NFL 2022-23 Season Thread

[Coffee Warlord]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Really surprised they got that much for him considering he's fairly overrated and will be a free agent.

And I can't imagine he's going to be any less insane negotiating a new deal (with no agent) with Balty.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I felt like Harris was a rich man's Benny Snell. As great as Snell was in college, I didn't think he'd have much of an impact in the NFL.

I think that is an entirely fair comparison. Snell is a competent NFL player, that is perfectly fine as a depth RB/special teams player. Harris is a little bigger, faster, and stronger, but seems like a competent starter without being exceptional.

I know I keep saying it, but I am frustrated with Harris and Pickett having been first rounders because there really are not a many flashes of greatness to go along with the expected struggles of being 1st or 2nd year players. If they were 3rd rounders, I'd be pretty happy with where they are, I guess.

The Steelers have a 1st round QB and RB, two 2nd round receivers (Claypool and Pickens), a 2nd round TE (Freiermuth), and a 3rd round receiver in Johnson (who got a 2nd contract, which is relatively unheard of for the Steelers with WRs). It almost seems like the timing of their window is off, where most of these skill guys are going to be too expensive or not good enough to keep by the time the offensive line and QB situation gets figured out.

The Steelers and Ravens have had good, long runs partially because they are good organizations but equally because the Bengals and Browns have been so poorly run. Both of those teams seem to have competent staffs and front offices now, along with each having a top 5-8 QB (if not higher). Might be rough sailing for the Steelers for awhile.

[Ksyrup]

Chubb to the Dolphins. I think a 1st round 2023 is involved.

[Ksyrup]

Also, Lions traded Hockenson to the Vikings.

[Atocep]

Bears trade their 2nd for Claypool.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Chubb to the Dolphins. I think a 1st round 2023 is involved.

Looks like the 1st is the 49ers pick, a 2024 4th, and Chase Edmonds (Denver needs RB depth) for Chubb and a 2025 5th.

If Chubb was leaving after this year anyway, this makes total sense.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Bears trade their 2nd for Claypool.

If there was ever a bunch of wideouts with talent who lack team attitude it's this year's Steelers group. Nary a Hines Ward in there. Instead, I think they all grew up watching Chad Johnson and AB (the fucked up one) for clues on how to do it in the NFL.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Bears trade their 2nd for Claypool.

I don't really love this for the Steelers. Steelers could have presumably had him for another year to see if he could put it all together or let him play out his rookie deal and gotten a comp pick or possibly dealt him over the summer for a better haul with everyone bidding on him. Honestly, he has seemed like he has matured some this season.

I feel bad for him that he has had a broken down Roethlisberger, Trubisky and Pickett this year, and then will have Fields as his QBs.

[henry296]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

The Steelers have a 1st round QB and RB, two 2nd round receivers (Claypool and Pickens), a 2nd round TE (Freiermuth), and a 3rd round receiver in Johnson (who got a 2nd contract, which is relatively unheard of for the Steelers with WRs). It almost seems like the timing of their window is off, where most of these skill guys are going to be too expensive or not good enough to keep by the time the offensive line and QB situation gets figured out.

Unfortunately, the line is 2 3rds, a 4th and 2 free agents (2nd / 3rd).

Looking back on the team's from the early 2010s, you had Pouncey /DeCastro as 1st round picks and Marcus Gilbert was a 2nd.

Should've draft OL the last 2 years instead of skill players. Good line play makes mid round skill players look better.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by henry296

Unfortunately, the line is 2 3rds, a 4th and 2 free agents (2nd / 3rd).

Looking back on the team's from the early 2010s, you had Pouncey /DeCastro as 1st round picks and Marcus Gilbert was a 2nd.

Should've draft OL the last 2 years instead of skill players. Good line play makes mid round skill players look better.

Hopefully, they can pick up a couple OL in the first 3 rounds next year. They need to address it, either with better development or better talent.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Bears trade their 2nd for Claypool.

Not sure I like this but the new GM botched the offseason and was in desperation mode for a competent receiver.

[Ksyrup]

Bills acquire Nyheim Hines from Colts.

[Ksyrup]

Also Brandin Cooks did not get traded and is none too pleased.

[larrymcg421]

Interesting move from the Fins, sending a 1st for LB Bradley Chubb.

