May 30, 2017 People really underestimate the whole "Running backs passed the age of 30 have limited success" argument. There's not many cases of successful running backs passed the age of 30. Off the top of my head? Tiki Barber, Walter Payton and Curtis Martin. It's not a long list.
May 30, 2017 Again though, Seattle has had one of the worst O-Line's in the league for the past couple years now. Lynch was able to find some success despite not being given much to work with his last couple years in Seattle. That's what makes the broken tackles/yards after contact stat so impressive. He's not your normal 30+ year old RB. He's taken a year off so his body has been given time to heal. That's not to mention he'll be playing behind what may be the best O-Line in football with a QB that's easily top 10 in the NFL, closing in on top 5. I know you're not a huge fan of PFF but they did a good write up on this: Well yeah, they got their a--- kicked this past season. I don't think that means anything for this upcoming season. Atlanta was playing some great football too last season as well. They were kicking the Patriots a--- for the first half of the Super Bowl until New England made some adjustments and Atlanta made some really stupid mistakes. Giants maybe. They're going to continue to underachieve as long as Eli is QB. They've essentially turned him into an upgraded version of Alex Smith where the offense is totally reliant only slants/screens/curls and getting the ball out of Eli's hands as fast as possible. A lot of that has to do with O-Line trouble but also because Eli has a tendencies to make stupid decisions the longer he holds onto the football. Panthers aren't the same team they were a couple seasons ago. Their defense simply isn't the same without Norman. Bucs and Vikings are promising young teams but they still have some ways to go. Is Bridgewater coming back this season? If not, do you really think Vikings can make it far with Sam Bradford? Bucs are going to have a h--- of an offense but they have no defense. I think you're mistaking Greenbay's refusal to run the football with inability to run the football. They have one of the best O-Lines in the league, they could run the ball effectively if they wanted to. Also, their issues on defense is totally on their secondary which they addressed in the draft. Their D-Line is actually pretty good.
May 31, 2017 Agree to disagree, but Seattle's O Line was pretty good pre-2015. And in 2015, he really didn't have that great of a year. Check his game logs. Could have to do with the line, or maybe age. I said the same thing about AP. Anyways, the same deficiencies you see with other teams is what I see with Green Bay. Actually, I'll give Green Bay their dues with running the ball, because their rushing averages are one of the most efficient in the NFL. I still have ZERO faith in their defense. They have an atrocious secondary. They're not bad at stopping the run, but I think that's an aberration because of how bad they defend the pass. I do think Minnesota can make some noise in the NFC. If Brock Osweiller can lead the Denver Broncos to a title, then Sam Bradford can. That defense is serious. It can be argued that the Giants have a MUCH more talented team than the Packers. Their defense has a ton of talent, as well as their offense. If they put it together, they're going to be f---ing dangerous. Tampa Bay and Green Bay are kind of mirror images of one another defensively , but I'd obviously give the edge to Green Bay because of experience. The point is, the gap is not really that far between Green Bay and the rest of the NFC. And the difference, for me, is that the Packers haven't really done enough to get better. These other teams seem to be making strides, while Packers seem to be regressing. Maybe the draft picks pan out, but it's really hard to bank on that. Green Bay is always in the mix, and I'm sure they'll be in the Divisional Round or deeper. I just don't think they've done enough to make that next leap.
