Snakebitten: A Real-Time MP FOF thread

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by Izulde

Just a note I'm still following. The chemistry approach has always fascinated me, though I pay literally no attention to it.

[QuikSand]

Free agency continues, no real news of note here.

Baltimore - transactions page

A one-year, cut-friendly deal for our RB2, who is fine and great for cohesion/chemistry, but not exciting skill-wise. We also re-up with our WR group leader affinity gimp at minsal.

Two more draft picks in the books:

2.29 TE Arturo Weydahl - the plan wasn't to go TE, TE in the first two rounds, but I don't hate it...this guy is more of a sure thing, different skill set, and my scout graded him VU which is pretty rare for us, so I move in.

Our status at TE is, effectively, an 8th year starter who thinks he's worth $25m (he isn't), a 4th year backup who will also price himself out of his contract after this year, a 2nd year guy who looks pretty good but is under-developed, and now two rookies with different skills... we might have pressure to just use the FB at FB, sadly, which is pissing away a 1st round pick.

3.29 CB Gregory Baskerville

Chemistry fit, bump-first guy who should step into a decent role with us. I wanted to add a usable DB, he looks like a fit. Scout graded him VO, and that bumped him out of my first round consideration, but I'm fine with him in the late 3rd... hoping for a long term CB4/DB6/ST sort here.

[QuikSand]

Incidentally, it looks like next year will be a free-for-all, with multiple directions to go. Jimmy Mc will want to be paid. I will have at least a half dozen important players in free agency, who were asking for (IMO) too much money. So, we'll have a big fork in the road about whether we remain in a "maintain" mode or whether we commit to more of a rebuild.

Guys who will be in the mix there: DE Rison, RB Phelps, WR Guthrie, DT Luke, S DeMatteo, LT Woolford, LB Shaw -- all veteran starters and major contributors, who are on team-friendly deals now and where extending isn't practicable for us this year. DeMatteo may well retire, others too, but if we let most of that fleet go, we'll lose a TON of cohesion.

[QuikSand]

More draftees:

4.29 CB Phil Ristic - my standard 4th round draftee, has some limited skills, can play special teams, and if I can manufacture some starts for him, he coudl be a long term asset... but 4th round gets me one year of free affinity, we'll see after that

4.31 C Brock Freeman - second verse, same as the first... though this guy is light enough on his feet that he could easily get some faux starts and be a long-termer

[QuikSand]

Been a while. Nothing exciting. Got my chem leader OL re-signed, that was important but not dramatic. Still have a leadership problem at WR/TE, no easy solution right now.

Should know more Monday.

I am, mentally, ready for next season to be a "start rebuilding it all" phase. I don't think Jimmy Mc is actually worth paying like a starter. This year's mid-round rookie might be our starter in year two.

[QuikSand]

Okay, training camp file sent in. Roster status summarized on Ben's "roster needs" page: GML: 2105.

-Jimmy Mc sucks, officially. Got it.

-We're loaded at the FB/TE position... what the F are we gonna do, run the double wing?

-We're solid but thin on defense, that's fine for now

Plan to see what we can do this year, and then do a major ere-eval after this season remain intact.

[Izulde]

Looks like you've got an extra ]here at the end of the URL that throws an SQL error (deleting the ]here fixed it)

[QuikSand]

Thanks, edited.

[QuikSand]

So, file sent. Everything points toward another pretty good (though maybe not 12-4) season here buoyed by chemistry and high cohesion, and then to a very intriguing offseason next go-round.

Running basically the same system as last year, with largely the same personnel, just one more season under the QB's belt. If he can post a 90 rating and not many sacks, I think we have the talent all around to do pretty well, and be a "factor" in the league. I'd be surprised if we were a bye team, but not shocked after we managed it last year. 9-7 also would not shock me, to be fair.

[QuikSand]

Welp. How 'bout 8-8 and out of the postseason?

GML: Baltimore Ravens 2106

We'll call last year the fluke. This was just bad.

[QuikSand]

Hmmmm. Disappointing. Looks like I failed to upload my file for the preseason stage... and my chemistry setup got gutted by the AI cuts then. I didn't notice that it had happened, and didn't go out and re-claim some of my gimps in the pre-camp stage. And...as I have proven multiple times, this is a very unforgiving league for that sort of malfeasance. Dammit.

[QuikSand]

I feel like there's a conspiracy to make me just quit FOF. This crap here, another league where I'm losing a season to playbook/gameplan weirdness. I keep coming back to "a league I care about" as a point in mentioning these... and then the reverb is "why do you care, dumbass?"

Maybe it's time to drop this hobby and move my attention elsewhere. Havin a great run in the stock market, good year in fantasy/DFS football, and in theory I'm also a dad and an executive or something like that.

[Pyser]

i think we're all just killing time til the next version comes out, but we're going on 2 years of that now...

[QuikSand]

Okay, turn the page. Shake it off. Big offseason here. We care. Honest.