Shows they clearly have confidence in Tua and are focusing on winning now.

[GrantDawg]

Falcons got rid of Calvin Ridley. Bye, bye trouble.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[stevew]

Good riddance to Mapletron.

[miami_fan]

Stolen from Twitter. I chuckled.



This photo turned into Tyreek Hill, Jaylen Waddle, Jevon Holland & Bradley Chubb.

[NobodyHere]

Dan, Tanya Snyder Retain Bank of America Securities to Explore Selling Commanders | News, Scores, Highlights, Stats, and Rumors | Bleacher Report

[miami_fan]

Y’all got Daniel Snyder canceled?

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by KSyrup

Also, Lions traded Hockenson to the Vikings.

I don't like this one for the Lions. Makes great sense for Minnesota, and I don't mind trading in-division, but trading away their most productive receiver over the last few years, a tight end who is 25? I don't think they got enough back to justify that.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

I don't like this one for the Lions. Makes great sense for Minnesota, and I don't mind trading in-division, but trading away their most productive receiver over the last few years, a tight end who is 25? I don't think they got enough back to justify that.

I don't like it either. It doesn't make a ton of sense.

They traded arguably their 2nd best offensive weapon (he'd 3rd if Swift could ever stay healthy) to a division rival to move up two rounds in 2023 (it will be more like one round given that the Lions' pick will be a high 4th and the Vikings' pick a low 2nd) and move up one round in 2024. You're getting a little more draft capital, but not actually getting more picks.

Also, if they had hung on to Hockenson this year and next and then let him go, they would have likely gotten a 3rd round comp pick when someone signed him. So, they lose out on that pick, as well.

Finally, it sends a pretty shitty message to any of the vets still there.

As entertaining as he is, I don't think Dan Campbell is the guy. I can't think of a single coach in this league who had a record like his after one and a half years (4-19-1) and actually led that same team to anything of note.

I am starting to question Brad Holmes, too. I am not sure what the plan is. I can't figure it out.

In a year where almost any team can beat any other team on a given week and in a league designed for party and for teams to be able to turn things around quickly, the Lions remain remarkable consistent at being awful.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by TJ Hockenson

That’s what we’re here to do, is to go somewhere and win some games. That’s kind of the first time I can say that

I'm beginning to see why the Lion's traded him.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

As entertaining as he is, I don't think Dan Campbell is the guy. I can't think of a single coach in this league who had a record like his after one and a half years (4-19-1) and actually led that same team to anything of note.

Tom Landry?

[larrymcg421]

Jimmy Johnson started 4-22

[NobodyHere]

Rod Marinelli was 10-22 before leading the Lions to a winless season. That's notable, right?

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Jimmy Johnson started 4-22

Chuck Noll started out 6-23 and Landry was 4-21-3.

So, based on his peers, the expectation is that Campbell should win between 2-4 Super Bowls and be in the Hall of Fame!

[Swaggs]

Dola....

I'll be damned, but I just looked up Bill Walsh: started out 5-22

Won 3 Super Bowls

Is there any coach who has won multiple Super Bowls that did not start out horribly?

[Bobble]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

Also, if they had hung on to Hockenson this year and next and then let him go, they would have likely gotten a 3rd round comp pick when someone signed him. So, they lose out on that pick, as well.

Not if they sign high-value free agents which they would be likely to do.

The comments I've heard for the Lions is that Hock would want top 5 TE money, he isn't performing to that level and we wouldn't pay that, so get what you can for him. Seems like they sold him low but keeping him doesn't really seem to get help us rebuild (again).

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Dola....

I'll be damned, but I just looked up Bill Walsh: started out 5-22

Won 3 Super Bowls

Is there any coach who has won multiple Super Bowls that did not start out horribly?

Shula started in 1963 and his only losing seasons were 1976 and 1988.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Shula started in 1963 and his only losing seasons were 1976 and 1988.

Belichick, Shanahan, and Holmgren were never terrible either. George Seifert was 28-4 in his first two years and ended up stinking with Carolina.

I guess the overall takeaway is to have a star QB.

[Ksyrup]

Yeah, Walsh/Montana and Johnson/Aikman had remarkably similar beginnings. A couple of struggle years and then breakout/stardom starting in Year 3.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Rod Marinelli was 10-22 before leading the Lions to a winless season. That's notable, right?

