Who had the best draft class of 2019 in the NFC North?

[CharVike]

We ran the ball well when defenses were setup to stop the pass. We were one of the worst in the NFL at run blocking when the defense was setup to stop the run.

Short yardage situations killed us last year because there was zero push on the line. To consistently run the ball well, you need to get push. To occasionally run the ball well, like we did last year, you just need to catch the defense off guard.

My recollection was we sucked running the ball pretty much all the time. Did we have a good YPC? If we did it must have happened late in the season. All I remember was seeing us getting stuffed on the run except for the Miami game.

Cook average 4.6 ypc. But yet we sucked running the ball all the time. We had two big problems. 1 we didn't run the ball because we didn't want to. 9 carries and then stop. No team can run that way. 2. Cook was banged up. Until proven otherwise he will miss time again. That's not good but we don't even have a legit backup anymore. We have a bunch of nobodies and a rookie who some feel was a big time reach and blows anyway. Howard for the Bears averaged 3.7. So the Bear OL must be horrible yet they ran at will against us at home to stuff our playoff hopes. So is their OL bad or is the top RB bad? Or is our run D bad? We will be a ground based offense this year and we have one legit RB who will miss time. He's not a bell cow. He can't take that type of pounding. You bring up push and I agree with that. But you need guys that can push and we are not building it that way. It's a zone deal. Angle blocking not push blocking. Short yardage will be a big problem again.

[CharVike]

Is this a prerequisite now for calling out bad decisions by the GM? I was unaware and was not a member at that time. Dang it!

First of all trading for Bradford was not a bad decision IMO. Second it's easy to say the GM should be omniscient and know which QB he should be drafting and all other players as a matter of fact. You claimed we should have gone with Hill for that season and tanked for a high draft pick right after coming off a very successful season and had a shot with a good QB at winning the Super Bowl. I want to know when you first went on record saying we should draft Mahomes. Was it before we traded for Bradford? If it was then yes we probably could have tanked and got him. If it was after we traded for Bradford we didn't have a first round pick so it would have been very expensive to try to get him. If it was after Mahomes was drafted it was impossible. When did you first speak out saying we needed to draft Mahomes? Should we have drafted Lock instead of Bradbury this year? Jackson instead of Hughes last year.
Assuming Raptorman has his stats right approximately one in 30 QBs drafted wins a Super Bowl some time in there career. First round QBs about one in 14 wins a Super Bowl. I think Cousins chances of winning a Super Bowl with us are better than one in 14.

You guys both make some good points. To me the bottom line is Speilman did a great job in getting Cousins. Is he or will he be the greatest QB ever? No. But 30 TDs isn't bad. We haven't had a top flight QB since Fran retired. We spent many seasons with Kramer and Wilson and both were bums. Could they have a good game. Yes. But overall they weren't that good. I give credit to Speilman for trying. Even Childress tried but picked a stiff, TJ, with a 2nd round pick. I knew it was a disaster the minute it was done. Same with Culpepper. The guy was a walking idiot. That's not a 1st round guy. It was a huge reach. Even this Sloter guy might develop but he's years away. To me Cousins gives us a chance. What we really need is a D that can play some football. I don't give a dam about some ranking. The get jacked up when we play bum teams. Shut the studs down not the Lions. But we can't do that. And get a TO. We can't do that either.

[StumpHunter]

First of all trading for Bradford was not a bad decision IMO. Second it's easy to say the GM should be omniscient and know which QB he should be drafting and all other players as a matter of fact. You claimed we should have gone with Hill for that season and tanked for a high draft pick right after coming off a very successful season and had a shot with a good QB at winning the Super Bowl. I want to know when you first went on record saying we should draft Mahomes. Was it before we traded for Bradford? If it was then yes we probably could have tanked and got him. If it was after we traded for Bradford we didn't have a first round pick so it would have been very expensive to try to get him. If it was after Mahomes was drafted it was impossible. When did you first speak out saying we needed to draft Mahomes? Should we have drafted Lock instead of Bradbury this year? Jackson instead of Hughes last year.
Assuming Raptorman has his stats right approximately one in 30 QBs drafted wins a Super Bowl some time in there career. First round QBs about one in 14 wins a Super Bowl. I think Cousins chances of winning a Super Bowl with us are better than one in 14.

