I'd be fine taking Clay's money and putting it toward getting the best CB on the market.
Grave Digger posted:I'm not arguing about it, I'm curious about everyone's position. So you think it's more prestigious or better in some way to lose in the SB than it is to lose in the conference championship? I'm of the opinion that losing in the playoffs is losing no matter where it is. I guess winning the conference championship is a little more gratifying, but not much more gratifying than knocking off two teams we weren't supposed to beat (NYG and DAL).
So the Lions had as good as season as the loser of the SuperBowl this year.
Copy.
I don't see Clay even taking a paycut this offseason
No need to touch Clay's contract, take Shield's $12.125mm and the $10.5mm no longer going to Peppers and buy whatever you want.
Grave Digger posted:I don't like "playing the contrarian", I just don't always agree with the 50 Drunks on X4 opinion. It's just interesting to me that some feel the season is somehow more successful because you made it to the SB than if you lost in the playoffs. The original point was that Belichick went a decade without a SB win, including two SB losses, 3 conference championship losses, 2 division round losses, 1 wildcard loss, and missed the playoffs once, but people seem to feel it was a successful stretch because he simply appeared in two SBs. This isn't to say Belichick wasn't successful, I think it was a highly successful stretch as he had his team in contention every year, but it's just hard to win a SB. McCarthy gets dogged out though because it's been 6 years since a SB win including a 2 conference championship losses, 3 division round losses, and 1 wildcard loss. I think this is a successful stretch as we are in contention every year, but it's just hard to win a SB. Same logic can be applied to Thompson's methods, his team building gets criticized but the team is constantly in contention.
BB = 7 SuperBowl appearances with Patriots
BB = 7-3 in Conference Championship game
MM = 1 SuperBowl appearance.
MM = 1-3 in Conference Championship game
Not really in the same category. He would need to win 6 NFCCG in a row and go 3-2 in the SB to match the stats.
Over the same time period BB is 1-2 in the Super Bowl, 4-4 (.500) in conference championships (7-4 overall, not 7-3), 15-9 (.625) overall in the playoffs.
McCarthy is 1-0 in Super Bowls, 1-3 (.333) in conference championships, and 10-8 (.556) overall in the playoffs.
If we use BB as a benchmark for success, which we should because he's an all-time great, then McCarthy isn't doing too bad. The point is not to say McCarthy is in the same class as BB, not even close, the point is that it's hard as fuk to win a SB. Even BB loses in the playoffs consecutive years at every level.
Let's start the clock in 2006 when MM /TT began their reign of ineptitude in GB
Since 2006:
BB: ...1-2 in Super Bowls and 3- time losers in getting caught cheating...
MM / TT... 1-0 in Super Bowls
John Churn- the -Roster Schneider... 1-1 in Super Bowls
John The Horseface Elway has amassed a 1-1 record in SB's and missed the playoffs this year
Giants won (2) SBs since 2006, by beating the cheatin pats.
So its fair to say that since MM arrived in 2006, no other team has lost more Super Bowls than the Patriots. 
Overall;
the cheatin' pats are . 500 in the Super Bowl, the Packers are 4-1. If you wanna convince yourself that "appearances" are important, then tell me why nobody ever lauds the 0-4 vikes or 0-4 Bills when talking about great NFL teams. I'll tell you why, because losing the Super Bowl is the worst kind of losing and only a dickhead would wear a Super Bowl Loss as a badge of honor.
Also noted : The Pats have lost as many Super Bowls as the vikings. ( hahaha !)
Also noted: The Packers kicked BB's ass in Super Bowl 31, starting with the 2nd play of the game for the Packers offense.
packerboi posted:Peter King of The MMQB and Sports Illustrated tells Bill Michaels from Radio Row "Green Bay Packers GM Ted Thompson needs to make a bold statement this off-season and sign a cornerback, even if it's going to cost a ridiculous amount of money." - Radio Joe
===============================================================
Yup, Bill Polian agrees.
"Ted, I know it ain't my place. But I think we need to take a long look at this Micah Hyde kid. Even if it's gonna cost a ridiculous amount of money. Going out and signing a racist shows we're serious about this free adversity thing"
Dom Capers
You can't win a game you're not playing in, so I'll take the Super Bowl appearance as much more success every time.
