DawgTalkers.net Forums Active Threads

Aaaaand there you have it.

The Guards couldn't be any more like the month of March... come in like a Lion, leave like a Lamb.

They've lost six of seven in the playoffs and twelve of their last fifteen when the games count.

Soooo predictable.

Maybe next year, eh??

Probably not.

What teams are likely to be looking for a Qb in round 1 next year?
Not all will take one but here are the teams I feel would like to (at this point in time):

Browns
Steelers
Dolphins
Jets
Vikings
Cardinals

To me, these 6 are for sure Qb hunting
There are several others that are maybe's

Colts
Texans

NFL suspends officials Jeff Seeman, Adrian Hill for conduct toward players

The NFL has suspended line judge Jeff Seeman for two games and referee Adrian Hill for one game as punishment for instances of unprofessional conduct toward a player.

NFL Vice President of Officiating Ramon George issued the suspensions.

Seeman was caught on camera apparently cursing at Arizona Cardinals tight end Trey McBride during Sunday's 36-24 loss to the New York Giants.

McBride felt he was interfered with by Giants cornerback Dru Phillips on a third-and-8 pass from quarterback Jacoby Brissett that fell incomplete. McBride got hit and complained to Seeman, who appeared to yell a profanity at McBride, according to video of the incident.

After the McBride incident, NFLPA Executive Director J.C. Tretter posted a statement on X that called for the same scrutiny of officials as for players.

"This kind of behavior from an official towards a player is unacceptable. Players are consistently held accountable when roles are reversed. We expect the NFL to hold officials to the same standard," Tretter wrote.

Hill's incident involved Minnesota Vikings linebacker Eric Wilson in their 15-10 win over the visiting Miami Dolphins.

Wilson was pushed into Hill by Dolphins running back Ollie Gordon II midway through the first quarter after a third-and-10 play was whistled dead because of a Minnesota penalty. Gordon drove Wilson away from quarterback Malik Willis and right into Hill, who was knocked down. As Wilson tried to help him up, Hill jumped up while pointing and yelling at Wilson to get away.

Wilson said he laughed off the incident with Hill.

"That was funny, honestly," Wilson told reporters in the Vikings' locker room. "I ended up apologizing to him and explained the situation. He was cool about it. He understood what was going on. He just said he didn't want us fighting, me and [Gordon]. He said he was just trying to break us up."

Vikings coach Kevin O'Connell said he didn't get a great view of the play, but did defend Hill as an official in the league.

"I think Adrian's a really good official and does a really good job," O'Connell said Monday. "And I think that was just kind of a fast moment that happened and we can put it behind us hopefully."

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id...-jeff-seeman-adrian-hill-conduct-players

If it doesnt fit you dont have to argue it!

Thanks for the info Irish. It brings things into a proper perspective.

We need to hit the reality button on Watson, he is the most expensive one year player (if he makes it through the season) in NFL history.

They will not be throwing the franchise tag at him. The future years would not accelerate, but the original contract had a poison pill built into it and if he is still a Brown on March 13th, another $200M is guaranteed for year 2029. That is what will kill this contract more than anything. He WILL BE RELEASED either March 11th or March 12th. They have to wait until March 11th, but have to have it done before close of business on March 12th in order to avoid this poison pill. They then will carry the entire contract cap until June 2nd, where they will get relief for the post June 1st designation. All of the carry over money Berry has utilized diligently is why they will be able to move on in 2027.

NOW, if they have a new contract in place for him before these dates, all bets are off, but that poison pill is there as much for him as it is the franchise. If he says he wants to go elsewhere and go into free agency, there isn't a damn thing the Browns can do about it without giving him another $200M in guaranteed salary for 2029 AND paying him the franchise tag amount in 2027 along with the other guaranteed money belonging in 2027 contract void years. Obviously the $200M will keep them from making that decision.

Whether he gets injured or just has a bad hair day.. he's bound to get booed again this season because he's earned those boos from the fan base and they can spend them however they want to. WHEN that happens, it will solidify his decision to move on to another city in Free agency. Once the post June 1 designation is turned in, the Browns will never negotiate with him on another contract and he will be forced to take what ever another team will pay him, which won't amount to more than a backup/prove it QB contract.