You guys both make some good points. To me the bottom line is Speilman did a great job in getting Cousins. Is he or will he be the greatest QB ever? No. But 30 TDs isn't bad. We haven't had a top flight QB since Fran retired. We spent many seasons with Kramer and Wilson and both were bums. Could they have a good game. Yes. But overall they weren't that good. I give credit to Speilman for trying. Even Childress tried but picked a stiff, TJ, with a 2nd round pick. I knew it was a disaster the minute it was done. Same with Culpepper. The guy was a walking idiot. That's not a 1st round guy. It was a huge reach. Even this Sloter guy might develop but he's years away. To me Cousins gives us a chance. What we really need is a D that can play some football. I don't give a dam about some ranking. The get jacked up when we play bum teams. Shut the studs down not the Lions. But we can't do that. And get a TO. We can't do that either.

You want a defense that is almost impossible to field in the modern era. Instead of focusing on making a great defense elite, the focus was, and should be, making a bad offense at least average.

[CharVike]

You guys both make some good points. To me the bottom line is Speilman did a great job in getting Cousins. Is he or will he be the greatest QB ever? No. But 30 TDs isn't bad. We haven't had a top flight QB since Fran retired. We spent many seasons with Kramer and Wilson and both were bums. Could they have a good game. Yes. But overall they weren't that good. I give credit to Speilman for trying. Even Childress tried but picked a stiff, TJ, with a 2nd round pick. I knew it was a disaster the minute it was done. Same with Culpepper. The guy was a walking idiot. That's not a 1st round guy. It was a huge reach. Even this Sloter guy might develop but he's years away. To me Cousins gives us a chance. What we really need is a D that can play some football. I don't give a dam about some ranking. The get jacked up when we play bum teams. Shut the studs down not the Lions. But we can't do that. And get a TO. We can't do that either.

You want a defense that is almost impossible to field in the modern era. Instead of focusing on making a great defense elite, the focus was, and should be, making a bad offense at least average.

Get to the Bears level. So it's not impossible. You think I want the 85 Bears or 2000 Ravens were teams couldn't score. Or the 1910 whatever. Our D is miles away from the Bears D. We don't get the TOs. The bad O scored 31 against the Super Bowl Rams, great effort, but our GREAT D let them do whatever they wanted to. That's what your missing. The Rams scored at will. That's not a great D IMO. The team we played had too much O for our scheme and or players. I know one bad game. No it was our D being over matched. Lead the league in TOs. Then you'll see what we can do and it also gives the O a chance. Plus our O had an OC that refused to run the ball and we ran it well. Every team we played knew it was pass, pass, ........ How did Cousins do anything like that. That's what you missing.

[StumpHunter]

You want a defense that is almost impossible to field in the modern era. Instead of focusing on making a great defense elite, the focus was, and should be, making a bad offense at least average.

Get to the Bears level. So it's not impossible. You think I want the 85 Bears or 2000 Ravens were teams couldn't score. Or the 1910 whatever. Our D is miles away from the Bears D. We don't get the TOs. The bad O scored 31 against the Super Bowl Rams, great effort, but our GREAT D let them do whatever they wanted to. That's what your missing. The Rams scored at will. That's not a great D IMO. The team we played had too much O for our scheme and or players. I know one bad game. No it was our D being over matched. Lead the league in TOs. Then you'll see what we can do and it also gives the O a chance. Plus our O had an OC that refused to run the ball and we ran it well. Every team we played knew it was pass, pass, ........ How did Cousins do anything like that. That's what you missing.

Yes that happened in a game, but if having a game or two like that means a defense isn't great, the Bears weren't great when they gave up 38 to NE, 31 to Brock Osweiler and the Dolphins, and 30 to a bad Giants team.

The Vikings held every team to under 200 passing yards for the final 10 games of the season, save Tom Brady. That includes QBs like Brees, Wilson and Rodgers. The offense on the other hand consistently sucked versus every good team they faced during those 10 games. That is why we missed the playoffs. Not our great defense, it was our bad offense, including the final game where the scape goat OC had been gone for weeks.

[CharVike]

Get to the Bears level. So it's not impossible. You think I want the 85 Bears or 2000 Ravens were teams couldn't score. Or the 1910 whatever. Our D is miles away from the Bears D. We don't get the TOs. The bad O scored 31 against the Super Bowl Rams, great effort, but our GREAT D let them do whatever they wanted to. That's what your missing. The Rams scored at will. That's not a great D IMO. The team we played had too much O for our scheme and or players. I know one bad game. No it was our D being over matched. Lead the league in TOs. Then you'll see what we can do and it also gives the O a chance. Plus our O had an OC that refused to run the ball and we ran it well. Every team we played knew it was pass, pass, ........ How did Cousins do anything like that. That's what you missing.