Herschel posted:You can't win a game you're not playing in, so I'll take the Super Bowl appearance as much more success every time.
But teams that lose usually suffer the next year.
After Shields and Starks are cut the Packers will have about 43 million dollars in cap space. So they don't need to mess with any other current contracts. I figure there should be enough there to bring back whichever of their own free agents they choose to bring back and still have enough to sign a big name free agent.
I do think both Matthews and Cobb could both be cap casualties after next season if they don't have at least above-average to good seasons next year.
Satori posted:Let's start the clock in 2006 when MM /TT began their reign of ineptitude in GB
Since 2006:
BB: ...1-2 in Super Bowls and 3- time losers in getting caught cheating...
MM / TT... 1-0 in Super Bowls
John Churn- the -Roster Schneider... 1-1 in Super Bowls
John The Horseface Elway has amassed a 1-1 record in SB's and missed the playoffs this year
Giants won (2) SBs since 2006, by beating the cheatin pats.
So its fair to say that since MM arrived in 2006, no other team has lost more Super Bowls than the Patriots.
Overall;
the cheatin' pats are . 500 in the Super Bowl, the Packers are 4-1. If you wanna convince yourself that "appearances" are important, then tell me why nobody ever lauds the 0-4 vikes or 0-4 Bills when talking about great NFL teams. I'll tell you why, because losing the Super Bowl is the worst kind of losing and only a dickhead would wear a Super Bowl Loss as a badge of honor.
Also noted : The Pats have lost as many Super Bowls as the vikings. ( hahaha !)
Also noted: The Packers kicked BB's ass in Super Bowl 31, starting with the 2nd play of the game for the Packers offense.
I want to buy you a drink sometime.
Hope you are not allergic to roofies, Satan.
Blair Kiel posted:Satori posted:Let's start the clock in 2006 when MM /TT began their reign of ineptitude in GB
I want to buy you a drink sometime.
I have bought him a drink!
Hateful.
Can you join us?
Did he put out?
"Let's start the clock in 2006 when MM /TT began their reign of ineptitude in GB"
Maybe the greatest STFU ever.
Kworst just slit his wrists and is bleeding out---should I call someone?
Or just order room service?
your fetishes are weird
You prefer normal fetishes, Rex?
kinda
I'd put out for Rex...if dom retired and Rex got the gig.
Salary cap also going up so Cleigh ain't gettin no stinkin cut.
Satori posted:Let's start the clock in 2006 when MM /TT began their reign of ineptitude in GB
Since 2006:
John The Horseface Elway has amassed a 1-1 record in SB's and missed the playoffs this year
Don't really care for Elway or the Broncos in general but in all fairness he's only been the GM since 2011 so he's been to twice as many Super Bowls as MM/TT in half the amount of time. Plus he's never had a QB that's even in the same stratosphere as AR.
Maxi54 posted:Satori posted:Let's start the clock in 2006 when MM /TT began their reign of ineptitude in GB
Since 2006:
John The Horseface Elway has amassed a 1-1 record in SB's and missed the playoffs this year
Don't really care for Elway or the Broncos in general but in all fairness he's only been the GM since 2011 so he's been to twice as many Super Bowls as MM/TT in half the amount of time. Plus he's never had a QB that's even in the same stratosphere as AR.
Same deal as the Pats. Only a about 4 AFC teams that have a legit shot at a Bowl every year. NFC churns out about 10.
Blair Kiel posted:Did he put out?
Satan always puts out. The question is, which one of you two was the slump buster?
Goalline posted:Blair Kiel posted:Did he put out?
Satan always puts out.
You promised me you wouldn't kiss and tell.... now Kiel has expectations
And as has been the history with Kiel, expectations that won't be met.
Satori posted:Goalline posted:Blair Kiel posted:Did he put out?
Satan always puts out.
You promised me you wouldn't kiss and tell.... now Kiel has expectations
Charge him for it. He'll pay.