I predict he signs a one year deal above a 3 year average deal with a team that feels they might be just out of the QB sweepstakes of the draft. Then they can still try to get one of them in the draft, but have him in their back pocket no matter what.

I'm saying exactly what I've been saying. AI is one useful tool in a toolbox. It's not the be all, end all. I'm also saying everyone has access to AI so there is nothing proprietary about that. Another thing I can tell you is that the question you ask, the way you phrase the question and what AI source you ask will give you differing results.

Once again I was comparing it to NFL GM's who also have all of the AI information as well as the opportunity to interview these players one on one. Something AI can not duplicate and is extremely valuable in the process.

I would like to ask you, do you think that NFL quality scouting departments do not speak directly to the players close friends/relatives/coaches/teammates? That's a critical part of the scouting process. And somewhere along the line here I believe you either forgot about or have totally decided to ignore the fact that every team in the NFL and most professional sports has an analytics department. And that is the very purpose of AI. Breaking down all the numbers and angles on players. It's been in use for a very long time now. I believe coming to some conclusion that NFL teams aren't fully embracing and using AI as a tool is naive at best.

And then I also have to wonder. Does AI value all factors in judging a QB equally or give higher priorities to those special skills? I think most everyone is in agreement that the ability to go through your reads while reading a defense quickly is one of the most valuable and hard to find qualities in a QB. So does AI give those things much more gravity when grading QB's than other QB skills?

Just for giggles I asked Gemini this question. "Rank the 27 quarterback class based upon the most advanced metrics available." And my list ranked them very differently than the answer bone got.

Thee current analytical ranking of the class’s top prospects emphasizes translatable NFL traits, efficiency, and performance under pressure:

1. Dante Moore | Oregon (Model Rank: QB1)

• The Metrics: Led the FBS with 30 big-time throws. He is highly valued by NFL scouts for his elite physical upside and an exceptionally accurate quick game.
• Scouting Outlook: Despite some high-variance tape, evaluators overwhelmingly favor his natural tools. In an ESPN poll of 25 NFL scouts and executives, Moore captured 14 first-place votes to be the top QB selected in 2027.

2. Julian Sayin | Ohio State (Model Rank: QB2)

• The Metrics: Boasts the #1 overall FBS PFF grade among eligible underclassmen and an elite 1.4% turnover-worthy play rate. His analytical profile is anchored by a class-leading 55.3 FRED score, proving his elite down-to-down efficiency.
• Scouting Outlook: Sayin is regarded as the most pure throw-for-throw accurate passer in the class. Concerns exist regarding his average arm velocity and a frame that has invited pressure/sacks, but his microscopic mistake rate keeps him at the top of advanced models
.
3. Arch Manning | Texas (Model Rank: QB3)

• The Metrics: Manning possesses an elite arm and mental processing profile, matching the ideal NFL build (6'4", 222 lbs). However, advanced metrics reflect recent late-September volatility—he currently ranks 29th in ESPN's QBR (67.6) due to deep-ball inconsistency.
• Scouting Outlook: Despite metrics showing a slight plateau in continuous production, his traits are undeniable. He secured 7 first-place votes from NFL executives, locked in as a premier talent whose ceiling matches anyone in the class.

4. Darian Mensah | Miami (Model Rank: QB4)

• The Metrics: Mensah is the fastest-rising statistical marvel in the country, leading the FBS with an astonishing 88.7% completion percentage alongside a 39.4 FRED score.
• Scouting Outlook: Analytical models are heavily heavily weighting Mensah’s absurd efficiency in Miami’s explosive offense. Scouts note he is rising "like a rocket" due to his elite decision-making and coachability.

5. Drew Mestemaker | Oklahoma State (Model Rank: QB5)

• The Metrics: Boasts a strong 40.4 FRED score after leading the nation in passing yards prior to his transfer from North Texas.
• Scouting Outlook: Favored heavily by traditional and volume-based analytical models, Mestemaker was recently named the No. 1 overall quarterback prospect on ESPN analyst Jordan Reid's Big Board.