Absolutely. They did what no NFL team had done before.

Lions Lead The Way (or something).

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Chuck Noll started out 6-23 and Landry was 4-21-3.

So, based on his peers, the expectation is that Campbell should win between 2-4 Super Bowls and be in the Hall of Fame!

I hope his HoF bust includes his racing helmet.

[korme]

Painfully accurate

I’ve watched this at least 50 times since it got sent to me. The “striking out Timothée Chalamet” guy actually doesn’t miss. pic.twitter.com/neOXZtVtJN

— Nate Tice (@Nate_Tice) November 2, 2022

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Jimmy Johnson started 4-22

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I hope his HoF bust includes his racing helmet.

Speaking of racing helmets - I forgot about Joe Gibbs (who was pretty much always average to very good as a head coach) and won 3 Super Bowls.

Also forgot about Parcells, who won the two Super Bowls with the Giants. His first season was a 3-12-1.

There really were some legendary head coaches during the 80's (when I first got into the NFL). Gibbs, Parcells, Noll, Shula, Landry, Walsh, Flores, and Ditka were all Super Bowl winners and then you had guys like Reeves, Grant, Schottenheimer, Knox, and Levy that were really good, but never won Super Bowls.

Probably just nostalgia, because it looks like there are six active coaches with SB wins and I'm sure some that are currently active will win in the future.

[bronconick]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

I don't like this one for the Lions. Makes great sense for Minnesota, and I don't mind trading in-division, but trading away their most productive receiver over the last few years, a tight end who is 25? I don't think they got enough back to justify that.

$15 million+ a year for a non-blocking tight end who plays usually misses 5+ games, has 2-3 good games surrounded by long periods of disappearance. Yeah...no. Blowing a first round pick on him was the mistake, like the other Lion tight ends before him this century.

[henry296]

Most of those coaches that had poor starts and then successful were before free agency, so it took time to draft and therefore owners had more patience.

[Glengoyne]

I watch about 10 minutes of each Thursday night game. Al and what's his name have 0 chemistry. Al almost makes up for that on his own. But the streaming quality seems awful. How cam my resolution on Prime Video be so good, but live streaming be so bad? Am I alone in that?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

I watch about 10 minutes of each Thursday night game. Al and what's his name have 0 chemistry. Al almost makes up for that on his own. But the streaming quality seems awful. How cam my resolution on Prime Video be so good, but live streaming be so bad? Am I alone in that?

I've been using Hulu for NCAAF (hardly watch pro nowadays).

I've noticed that zoomed out is horrible on my 4k TV. Blocky as crap. Zoomed in is acceptable. My guess is they are still using like 720p for zoom out.

Yeah, haven't noticed any issues with my Prime or Netflix. Not crisp as in a 4k blu-ray but pretty acceptable.

[henry296]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

I watch about 10 minutes of each Thursday night game. Al and what's his name have 0 chemistry. Al almost makes up for that on his own. But the streaming quality seems awful. How cam my resolution on Prime Video be so good, but live streaming be so bad? Am I alone in that?

Streaming on my fire stick is awful but the commercials look great. Looks fine on my laptop.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by henry296

Streaming on my fire stick is awful but the commercials look great. Looks fine on my laptop.

I'm using an Apple TV, so it is probably a similar experience to the fire stick. I can watch on my PC, but they need to figure this out. I think the NFL would be in agreement. Right now, it isn't a good product on my TV, where I watch sports.

[Ksyrup]

So weird. The first game they streamed, it was the best picture I've ever seen on a TV. Since then it's been normal - no better or worse than my typical DTV picture. I'm not getting any bad pictures, but it hasn't looked as good as that first game.

[cuervo72]

Looked pretty good on my Samsung.

[Ksyrup]

Interesting article. The upshot is that TNF has lost 2 million viewers over last year's TNF package on NFL Network and Fox. I did not tune in last night, as I was watching the Phillies game. However, had TNF been on a standard cable channel, I almost certainly would have at least switched over during commercials and probably hung on during red zone drives, important plays, etc.

https://awfulannouncing.com/nfl/thro...medium=twitter

This has me still rethinking a move to streaming. It seems like an almost impossible pain to switch between games on streaming services, as opposed to literally pressing one button to go back and forth now. I suppose I'd just end up sitting on one game and maybe opening up a laptop or two to watch other games?