Packiderm posted:Maxi54 posted:Satori posted:Let's start the clock in 2006 when MM /TT began their reign of ineptitude in GB
Since 2006:
John The Horseface Elway has amassed a 1-1 record in SB's and missed the playoffs this year
Don't really care for Elway or the Broncos in general but in all fairness he's only been the GM since 2011 so he's been to twice as many Super Bowls as MM/TT in half the amount of time. Plus he's never had a QB that's even in the same stratosphere as AR.
Same deal as the Pats. Only a about 4 AFC teams that have a legit shot at a Bowl every year. NFC churns out about 10.
Yeah, I agree that the AFC seems to be top heavy every year. In head to head games the AFC holds a +15 game margin against the NFC since 2006 so there are always bottom feeders that the top teams in each conference feast on every year. From 1996 through 2010 the AFC won the head to head game count for 15 straight years and 2004 was the most lopsided year ever where the AFC was +24 games and the Pats then won the 2005 Super Bowl.
Satori posted:Goalline posted:Blair Kiel posted:Did he put out?
Satan always puts out.
You promised me you wouldn't kiss and tell.... now Kiel has expectations
Eh, all you have to do is get him drunk on Riunite.
Brady, Ben, Manning. Rinse. Repeat. Even more boring with Manning out now.
Even with a pair of 12-4 teams joining the mix in the AFC playoffs this year, you knew there were only two real possibilities.
Meanwhile in the NFC, there was a case to be made for everyone except DET. How has it stayed like that for 15 years?
When Carr snapped his leg in week 16 that was pretty much that for NEs path to Houston. Leveon Bell injury in the title game didn't hurt.
Here is Alex Smith over the weekend showing off his rocket arm in dodgeball.
I mean **** Alex.
I don't like Bill Belichick. He cheats. He looks to cut any corner to the very fringe. But he places a huge premium on his coaches. He's always looking for the best available. O'Brien, Patricia, Weiss, McDaniels, Saban, Schwartz, Ferentz. And while there's a comfort level in being a D coordinator for one of the best defensive minds ever. Romeo Crennell did turn Houston into the best NFL defense in three years and gave NE all they could handle in the divisional round with Brock Lossweiler at QB.
Which brings us to Dave DeGuglielmo and Dante Scarnecchia. Scarnecchia was offensive line coach in NE from 2000 to 2013. He retired in 2013 but stuck around in the background to help evaluate potential draft picks. He left for good prior to 2015. DeGuglielmo was brought in to coach the OL for the 2015 season.
Rushing Average went down. Sacks went up. Pressures went up. Not horrible. But things got worse.
Bill Belichick told DeGugliemo to pack his **** and beat it after one year and asked Dante to come back in 2016. Dante did. Sacks went WAY down. Rushing average went way up.
So when your watching the game Sunday just remember NE didn't sign an OL FA to fix things and it's the same line DeGulielmo royally screwed up save for rook LG Joe Thuney.
Coaching matters.
ChilliJon posted:I don't like Bill Belichick. He cheats. He looks to cut any corner to the very fringe. But he places a huge premium on his coaches. He's always looking for the best available. O'Brien, Patricia, Weiss, McDaniels, Saban, Schwartz, Ferentz.
You forgot Capers.
So by your logic the issue is position coaches and not the coordinator. So does that mean Joe Whitt should be held accountable for the CB group? People insist he's a good coach, which I believe he is, so either he screwed up this group of CBs or he has a group that just didn't execute. The reason I think it is the latter is because we have had a high level of peformance in the past from the CB group, same for players under Darren Perry and Trgo. The weak links, position coach wise, are Moss and McCurley. Neither has ever had a position group perform at a high level under their watch. ILBs under performed under Moss and McCurley, OLBs have underperformed under Moss.
Dom is ultimately responsible for the mess on defense. I think Moss sucks. McCurley isn't exactly building a solid resume. I think there is a comfort level that exists on the coaching staff overall. The only evidence I have of this is Clements sitting around doing I don't know what until his contract expired and Perry getting liquored up in Green Bay the night before another must win game in Chicago.
Philbin and McAdoo are the last two coaches on the staff to leave for elevated positions. Ben left three years ago. Who was the last defensive coach to leave? Other than Whitt is there a candidate on the defensive staff that appeals to another team? That's a problem.