6. CJ Carr | Notre Dame (Model Rank: QB6)

• The Metrics: Carr operates at a blistering pace with a lightning-fast average time-to-throw of 2.54 seconds. He features a 6.5% big-time throw rate against a 3.2% turnover-worthy play rate.
• Scouting Outlook: Models appreciate his bloodlines and high-floor processing, though a lower FRED score (10.6) and below-average NFL arm velocity push him to a Day 2 projection.

Just for the hell of it I asked ChatGPT about the list - then specifically if there was any data to know which has the faster/fastest release and who processes faster thru progressions:

CJ Carr — possibly the best natural processor

This is the one I want to emphasize.

If you asked me:

"Which of these guys looks most comfortable going through a full-field progression?"

I'd have Carr and Sayin very close.

Carr doesn't necessarily look spectacular doing it. That's part of what I like.

He gets through the progression, recognizes the coverage, resets his feet and delivers the ball without excessive movement.

He's a very rhythmical quarterback.

The thing I'd like to see more of is Carr doing it against defenses that can consistently disguise coverage and pressure him. Notre Dame's protection and overall offensive structure make his job considerably easier.

But I think his mental processing may actually be one of his biggest NFL selling points.

Sayin vs Carr

If I had to split them:

Sayin

quicker release
perhaps slightly quicker eyes
better at manipulating the pocket
excellent anticipation
very efficient

Carr

perhaps slightly more natural progression QB
excellent anticipation
very calm
very consistent footwork
less reliant on predetermined throws

Well, first I was agreeing with Bone and didn't really think this was technically a debate at this point.. I was just curious if the defenses were included in the analysis. The analysis can run as deep as the analyzer goes down a rabbit hole. You can start out with a vague question, then add details to drill it down further and further. JUST going off of game stats vs historical value is one thing, but in the day of AI, adding in the defensive tendencies of the opponents, which is information AI can already take into consideration, will drill it down that much further.

You made a bold statement based on his post and I asked you for some clarification as well. To clarify further, are you asking for a debate on the reliability of AI vs "Draft Guys"? I'm just not sure where you are going with this. If that's what you are looking for, I'm going to bow out right now.. AI can't do anything without someone asking the questions.. "Draft guys" can't do anything without knowing the right questions to ask. All AI does is speed up the process for someone analyzing the players we are discussing. It isn't about which one is better, AI can't do anything without the human, but the human can do it so much better with AI.

I will argue that if you are going to put an old time scout that refuses to use AI in a room with a novice person that knows AI and the sport and neither get an opportunity to speak directly to the player, their close friends/relatives/coaches/teammates... Then the argument turns to watching game film and all the information that can be gathered. Someone that only turns on a computer and "analyzes" a player based on stats is going to get schooled by the old timer that has watched every play of a player the past two seasons, while making notes of each of those plays. However, if the novice understands the game, watches every play AND utilizes AI in sorting that information that he now has the knowledge to ask the right questions.. then I would go with the novice.

Could the old time evaluate every defense the QB has ever gone up against? Sure, but it would take him years compared to AI who can do it in minutes. They don't have years to get the packets on each player put together for draft season. In the past they had a snapshot of what each player is, now that picture is so much more complete, because the old timers that refuse technology are no longer employed.



Edit: Now, going to the talking heads, they typically play off of each other rather than actually putting in hours of analysis on each player.. that is a whole other discussion. They have deadlines and that is more important than getting all the relevant information in front of them. Many of them don't even watch game film. They just do a quick AI question on consensus of the others talking about the same subject. None of which might have used all the tools necessary to render their opinions.

Still early.

Draft analysts are not GMs. They are informed people with an opinion. Their opinions are valid but they are opinions.

GMs also have opinions but they can act on their opinions. Right or wrong. Analysts are not accountable.

This season will play out.

IMO the Browns will draft a qb. Right now we are all clueless. Not even worth a guess.

Great post.

Your points 1 and 2 are hard for anyone willing to have an honest discussion to refute.

Sadly I think the powers that be have us plebs exactly where they want us - folks would rather spam random tweets and "news" about the extreme idiots on the other side of their political perspective than have a meaningful debate or try to hold 'their politicians' accountable. Both sides do this. The result is what we see here. Dawgtalkers is a as a microcosm of the larger issue.

