DStack11

Man I miss Art Haley

I approve of this ranking list. No reason in particular.

You can add me in as a fellow 2011 alum. Franklin needs to relinquish play calling influence in any capacity and focus on recruiting.

What a game to start the season. Carolina looks like a bit more balanced on offense, Nick Hall just did Nick Hall things. That O-line for the Raiders though... Could it prove to be the achilles heal for this team, and season?

Hey, @alienufo so I just noticed some discrepancies with home/away games for our schedule: Week 3 - Shown as both a home game for IND and PHI Week 5 - Shown as both a home game for TEN and PHI I'm assuming both of those are away for us?

After two straight years of getting shafted on OLB's, I've had enough. Come hell or high water I'm getting me a nice shiny OLB this season.

Man, lotta disrespeck put on the Seminoles skill guys in these articles. Brett England and Mateo Gates got plenty of bulletin board material today.

I know I say this every preseason but damn, Alex Bridgewater is such an underated quarterback.

I guess people don't realize the Eagles ran 2 RB in 2021 fairly successfully: Troy White: 267 Att for 1308 yards (4.9 ypc) and 14 TD (All Pro Selection - 1st) Marshawn Miller: 133 Att for 719 yards (5.41 ypc) and 7 TDs 5th in the NFLHC in scoring with 29.8 ppg 3rd in the NFLHC rushing yards with 132.9 ypg 2nd in NFLHC in team rushing yards per carry with 5.11

I've tried copying player lines from your progressions post and is giving me a grey background that I can't remove with the site's formatting tools. Is there a workaround for this or will the grey backgrounds be acceptable on the DC?

I'm C&P from your progressions post into my new DC post but I'm still getting a grey background. @Soluna is there a proper work around for this?

This statement actually validates teams' concerns of dictating how their personnel is to be used in the preseason, but I digress. Rules is rules so it appears to be moot. Can we quantify what a "large amount of fitness" and "likely" loss of practices would be ahead of the 3rd week of preseason?

I completely understand the point that simming four weeks of backups v backups or backups v starters adds little value to the game (though I do think it's extremely useful for evaluating depth and potential) and is probably a pain in the ass, in general. But if I may, I'd like to suggest a possible alternative to encourage the type of preseason game play that's being sought out: What if teams who choose to play starters received a slight boost in chemistry/fitness instead of punishing teams who choose to evaluate their depth and rest starters? Perhaps two teams that agree to play starters against one another receive an extra bonus on top (I imagine this would be capped, however). This way young teams and/or coaches who are changing schemes benefit from playing starters while teams with established rosters/schemes don't have to unnecessarily risk veteran player health in a preseason game, but as a result, wouldn't reap any of the chemistry/fitness benefit. I would think this would encourage the type of game play being looked for and may even have an ancillary benefit of added risk/reward strategy for coaches. If this idea is well received I'm happy to post in the appropriate suggestions thread. Just throwing out two cents.

Any chance this could be week 1 instead? Rather have the extra couple weeks to get healthy should any of my starters become injured playing in the preseason.