Retirement hand us a twist I didn't expect - WR Guthrie retired. I didn't extend his deal as he was asking for huge money, but I fully intended to give it a shot. Now we're moving on like it or not.

S Doud DeMatteo also retired - serious talent and major cohesion influence for us for years, that fully transitions out the stellar DB group we featured for a while. I feel okay at DB longer term, but we need a legit guy to play safety this year, through the draft or free agency.

Setup is:
-we've got $272m in cap space, about 40% of the total
-we've got 35 players signed, and have lots of holes to fill
-we have to make a decision about a decent young QB
-we have zero RB signed, and our stalwarts are in years 8 and 10

So... this is basically a chance to dramatically shape the team. I feel like the decision at QB is the linchpin. If we can get capable QB play, then we might be well served to try to retain what we can for cohesion purposes, and try to "maintain" a high level, writing off last season to managerial malfeasance.

Jimmy Mc looks like he'd sign for maybe $12m/yr... cheap for a starter with experience, but he's not genuinely talented. My scout makes him 25/39, here's his page from the BELCo engines. I think what we get with him is a mobile QB with limited range... not awful, but unlikely to be the main reason we succeed, if that makes sense. I was expecting his price tag to be more like $25-30m, which I think I would just rule out... at half that, I'm thinking about it.

[QuikSand]

Wide receiver is an intriguing dilemma for us, with Guthrie off the table. My starting three would be these guys, if we make no additions:

WR Mercury Bailey (70/70)--yr 6
WR Victor Lester (52/63)--yr 3
WR Bernie Richmond (39/50)--yr 3

Bailey is the lamest 70/70 ever... overall ratings buoyed by great return skills, and a low enough "route running" rating to remind me that in FOF, that rating is tantamount to meaning "ability to play wide receiver" and without a good bar there, your guy is at best a complementary piece. Bailey has 44, and he's basically mediocre at wideout.

I have posted Bailey on the trade block section of the forum. If someone buys in, then that likely pushes me even further toward a rebuilding.

Lester and Richmond are fine, but nothing special. On a contending team, I might use them as WR3 and WR4, I think. If Lester slid into our #1 role, he'd likely get overmatched in coverages a lot, and would probably be a boring 200 targets, 140 catches, 1,200 yard sort of guy... big gross stats, but on a measly 6 yards per target, or thereabouts.

So... I think I might walk back from "QB sets the plan in motion." I think it might be that WR does. If we deal Bailey, we're likely going to be a 7-9 team for real this season. If we find a complement in free agency, and put Bailey back in the WR2 level, then maybe we're back in the serious picture.

[QuikSand]

Free agency thinking:

DE Rico Rison is going to be a Stage 2 guy, naturally, so I don't get a chance to wait and see with him. Here's his deal: I signed him to a fat contract when I was totally starving for a pass rusher... he was a heavy LB with a huge PRTech rating, and I rolled the dice he could play DE.

4 seasons in (gag) Pittsburgh: 22 sacks.
6 seasons in Baltimore: 81 sacks.

He's blossomed into a menacing presence. Now he wants to be paid like one - over $45m per year and he's in his 10th season. I'm guessing he will go to AVAILABLE. I am okay with pass rushers now (have two legit DEs and one legit DT - good enough for a zero-injury league), and think we can remain strong there without him.

RB Jaylen Phelps is a chemistry anchor, comes off a productive season with 5.2 ypc, and is only asking for $10m/yr. Seems like a reaosnable investment for us, despite him being an 8th year back. Maybe he can be our Marcus Allen of Frank Gore. We'll try to retain him. We get a stage to wait and see.

DT Darryl Luke is worth a lot to us for cohesion, we'll try to keep him.

LT Willie Woolford is a pretty good 9th year guy, and he's the perfect center of our debate this offseason. Chemistry plus, cohesion big plus, and talent is grade B or so... definitely good enough to start for a decent team. He wants $30m/yr which seems to be too much... but what else would we spend the money on here? He's likely to remain a viable starter for a few more seasons... I guess we try to retain him, but that feels like it might serve to frustrate any rebuilding effort. He's a stage 8 guy, so we have the luxury of waiting to see what else falls together here.

Working down the list...not too much thrilling here. WR Gene Lyons, who projects as my WR3/4 as it stands, comes off a 300 yard season and thinks he's a $15m/yr guy. Really, now.