...on this site. (Though I'd complete that thought for you...lol). Actually, posting on here could be a full time job, perhaps unpaid though.

Even all of the talking heads have access to all of this information. So I'm not sure how you can conclude AI knows more. Then even you yourself pointed out the difference in the defenses that he had faced in a counterpoint to the very rankings bone posteded from AI.

So I'm not quite sure which side of this debate you're on?

Well, I'm almost positive Bone was talking about the talking heads... What NFL GM is giving out his road map to who he thinks is the best QB in a draft that hasn't happened yet?

That's one part of my point. And no, I wasn't referring to the talking heads. I was talking about NFL GM's.

You see they have the same access to all of the AI database that was shown above. So there's nothing proprietary about that. On top of that they have entire scouting departments and in person interviews that tell you more about a player than statistics do. If such statistics alone told the entire story I may agree. But it doesn't so I don't.

I am always hesitant to enter these discussions, especially when questions appear loaded and the discussions in this forum often produce no productive results. That being said, I think it is important to reframe the current context.

This is the original question you asked:


They are not attractive. Nobody is attractive. It has been that way for a long time. My whole voting existence has pretty much been between the lesser of two evils. I do take exception to the binary concept that it is one or the other. We really must escape that system. There is no shortage of people who conform their beliefs to fall in line with a certain party, rather than the other way around. That dynamic has absolutely crippled us as a nation going back decades in the election cycles.

The issue, though, becomes people's needs to escape the "unattractiveness" of what we are currently witnessing. I imagine you felt very similarly during '21 to '24. You cannot simply exclude the performance of the administration in power when deciding on a replacement. To create a Browns metaphor - if your head coach is 1-31, you want to get rid of him before he finds a fax machine to make trades and you sure as hell don't want to promote people on his staff who thought he did a great job while being a part of 1-31. That factors into your decision making.

One thing I do think we need to escape is the binary nature of our politics, which I think the creation of this thread focuses on. It is one or the other. People feel a need to paint with a broad brush or fall in line with a party ideal and/or write off the other side simply because there is an R or a D after the name. I believe that dynamic of looking at the party first has truly done irreparable harm to us as a nation. Throw rage bait algorithms on top of that as reinforcement, and you land with the current mess that we have collectively become.

For my part, this is my alternative approach: I create a grading rubric from which I view candidates. The rubric is a hierarchy of priorities that I think are urgent. These priorities morph over time depending on what I think the urgencies of the nation are. I line up those priorities and then compare them to the candidate platforms and decide on the candidate who most closely advocates for what I believe is important, regardless of party. Like I mentioned, the candidates have become so poor that I am often choosing a candidate that grades out as a D vs a candidate that grades out as an F.

To directly answer your question regarding policies, I will go in order of what I think is most urgent for us:

1. Anti-corruption, campaign reform, and money in politics. If I had a list of 10 priorities, this would be 1-9. Until we get this, there really are no other policies or platforms. Why? Because candidates will Trojan horse their way in. They will campaign on platforms they have no intention of fulfilling, just to make it through the door, before doing whatever they will. Current POTUS certainly has gone the opposite of his campaign platforms and the previous POTUS failed on some of his as well. We really require a constitutional amendment on this issue. Since Citizens United, PAC money has exploded from $574M to raising over $8B (feel free to check me on that) to influence elections. Candidates spend more time campaigning and are more beholden to special interests than ever before. Insider trading has gone off the charts. Thomas Massie had $30+M thrown against him in his Kentucky district from people who have absolutely zero interest or connection to his district. That is simply wrong. Unless I am mistaken, most of the push for an anti-corruption amendment has been on the Democrat side. Hat tips to Bill Cassidy and Thom Tillis for crossing those lines, but I believe both are lame ducks. Limiting the corruption of our politicians though is the absolute most urgent priority.

