NationStates

Idzequitch wrote:I find it funny, the people who seem to think Brown's behavior is some sort of huge problem. Look, yes, the FB Live thing was ill-advised. But other than that, I mostly just see a guy who likes to have fun, doing his best to have fun, despite the league mandate that no fun should ever be had.

Seriously, do you a remember the likes of Terrell Owens and Chad Johnson/Ochocinco? Brown's "distractions" are literally nothing compared to those two. Even compared to Dez Bryant or Odell Beckham's issues, I'd far rather have Brown's. And the guy is, honestly, the best WR in football right now. If that kind of talent is accompanied by a few minor shenanigans, I'll take that every day of the week, and twice on Sundays.

Remember Johnny Manziel?

Antonio Brown is a competent enough player that it's worth it to deal with his off the field problems (complaining about not getting thrown a touchdown pass, livestreaming the coach meeting)

GreatestBanks wrote:

Idzequitch wrote:I find it funny, the people who seem to think Brown's behavior is some sort of huge problem. Look, yes, the FB Live thing was ill-advised. But other than that, I mostly just see a guy who likes to have fun, doing his best to have fun, despite the league mandate that no fun should ever be had.

Seriously, do you a remember the likes of Terrell Owens and Chad Johnson/Ochocinco? Brown's "distractions" are literally nothing compared to those two. Even compared to Dez Bryant or Odell Beckham's issues, I'd far rather have Brown's. And the guy is, honestly, the best WR in football right now. If that kind of talent is accompanied by a few minor shenanigans, I'll take that every day of the week, and twice on Sundays.

Remember Johnny Manziel?

Antonio Brown is a competent enough player that it's worth it to deal with his off the field problems (complaining about not getting thrown a touchdown pass, livestreaming the coach meeting)

DON'T BRING UP JOHNNY!

GreatestBanks wrote:

Idzequitch wrote:I find it funny, the people who seem to think Brown's behavior is some sort of huge problem. Look, yes, the FB Live thing was ill-advised. But other than that, I mostly just see a guy who likes to have fun, doing his best to have fun, despite the league mandate that no fun should ever be had.

Seriously, do you a remember the likes of Terrell Owens and Chad Johnson/Ochocinco? Brown's "distractions" are literally nothing compared to those two. Even compared to Dez Bryant or Odell Beckham's issues, I'd far rather have Brown's. And the guy is, honestly, the best WR in football right now. If that kind of talent is accompanied by a few minor shenanigans, I'll take that every day of the week, and twice on Sundays.

Remember Johnny Manziel?

Antonio Brown is a competent enough player that it's worth it to deal with his off the field problems (complaining about not getting thrown a touchdown pass, livestreaming the coach meeting)

Those are frivolous things. Manziel's cases are much more serious than complaining about not getting enough targets. If a star running back doesn't get enough carries and the team loses, you do not deviate from gameplan.

Tenburg wrote:

Trollgaard wrote:
I want the browns to just ditch the quarterback in a traditional sense and just run the ball. But get smart about and build the team to that end. No wide recievers, or qbs, just lineman, all kinds of half backs, full backs, running backs, and some tight ends. It would be glorious.

Nine linemen, a running back and a tight end to block

Essentially that.

And on occasion...11 lineman. All moving up in formation. Try taking them all down, lol.

Idzequitch wrote:I find it funny, the people who seem to think Brown's behavior is some sort of huge problem. Look, yes, the FB Live thing was ill-advised. But other than that, I mostly just see a guy who likes to have fun, doing his best to have fun, despite the league mandate that no fun should ever be had.

Seriously, do you a remember the likes of Terrell Owens and Chad Johnson/Ochocinco? Brown's "distractions" are literally nothing compared to those two. Even compared to Dez Bryant or Odell Beckham's issues, I'd far rather have Brown's. And the guy is, honestly, the best WR in football right now. If that kind of talent is accompanied by a few minor shenanigans, I'll take that every day of the week, and twice on Sundays.

It really is quite silly, how much they blew it up. He's not breaking the law, he's not hurting his girlfriend, he's not doing drugs, he was being silly with a teammate. He's a goober. Considering how much worse he COULD be, I'd consider it a non-issue. And while this issue has been beaten to death, it's certainly telling how much more people care that he was on FB, after a game, than they do about Josh Brown pounding his wife.

New Serrland wrote:

GreatestBanks wrote:Speaking of trades, Jimmy Garoppolo, one of the bigger stories of this offseason.

As we all have heard by now, he played in 1 and 1/2 games and was injured against the Miami Dolphins. He's thrown 90-something passes with no interceptions.

Rumors range from obtaining a 1st round pick for him to 3rd or 2nd rounders. Is he worth that much? How much is Garoppolo worth?

Imo, he has a good chance of being the product of the "Patriot Way." He may just be good due to the system that he has been placed in. In his two games, he was surrounded by a legendary coach, great system, and great players.

Belichick would only trade up in value. I don't think the Patriots will let go of Jimmy if he is truly a franchise quarterback.

At his age Brady is only an injury away from his career being over. I can't see Bill trading Jimmy G.

I think it would be fair for there to be concern about this being a Matt Cassel v2.0 situation too - a product of a system.

I think Jimmy will be a Pat come the start of the season.

And this coming from a born and raised Bears fan (one of the teams often talked about as a destination for Garoppolo)

The Pats have made it pretty clear that he's up for a trade if my info is correct tho.

GreatestBanks wrote:

Idzequitch wrote:I find it funny, the people who seem to think Brown's behavior is some sort of huge problem. Look, yes, the FB Live thing was ill-advised. But other than that, I mostly just see a guy who likes to have fun, doing his best to have fun, despite the league mandate that no fun should ever be had.

Seriously, do you a remember the likes of Terrell Owens and Chad Johnson/Ochocinco? Brown's "distractions" are literally nothing compared to those two. Even compared to Dez Bryant or Odell Beckham's issues, I'd far rather have Brown's. And the guy is, honestly, the best WR in football right now. If that kind of talent is accompanied by a few minor shenanigans, I'll take that every day of the week, and twice on Sundays.

Remember Johnny Manziel?

Antonio Brown is a competent enough player that it's worth it to deal with his off the field problems (complaining about not getting thrown a touchdown pass, livestreaming the coach meeting)

Money Manziel had charges for domestic assault, beating his girlfriend to the point that she lost hearing in one ear. He skipped a game (while concussed) to party in Vegas and had identified himself as Billy. He was reportedly showing up to practice drunk.

AB sleeps around, but that's just about it as far as I know.

Luminesa wrote:

Idzequitch wrote:I find it funny, the people who seem to think Brown's behavior is some sort of huge problem. Look, yes, the FB Live thing was ill-advised. But other than that, I mostly just see a guy who likes to have fun, doing his best to have fun, despite the league mandate that no fun should ever be had.

Seriously, do you a remember the likes of Terrell Owens and Chad Johnson/Ochocinco? Brown's "distractions" are literally nothing compared to those two. Even compared to Dez Bryant or Odell Beckham's issues, I'd far rather have Brown's. And the guy is, honestly, the best WR in football right now. If that kind of talent is accompanied by a few minor shenanigans, I'll take that every day of the week, and twice on Sundays.

It really is quite silly, how much they blew it up. He's not breaking the law, he's not hurting his girlfriend, he's not doing drugs, he was being silly with a teammate. He's a goober. Considering how much worse he COULD be, I'd consider it a non-issue. And while this issue has been beaten to death, it's certainly telling how much more people care that he was on FB, after a game, than they do about Josh Brown pounding his wife.

My thoughts exactly.

Give Brown a break.

Alright, I was going through the Internet and I saw a couple of images I couldn't resist sharing. Call it little friendly teasing.

First up, the New England Patriots, the 2016 NFL Champions of the World (or just American Football )



And here's the 2016 AFC Championship summed up...



And then we've got this little gem...



And, of course, the Atlanta Falcons' collapse in the Super Bowl memorialized in this image...



This pretty much sums up the Steelers' gung-ho attitude.



And finally, here's a little friendly exchange between two AFC North rivals...



...though in all actuality the Bengals are more like this...



...so I don't know why I'm talking crap.