[QuikSand]

Chemistry situation:

RB/FB: Marrero is in place and would be a find 4/5 leader... if Phelps re-signs he'll be a 6/7 leader...we're okay here

WR/TE: Ugly...WR O'Neill is our leader (and ST/KR specialist), but only 66 personality undercuts that... and believe it or not we're carrying a hidden conflict with WR Bailey... better to land a serious leader here from the 2/3 group, but Bailey makes that hard with a 6th/89 leadership force

OL: We probably have to live with G Dielman (9th/78) as our leader, but that's neutral with several key guys... we've got a young 4/5 guy on board to groom as a future leader, but he's far away from claiming it over Dielman...the only guy in the whole league who might fix this for us short term is tied up with AVAILABLE, so I think I have no real hope of making it right

D7: DE McLeon is cemented in as our starter, but pissed about playing time - that should change after starting this season, but it puts his long term future with us in some doubt... I've got enough to panic about already, I'll jump off that bridge when we get to it next season

DB: CB Meadows is a decent CB1 and we've built nicely around him...we re-signed CBs Wordehoff and Rumans (cuts from the AI purge last season) and they'll be back after signing as RFAs. Chemistry fine here, with Meadows only an 8th year guy and comfortably in charge

So... the OL is un-rebuildable. Will just go without a good chem situation there, I guess. Will splash around for options at WR/TE. Won't be a top-tier factor this year, but should remain best in the league by far.

[QuikSand]

Well, after flipping through the free agent class this offseason, this much is clear: we cannot do a major rebuild here. Just not enough.

If there were several 5th-8th year good fits out there, then I might be saying let's invest in them as the next big wave. But...really nothing much for us. Talent level is a bit thin overall, and very poor in the chem groups we focus on. I'm only so willing to invest in non-affinity guys, so that's a major limiting factor.

Don't expect fireworks, I'm saying here.

[QuikSand]

So, I have one pretty good offer in hand already for WR Bailey. I'm leafing through chemistry effects to see how I'd put it together without him around.

The best plan sounds very rebuild-y... I'd have to cut (or trade) WR O'Neill, then TE Thomason, and then WR Richmond... and give up on re0signing WR Lyons...and THEN I'd be pretty clear to go grab a 2/3 leader to bring my group together. I would be heavily dependent on my recent wave of h-back draftees, and that isn't a great thing. So, that would probably drop my offense down a peg and a half.

For a good draft haul, it could be worth it. But it might tip me toward figuring this season is basically a dud.

[QuikSand]

First FA stages - we end up making a pretty big splash signing - with a non-affinity guy who can play CB1. Gabe Everett will be chem-neutral, but ought to be an asset (or trade capital) for us for a while.

We also land a young OT who looks like he's on track to be good enough to start. Makes it that much easier for us to say no to Woolford's FA demands and just walk away.

I'm still waffling on the trade offer for WR Bailey. A sweetener has been added. I'm very close to 50/50 on it.

[QuikSand]

With out top pick at 1.15, earlier than we'd prefer, the boss move is to target the positions that tend to be wiped out by the end of round one - namely wide receivers. I don't love anyone there, so I just target need, and take a chem fit guy whom my scouts graded as underrated

http://gml.fof-belco.com/forum/showt...ll=1#post54266

We're perilously thin at LB, so if this guy develops into an anchor SILB or SLB for a decade, that's fine by me.

[QuikSand]

Okay, free agency continues... and a couple noteworthy twists.

We lose out on RB Phelps. I didn't think he'd get any attention as an old guy, but I was wrong - Ben's Atlanta team outbid me, and he's gone. One more point in favor of a rebuilding attitude here - I struggled for years to get my running game to work well, and he was the guy who brought it all together. Alas. I have options on hand, including a new no-risk signee, and could be drafting there soon (as I type I'm only a few picks away, with a RB now atop my draft queue).

I'm still plumbing for fixes to my free agency situation. Stay tuned, but there won't be a Christmas miracle here, I fear.

[QuikSand]

So, was away a while. You missed a few things.

Draft recap - not interesting but here it is:
1(15) SLB Renaldo Randolph 40/58
2(14) RB Roger Harden 40/53
4(17) FS Levi McGee 27/48
7(14) LT Ruben Monroe 17/40

So, the biggest news is that we signed a young QB, whom I now think might have the edge to start for us this year. Teddy Farrell looks pretty good to me, and was pretty inexpensive after riding the pine elsewhere. I let Jimmy Mc slide into late free agency, we'll see if he comes back (we will offer him) to be part of the mix, but his second season suggested to me he isn't the long term answer for us.

I still don't really have a feel for what this team is going to be "about" this year. I think I have ruled out dealing Bailey for a late 1st rounder plus, on grounds that I wouldn't get anyone as good as him there, and would then just be back to scrambling for a WR1. But at the same time, I really don't love our passing game personnel this year, unless I shift to a much more conservative and TE-focused offense.

Full transactions here:
Transactions summary

[QuikSand]

Oh, I guess I should note...RB is a scramble now, too. The rookie is the standard "a few good bars, but apparently the correct ones to have," based on people who certainly understand the RB position better than I do, so I'm hoping he can be a productive 1st-and-10 runner for us. I have a couple veterans who have previously been very productive elsewhere (including a 2,000 yard rusher) but I don't know what combination I expect to keep around for this year and beyond.