2. Spending/Debt/Deficit. I have often complained about this before, but it bothers me greatly that we have septuagenarians, octogenarians, and even a senator in his 90's discussing the financial fate of our country's future. For decades, I've been lectured about how millennials need to be financially savvy and how we shouldn't "take what is not ours" while watching legacy politicians borrow against future generations with impunity, all before they kick the bucket with no consequences.
We have spent the last fifty years or so living with social benefits while also enjoying low tax burdens, especially in comparison to how they were during the Eisenhower administration. That combination has led us to an insane amount of debt with deficits that have been unconscionable. This is also an historic failure on the part of both parties.

The bottom line is that I am given the choice between one party that wants to raise revenue and raise spending vs a party that wants to cut revenue and raise spending. As far as actual policies go, I am not a fan of the Trump accounts. As a traditional conservative, I believe Government spending should largely focus on three things: keeping your populace safe, healthy and well-educated. I’d prefer getting rid of tariffs and non-interventionist policies that allow me to naturally keep that money and invest it as I see fit. I find the $5,000 to be absolutely absurd. I also lived through DOGE, and calling that a joke would be offensive to jokes. That being said, I really don’t see anything promising from the Dems in terms of reining this in. Schumer is an old puppet and Jeffries is all platitudes and no substance. This is where I’m choosing between D- and F for most candidates.

I do think we need to rein in the power of the billionaires. I largely find myself at odds with the progressive caucus, but this is an area where I do align with them. Yes, I am a traditional conservative, but this problem has festered for so long. Their power has become so immense that they are rising to the level of getting de facto government positions and self-dealing with Government contracts. It is also simply wrong for Walmart to earn so much substantial revenue while paying its employees so little that it essentially socializes their benefits to the taxpayers (via SNAP, Medicaid, etc.). Jeff Bezos getting to essentially rent out the entire city of Venice for his second marriage while many of his warehouse workers rely on social programs is also wrong. I firmly believe that you should be rewarded for hard work and innovation, but we are reaching fever pitch extremes here. Billionaires are no longer being rewarded for the fruits of their labor, but just making gobs of money based on…their money itself. I do think this problem can be solved with an amendment that I listed in number 1 above.

3. Restoration of our institutions and federal employees. Our institutions have come under attack. Yes, I do think there were people who were bad actors that opened up certain institutions as prime targets, but that was used as a broad brush excuse to absolutely gut things. The elimination of USAID, who just so happened to be investigating a certain high-dollar political donor, was wrong. I think we need to restore faith in institutions and federal employees alike. I understand that this is more personal to me, but you asked what my priorities are, so I am answering.

When FY25 ended, my organization explored our metrics and realized that we were saving $300 in negotiations for every $1 we were paid in salary. That is a good return on investment. Via DOGE/RIFs, my branch was reduced to 57% of our previous capacity in FY26, and certain changes took arrows out of our quiver to successfully negotiate. Banning cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts, raising the TINA threshold to $10M, and starting a war after significantly RIFing DoD employees was the embodiment of ready, fire aim.
There is a lot of greed and a lot of war profiteering. The war profiteers are also in power, but nobody knows about them. If you’re curious, check out Steven Feinberg. They are defanging my ability to negotiate strongly so that I am forced to spend more of YOUR money. It is all behind the scenes too and gets very little attention. That has to stop.

We federal employees were attacked by POTUS for working two jobs and ironically for playing golf when we should be working, which was not remotely true. On top of that, we were given a 1% raise, RIF’d last year, and look to receive absolutely no raise in 2027 while our health insurance premiums are rising 11%. We often have to work without soap in the bathrooms or toilet paper either because of “budget cuts” with people needing to bring in their own. Many of you remember that saga. I simply cannot keep going on this way. The guise of needing to save money by eliminating us was also fake. DOGE employees admitted their efforts to reduce the deficit did not work. Also, looking to rein in spending by eliminating departments/employees is only focusing on 4% of federal spending, not the 70% that is social security, healthcare and defense.

