#culturechanging4wins got us there. 

 

 

Oh cry me a damn river.  

 

Our team played hard, improved, and won against some sorry teams.  We overachieved to get 4 wins under Bradley's guidance.  I won't be mad at those 4 wins like some of you pathetic people.

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

Oh cry me a river.  

 

Our team played hard, improved, and won against some sorry teams.  We overachieved to get 4 wins under Bradley's guidance.  I won't be mad at those 4 wins like some of you pathetic people.

 

Agree 100%. I will never understand some people.

---

Oh cry me a damn river.


Our team played hard, improved, and won against some sorry teams. We overachieved to get 4 wins under Bradley's guidance. I won't be mad at those 4 wins like some of you pathetic people.

some people just live life like that, cry about everything. Just most of the time its a women

---

Oh cry me a damn river.  

 

Our team played hard, improved, and won against some sorry teams.  We overachieved to get 4 wins under Bradley's guidance.  I won't be mad at those 4 wins like some of you pathetic people.

 

We fundamentally disagree that 4 wins is overachievement for this roster. I think 4 wins for this roster is pretty much "meh". 6 or more wins?--That would have been overachievement, IMO. 

 

People keep forgetting how easy the schedule was in weeks 9 through 16. 

---

We fundamentally disagree that 4 wins is overachievement for this roster. I think 4 wins for this roster is pretty much "meh". 6 or more wins?--That would have been overachievement, IMO. 

 

People keep forgetting how easy the schedule was in weeks 9 through 16. 

 

Call it whatever you want, but if this team lost 15 this year... our franchise would be in a worse situation than it is now.

 

I'll explain why.  Yes, we would have higher draft picks.  But you know what?  That would also mean that Bradley UNDERACHIEVED or couldn't get the most out of what he had.  It would mean that our young players showed no growth.  It would mean that our 2013 draft class was an epic failure.

 

I wouldn't want to trade that for what we have now.  We are still in a good position, draft wise.  We have 10 picks and a coach who is absolutely a star in the making.  There is no clear #1 pick in this year's draft.  We'll get to choose between Bridgewater, Clowney, or Manziel, if we just stay put.  Splitting hairs because we pick 39th instead of 35th is what losers do.  Grow the hell up.  

 

Sucking so bad to get the #1 pick would mean that Bradley is a failure.  I'm glad he isn't (yet).  

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

Call it whatever you want, but if this team lost 15 this year... our franchise would be in a worse situation than it is now.

 

I'll explain why.  Yes, we would have higher draft picks.  But you know what?  That would also mean that Bradley UNDERACHIEVED or couldn't get the most out of what he had.  It would mean that our young players showed no growth.  It would mean that our 2013 draft class was an epic failure.

 

I wouldn't want to trade that for what we have now.  We are still in a good position, draft wise.  We have 10 picks and a coach who is absolutely a star in the making.  There is no clear #1 pick in this year's draft.  We'll get to choose between Bridgewater, Clowney, or Manziel, if we just stay put.  Splitting hairs because we pick 39th instead of 35th is what losers do.  Grow the hell up.  

 

Sucking so bad to get the #1 pick would mean that Bradley is a failure.  I'm glad he isn't (yet).  

 

Not necessarily. Did Jimmy Johnson's Cowboys suffer for going 1-15 in 1989? When you're talking the difference of going 1-15 or 4-12 , nobody cares. Its all bad records. 0-16? Yes, that might have carried a stigma. But otherwise? No. 1, 2, 3, 4 wins?? The only thing really different is the better draft slotting. 

---

Does this guy [BLEEP] every thread he posts in? Why are we arguing about our wins, a thing o the past and something that's done, in a thread about a prospect?

 

What's done is done, it's in the past, deal with it. I'd like to talk about Ford more.

---

"A man with no sauce is lost.

<p style="text-align:center;">But that same man can get lost in the sauce."

Not necessarily. 

 

You'd be the very first one to call for Caldwell and Gus' head if we went 1-15 or 0-16, so shut up.

You wouldn't give them the benefit of the doubt.  You know it.  Don't pretend like you would say "Hey, we got the 1st pick... I trust Gus and Caldwell will do the right thing"... It's not something you're programmed to do.

 

Back on topic:

 

Dee Ford will rise in the charts, but it's not smart to fall in love with a guy like that.  He has weaknesses that were evident in the last 2 years as well.  He IS undersized, he does not have elite athleticism (good, but not great) etc.  

 

He also didn't get his 2 sacks against the best tackle yesterday (Zach Martin), so you have to take his performance with a grain of salt.  I still like him at 39 or in the late 1st.  

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

We fundamentally disagree that 4 wins is overachievement for this roster. I think 4 wins for this roster is pretty much "meh". 6 or more wins?--That would have been overachievement, IMO. 

 

People keep forgetting how easy the schedule was in weeks 9 through 16. 

 

You mean 10-16. Arizona was actually good last year.

---

You'd be the very first one to call for Caldwell and Gus' head if we went 1-15 or 0-16, so shut up.