Have 5 RBs on the roster, may carry 3, but am already facing a need for an affinity gimp (likely a position-switched QB to seize the leadership away from FB Marrero) so maybe only two RB.

[QuikSand]

Okay, regardless of whether it really kicks in this year, I want to be thinking about our "plan" at each position. Here's my sketch for right now:

Roster Needs page for reference

QB - I'm hopeful that Teddy can take the reins and be "the guy." If we re-sign Jimmy Mc, then that's a two-way conversation, with either guy an arguable candidate to still be our QB1 in 5 years. I'm staying open to the notion that we can win without paying the QB position, too (look at Jimmy Mc's first year)... but that seems to require high level surrounding talent, especially at WR, and that's a hard piece of the puzzle to fit in later without a tank. Most likely, we'll try to build cohesion with Teddy or Jimmy, and pay him not-quite-stupid-money that way.

RB - Well, the main hope is that rookie Roger Harden can launch a career similar to our now departed workhorse Jaylen Phelps. If so, then this is easy - in a no-injury league we just plug him in as a RB1, find someone young or cheap to play RB2, and that's that. If Harden doesn't look like that guy, then we splash around with veterans until we find the guy.

FB - ideally, Jackson Lusignan will continue to develop, and be our high cohesion starter and special teams ace for a long time. One of the FB-to-TE converts could surely either switch back or just play as a lead blocker as warranted.

TE - we've invested too much capital here already - how to best harness that? Weydahl is the best of the lot, despite lousy BPR... Carr and Austin are both solid assets. I expect we will rotate and keep them all relevant, and still have all three of them around in five years. Perhaps we will be getting 1,200+ yards receiving from the group by then (that figure was around 900 last season, with veteran Thomason still counted in the mix).

WR - Depends on Bailey. I'm trying to get a somewhat sweeter deal to move him out, if so we will be close to bare - pushing young Victor Lester into the starting WR1 job despite him being more of a WR2/3 in a good offense. In that scenario, we'd have to commit either big draft capital or free agent capital to landing someone to play WR1 longer-term. If Bailey stays as WR1, I suspect I'll get frustrated enough that I'll still be looking to add quality here, even an end-of-career patchover guy.

OL: I need a chemistry lead change, but with G Dielman here, that's not happening soon. Longer term, he will leave, and we'll have decent quality built around a new leader... I think this current formula of cohesion and occasional quality is working fine.

DL: Even without Rison, we are looking good here - McLeon should step into Rison's role and complement Tuholski, we should remain above average in pass rush. I don't much care about stopping the run.

LB: We're weak here, I'm really counting on 1st round rookie Renaldo Randolph to be our next LB anchor, a la Corey Shaw. He doesn't look like a great run stopper, but if he bumps across the board a bit, he should be a long term LB1. Then we build similarly to the OL... find cheap decent guys who fit around our star or two, use chem and cohesion to make it good enough.

DB: We go pretty deep here already, and signing FA CB Gave Everett to sit atop the food chain as our CB1 makes this unit really strong. Everett is locked up for 4 years, I expect we can sit back and coheeze around the guys we've got, mostly, for the years ahead. We'll have some tricky decisions about guys without starts yet (the sort of thing that might hinge on whether this is a serious year) but overall, I'm basically fine. Second S playing time might go to surplus CBs (like Metzenbaum or Herndon) but that's fine here.

P/K: whatevs


Team is in pretty good shape. Honestly, if WR Guthrie were back this year, I'd be thinking about another "go for it" effort. Instead, I'm thinking our WR corps isn't good enough to really elevate a young QB, and we'll suffer for that. Regardless of which youngster is at QB, I'm thinking we're pretty average among the human teams this year, maybe a 9-win outfit or so.

[QuikSand]

Fun twist with our former workhorse RB, Phelps. I bid for him, but got beaten out by a shorter term but more lucrative (per year) deal from Ben's Falcons. So it goes.

Then Atlanta turns around in the stage right after the draft and releases him. That happens in time for an AI team to sign him (more cheaply than they were offering in the early FA stages). So, that happened. Regardless of the original motives (chemistry, quality, whatever) I'm out looking for a RB and an AI team is sitting on a cheaper contract with my guy than I had been offering for him to stay and thrive. It happens.

[Chas in Cinti]

Teddy looks intriguing...

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by Chas in Cinti

Teddy looks intriguing...

Yes, I think so, too. I think he might be less of a turnover machine as Jimmy Mc seems to be, and that might be promising. So, I think the race is maybe 60/40 in my mind between the two of them.

[QuikSand]

Okay, just dealt WR Bailey for a 1,2,3 and a pretty good FB. Not sure I have time to develop a whole new playbook (by tomorrow), but shifting this team to a lot more 2TE formations seems like a no brainer at this point.