Welp, NFL schedules for 2017 are out:
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/2017- ... e-of-doom/

Unsurprisingly, the four AFC West teams have the hardest schedule. At the bottom are the Steelers&Vikings tied for 5th easiest, Bengals, Jaguars, Titans, and Colts.

Super Bowl champions the Patriots are 12th on the list, with Atlanta right behind them at 13th.

While this list is mostly helpful, idk about putting too much belief into this. For instance, in 2016 Atlanta was supposed to have the league's most difficult schedule, however, their opponents turned out to be much worse than expected. In the end, Atlanta ended up having the 8th easiest schedule.

So, does this matter?

Kinda. 4/5 teams with the easiest schedules (Packers, Lions, Giants, Cowboys) all made the playoffs.

Your thoughts NSG?

GreatestBanks wrote:Welp, NFL schedules for 2017 are out:
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/2017- ... e-of-doom/

Unsurprisingly, the four AFC West teams have the hardest schedule. At the bottom are the Steelers&Vikings tied for 5th easiest, Bengals, Jaguars, Titans, and Colts.

Super Bowl champions the Patriots are 12th on the list, with Atlanta right behind them at 13th.

While this list is mostly helpful, idk about putting too much belief into this. For instance, in 2016 Atlanta was supposed to have the league's most difficult schedule, however, their opponents turned out to be much worse than expected. In the end, Atlanta ended up having the 8th easiest schedule.

So, does this matter?

Kinda. 4/5 teams with the easiest schedules (Packers, Lions, Giants, Cowboys) all made the playoffs.

Your thoughts NSG?

Saints always have a middle-of-the-road schedule. Just gotta roll with it this year, see if we can finally get above .500 again.

Luminesa wrote:

GreatestBanks wrote:Welp, NFL schedules for 2017 are out:
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/2017- ... e-of-doom/

Unsurprisingly, the four AFC West teams have the hardest schedule. At the bottom are the Steelers&Vikings tied for 5th easiest, Bengals, Jaguars, Titans, and Colts.

Super Bowl champions the Patriots are 12th on the list, with Atlanta right behind them at 13th.

While this list is mostly helpful, idk about putting too much belief into this. For instance, in 2016 Atlanta was supposed to have the league's most difficult schedule, however, their opponents turned out to be much worse than expected. In the end, Atlanta ended up having the 8th easiest schedule.

So, does this matter?

Kinda. 4/5 teams with the easiest schedules (Packers, Lions, Giants, Cowboys) all made the playoffs.

Your thoughts NSG?

Saints always have a middle-of-the-road schedule. Just gotta roll with it this year, see if we can finally get above .500 again.

Brees still has some time left. The NFC South will be an all out brawl for the 2017 season.

GreatestBanks wrote:

Luminesa wrote:Saints always have a middle-of-the-road schedule. Just gotta roll with it this year, see if we can finally get above .500 again.

Brees still has some time left. The NFC South will be an all out brawl for the 2017 season.

Falcons are gonna have a Super Bowl hangover, too. Heheheh...TIME TO TAKE BACK THE CROWN.

GreatestBanks wrote:Welp, NFL schedules for 2017 are out:
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/2017- ... e-of-doom/

Unsurprisingly, the four AFC West teams have the hardest schedule. At the bottom are the Steelers&Vikings tied for 5th easiest, Bengals, Jaguars, Titans, and Colts.

Super Bowl champions the Patriots are 12th on the list, with Atlanta right behind them at 13th.

While this list is mostly helpful, idk about putting too much belief into this. For instance, in 2016 Atlanta was supposed to have the league's most difficult schedule, however, their opponents turned out to be much worse than expected. In the end, Atlanta ended up having the 8th easiest schedule.

So, does this matter?

Kinda. 4/5 teams with the easiest schedules (Packers, Lions, Giants, Cowboys) all made the playoffs.

Your thoughts NSG?

Let's see...
AFC South will be better this year. So the Colts really don't have that easy of a schedule. They'll go .500 again, just wait. They're always over hyped, and they aren't sweeping a much better team in the Titans again.

Broncos won't collapse. That defense is still rock solid, even if it's not going to be it's 2015 self ever again, and if they get Romo, holy hell they'll be scary assuming he doesn't get injured (and then Lynch will pull a Prescott maybe. XD)

Luminesa wrote:

GreatestBanks wrote:Brees still has some time left. The NFC South will be an all out brawl for the 2017 season.

