oakland. Maybe he can walk on water twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrangeSkin Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 Originally posted by One Dollar the discussion was strength of schedule prior to the season, and yes the Bucs have had the top five toughest the last five years according to that. So you expect them to make it to the super bowl when they have a creampuff schedule? They may go 11-5 or 12-4 this year, but what's going to happen you get to the playoffs? Another smackdown, more than likely. The Bucs are waaaaay overrated this year. We're on par with them, at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One Dollar Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 Originally posted by OrangeSkin So you expect them to make it to the super bowl when they have a creampuff schedule? ... Why yes. Yes I do. and Click here to see why I think that among other changes that have happened this off season. FYI our creampuff schedule still has the Rams, Steelers, Eagles, Packers, Ravens, & Browns on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brave Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 Browns, Dollar? I'll give you the others, but ... what have the Brown's done to deserve a spot on your "these are our tough games" list? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted July 10, 2002 Author Share Posted July 10, 2002 the same factors that lead experts to discount a fast start by the Redskins also weigh on the Bucs. New head coach, new system, new feature players at qb, rb, wr............. the other thing is, I didn't see the Cardinals have much success with Pittman or the Bills with Rob Johnson, but they are going to be prime players for the Bucs? What's that based on, wishful thinking? hey, there are 32 teams around the NFL that have some similar warm, fuzzies about players on their own squads..............:laugh: This is coming up on Year 4 of the Sapp plan to win the Super Bowl. After '99, didn't he promise the Bucs would be back in the NFC title game in 2000? After '00, didn't Sapp promise the Bucs would go to the Super Bowl with Brad Johnson and Keyshawn in the fold? when are these frauds actually going to either do something or shut up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One Dollar Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 I guess every team is a fraud if they don't win it all. Agree on the warm-fuzzy comment. It's off-season and you can toot your horn as loud as I and we both won't be louder than the other. It sure feels good though (how I feel about my teams chances) and I'm sure you have the same feelings too. Hopefully reality doesn't disapoint us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fiddler Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 There's no doubt that the schedule has been tough on the Bucs the last few years, and that has contributed to their lack of home field advantage in the playoffs. This is part of the reason that they appear to be underachievers, IMO. The Bucs may have been 1-3 in the playoffs in the last 3 years, but all three losses were on the road, and their sole win (against us :mad: ) was at home. It's not so much that they fold in the playoffs but that they fold away from home in the playoffs, just as most other teams do. The home field advantage is incredibly important in the playoffs. Since 1990, home teams are 36-12 in the wildcard round, 39-9 in the divisional round and 14-8 in the conference championships for a total of 89-29. The Bucs are in a weak division which bodes well for home field advantage in the playoffs, and that's a huge advantage no matter what you think of Brad's noodle arm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted July 10, 2002 Author Share Posted July 10, 2002 If Brad Johnson continues to be the quarterback the Bucs aren't going to win anything. He is not a mentally tough player as has been evinced by his poor playoff performances. He played awfully last year, but if you back to '99 his two interceptions with the Redskins ahead against the Bucs helped Tampa get back into that game, and ultimately win 14-13. Anyone else remember that wounded duck that was intercepted by John Lynch? It came down like a punt for crying out loud :mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.