[QuikSand]

Well, biggest news in the camp stage is that QB Jimmy Mc is back. I somehow neglected to offer him in the first lats FA stage, but nobody else was interested. That forced my hand way from my intention (a fat 1yr deal, keeping him around as a RFA) and into a 4yr deal at his asking price, which as I now understand is the ticket for this stage. Anyway, he has re-upped, and our options are now open.

Having technical problems, so won't get to my file for a while. But that's the main news here, for certain.

[QuikSand]

...also LB Renaldo Randolph is on the "Dandies" list of players the league scouting tabs for ratings jumps... that's what I'm looking for with him, I would have been disappointed had he not been listed there. I don't want to fritter away a mid-first pick on a non-impact player... taking any LB is bad enough, he'd better be a stud.

[QuikSand]

Okay, preseason done, today is the regular season stage. time to resolve some position auditions.

Roster page for reference

RUNNING BACK

The hope was that our rookie Harden would give a +8 in his initial reveal, and he'd slot in as the RB1/2 for the next six years. Instead, he's a -2, my scout is now pessimistic, and he's got very low personality, making him a borderline bust and a spec play there at best. So, we have two "stars of 2015" to choose from. 8th year Schwake put up a 2,000 yard season in 2015, then inexplicably jumped to the Jets on a minsal deal. We have him now, and he basically fits the profile for a "two year veteran starter while we figure this stuff out." Even if he's the Cardinals version of Chris Johnson (seeps like the apt comparison) that's not awful. The guy left out would be 4th year Dodge, who had a solid 1,000 yard season in 2015 and then sat unclaimed last year - now he's our on a minsal deal. He looks like the prototype "replacement level" guy to me... so I guess I'll stick with the rookie as RB2 (mostly as a change-of-pace runner, not a scatback/receiver), and let Dodge go.

QUARTERBACK

Both Jimmy Mc and Teddy Farrell will make the team, so only QB3 Shaun Reed is really bubbled. But who starts? I'm genuinely torn. I feel like getting Teddy his starts and getting his likely pick-a-thon debut behind us has merit, especially in a season where we are likely not to really threaten anyhow. So... I'm mentally penciling in Teddy as the starter, but it will be a tough call.

O-LINE ... WAIT WTF?

Oh boy, we got a random mega-bust with you very promising young OT Roy Brennan. Ouch, that was our left tackle for 2019-2025, basically. Now he's likely to be stocking shelves at Piggly Wiggly by next week. Dammit. Volatility can stink sometimes.

We do have a rookie boom, but it's with an asterisk. OT Amos Curry looks like a decent rotation-caliber guy (maybe he projects to that) and he's got a very strong leadership profile (98/90) ... so he's a great find for us? Perhaps. But the problem is, our centerpiece players for the next 5 years (well, minus Brennan, now) are all in the 6-7 group already. So, no chemistry benefit unless we really commit to this guy as a future leader, get him starts to activate his chemistry effects, and then build up with 2-3 and 4-5 linemen. Plus, QB Farrell, if he's going to be our long term guy, is a 6-7, too, making that a bad (merely neutral) group for leadership in offense. Damn.

So... the better plan is to try to clear the way for a 2-3 leader. The best candidate we have on hand is young C Marshall Keith, a 4th year guy with a 66/89 profile. It may take time, but he could turn into a chemistry asset/anchor over time, and we have guys who would click around him. Losing Brennan is a major deficit in this plan, but it's still the best angle I have to work toward, I think. Moving G Dielman is part of the plan, eventually, I have him blocked but it likely won't happen this offseason... we'll see if there's ever a market for a top-tier OG in this league.

[QuikSand]

Okay, refigured the offensive gameplan for this season (this is highly unusual for me). Saved as "TeddyTightEnds" to give you a flavor of the approach. Going to try to get more out of my "T" tight end. It will come at the expense of some designed runs for the QB, and some WR1/2 targets, unsurprisingly. I don't think this will be a massive shift, but a meaningful one... I have deliberately put some medium-length passes at the T in my 1st-and-10 packages. I am going with 4 active tight ends, and I'd like to see over 1,000 yards form them in total.

[QuikSand]

Giant mystery season ahead here- we have not been this weak at WR for a long, long time. Tossing a new QB into that mix seems rough, so I don't expect big things... but if he's fairly cautious with avoiding turnovers, we might be an average or better offense, albeit a pretty conservative one (if my gameplan tweaks have the effect I want).

The good outcome:
QB Teddy 85 rating, 7.0 ypa, 22/10
RB Schwake 1400 yds on 4.6ypc
WR Lester 1000 yds, Richmond 700 yds
TE combine for 1200 yds

The bad outcome:
QB Teddy 75 rating, 6.0 ypa, 18/18
RB Schwake 1000 yds on 4.0ypc
WR Lester 900 yds, Richmond 600 yds
TE combine for 1000 yds

I think we end up closer to the top than the bottom, and get some valuable experience as we start an effort to build things up toward being very good again in about two seasons. This year, though, we go 7-9 and are a non-factor.