Yes that happened in a game, but if having a game or two like that means a defense isn't great, the Bears weren't great when they gave up 38 to NE, 31 to Brock Osweiler and the Dolphins, and 30 to a bad Giants team.

The Vikings held every team to under 200 passing yards for the final 10 games of the season, save Tom Brady. That includes QBs like Brees, Wilson and Rodgers. The offense on the other hand consistently sucked versus every good team they faced during those 10 games. That is why we missed the playoffs. Not our great defense, it was our bad offense, including the final game where the scape goat OC had been gone for weeks.

I'm not posting the numbers again but teams ran the ball down our throats the last 4 games. The Seahawks only had 90 yards passing but 200 + rushing. No passing I agree. A great D doesn't let a team pound the ball down their throats. Plus you forgot the TOs. The Bears had 27 ints. We had 12. The Giants had more. That's not even close. TOs are a key to games. That's what I was getting at. The Bears had 169 the last game. A great D don't allow that especially in a non rush league and at home. That's losing the LOS battle big time.

[StumpHunter]

Yes that happened in a game, but if having a game or two like that means a defense isn't great, the Bears weren't great when they gave up 38 to NE, 31 to Brock Osweiler and the Dolphins, and 30 to a bad Giants team.

The Vikings held every team to under 200 passing yards for the final 10 games of the season, save Tom Brady. That includes QBs like Brees, Wilson and Rodgers. The offense on the other hand consistently sucked versus every good team they faced during those 10 games. That is why we missed the playoffs. Not our great defense, it was our bad offense, including the final game where the scape goat OC had been gone for weeks.

I'm not posting the numbers again but teams ran the ball down our throats the last 4 games. The Seahawks only had 90 yards passing but 200 + rushing. No passing I agree. A great D doesn't let a team pound the ball down their throats. Plus you forgot the TOs. The Bears had 27 ints. We had 12. The Giants had more. That's not even close. TOs are a key to games. That's what I was getting at. The Bears had 169 the last game. A great D don't allow that especially in a non rush league and at home. That's losing the LOS battle big time.

Against Seattle the Defense held Seattle to 0 pts through 3 quarters and only gave up 14. Versus Miami 16, versus Detroit 9. The Bears game they did actually struggle a bit to stop the run...after 5 series where our offense gained 16 yards and never gave the D a break. In that game this is how it went down:

3 yards gained, punt.
1 yard gained, punt.
7 yards gained, punt.
-9 yards gained, punt.
16 yards gained, punt.
37 yards gained, FG.
92 yards gained, TD
Turnover on downs.
Turnover on downs.
Turnover on downs.

But the D was the problem?

[Raptorman]

I'm not posting the numbers again but teams ran the ball down our throats the last 4 games. The Seahawks only had 90 yards passing but 200 + rushing. No passing I agree. A great D doesn't let a team pound the ball down their throats. Plus you forgot the TOs. The Bears had 27 ints. We had 12. The Giants had more. That's not even close. TOs are a key to games. That's what I was getting at. The Bears had 169 the last game. A great D don't allow that especially in a non rush league and at home. That's losing the LOS battle big time.

Against Seattle the Defense held Seattle to 0 pts through 3 quarters and only gave up 14. Versus Miami 16, versus Detroit 9. The Bears game they did actually struggle a bit to stop the run...after 5 series where our offense gained 16 yards and never gave the D a break. In that game this is how it went down:

3 yards gained, punt.
1 yard gained, punt.
7 yards gained, punt.
-9 yards gained, punt.
16 yards gained, punt.
37 yards gained, FG.
92 yards gained, TD
Turnover on downs.
Turnover on downs.
Turnover on downs.

But the D was the problem?

Lets us also not forget that with 5 minutes left in the game, the score was 0-6 Seattle.

[VikingsVictorious]

I should let this go, but calling Bradford a garbage QB was bothering me. Injury difficulties yes, but when healthy he was very good.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJi4IG_pPAI&t=200s

[StumpHunter]

I should let this go, but calling Bradford a garbage QB was bothering me. Injury difficulties yes, but when healthy he was very good.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJi4IG_pPAI&t=200s

He was statistically one of the worst starting QBs this decade and he never had a winning season. Does one good game opening game versus the Saints, a defense that is notorious for starting slow, change that?

