NFL 2013 Season Thread

[Al B. Sure!]

I'll hold judgement on the Cutler signing till I hear the money. I'll bet less than 100 mil. Or god I hope so.

7 year $126M with $54M guaranteed.

Cutler's deal is in the Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, and Tony Romo ballpark. I'm not sure that Cutler is actually worse than any of those QB's. They're all flawed in some way.

[rah]

None of the names mentioned deserve that kind of money. A shame

[Al B. Sure!]

None of the names mentioned deserve that kind of money. A shame

Over four years, Russell Wilson will make what Cutler makes in about 10 quarters.

[-Jrabbit]

He's a non-first-rounder still on his rookie deal. Try signing Russell Wilson to a new deal and see what it costs. Oh right, he has to play another year before he's even allowed to renegotiate.

While some sanity was needed, rookies were totally thrown under the bus in the new CBA.

[Ben Kenobi]

It is pretty pathetic that they needed OT to beat Chase Daniels in his first NFL start and a running game headlined by Kniles Davis.

They are stronger than the Ravens, Steelers, Jets and Dolphins this year. They are erratic - their worse loss all season was to the Raiders by 10 points. Not something you'd expect.

Not saying they won't beat the Bengals this week. They very well might since the Chargers seem to play better against good teams and Andy Dalton can be erratic, but a playoff team really should have blown the second-string Chiefs out.

Who else was better? I'm also not buying the Bolts at 7.5 either. I expect the Pack and Philly to get smoked.

Makes you wonder if the second-string Chiefs would beat Houston or Jacksonville starters?

Chargers outplayed them all game. The stats were in their favor, just not on the scoreboard.

[Ben Kenobi]

But it was a gift

Right. This coming from the same dude in fantasy whining about luck. The Chargers had bad luck early on and they had some good luck later on. They already beat the KC starters - in Arrowhead. What gift? Are you really stating that you believe the Chargers couldn't do what they did at home what they did on the road? I don't see it.

The Chargers earned their playoff spot by virtue of being the better team over all 16 games. Any other result would have been considered to be unlucky. The Chargers have slightly bad luck over the season even with the win against KC. Their expected wins is 9.2-6.8.

, especially considering who KC started. And your sensitive reaction suggests you know damn well it's so.

Unfortunately statistics don't support this conclusion.

[-Jrabbit]

Don't be obtuse.

The gift = a non-call on what should be a routine count-the-players penalty. Which the NFL has acknowledged.

You keep trying to paint me as some kind of anti-Chargers guy. The fact is, I'm perfectly happy to see them in the playoffs. Did I say they were lucky? No. See post #962 to review what I actually stated. My pointing out a factual news item doesn't change that (except, apparently, in the Beniverse). But I do think that bad call with the game on the line should be acknowledged -- just as it should be noted that SD barely eked out a win against a team that with nothing to play for and without its starting QB, RB1, and WR1.

But they did what they needed to do, albeit with the help of the back judge and/or Succop choking from 41 yds. So good on the Chargers, and good luck to them. They've already proven they'll need it.

[Donegeal]

From what I can tell, I'm happy about the Cutler signing.

Under Trestman, with a year in the system and the O-line playing together for a second year, he's a top 5 QB.
And to boot, since it's a top heavy high signing bonus and lower anual salary, it is an easier cap number to work with than I initially thought (although I'm not a cap-alogist, so I could be mistaken).

The Slausen and Jennings re-signings are also good.

[Al B. Sure!]

Bengals, Colts, and Packers fans might be blacked out since not enough tickets have been sold. Of this weekend's games, only the Eagles have sold enough tickets.

[-Jrabbit]

I didn't realize until today that blackout rules actually apply to playoff games. That has PR disaster written all over it.

Gotta say, I can't blame the Packer fans. Sunday's high temp in Green Bay is forecast at 5 below zero. And it will be colder than that, since game time is 5pm. Projected wind chill is about -30 F.

[Ming]

Some local Car Dealers usually buys the tickets for PR purposes... Still plenty of time to sell out.

[snoopy369]

I didn't realize until today that blackout rules actually apply to playoff games. That has PR disaster written all over it.

Gotta say, I can't blame the Packer fans. Sunday's high temp in Green Bay is forecast at 5 below zero. And it will be colder than that, since game time is 5pm. Projected wind chill is about -30 F.

Packers were screwed over by the fact that they announced playoff tickets to the season ticket holders back when Rodgers was hurt. Hence nobody wanted one.

[snoopy369]

Cutler wise, I'm of mixed feelings. Cutler is a very good (but not great) quarterback with a few significant flaws (as almost all of them have). He's around a top 10 QB [if you put all of them on identical teams]. His flaws, however, make him a poor fit for the Trestman offense; mostly, if he has any stress at all he stops his progression and bails to Marshall (or otherwise modifies the play). Trestman's offense is great if you listen to him and do what you're told, but if you don't you end up stalling out. Hence McCown doing well in it.

I feel that we could probably be successfull with a mediocre QB (like Alex Smith type) in this offense, and so paying very good QB money ($18MM a year is that) is probably unnecessary. But if Trestman believes he can fix Cutler's flaws - ie, can train him to listen to the progressions and not go cowboy at bad times - this could be a huge offense. Cutler does have the arm to take advantage of the WRs we have - heck, if every play was 'Marshall and Alshon go deep' we might score 80, if Forte and Bennett were available to catch midrange passes - so he could be very successful if he learns. Trestman claims he's easy to teach and likes him, and that needs to count for something; I'm just not sure it's needed for this team, which so badly needs to spend money on the defense.

That said, there's something to be said for not having to think about QB for 3 to 5 years, and that means we can draft a great defense if Emery is capable of doing so. I don't think Mel Tucker is the right guy for the job, however; where a coach proves his worth is in adversity where he takes a group of poor players and gets the most out of them. Mel didn't. Our defense was injured all over the place, but honestly we had enough depth except at DL such that it shouldn't have mattered. He wasn't able to get our DLs, LBs, and DBs to reach their potential, and I put the blame squarely on his shoulders for that.

In terms of the dollar value, that's about what it should be given we decide to sign Cutler in the first place. Tier 1 QBs are underpaid because it would ruin the team to pay them appropriately - Manning/Brees/Brady/etc. should be making over $30MM a year, but you couldn't build a team with the rest of the money in that case. So they make a few million more than Tier 2 QBs, who are still significant upgrades over Tier 3 QBs and Tier 4 QBs, and are rare enough (only about half the teams in the league can have a Tier 1/2 QB) that they cost a lot on the open market. Hence 18-20MM being about what they are worth.
(of QBs not on their rookie contracts, in no particular order):
Tier 1: Brees, Brady, P Manning, Rodgers
Tier 2: Stafford, Cutler, Ryan, E Manning, Romo, Roethlisberger, Flacco, Rivers (Of rookie contracts, Luck, RG3, Cam Newton, Wilson might be here)
So basically half the teams in the league can have a 'good' QB and the other half are stuck with 'okay'. Hence the expense. LT is similarly expensive (not as high, but still way higher than other positions), because it's similarly hard to find a LT who can beat DEs consistently. In general, every other position is far less simply because you can build a winning team without an above average [every other position], but QB you really need competence at to win. The last team to win a superbowl without a tier 1/2 QB? Baltimore in 2000, I think. Of course, you can luck out and get a QB who's tier 1/2 but not pay him for it thanks to rookie contracts, but that's almost pure luck (Ryan Leaf, everybody!)

It's going to be a smaller hit at the front of the deal - Flacco is $6.8MM against the cap this year, for example - and that'll help in the short term as well. Add a few defensive pieces and we might have a superbowl contender next year with this incredible offense - but we need to use that $46MM effectively since we're replacing nearly the entire defense (the offense, fortunately, is good to go for 2014, and I think only Marshall is up after that).

[Ben Kenobi]

The gift = a non-call on what should be a routine count-the-players penalty. Which the NFL has acknowledged.

Which counterbalances the Houston game. Looking at the stats to week 15 - the Chargers should have been 9-6 going into the final week. They were somewhat unlucky so they were 8-8, and needed the last game to get in. Had the Chargers simple received neutral (or close to neutral luck), the final game with KC would have been meaningless.

They simply received what they ought to receive by game 16 - which is a call that went their way. Why is this so difficult to understand?

You keep trying to paint me as some kind of anti-Chargers guy.

You are. You said nothing about the Houston call. You've never had a positive word about the team, ever. When the team finally gets a break, you're right there whining with the Squealers fan about, "it's unfair!" and taking away the fact that the Chargers did, in fact, earn the win.

All the Chargers received was a tie game - they still had to win it in OT.

Had Succop simple made the kick (there was no interference on the play), the Chargers would have lost - he did not. The failure on that kick is all on Succop.

The fact is, I'm perfectly happy to see them in the playoffs.

So then, qwitcher *****in'.

Did I say they were lucky?

You said they received a gift. I'm saying, they are simply receiving what they should have already gotten. See the Houston game - where an officiating mistake gave Houston a re-kick where there was no such penalty on the play. Where were you? You claim you're neutral, and yet you were silent there. This is evidence of anti-Charger bias right here.

Nothing I've said here is pro-Charger bias. The stats all support the conclusion that the Chargers are the 6 seed we expect to see in that slot.

My pointing out a factual news item doesn't change that

Neither does mine. Mistakes have been made this season against the Chargers, specifically the Houston game. Again - over a 16 game season, mistakes will tend to level. This is why they go 16 and not 1.

But I do think that bad call with the game on the line should be acknowledged

On a play in which there was no interference with the kicker? I don't. Succop missed the kick, the Chargers did not influence it.

just as it should be noted that SD barely eked out a win against a team that with nothing to play for and without its starting QB, RB1, and WR1.

Sure, as opposed to beating a fully stocked Houston team with Schaub and Foster playing their best. And again - a KC team they had already beaten in Arrowhead. Are they lucky that they faced the KC backups? Sure. Were they lucky to face the good Houston team? No, given that the team only won one other game the whole season, after being touted as preseason division leaders. Again - luck will counterbalance over the year, and in this case, it took all 16 for it to swing the Chargers way.

I believe I commented on this earlier, before their comeback.

So good on the Chargers, and good luck to them. They've already proven they'll need it.

Again, they've simply received close to neutral luck on the season. They've gone 6-2 against playoff contenders with losses to Cincy and Miami. Evidence suggests that it is not unreasonable for them to win as they have beaten other, better teams, on the road. They have 2 such wins (KC + Den) already.

[Ben Kenobi]

In terms of the dollar value, that's about what it should be given we decide to sign Cutler in the first place. It's going to be a smaller hit at the front of the deal - Flacco is $6.8MM against the cap this year, for example - and that'll help in the short term as well. Add a few defensive pieces and we might have a superbowl contender next year with this incredible offense - but we need to use that $46MM effectively since we're replacing nearly the entire defense (the offense, fortunately, is good to go for 2014, and I think only Marshall is up after that).

What does Cutler provide that McCown does not? I'm happy to see the Bears spending money on Cutler to find out that they never really needed him in the first place. I believe I said they were trading away the better QB in Orton and that Orton was never the problem. I stick with that. Is an 8 million dollar insurance policy really what's going to improve the Bears?