[QuikSand]

Okay, regular season results are in: we went 8-8, about what I expected, maybe a shade better

TeddyTightEnds was solid for the seaosn, and earned 2nd team in the AFC:
392 for 638, 4429 yards, 30 TDs, 10 INTs. 91.4 rtg. 71 att, 399 yds, 7 TDs, 5.62 ypc. 5 fmb.

Teddy's receiving targets were solid:

TE Arturo Weydahl
62 catches, 867 yds, 4 TDs, 9.03 ypt. 0 for 4 KRB. (0.0%) 0 pnk. 0 sk allowed.

WR Victor Lester
103 catches, 1198 yds, 11 TDs, 6.97 ypt.

I was wrong about our WR2, forgetting how much we throw to the slow in our 11 formation - so Lyons got those targets and his own 826 on 7ypt.

Running game? Not so much. Schwake posted 662 yds on 3.8 ypc, and we ranked 30th rushing on only 4.26 ypc team=wide (including Teddy's 400 yards at 5.62 ypc). So, that stunk, but we'll blame the O-line.

Defense was pretty anemic. Rookie LB Randolph is going to be excellent (17 PD!!!), and the cast around him should be okay. DLs McLeon, Tuholski and Calhoun are all pass rushers, but our group only managed a 19.2 PR%, not good enough for when we become a winning team again. Going forward, we will have a lot of options, and long term our special teams might turn out to be the real winner here - we have a gaggle of young players who will be serious ST assets for a long time.

Decent season. Nothing remarkable, but the plan is in place. We'll look more closely at Teddy's air game, but he may indeed be our guy going forward. Maybe Jimmy Mc can work his way into a "slash" role - that's not easy to do, but it's possible. Guy still runs in the 4.45 range, he might do okay in open space here and there.

[QuikSand]

Okay - the plan is to get this team back into top-tier contention for the 2019 season. This year was the bottom. Next year we have a shot to load up with rookies and potentially free agents. The driving thinking is "are you going to help us during our run from 2019-2023?" 9th year plus veterans and non-affinity marginal players are on notice.

[QuikSand]

2108 Offseason, and the Five-Year-Plan



Okay, here's where we are as a franchise. I am generally okay with going through a phase like this, but now we have a plan. We are hopeful that the team will improve in 2108 over last year's 8-8, but that's not the real objective. The real objective is to regain league dominance over the next five years.

For me, as a way to order my thinking, here's what that means: on just about every decision of consequence, I want to be thinking about this team for the 2122 season an onward. The team might be good enough to contend before then, and that would be fine, but the real goal is to have things come together right around then and we max out for several years. The way this happened in another league where I run the Ravens (CCFL) was by way of strong chemistry and cohesion, coupled with solid roster-building and gameplanning. I'm targeting the same thing here... but the element I need to focus on is cohesion.

In this year's draft, we hold two picks in each of the first three rounds, via our trade-away of WR Bailey. That left a major roster hole at WR1, of course, and our team suffered for it. But it gives me a serious chance to load up with young players who could all be peaking after their first few years on the team, and if I play my cards right, could all be contributors with on-team experience by 4-5 seasons from now. Surround them with a strong chemistry structure (Billie Eilish says "duh") and enough talent to run the schemes I want, and we should be better than good. That's the goal.

So, I will do a roster evaluation now, through the filter of the soviet style five year plan.

[QuikSand]

And... we are on the clock with 1.19, as I write. I am down to two players for the pick, and there's a chance I could land them both if one slides all the way to pick 1.31. That would be nice.

In a more nearly perfect world, I'd be getting a value pick at WR here, a serious team need and one I just find hard to draft later than the top half of the first round. I'm fine grabbing WR3-caliber guys later, but getting a WR1 seems elusive, to me and to most GMs, I think. Alas, I don't see a WR1 in this pool, and I'm instead likely to just go for Best Available Chemistry Fit.

So, the pick is on the trade block for a while, but I'll likely just target my good-fit need-position guy and hope the other one slides to 31.

[QuikSand]

I can't get my generic print-to-file setup working properly here, so I'll just link back to the online roster page, and try to reference that.

Roster Page

QB is easy... TeddyTightEnds is the guy. I was pleasantly surprised when JimmyMc put up nice numbers as a hobo rookie, but we have a better fit in Teddy. I will hope that the OL develops well enough to live without JimmyMc's super-power level un-sackability... instead we will pursue the promise of a young QB with potentially maxed-out accuracy and timing. Teddy in, and, in a no-injury league, JimmyMc could end up being a cut/trade casualty (I messed up and failed to submit my intended fat 1yr offer to re-up with JimmyMc last offseason... but after a year on the bench he has had a ratings drop and a big combine drop).

Noteworty: Teddy is a 6-7 chem guy, Jimmy a 4-5 guy. With teddy locked in as the man, I will be considering offensive group leadership in search of good fits with him, as well as the rank and file in the position group. That could work against JimmyMc also.

