Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: The Bucs are NOT the worst team in the NFL « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3

1sparkybuc

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 7267
Offline
: February 12, 2012, 09:39:04 AM

People keep saying that and it's BS. They were a bad team last year because of the coaching and a few key injuries. Those coaches are gone and those players are healing. Four teams are drafting in front of us and their rosters are all older than ours. Old and bad trumps young and bad every time. The Bucs will most likely go into 2012 as the youngest team in the league. That will be at least the third year in a row that that has been the case. I'm not sure how they ranked in 2009. Obviously they are the least experienced team in the league, but that doesn't translate into "worst" . Ten straight losses left the building with the fired coaches. The players can't be blamed for all of it. We have some great young talent that needs better leadership and coaching. I believe they will soon get what they need and will respond to it.

GMACsBlankey

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2649
Offline
#1 : February 12, 2012, 09:42:33 AM

The Colts will have Andrew Luck this year fixing their QB issue and probably making them a 7-8 win team. The Rams are about as bad as we are so that's a push. Minnesota and us are probably equal. Cleveland was competitive in a lot of their games, they just didn't have the offense to push over the edge.

We lost 10 straight and most of which by 15+ points. When was the last time we lost a game by one score?

CyberDilemma

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 8225
Offline
#2 : February 12, 2012, 09:44:41 AM

People keep saying that and it's BS.

But if they don't say that then the message board will be lacking drama.........and we all know how our posters love drama.

buchead

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2437
Offline
#3 : February 12, 2012, 10:08:13 AM

By the end of the season the bucs were the worse team in football. Just go look at the disparity on the scoreboard. No other team loss that bad every week. List the 4 teams ahead of us. Add the 4 teams to the end of the schedule, now who we beating?
  Colts? Not! We barely beat them early on in the season when they were down and out. By seasons end they were on a upswing. Rams? Hand it to Steven 30 times and the bucs wouldnt stand a chance in hell. The vikes? Maybe but the defense was worse every week. Hand it to AP 30 times. Browns? Maybe.
 IDC what excuse or reasoning you use(injuries, coaching) the bucs were definitely one of the worse 2 teams in football. The colts can complain about injury and coaching. So can the rams, vikes, and browns. That doesnt take away the fact that they are worse than the rest of the league. Someone saying the bucs was the worse team isnt fact but it isnt total B.S so stop ranting.

Samari28

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 3779
Offline
#4 : February 12, 2012, 10:13:35 AM

Try to blame Raheem all you want but we were awful for a number of reasons, bad coaching, piss poor ownership and front office, crap for players in Biggers, Lewis, Blount, Hayes, etc. Try to sugar coat it all you want, this team has a lot of issues and the new coaching staff is not as big of an improvement as some hope for. They have proved nothing, hell they couldn't even win a Big East championship, sit back and think about that for a second, they could not win the BIG EAST.

Morgan

User is banned from postingMuted
*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 14658
Offline
#5 : February 12, 2012, 10:18:18 AM

Since the London game, I'm guessing the Bucs performed the worst in the league, regardless of the W-L record at the end of the season.  I can't remember a team giving up so many 40+ point games.

Skull and Bones

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 23055
Offline
#6 : February 12, 2012, 10:21:52 AM

I think we were by the end of the season.  I think any one of those 4 teams could have beat us fairly easily.  Also don't think you can call the Rams an old team.  They have a nice mix but more importantly their franchise QB is starting his 3rd year.   If they can get it together their future can be quite bright.  also really like Andrew Luck and the coaching staff the Colts hired.  I think their future could be really good.  The Vikings fortunes depend on Ponder developing and the Brown's need a better QB than Colt McCoy.  Like most teams if you get your QB situation settled thats the big thing.  It's just our luck to be arguably the worst team in the league last year and not have the rights to the best draft prospect in the last 15 years.


buccaneer4ever

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5161
Online
#7 : February 12, 2012, 10:24:07 AM

Since the London game, I'm guessing the Bucs performed the worst in the league, regardless of the W-L record at the end of the season.  I can't remember a team giving up so many 40+ point games.