You wouldn't give them the benefit of the doubt.  You know it.  Don't pretend like you would say "Hey, we got the 1st pick... I trust Gus and Caldwell will do the right thing"... It's not something you're programmed to do.

 

Back on topic:

 

Dee Ford will rise in the charts, but it's not smart to fall in love with a guy like that.  He has weaknesses that were evident in the last 2 years as well.  He IS undersized, he does not have elite athleticism (good, but not great) etc.  

 

He also didn't get his 2 sacks against the best tackle yesterday (Zach Martin), so you have to take his performance with a grain of salt.  I still like him at 39 or in the late 1st.  

 

0-16, I wouldn't have liked, but disagree otherwise. 1-15 to 4-12 is all the same to me. 

 

As for your point about Ford....never fall in love with any non QB...and the only QB you should fall in love with are the kind of players that are going unanimously 1st overall anyway, like a Peyton Manning or Andrew Luck. 

 

Otherwise, in agreement. 

 

Ford would be a nice player to add, but don't do anything stupid like overdraft him or give up the farm in a trade up to acquire. 

---

 

 

As for your point about Ford....never fall in love with any non QB...and the only QB you should fall in love with are the kind of players that are going unanimously 1st overall anyway, like a Peyton Manning or Andrew Luck. 

. 

 

So you should have taken your own advice. You fell in love with Bridgewater and he's not unanimously going 1st overall.  Hell, he's not even the unanimous #1 QB this year.

 

I still like Bridgewater, but it appears you (and others) were wrong about him being in the Manning/Luck/Aikman category.  

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

 

Ford would be a nice player to add, but don't do anything stupid like overdraft him or give up the farm in a trade up to acquire. 

 

Agree.  There's a lot of guys I like in the top 40.  We'll get 2 of them at least.  No need to panic.  Ford isn't the only one that can rush the passer. 

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

Agree.  There's a lot of guys I like in the top 40.  We'll get 2 of them at least.  No need to panic.  Ford isn't the only one that can rush the passer. 

 

But if he is the best pass rusher available at #39, the only reason not to pick him is wanting to fix a different position first.

---

Huh?

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

So you should have taken your own advice. You fell in love with Bridgewater and he's not unanimously going 1st overall.  Hell, he's not even the unanimous #1 QB this year.

 

I still like Bridgewater, but it appears you (and others) were wrong about him being in the Manning/Luck/Aikman category.  

 

I'll agree that Bridge is not quite the Luck/ Manning (bacause of size only, not because of ability), but I still think he's got a great chance to go 1st overall. He's still easily my top QB in this draft and still top player overall. 

---

I'd love Bridgewater in the 1st Dee ford in the 2nd.

 

 

That's a dream scenario for me..

---

The biggest problem is that until the last 3 weeks (FSU game and senior bowl week), Ford was looking quite a bit like the horribly overhyped Jarvis Jones from last year. Most of both of their production came from effort/coverage sacks/scheme/etc. They don't have have a lot of tape where they straight lined up and whipped the opposing lineman. I refer to the awesome @NU_Gap once more: 

 

 

Greg Peshek ‏@<b>NU_Gap</b>Jan 20
<p style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(245,245,245);">Interesting that on every sack but one by Dee Ford, the QB was scrambling. Averaged 4.26 seconds from snap to sack which is a bit below-avg

<p style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(245,245,245);"> 

<p style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(245,245,245);"> 

<p style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(245,245,245);"> 

<p style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(245,245,245);">If it's going to take 4+ seconds for Ford to get the majority of his sacks in the NFL he's going to be a large disappointment.

---

The biggest problem is that until the last 3 weeks (FSU game and senior bowl week), Ford was looking quite a bit like the horribly overhyped Jarvis Jones from last year. Most of both of their production came from effort/coverage sacks/scheme/etc. They don't have have a lot of tape where they straight lined up and whipped the opposing lineman. I refer to the awesome @NU_Gap once more: 

 

 

<div style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(245,245,245);">Greg Peshek ‏@<b>NU_Gap</b>Jan 20
<p style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(245,245,245);">Interesting that on every sack but one by Dee Ford, the QB was scrambling. Averaged 4.26 seconds from snap to sack which is a bit below-avg

<p style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(245,245,245);"> 

<p style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(245,245,245);"> 

<p style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(245,245,245);"> 

<p style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(245,245,245);">If it's going to take 4+ seconds for Ford to get the majority of his sacks in the NFL he's going to be a large disappointment.

</div>

 

Thats an interesting quote right there...

 

I hope our guys are doing due diligence. 

---

That's why Dee Ford was looked at as a 2nd-3rd rounder.  He's not some freak DE and sack master.

 

That's why he needed to showcase he can rush the passer in the Senior Bowl - and consequently his stock is rising.

 

Looking at his whole body of work, I still think we can get possibly at 39.  No need to Reach for him in the teens.  And if someone else takes him before us, that's fine.  Dee Ford is a nice player, but he's definitely not a "can't-miss" prospect.

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

Thats an interesting quote right there...


I hope our guys are doing due diligence.

That's literally their job...


So it's safe to say they are.

---