Falcons are gonna have a Super Bowl hangover, too. Heheheh...TIME TO TAKE BACK THE CROWN.

Sorry. I need Jameis to defy my predictions and go to Super Bowl 52 against the Titans, because we all know how Jameis v Mariota goes.

GreatestBanks wrote:Welp, NFL schedules for 2017 are out:
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/2017- ... e-of-doom/

Unsurprisingly, the four AFC West teams have the hardest schedule. At the bottom are the Steelers&Vikings tied for 5th easiest, Bengals, Jaguars, Titans, and Colts.

Super Bowl champions the Patriots are 12th on the list, with Atlanta right behind them at 13th.

While this list is mostly helpful, idk about putting too much belief into this. For instance, in 2016 Atlanta was supposed to have the league's most difficult schedule, however, their opponents turned out to be much worse than expected. In the end, Atlanta ended up having the 8th easiest schedule.

So, does this matter?

Kinda. 4/5 teams with the easiest schedules (Packers, Lions, Giants, Cowboys) all made the playoffs.

Your thoughts NSG?

One thing that's slightly misleading about these lists is that each team plays 6/16 games against division opponents. So if their division was weak last season, (notice how well represented the AFC South is in the easy column) they'll be lower on the list. Because more than 1/3 of their games come against division opponents every season.

Also, you make a fair point that some "tough" teams will regress this year, and some "weak" teams will be tougher than expected. So long story short, I don't put a lot of stock in lists like this one.

People sleeping on the Colts will just give us more wins, not that we need them

Ranoria wrote:

GreatestBanks wrote:Welp, NFL schedules for 2017 are out:
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/2017- ... e-of-doom/

Unsurprisingly, the four AFC West teams have the hardest schedule. At the bottom are the Steelers&Vikings tied for 5th easiest, Bengals, Jaguars, Titans, and Colts.

Super Bowl champions the Patriots are 12th on the list, with Atlanta right behind them at 13th.

While this list is mostly helpful, idk about putting too much belief into this. For instance, in 2016 Atlanta was supposed to have the league's most difficult schedule, however, their opponents turned out to be much worse than expected. In the end, Atlanta ended up having the 8th easiest schedule.

So, does this matter?

Kinda. 4/5 teams with the easiest schedules (Packers, Lions, Giants, Cowboys) all made the playoffs.

Your thoughts NSG?

Let's see...
AFC South will be better this year. So the Colts really don't have that easy of a schedule. They'll go .500 again, just wait. They're always over hyped, and they aren't sweeping a much better team in the Titans again.

Broncos won't collapse. That defense is still rock solid, even if it's not going to be it's 2015 self ever again, and if they get Romo, holy hell they'll be scary assuming he doesn't get injured (and then Lynch will pull a Prescott maybe. XD)

Luminesa wrote:Falcons are gonna have a Super Bowl hangover, too. Heheheh...TIME TO TAKE BACK THE CROWN.

Sorry. I need Jameis to defy my predictions and go to Super Bowl 52 against the Titans, because we all know how Jameis v Mariota goes.

Romo has, at most, two or three years left in him. Plus, he's injury prone. Is he worth what will likely be a lot of money? Probably not.

Yes, Mariota is coming back for the 2017-2018 season fully healthy. Is he going to win a Super Bowl? I don't know. Can he win AFC South or obtain a wildcard playoff berth? There's a chance. This is AFC South after all, a division won by a 9-7 team with a very bad quarterback. Though they'll likely need to pick up some weapons in the offseason.

GreatestBanks wrote:

Ranoria wrote:Let's see...
AFC South will be better this year. So the Colts really don't have that easy of a schedule. They'll go .500 again, just wait. They're always over hyped, and they aren't sweeping a much better team in the Titans again.

Broncos won't collapse. That defense is still rock solid, even if it's not going to be it's 2015 self ever again, and if they get Romo, holy hell they'll be scary assuming he doesn't get injured (and then Lynch will pull a Prescott maybe. XD)


Sorry. I need Jameis to defy my predictions and go to Super Bowl 52 against the Titans, because we all know how Jameis v Mariota goes.

Romo has, at most, two or three years left in him. Plus, he's injury prone. Is he worth what will likely be a lot of money? Probably not.

Yes, Mariota is coming back for the 2017-2018 season fully healthy. Is he going to win a Super Bowl? I don't know. Can he win AFC South or obtain a wildcard playoff berth? There's a chance. This is AFC South after all, a division won by a 9-7 team with a very bad quarterback. Though they'll likely need to pick up some weapons in the offseason.

Titans will win the AFC South next year unless Romo comes into Houston (which he won't, Brock is eating way too much of the cap), and stays healthy. Mariota found his stride after a slow start, and if we can get a good corner (sorry Jason McCourty) and a #1 WR, that team will be scary. Demarco and Mariota are a solid duo. Rishard Matthews would make an above average #2 receiver. Delanie Walker is a stud. But we need to pick up a legit receiver.

Ranoria wrote:

GreatestBanks wrote:Romo has, at most, two or three years left in him. Plus, he's injury prone. Is he worth what will likely be a lot of money? Probably not.

Yes, Mariota is coming back for the 2017-2018 season fully healthy. Is he going to win a Super Bowl? I don't know. Can he win AFC South or obtain a wildcard playoff berth? There's a chance. This is AFC South after all, a division won by a 9-7 team with a very bad quarterback. Though they'll likely need to pick up some weapons in the offseason.

Titans will win the AFC South next year unless Romo comes into Houston (which he won't, Brock is eating way too much of the cap), and stays healthy. Mariota found his stride after a slow start, and if we can get a good corner (sorry Jason McCourty) and a #1 WR, that team will be scary. Demarco and Mariota are a solid duo. Rishard Matthews would make an above average #2 receiver. Delanie Walker is a stud. But we need to pick up a legit receiver.

Tennesee does not even have a chance unlike Alanta and Houston

Lisianski wrote:

Ranoria wrote:Titans will win the AFC South next year unless Romo comes into Houston (which he won't, Brock is eating way too much of the cap), and stays healthy. Mariota found his stride after a slow start, and if we can get a good corner (sorry Jason McCourty) and a #1 WR, that team will be scary. Demarco and Mariota are a solid duo. Rishard Matthews would make an above average #2 receiver. Delanie Walker is a stud. But we need to pick up a legit receiver.

Tennesee does not even have a chance unlike Alanta and Houston

Tennessee just missed the playoffs this year. I do think Ran is a bit overenthusiastic about their chances next season, but to sleep on them would probably be a mistake.

Luminesa wrote:

GreatestBanks wrote:Brees still has some time left. The NFC South will be an all out brawl for the 2017 season.

Falcons are gonna have a Super Bowl hangover, too. Heheheh...TIME TO TAKE BACK THE CROWN.

If Drew Brees has a magical year and the defense is decent, then maybe. But the Falcons still have Julio and Matty Ice.

Lisianski wrote:

Ranoria wrote:Titans will win the AFC South next year unless Romo comes into Houston (which he won't, Brock is eating way too much of the cap), and stays healthy. Mariota found his stride after a slow start, and if we can get a good corner (sorry Jason McCourty) and a #1 WR, that team will be scary. Demarco and Mariota are a solid duo. Rishard Matthews would make an above average #2 receiver. Delanie Walker is a stud. But we need to pick up a legit receiver.

Tennesee does not even have a chance unlike Alanta and Houston

Just wait til we have a secondary and Houston has Brock. Not that I'd mind if they won a super bowl. JJ Watt deserves a ring or three.

Idzequitch wrote:

Lisianski wrote:Tennesee does not even have a chance unlike Alanta and Houston

Tennessee just missed the playoffs this year. I do think Ran is a bit overenthusiastic about their chances next season, but to sleep on them would probably be a mistake.

I completely agree with this, just so everyone knows.

As a Chiefs fan I'm worried about our offseason...we could be losing some stars. I think we HAVE to keep Eric Berry, even if that means Dontari Poe goes. Eric Berry is one of, if not the best safety in the league.