RB, I don't really know. Harden is the only guy signed, and the sunk cost fallacy says we should be putting him to good use. I see a guy with...hmmm... "good enough" ratings at three key areas, but little else. The sort that I feel we could replace. Is he good enough to still be in our plans after another 4-5 years, once he is entering his RB twilight? Doubtful. I think he's a play-the-rookie deal sort of guy, and then ends up on the FA scrapheap. Allen is a camp guy, likely won't make this year's team.

FB Stai is a nice player, who would sign long term fairly cheaply, and in another setting this would be a no brainer. He'd help us for 18-19-20. What about 22? Hmmm. This is, probably, the exact guy I'm targeting with a five year plan... he might play this year and then just walk. FB Lusignan is a 4th year guy with starts and 90/100 in special teams. Bullseye. Stick around, dude, you're part of the plan despite not being much of a "football player." FB Reish is a 6-7 leader with 82/94 traits... great thus far, but he meshes with Jimmy not Teddy at QB. He's not talented enough to keep a role other than as a leader, so I need to give this some real thought. Ideally, I would like to lock in on a leader to build this group around...it's possible it's him, but it would be better if it were a guy who clicks with Teddy.

TE: We are loaded here with young guys, and I want them all to be part of the plan. I'm actually intrigued by the idea of building a more TE-friendly gameplan, but not enough to, you know, really do it. So, last year, I just took my stock offense and dropped about 8 TE-focused played into fairly common situations. that seemed to work okay. This year, perhaps I'll do the same again, and see if that still works. Like everything in FOF, it surely has a breaking point, but in concept I like throwing from a 12 formation, as that's likely to have plenty of teams with their run-first defenders on the field.

Personnel: Weydahl has only a 4 in BPR, and 40 in run blocking, but past that he's basically a stud. Who does that make him? Darren Waller? Fine by me. He'll want to get paid soon, like $30m+ and he'll get it. He's a great follower for chemistry (0/63) in the 6-7 group, one more reason to find a new group leader. Carr was the 1sy round pick ahead of Weydahl, but he's Hayden Hurst to Weydahl's Mark Andrews. Solid player, good chem asset (70/85 in 4-5 group) and certainly a guy we want to keep around long term as well. both these guys were around 10 ypt last season in our TE-friendly offense. They are the build-around dudes. TE Austin is his decision year, but isn't asking for a lot over minsal to extend. My guess is we will not extend him, but will see what he seeks next offseason.

Could Carr be the guy we build chemistry around? Maybe. He's good enough to play, and in time he could take the leadership role, where he'd click with Teddy. His personality of 85 is, for me, borderline... but I do like being able to eschew using a corpse to build chemistry around. That's a possibility, but not perfect.

[QuikSand]

Bottom line, for this year's drafting and for younger players... on offense, the safest group to draft is going to be 6-7, same as my long term QB. I don't really know yet who my long term leader will be at RB/FB or TE/WR, but I'm very likely to align both groups to fit with Teddy. We're already deep at TE/WR with 6-7 guys, so that's the safe play there, too.

[QuikSand]

Draft update: I take a run-stopper safety at pick 19, Cole Austin. Had a three-way conundrum with the pick, but I know we are going to need help at SS. He's in the 8-9 group, which fits with the core set of young guys we are building around, so he'll gel with our leader whether he's a 7-8 or 11-12. The possible void at a static bar is a giant red flag, but I see enough to think he will be very solid for us, even if that's legit - I am waving off the "huge bust" red flag and taking him here.

[QuikSand]

Roster Review, continued...

Offensive line: Well, we had a plan. Now I'm not so sure.

Tricky situation arose last season - our three current build-around veteran linemen (LT Woolford 10th, LG Dielman 10th, C Castillo 9th) all happen to be from the same chem group, 6-7. I've had an awful time getting someone to take the chem lead away from Dielman - last year I just gave in and started youngish Marshal Kieth (2-3 guy, 66/89) to prep him for future leadership. That looked fine - just build around a solid-looking 2-3 leader. Once Dielman goes, by trade or contract expiration, Kieth can take over and we'll be fine.

Problem is, that's presumably about when Woolford and Castillo will be ready to go, too. So... we really don't have to build chemistry around them, right?

So...the plan now is to establish somebody as the leader-in-waiting, and make sure we have pieces in place so that over the 5 year plan, we will remain solid in talent, loaded in chemistry, and at least developing in cohesion. RT Brennan was supposed to be the centerpiece of that, but he choked on a bone in camp last year and is now a waterboy. Instead, 5th year RT Gage Peterson has a year under his belt and an 89 personality in the 6-7 group, so he could be a long term asset for us. But I don't have a ton of guys to build around. So, I expect to use this draft to fill in at least one, maybe two, of those slots.