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Interesting article. The upshot is that TNF has lost 2 million viewers over last year's TNF package on NFL Network and Fox. I did not tune in last night, as I was watching the Phillies game. However, had TNF been on a standard cable channel, I almost certainly would have at least switched over during commercials and probably hung on during red zone drives, important plays, etc.

Through eight weeks, Amazon is a strain on the NFL's viewership

This has me still rethinking a move to streaming. It seems like an almost impossible pain to switch between games on streaming services, as opposed to literally pressing one button to go back and forth now. I suppose I'd just end up sitting on one game and maybe opening up a laptop or two to watch other games?

This is interesting. I was listening to a podcast a few weeks ago and they were talking to a former Fox executive about the Pac 12 looking at more streaming options (possibly instead of sticking with ESPN and Fox/FS1) and the hosts and the Fox guy were all mentioning what a pain in the ass it was to flip back and forth between streaming and cable/satellite with load times and such and how they had all pretty much stopped doing it during commercials, unless it was a game they were directly interested in.

It all seems like common sense, but these are hard numbers in the article you linked and the TNF games have much less competition than a Saturday college game (when there might be games to flip between on CBS/NBC/ABC, the ESPN and Fox networks, and then all of the local stuff like the B10/ACC/etc or, down the road, potential NFL games that are at competing times.

The other interesting thing they brought up is whether college and NFL will make adjustments or sort of honor their agreement not to compete against one another once the college football playoff starts up. The last several years, the NFL has moved games to Saturday once the NCAA season winds down, but that may not be the case once they running up against marquee NCAA games.

[Solecismic]

I think it's just age, mostly. Cable became steadily more expensive, and the commercial breaks got longer and longer. Then, just muting the commercials wasn't enough - commercials now have to do the visual equivalent of blaring a fog horn to get your attention.

So when streaming came along with all the channels I wanted at less than half the price, seemed OK for the inconvenience of longer channel load times. And cable had even given up part of that advantage because they didn't have room for 300 channels no one was watching, all in HD. So cable channel load times were increasing.

But then streaming prices rose steadily, and the service I had chosen (Vue) went under. And there were long periods without any service at all, and I found I didn't really care about most of the sports I watched. At least not enough to consider the whole channel-change dance during commercial breaks.

Sure, there are times like last night when I'd like to tune in and see Philadelphia for a half. But then I'd have to deal with all that nonsense again.

I can't imagine myself ever returning to cable or streaming at this point. And during the DVD sales at Christmas, I'll take a look at what the critics liked on the major channels like HBO and AMC, and for the price of one month of cable, we can have quite a few season discs if we like.

Broadcast and Tablo isn't perfect, and we just lost our Decades channel this week, but there are 7-10 football games every week to choose from, and that works out fine, even if it includes every Cleveland Browns game.

[Ksyrup]

I regularly flip between 3-4 games at any given time on a Saturday. Streaming would hit me hard - even just manually getting out of one game and into another within the ESPN app is a pain, so having to go from ESPN to, say, Fubo or YT for another game, back to ESPN, etc. Right now it's just a matter of back button or remembering a 2 or 3 digit number for other games to easily go from one game to another.

If I take the plunge, it's going to require a complete change to the way I have watched sports for as long as I can remember. It's hard to quantify what that is worth. Right now my DirecTV bill without any league sports channels is about $220. I can get nearly every channel I want for about $90 between two main streaming services (plus ESPN+). It should be a no-brainer, but I'm hedging. I think I might try the ransom method with DTV before I leave them - if they cut my bill in half, there's no reason to leave.

[thesloppy]

Switching between streams on a PC is as easy as switching tabs,and it seems like it wouldn't be too big of a lift to try to bring that tab functionality to smart TVs.

[Thomkal]

in the Buf/NYJ game they had a cable snap on the Sky Cam causing the camera to drop lower and the cable be a danger to anyone on the field-have had to stop play for 10 minutes and counting now

[SirFozzie]

The Falcons hail from the A-T-(Take The)L yet again.

At least 2-3 times a year they go to the last play and lose.