I've read a lot of repeated articles saying that there is interest in Romo coming to KC...I don't really see how that's doable, and we would have to make some crazy moves to improve the O line so he doesn't break bones...but man...that is an intriguing possibility. I not necessarily think it is a good option, or a doable option...but still intriguing as if Romo still has his arm...that would be a hell of sight seeing him unloading to Tyreek Hill downfield...

Trollgaard wrote:As a Chiefs fan I'm worried about our offseason...we could be losing some stars. I think we HAVE to keep Eric Berry, even if that means Dontari Poe goes. Eric Berry is one of, if not the best safety in the league.

I've read a lot of repeated articles saying that there is interest in Romo coming to KC...I don't really see how that's doable, and we would have to make some crazy moves to improve the O line so he doesn't break bones...but man...that is an intriguing possibility. I not necessarily think it is a good option, or a doable option...but still intriguing as if Romo still has his arm...that would be a hell of sight seeing him unloading to Tyreek Hill downfield...

Romo to KC doesn't make any sense to me. He's not that big an upgrade over Alex Smith. Denver seems like the best landing spot for him in my opinion. Texans too, but with what they're paying Osweiler, that may not be doable. It would be funny seeing him somewhere like the Jets though.

Idzequitch wrote:

Trollgaard wrote:As a Chiefs fan I'm worried about our offseason...we could be losing some stars. I think we HAVE to keep Eric Berry, even if that means Dontari Poe goes. Eric Berry is one of, if not the best safety in the league.

I've read a lot of repeated articles saying that there is interest in Romo coming to KC...I don't really see how that's doable, and we would have to make some crazy moves to improve the O line so he doesn't break bones...but man...that is an intriguing possibility. I not necessarily think it is a good option, or a doable option...but still intriguing as if Romo still has his arm...that would be a hell of sight seeing him unloading to Tyreek Hill downfield...

Romo to KC doesn't make any sense to me. He's not that big an upgrade over Alex Smith. Denver seems like the best landing spot for him in my opinion. Texans too, but with what they're paying Osweiler, that may not be doable. It would be funny seeing him somewhere like the Jets though.

It doesn't to me either, and perhaps i'm just dreaming of having games like Romo's shootout with Manning in...2015? It was like 52-49 with the Broncos winning, but still. I don't think it'll happen, as it seems that the Chiefs are behind Alex Smith, who I don't mind, but I find the offense frustrating with its lack of consistency.

Oh, and I'm glad the Chiefs have a 'hard' schedule, should provide some good games and prove if they have what it takes...or if big changes will be needed.

Trollgaard wrote:As a Chiefs fan I'm worried about our offseason...we could be losing some stars. I think we HAVE to keep Eric Berry, even if that means Dontari Poe goes. Eric Berry is one of, if not the best safety in the league.

I've read a lot of repeated articles saying that there is interest in Romo coming to KC...I don't really see how that's doable, and we would have to make some crazy moves to improve the O line so he doesn't break bones...but man...that is an intriguing possibility. I not necessarily think it is a good option, or a doable option...but still intriguing as if Romo still has his arm...that would be a hell of sight seeing him unloading to Tyreek Hill downfield...

You'll keep Berry. Poe is a stud, but his loss wouldn't be the end of the world, and I think they could keep both of them.

Trollgaard wrote:

Idzequitch wrote:Romo to KC doesn't make any sense to me. He's not that big an upgrade over Alex Smith. Denver seems like the best landing spot for him in my opinion. Texans too, but with what they're paying Osweiler, that may not be doable. It would be funny seeing him somewhere like the Jets though.

It doesn't to me either, and perhaps i'm just dreaming of having games like Romo's shootout with Manning in...2015? It was like 52-49 with the Broncos winning, but still. I don't think it'll happen, as it seems that the Chiefs are behind Alex Smith, who I don't mind, but I find the offense frustrating with its lack of consistency.

Oh, and I'm glad the Chiefs have a 'hard' schedule, should provide some good games and prove if they have what it takes...or if big changes will be needed.

I think Alex Smith is a much better QB than he gets credit for. KC's biggest need is to keep its best players healthy, because they always have 2+ absolute beasts off the field. (Allen Bailey, Derrick Johnson, Justin freaking Houston, Tamba Hali, Jamaal Charles(who needs to be done with, btw)