My pick at 1.31 is coming up, and there's a run-blocking OT I didn't really love, but who was #7 overall on the in-game big board, and looks solid enough, at least to play RT. So, if he slides to our pick at 1.31, maybe I do that? (He's a 2-3 guy, so that might force my hand out of using Kieth as the leader...but his 89 personality we never ideal, to be honest) Regardless, across these first 7 picks, I expect to land two linemen, or so. Might have to stick to the 6-7 group, even. Ugh.

[QuikSand]

Okay, in the first stages of free agency, our single biggest outstanding issue has been settled, in our direction. DE Owen McLeon is back - meaning we don't have to scramble to replace his 9 sacks, and equally important, we have him for a few more years as our chemistry leader for the D7 group. That puts a major worry to rest... good. He's solid, the pass rush is now pretty solid, and losing him would have created a pretty significant problem for us, short term.

Still awaiting progress toward our draft pick at 31. The high-rated OT is still there, I'm still fence-sitting about committing to a 2-3 group guy as a build-around and really tying my own hands with leadership choices.

[QuikSand]

Well, I thought I had a trade in hand to grab the pick at 1.28, but it fell through. So it goes.

At 1.32, I do land a guy who makes sense, given all my long term navel-gazing here... G Donald Foreman won't have a big personality but he's from the 6-7 group, and if those big bars hold, he ought to be a plug-and-play starter for a long time. I'll give a quick look at a move to LT, but will be okay if he's just a high end guard for a long time.

[QuikSand]

Draft update - continuing to build along the defensive front... back to "best good fit available" over "guys who can actually help us win"

2.18 DT Pete Neil

2.31 LB Tucker Brotzman

I'm fine, thought not excited, with these picks... both are relative need positions (pass rusher more than DT per se, and all-around LB) so both guys should have little trouble finding a role for five years plus, barring a big collapse.

[QuikSand]

More draftees:

3.17 CB Richie Keeler - two static bars nearly maxed, and ST close... hell, if he's meh save for an 85 in bump and special teams, he makes the team long term... I am unafraid to use bumps-only corners in my 1st and 10 defense.

3.31 DE Anthony McCormick - another "big static bars" guy - his seem maxed to me and to the consensus view, so that could portend something good... if he's a DE3 eventually, great

4.16 G Donnie Darby - run-first guard, fits our system... that's it, that's the sales pitch

5.15 RB Dashawn Lindasy - actually trying for a RB1 here, he's got some semi-promising bars

[QuikSand]

Special Teams that could be... special

Alongside my efforts to develop chemistry and cohesion, why not add to the degree of difficulty, right? Let's see how special teams look long term.

Here are players I currently expect to stick around for the 5 years ahead, and who have enough on special teams to remain active and encouraged for ST play:

72/82 RB Harden
90/00 FB Lusignan
65/78 TE Austin
68/78 TE Carr
85/85 TE Weydahl
72/86 DE Baither
78/78 NT Calhoun
92/94 LB Rossini
66/66 LB Dandron
78/84 LB Randolph
77/77 LB Armstrong
85/88 CB Baskerville
82/82 CB Metzenbaum
94/94 CB Wordehoff

So... in a zero-injury league, I already have the pieces on the roster who could give us a possibly league-best collective ST rating. Like, we could have an average rating of 80 or so. And, incidentally, even the fringe-y guys on that list (FB Lusignan, TE Austin, DE Baither, CB Baskerville and Wordehoff) already all have the starts needed to stay on the team and contribute via chemistry, so they won't get bubbled for that reason.

I just need to stick with my five year plan, stick with these guys, add in even more good-fit rookies along the way, and they should become a major engine powering the team by then, and also helping us to ace special teams along the way.

[QuikSand]

As the draft has wrapped, we finish out the first stages of free agency. I make token efforts to retain a couple veterans, but lose out on TE Thomason. So it goes. If he made the team this year, it would be mainly to displace snaps for young guys - might make them cheaper to re-sign, but Thomason is not part of the 5 year plan, the three kids are. So... off he goes. CB Joel Givens is similarly situated - he's back on a salary-only 1yr deal, and his grasp of a roster slot is tentative. Right now, he's a decent CB2/3 caliber guy with a 99 personality match, so ordinarily he'd be a yes-yes-yes guy for me... but as a 9th year guy already he won't still be here when we want to be peaking, so... perhaps not.

[QuikSand]

Fun trade offer I have put out there:

BAL sends:
2109 BAL 2,3,4,5,6,7
2110 BAL 2,3,4,5,6,7
2111 BAL 2,3,4,5,6,7

YOU sends:
???

Who wants it? Come in and put a serious stamp on your team, here's the fast track to doing that.

[QuikSand]

My logic here is: I have loaded up with kids, and for the most part want to reduce my roster churn for the next few seasons. This seems like a way to do this... if I can get some more focused draft capital in this deal, then a bunch of my 23/37 guys can continue to develop, gain playing time, and be ready to contribute more seriously when this team is ready to peak.

We'll see.