Mike McCoy

[Mister Hoarse]

wow. You're old

I was much younger in that picture

[Stinky Wizzleteats+]

Its a hat rack. We have the number 1 this or that, its the stuff you like to think about going into a game. Its all new so those with hats are bitching they have nothing to hang there hats on.

I say this to you, hat firmly in hand, weight for it.

That is all.

[RobH]

Ranking units sounds like something that would happen on the Howard Stern show. Bababooey.

Better than having a rank unit. Now that deserves a big eeewww!

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

SIGH....

In 2010, we had arguably the worst special teams in NFL history that cost us anywhere from 3-5 wins. It wasn't the fault of either the highly ranked offense or the highly ranked defense.

In 2011, the defense was the worst at getting off the field on third downs since the 1995 Browns and we still would have made the playoffs if Novak could have made his FG attempts against the Broncos instead of peeing on the sidelines. It was not the fault of the top 5 scoring offense.

In 2012, we had the #31 ranked offense. Our failures last year were not the fault of the #9 ranked defense.

And you usually don't get wins by having crappy units. If you think there is no correlation at all between unit ranks and record, I think you are mistaken as yards lead to points, which lead to wins. So having a good unit in terms of yards and points is usually a good thing.

Take a step back and look at what you just wrote. The team has teetered back and forth between crap ST, crap O and crap D. As I have stated several times (and you have disagreed with me, which is your prerogative), it seems to me that Telesco was trying this offseason to strike something of a balance. We knew we had nascent young talent on the defensive side of the ball in the form of Liuget, Reyes, Butler, Weddle, etc. We also knew we had some older guys that probably weren't going to be around for the team's return to prominence. On the other side of the ball, we had a putrid offensive line that reduced our #1 asset and biggest contributor to potential wins (Philip Rivers) to a shell of his former self. I think TT reallocated resources from the one side of the ball to the other, not with the intent of diminishing the defense but with the idea of making the team more balanced overall.

I know that you don't believe the financial resources / constraints point of view but it seems clear to me the way we approached the offseason that there were either real or artificial constraints that we were operating under. We don't know what those might have been, but they could have ranged from Spanos limiting Telesco's spending until he got out from under Gaither/Meachem or it could have been that, strategically, they made the decision to not invest in older, declining players since the overall objective was to get younger and prime for another multi-year run. I would anticipate a "Yeah but..." at this point, meaning Freeney. But I don't think Freeney would have been signed had they not been confronted with the Ingram injury. They simply couldn't go into the year without a pass rusher that (actually or even just reputation-ally) forced opponents to scheme against. Argue the Barnes/Phillips stuff all you want (maybe Telesco made a mistake...maybe he would even confess to it in light of Ingram's injury). But he did what he had to do and persuaded Spanos to go along with him.

We'll have another offseason next year where, hopefully, we have a better handle on the young defenders and can add another major piece on the OL and fill in some of the depth on D. Insofar as that's the plan, I think it makes sense. Of course, I could be wrong. But that's what it looks like to me and I support the approach. There's a method to the madness.

[Beerman]

Take a step back and look at what you just wrote. The team has teetered back and forth between crap ST, crap O and crap D. As I have stated several times (and you have disagreed with me, which is your prerogative), it seems to me that Telesco was trying this offseason to strike something of a balance. We knew we had nascent young talent on the defensive side of the ball in the form of Liuget, Reyes, Butler, Weddle, etc. We also knew we had some older guys that probably weren't going to be around for the team's return to prominence. On the other side of the ball, we had a putrid offensive line that reduced our #1 asset and biggest contributor to potential wins (Philip Rivers) to a shell of his former self. I think TT reallocated resources from the one side of the ball to the other, not with the intent of diminishing the defense but with the idea of making the team more balanced overall.

I know that you don't believe the financial resources / constraints point of view but it seems clear to me the way we approached the offseason that there were either real or artificial constraints that we were operating under. We don't know what those might have been, but they could have ranged from Spanos limiting Telesco's spending until he got out from under Gaither/Meachem or it could have been that, strategically, they made the decision to not invest in older, declining players since the overall objective was to get younger and prime for another multi-year run. I would anticipate a "Yeah but..." at this point, meaning Freeney. But I don't think Freeney would have been signed had they not been confronted with the Ingram injury. They simply couldn't go into the year without a pass rusher that (actually or even just reputation-ally) forced opponents to scheme against. Argue the Barnes/Phillips stuff all you want (maybe Telesco made a mistake...maybe he would even confess to it in light of Ingram's injury). But he did what he had to do and persuaded Spanos to go along with him.

We'll have another offseason next year where, hopefully, we have a better handle on the young defenders and can add another major piece on the OL and fill in some of the depth on D. Insofar as that's the plan, I think it makes sense. Of course, I could be wrong. But that's what it looks like to me and I support the approach. There's a method to the madness.

That's pretty much how I see it as well.

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

That's pretty much how I see it as well.

Probably should have written piece or two for the OL. But of course, there's only so much that can be done. Best case scenario is that Rinehart continues to play well that that Clary either establishes himself as a top-flight OG or we divorce ourselves from him and his cap number completely as Troutman emerges (porkchops notwithstanding). Then we'd be in position to draft a LT to replace Dunlap. Hardwick is of course another kettle of fish. Maybe we can milk another year out of him?

[Beerman]

Probably should have written piece or two for the OL. But of course, there's only so much that can be done. Best case scenario is that Rinehart continues to play well that that Clary either establishes himself as a top-flight OG or we divorce ourselves from him and his cap number completely as Troutman emerges (porkchops notwithstanding). Then we'd be in position to draft a LT to replace Dunlap. Hardwick is of course another kettle of fish. Maybe we can milk another year out of him?

We will have 2 1st round OT's and then he's going to make do with whatever else he can find IMO. I don't see him investing high round picks into the interior line. 3rd and 4th rounders or vet FA's. As long as we have 2 stud OT's, I'm fine with that. Maybe a 2nd rounder on a C.

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

If we really do spend a #1 on a tackle again, then I cannot see spending a #2 on a C. Agree with you on interior line. We have got to get more difference makers and more depth on defense. And unless Brown and Allen really emerge, we're going to need more there. Not seeing a #2 on a WR necessarily, but I'd do that before investing the top two picks on OL. Right now, I'm sort of thinking LT and DB or LB/pass rush.

[thelightningwill]

If we really do spend a #1 on a tackle again, then I cannot see spending a #2 on a C. We have got to get more difference makers and more depth on defense. And unless Brown and Allen really emerge, we're going to need more there. Not seeing a #2 on a WR necessarily, but I'd do that before investing the top two picks on OL. Right now, I'm sort of thinking LT and DB or LB.

Best players available

[Beerman]

If we really do spend a #1 on a tackle again, then I cannot see spending a #2 on a C. Agree with you on interior line. We have got to get more difference makers and more depth on defense. And unless Brown and Allen really emerge, we're going to need more there. Not seeing a #2 on a WR necessarily, but I'd do that before investing the top two picks on OL. Right now, I'm sort of thinking LT and DB or LB/pass rush.

I kinda agree that it likely doesn't happen in the same draft class. There may be a player too good to pass up though and he may be able to play at OG for a season till Hardwick retires.

I think we have to invest in a DB in some form. We have got to improve the talent level on the backend.

[Beerman]

Best players available

:beer:

[Panamamike]

Best players available

According to who? We definitely need pass rush and help in the secondary. Interior line I do not see using anything higher than a fourth, and likely not even that high.