The biggest problem for us is that we do not have a voice. There is no “federal employee” lobby or PAC out there that fights for us. So we have become victims of special interests who see us as a road block to them siphoning off that sweet, sweet government money. There has been an inaccurate picture painted of us as DMV bureaucrats, but we are more than that. We are lawyers who negotiate to keep troops safe and well-equipped while saving your money. We are air traffic controllers. We are law enforcement officers, we are IRS employees going after tax loopholes and people who hide money. We are food safety inspectors. On this front, the only advocacy we currently have is from the Dems. Even if it is platitude driven, it is still better than the alternative.
4. Healthcare. I have already had a very long post, so I won’t go into it. Basically, even a so-so plan or a bad plan is still better than no plan. All I am seeing on this front from one side is “concepts of a plan” for over a decade vs something that barely helps at all. Again, choosing the D- over the F.

There are more, too, but I wanted to put that out there. In applying that rubric I decide on candidates. For instance, Josh Turek out of Iowa (obviously outside my voting area) is in favor of a lot of what I asked for, while also being pro-2nd amendment and pro secure border. Sign me up. Brian Fitzpatrick is another candidate I generally like. Both of them are on opposite sides but generally grade higher in my rubric than their alternatives. Fix priority number one, though, if we want to have any hope in our future. As it stands right now, it is pretty lopsided on that front from what I can tell.

AI has all the metrics the draft guys (talking heads, is who I am assuming this refers to) do and more. It also knows better how to analyze those metrics. The best part of being an actual employee of a NFL Franchise is you have access to the players during the off season. A live person will be able to get a better understanding of the person through multiple conversations with the young man that can make a difference in those prospects that the metrics have too close to call.

What he is doing is ignoring the fact that trump has attacked every judge, every prosecutor and even his own appointees who do not rule the way he wants them too. He is also ignoring that trump's comments about James had nothing to do with anything he posted and was strictly a personal attack against her. You know, Memphis being Memphis.

Does it include strength of schedule and NCAA defensive ratings?

Reminder of Mensah's current state of opponent:
Stanford ranked 111
Florida A&M ranked 108
Wake Forest ranked 71
Central Michigan ranked 55
Clemson ranked 68
Florida State next ranked 128
THEN FINALLY... Pitt comes in at #16 nationally (Though they have played Miami OH/UCF/Syracuse/Bucknell, so might want to take that with a grain of salt)
The true test will be in a marquee matchup with Notre Dame, who is currently #7 ranked in defense. Irish have played (3) B1G teams and Rice.

To compare to my pick of the litter, CJ Carr
Wisconsin ranked #29
Rice ranked #105
Michigan State ranked #67
Purdue ranked #130
North Carolina ranked #43
with upcoming;
BYU #17
MIAMI now #1

If anyone wants to look at what QB play looks like in NCAA that can (not guaranteed mind you) translate to the NFL, watch the Miami vs Notre Dame game November 7th! This is a marquee match up of arguably the two best QBs going against two of the best defenses in the NCAA.

BTW, I do think Manning has a nice career ahead of him in the NFL. He has fixable issues, but I believe he is going to end up being as good as his uncle Eli.

So what are you saying???

Are you saying FB and Twitter posts DO matter ??? Or unhinged, dumb, moronic or ALL CAPITAL POSTS with mispelings only matter when it's not the POTUS?? Got it.

How many people do you know or do you think that post on this board have a history of sexual assault? Stop pretending everyone's history is equal because it isn't.

I don't have an issue with hoping he plays well because that is a benefit to every other player on the roster, the coaching staff and the fans. But that's where it ends. There's a difference between watson the player and watson the person. The player I can hope does well but I'll never be in the corner of watson the person. I have a mother who passed long ago. I have a wife, a daughter a granddaughter and even great granddaughters. I can never disrespect them by siding with a sexual predator. To me that just sounds disgusting. Especially since he has never manned up and apologized or accepted responsibility for any of it.

I like Rockabilly. Two of my favs, the great Johnny Cash and Marty Stewart.

And she is also dumb enough to post on Facebook assuming the facts in this situation already showing bias in this case. She is an idiot.



iDePeNdAnt rEevIeW

Any comment about what he said about his own SCOTUS appointees?

You see, the point here is he will attack the justice system no matter who it is. He and James have a history of which the article points out. His own SCOTUS nominees simply didn't rule the way he wanted them to. It's a clear and obvious pattern. The rule of law doesn't matter to him and he has no respect for the justice system unless they give him what he wants. And when they don't he'll undermine them at every turn. That doesn't bother you?