I guess that means Fitzpatrick is a good starter, since he did even better on opening day a year later?

Here are the stats of the QB who we traded for:https://www.sportsgrid.com/real-sports/ ... ord-sucks/

Statistically the WORST starter since 2010 with 60+ starts. That means every QB worse statistically (and a number better) were benched or cut. We gave up a first for a bad QB who was always hurt. How do you defend that trade?

[CharVike]

Against Seattle the Defense held Seattle to 0 pts through 3 quarters and only gave up 14. Versus Miami 16, versus Detroit 9. The Bears game they did actually struggle a bit to stop the run...after 5 series where our offense gained 16 yards and never gave the D a break. In that game this is how it went down:

3 yards gained, punt.
1 yard gained, punt.
7 yards gained, punt.
-9 yards gained, punt.
16 yards gained, punt.
37 yards gained, FG.
92 yards gained, TD
Turnover on downs.
Turnover on downs.
Turnover on downs.

But the D was the problem?

Lets us also not forget that with 5 minutes left in the game, the score was 0-6 Seattle.

The D couldn't stop the run game. That's a big problem. A great D don't allow that.

[StumpHunter]

Lets us also not forget that with 5 minutes left in the game, the score was 0-6 Seattle.

The D couldn't stop the run game. That's a big problem. A great D don't allow that.

They weren't that much different than the Bears in YPA.

With a viable offense, you can make the opposing team one dimensional, moving away from the run to keep up with our offenses scoring. We never really had that last year outside of against bad teams.

[CharVike]

The D couldn't stop the run game. That's a big problem. A great D don't allow that.

They weren't that much different than the Bears in YPA.

With a viable offense, you can make the opposing team one dimensional, moving away from the run to keep up with our offenses scoring. We never really had that last year outside of against bad teams.

What about TOs. Winning the TO battle is an important part of the game. Our D didn't get many TOs. Just look at the interceptions the Bears had compared to us. I think they had double the amount. That don't cut it. We will have a hard time scoring on the Bears especially early in the season. We are starting over on O again. Now it could work but I do think it will take time to jell. All the blame will then go to Cousins. You think I'm expecting our D to hold teams below 10 points a game. That's not true. We will stuff the stiffs but we need to play better against the other good teams.

[StumpHunter]

They weren't that much different than the Bears in YPA.

With a viable offense, you can make the opposing team one dimensional, moving away from the run to keep up with our offenses scoring. We never really had that last year outside of against bad teams.

What about TOs. Winning the TO battle is an important part of the game. Our D didn't get many TOs. Just look at the interceptions the Bears had compared to us. I think they had double the amount. That don't cut it. We will have a hard time scoring on the Bears especially early in the season. We are starting over on O again. Now it could work but I do think it will take time to jell. All the blame will then go to Cousins. You think I'm expecting our D to hold teams below 10 points a game. That's not true. We will stuff the stiffs but we need to play better against the other good teams.

It is the same issue we had with the run game. Teams didn't pass against us because they feared our pass rush and secondary. If the offense had put more pressure on the opposition to score quickly through the air, the picks would have happened more.

KC had one of the worst defenses in the NFL last year, but were 7th in interceptions per drive because their offense forced teams to take chances.

[VikingsVictorious]

I should let this go, but calling Bradford a garbage QB was bothering me. Injury difficulties yes, but when healthy he was very good.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJi4IG_pPAI&t=200s

He was statistically one of the worst starting QBs this decade and he never had a winning season. Does one good game opening game versus the Saints, a defense that is notorious for starting slow, change that?

I guess that means Fitzpatrick is a good starter, since he did even better on opening day a year later?

Here are the stats of the QB who we traded for:https://www.sportsgrid.com/real-sports/ ... ord-sucks/

Statistically the WORST starter since 2010 with 60+ starts. That means every QB worse statistically (and a number better) were benched or cut. We gave up a first for a bad QB who was always hurt. How do you defend that trade?

It's very easy for me to defend that. I don't even have to look at the stats you are talking about. I did try to look at the stats you were using, but I wasn't going to sign up for them so I couldn't. Just by the title it was obviously some anit-Bradford site wanting to do a hatchet job on him. You can use statistics to prove about anything you want to some times. I know Bradford is one of the most accurate QBs ever. When I saw him play he played well for us. Both seasons when he started healthy he was superb.