Because almost no one did. Ever. The 2011 Buccaneers are the 4th worst in the history of the NFL, and that's not rhetoric.

Quote
That record means the Bucs are now tied for fourth place on the all-time NFL list of points given up in a season. They are tied with the 2009 Detroit Lions. Only the 1981 Baltimore Ravens, the 2008 Detroit Lions and the 1966 New York Giants have ever given up more points in a season.

Link: http://www.bucsnation.com/2012/1/2/2675497/negative-records-mark-the-2011-tampa-bay-buccaneers

I'm the biggest homer ever, but even I know reality. Do we have the peices in place to play successfully? We do, but we need a healthy GMAC to play the whole season and we need to do something, anything, at LB.


1sparkybuc

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 7267
Offline
#8 : February 12, 2012, 10:24:07 AM

People keep saying that and it's BS.

But if they don't say that then the message board will be lacking drama.........and we all know how our posters love drama.

There's some of that drama you were talking about.

Skull and Bones

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 23055
Offline
#9 : February 12, 2012, 10:27:39 AM

your're talking potential Sparky.  the ones saying it are basing it on actual play last year.  based on actual play its hard to argue they weren't.


Blaze688

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 3092
Offline
#10 : February 12, 2012, 10:32:04 AM

Try to blame Raheem all you want but we were awful for a number of reasons, bad coaching, piss poor ownership and front office, crap for players in Biggers, Lewis, Blount, Hayes, etc. Try to sugar coat it all you want, this team has a lot of issues and the new coaching staff is not as big of an improvement as some hope for. They have proved nothing, hell they couldn't even win a Big East championship, sit back and think about that for a second, they could not win the BIG EAST.

This means nothing.

Bill Walsh won three Super Bowls, changed the game of football with his genius, and might be the greatest coach of all time, but when he took over Dennis Green's Stanford team in 1992, they went 10-3, 4-7, and 3-7 (the latter being the worst season the Cardinal had suffered in 32 years).

Schiano might be cut out for the pro game, and he might not be.  His coaching record in college doesn't mean as much as the players he has developed or the attitude he brings.


Samari28

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 3779
Offline
#11 : February 12, 2012, 10:36:39 AM

Who did Schiano develop? And before you say Ray Rice did he coach Ray or was it other position coaches as head coaches do not develop players.

Skull and Bones

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 23055
Offline
#12 : February 12, 2012, 10:41:01 AM

there are about a dozen guys he coached at the U that made it to the big leagues.  Some of them like Ed Reed are pretty good even,.


freddy

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 3606
Offline
#13 : February 12, 2012, 10:43:30 AM

...... head coaches do not develop players.

Is that just College HC's or all HC's?

JasonOfthetower

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 6854
Offline
#14 : February 12, 2012, 11:00:28 AM

People keep saying that and it's BS. They were a bad team last year because of the coaching and a few key injuries. Those coaches are gone and those players are healing. Four teams are drafting in front of us and their rosters are all older than ours. Old and bad trumps young and bad every time. The Bucs will most likely go into 2012 as the youngest team in the league. That will be at least the third year in a row that that has been the case. I'm not sure how they ranked in 2009. Obviously they are the least experienced team in the league, but that doesn't translate into "worst" . Ten straight losses left the building with the fired coaches. The players can't be blamed for all of it. We have some great young talent that needs better leadership and coaching. I believe they will soon get what they need and will respond to it.

The Bucs were the worst team in the NFL at the end of the 2011 season - period. It's not about the talent, though - it was about the way they played. They quit on their coaching staff and were blown out in their last 10 games what - 8 times?

Page: 1 2 3
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: The Bucs are NOT the worst team in the NFL « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools