HRNY4ZRNY Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Greg how did you grade Vinny's offseason? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregpeck99 Posted July 22, 2009 Author Share Posted July 22, 2009 Realisticly this defense should be good enough to keep us in games I am not saying they are the best ever or anything like that I am just saying that defense still goes a long way in the NFL... Totally agree ... but in NFCEast ... you gotta be able to score more than 20 points per game to be competitive ... let alone to dominate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InsaneBoost Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 He's over the hill Insane ... and more trouble than he's worth ... we need to move on at RB ... reliance on Portis off tackle on 1st and 2nd down doesn't do it in the WCO ... its Gibbs-ball. Conservative, dull and guaranteed not to score points (especially with JC at QB). I don't think Portis is that big of a problem to be honest, I only remember the one incident last season after week 1 about an O line he'd like to be behind and that's it. I think there might have been a small one with Zorn as well. All which have been cleared up now. I don't think getting rid of Portis would move us anymore forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rd421 Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 He's over the hill Insane ... and more trouble than he's worth ... we need to move on at RB ... reliance on Portis off tackle on 1st and 2nd down doesn't do it in the WCO ... its Gibbs-ball. Conservative, dull and guaranteed not to score points (especially with JC at QB). The only reason I disagree with this line of thought is because to be competative and win the NFC East you need to be able to do 2 things well Run the ball and shut down offenses... Our D can shut down offenses that does not worry me but headache or not love him or hate him CP is still arguably the best RB in the East and even if he was not who would run the ball for us? Not Betts he is good at one thing fumbling the ball to give the other team good field position...which brings me to another point if our D can win the field position battle our offense does not have to be amazing Run The ball and Defense = our best shot this year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ucfSKINS Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Your entire post was utterly insane with nothing to back up your claims. And I, along with many others on ES, would have to GREATLY argue your claim about our uniforms. If they are so 'outdated', go cheer for the seahags and their 'new school' piece of **** jerseys. fans like you make me sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregpeck99 Posted July 22, 2009 Author Share Posted July 22, 2009 Greg how did you grade Vinny's offseason? Good question. here is my report Card. Haynesworth = A Dockery = B Hall = B+ Draft = F (Failed to get Sanchez) Cutler = F Combined Score = C- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HRNY4ZRNY Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 What about Orakpo? Barnes? Jarmon? Bridges? Hunter Smith? Mike Williams? C- means below average We got the best DT in the league, A solid 13th pick with Orakpo, A great move getting Jarmon an area of need. We brought in competition at PR. Brought competition in for Suisham, and got rid of veterans we all liked but needed to go to get youth. How could that be below average? If Snyder wanted Sanchez or Cutler he would have got them. He probably showed a little interest which you should do as a owner or GM. (leave no stone unturned) But he didn't want to mortgage our future which many people would have been upset about. Besides if we are as bad as you think we can pick up a QB in the draft next year and not have to give up multiple picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IbleedBnG83 Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Dump Campbell and Portis ... then go from there. By dumping JC and Portis you are setting the franchise even further back. It seems you are looking to gamble more than to try and make a smooth transition, a quick fix if you will. If the team dumps JC, then what? Colt? We are still where would be at with JC with a less experienced QB. At least JC has the potential to significantly improve, while giving Colt another year to develop. After all, the OL is still shakey. Why through an even younger and more developmental QB in the fire with a less than stable OL, right? Unfortunately we are financially handcuffed to CP. He still has tread left on the tire. If we had dumpbed him, where would that leave us? Betts and Cartwright? Good question. here is my report Card.Haynesworth = A Dockery = B Hall = B+ Draft = F (Failed to get Sanchez) Cutler = F Combined Score = C- Are you giving them an F for failing to get Sanchez and Cutler because it caused a rift between JC and the organization or because they would have been the best option. How could you possibly think getting a rookie QB would yield high dividends right away? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregpeck99 Posted July 22, 2009 Author Share Posted July 22, 2009 The only reason I disagree with this line of thought is because to be competative and win the NFC East you need to be able to do 2 things well Run the ball and shut down offenses... In order to run ball well you must have a QB ... Skins running game collapsed because Teams were able to read JC, began to NOT fear him, and stacked the Box. A Running game has two components ... a good ... not necessarily great running back AND a very good QB. Giants ran well with 3 running backs lasy year, at least 2 of which were journeymen. Why? ... because of Eli ... thats why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 So if you rate the Haynesworth pick-up an A, what's with the line in the OP about him being "a prima donna tending to do his own thing, rather than adapt to a team concept?" :whoknows: Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregpeck99 Posted July 22, 2009 Author Share Posted July 22, 2009 How could you possibly think getting a rookie QB would yield high dividends right away? IMO Sanchez way more productive than JC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rd421 Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 In order to run ball well you must have a QB ... Skins running game collapsed because Teams were able to read JC, began to NOT fear him, and stacked the Box. A Running game has two components ... a good ... not necessarily great running back AND a very good QB. Giants ran well with 3 running backs lasy year, at least 2 of which were journeymen. Why? ... because of Eli ... thats why. Eli is not an arguing piece that guy is terribly overated he has the worst mechanics of any qb I have ever had to watch and this year without plaxico that will be magnified...I would argue that Eli was so good because of a strong running game to be honest... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregpeck99 Posted July 22, 2009 Author Share Posted July 22, 2009 So if you rate the Haynesworth pick-up an A, what's with the line in the OP about him being "a prima donna tending to do his own thing, rather than adapt to a team concept?" :whoknows:Hail. He is soooooo good ... he is entitled to be a little bit primma donnish ... but I'mholding my breath. Hail! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IbleedBnG83 Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 IMO Sanchez way more productive than JC. Do you mean he WOULD be more productive than JC? You are basing this on pure gut feeling and not reasoning. You really don't want the team run that way do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregpeck99 Posted July 22, 2009 Author Share Posted July 22, 2009 Eli is not an arguing piece that guy is terribly overated he has the worst mechanics of any qb I have ever had to watch and this year without plaxico that will be magnified...I would argue that Eli was so good because of a strong running game to be honest... I guess its "who comes first" the QB or the RB ... each to his own. All I know is that with JC ... Portis stinks ... and vice versa. Let's move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soup Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 This guy is just a MSF clone. Can't get anyone to chat with him unless he bashes the team and we are all just falling for it. won't be surprised if its Major Harris again, But its the offseason so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregpeck99 Posted July 22, 2009 Author Share Posted July 22, 2009 Do you mean he WOULD be more productive than JC? You are basing this on pure gut feeling and not reasoning. You really don't want the team run that way do you? I have no confidence in JC ... IMO he is limited and a journeyman ... he has had 4 years to prove himself ... he didn't ... had his shot ... time to move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InsaneBoost Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Wait wait I think I got it, this is another one of those joke threads. Harris behind of this again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehogs Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Reword some stuff and chunks of it could have been posted last season! one thing, if JC doesnt take a significant step forward this year he is gone. Team jerseys is the least of our worries. If thats in the top 5 concerns then things cant be quite as bad as presented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IbleedBnG83 Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 I have no confidence in JC ... IMO he is limited and a journeyman ... he has had 4 years to prove himself ... he didn't ... had his shot ... time to move on. Well thats your opinion. IMO, this will be truly be the first year has has all the pieces in place. The FO set him up for failure. He was investment and I wouldn't want to jump ship just yet. This is do or die. Dumping him this year wouldn't have made much of a difference IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HRNY4ZRNY Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Portis stinks? Man this is just absurd... You want Sanchez? To get him you would of had to trade up. Which means giving up Orakpo at 13, Barnes in the third and possibly a 7th. To get a rookie QB that "could" be better than JC. But lets be honest, no one thinks Sanchez is going to be elite. So why not get Orakpo, Barnes, keep your picks, let Jason play the last year of his contract out and if he doesnt play well drat a QB next year or let Colt play. To give an F for not getting Cutler makes me realize you are not thinking clearly or just not thinking. The Bears had to give up a QB and two 1st round picks to get him. Which means we would have had to give up Jason Campbell (which you would be happy about anyway), Orakpo (our 13th pick), next years 1st rounder and possibly something else because you would have to give more than the Bears. Then we would have Cutler. And when he is not as productive as he was in Denver you would blame CP or Moss or Randle El or Offensive Line. No offense but you make Vinny look like a genius. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rd421 Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 I guess its "who comes first" the QB or the RB ... each to his own. All I know is that with JC ... Portis stinks ... and vice versa. Let's move on. I would not say portis stinks....he was an MVP candidate for most of the season ...However I agree that Campbell has to be better MUCH better if we want to win and I think that even the JC diehards can agree that we need better qb play... I know this so far JC has said he understands this and he has done all the correct things this offseason he has started to show somoe really good leadership traits and I hope this translates to the field I will give you one reason for hope Drew Brees was not very good his first few years and now look at him QBs develope at there own pace and last year JC set records for no Ints and showed progress this season is definately it though give him this chance if he fails time to move on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MustangSteve Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 I think our uniforms are the best in the league, leave em alone. As far as our offense stinking, nobody has any proof that your wrong there. All we can do is hope that JC will step up and attack defenses instead of that dink and dump garbage. Most likely our defense will take another step up, get more turn-overs and that should help our offense even more with good field possession. If JC and this offense steps up, this team can win the division. If this offense hasn't changed anything from last season, we are in for a long season. Not only will we see if JC is the future of this team, but we will also see if Jim Zorn belongs coaching in this league. A good coach would see and fix these problems in the offseason, after all this is a playoff team that Jim Zorn was given. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregpeck99 Posted July 22, 2009 Author Share Posted July 22, 2009 Do you mean he WOULD be more productive than JC? You are basing this on pure gut feeling and not reasoning. Basing it on my observation that Sanchez has much better field vision and footwork than JC ... and is more ideally suited for WCO. We shall see if Sanchez becomes a star for the Jets ... or if JC has a breakout season for the Skins ... this will be a fascinating year indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoosandskinsMUSTwin Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 The OP makes valid points, well everything except the uniform crap, and truth be told I have serious concerns about each one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.