Mike Sullivan to stay with Buccaneers

[jhop88]

this could quite possibly be the most important (non) move of the offseason. those who take a negative POV on freeman aren't giving enough credence to the fact that it was his 3rd offensive system in 4 years, and he still put up the numbers he did. yeah there were a lot of picks and bad throws, and i saw them just like all of you, but it's a known fact that sullivan's offense is complex and requires the QB and his receivers to be thinking the EXACT same thing. quite obviously, freeman and his receivers weren't. but i'm fairly confident that another offseason of practice and finally some offensive continuity will fix a lot of those bad decisions. 

i really think the 1-5 finish is still impairing a lot of people's view of the big picture. which is even with that **CENSORED**ty slide to finish the season freeman put up single-season franchise records for yards (4,065), TD's (27), is now the franchise leader in career TD's (78), AND the team was the highest scoring group in team history (389 points). i guess the superb level of QB play this franchise has enjoyed for the last 37 years has spoiled everyone. dude is only 24 and is re-writing the record books, but if he's not "elite" after 4 years, not perfect on every throw, well then he's a donkey.

The 1-3 start and the 1-5 finish should have given some insight on what an inconsistent player the QB is. We keep hearing about how complex the system is, and how our 4th year QB can't quite get a full grip on it....well if that's the case then the coaching staff should have dumbed it down like the staffs of the 49ers, Seahawks, Colts, and 'Skins have with their young QBs. Freeman being in the first year of an offensive system has little to do with his terrible mechanics and inaccuracy.

The franchise records are irrelevant. As you stated sarcastically about the "superb" play from previous QBs in this franchise....that shows that the franchise history when it comes to offense is pitiful. So the fact that franchise passing records are being broken in a league that currently revolves around the passing game, it really isn't that big of a deal. He is now 25 and he is re-writing records that mean zilch.

i can't believe these clowns keep bringing up the "franchise records" nonsense. I was thinking about this last week...is their a franchise in football w/absolutely ZERO franchise, elite, etc QBs in their history? Of the top of my head, the only 3 I could think of one are Carolina, Detroit and the Bucs. People need to stop throwing the "franchise record" garbage around as if it actually means something w/this franchise.

Well not elite for more than one season, but Carolina had a great season from Steve Beurlein in 1999. Matt Stafford also had his elite year last year. Scott Mitchell had a good year in the 90s too for the Lions.

If Freeman broke franchise records on those teams, you're talking about at least 37 TDs, which probably gets you into the playoffs.

Yea, I was thinking long-term success. I'm sure there are other franchises, but those 3 jumped out as never having a franchise, elite QB. Trying to make Freeman sound better than he is by comparing his #s w/this franchise is a joke IMO...the history of QBs w/this franchise is atrocious.

[Hate]

 " Trolling....by sharing my opinion? "

You don't care for your own medicine, sir?

As intelligent as you pretend to be, one would think you'd know the difference between having a differing opinion and trolling. Then again... nothing you post should come as a surprise to anyone.

[jhop88]

The thing is, those two games and 8 ints exist, whether people want to acknowledge them or not.  I just don't get the, "well, if you don't look at this, this, and this..then Freeman was pretty good". I really hope the coaching staff doesn't do this when evaluating Freeman. Sure, he can bounce back and have decent numbers...and that's great for those who love to sit around and masturbate to a stat sheet webpage on ESPN.com...but stats rarely tell the whole story. We weren't in playoff contention for the last month of the year...hard to argue that we were in contention when it actually mattered. The Bucs went 1-5 down the stretch because the whole team faltered....not just the defense, and not just Freeman. Freeman was not blameless in any of those last 5 losses. Should have beaten Atlanta, and beating Atlanta are two completely different things. The team that deserved to win that game, won. Period. I wouldn't exactly call that loss against Denver a product of a great manning comeback...also Freemans pick 6 pretty much put things out of reach in that one. You certainly like to play a lot of "ifs".

no doubt those 8 INTs exist, but thats where we differ. it seems to me lots of people see things very black and white on the freeman situation when in reality there are varying shades of grey. too much context is lost looking at things in such stark terms. and if that "context" gets labeled as excuses, so be it. labelling them as excuses doesnt change the fact that all these "what if's" significantly impact the way #5 is viewed and to an extent, dealt with. i use the secondary and the lack of o-line depth because those are two significant factors that led to this team losing games (along with freeman's play in a few games). you can call them excuses, but the reality is they are two issues that are realistically going to be addressed this offseason, and if done correctly should help this team win games, as well as reducing the pressure on freeman to win it himself (and make bonehead decisions in the process).

bottom line is if you step back, you can see that while freeman did contribute to this team's failures this season, he is hardly the team's biggest problem (not yet anyway). and IMO the positives as i can see them significantly outweigh the negatives of freeman's game, some of which are nitpicky at best. again, that's not to say he doesn't have his faults but QB is the least of their worries at this point.

Two things I don't understand.

1. If freeman was drafted by a team that already had a good defense (ie, the broncos), wouldn't it be safe to say that he would have had a better chance starting out of the gate?

The guy was forced to start after a failed season, had morris as a HC (which happened to start "me throw" instead of his first round pick), and has yet to even see the defense be close to even average his entire tenure. Now to me, all of this instability has led to, well... instability. An that's not even taking into account the new systems yearly.

2. The people attacking freeman apparently don't understand the team concept, or just don't get the idea that there were parts of the team that faired much, much worse than free. Is it wrong of me to want posters to mention the CB argument every time they open there free-hating mouth?

When will people go after the failures on this team?? Freeman is no failure, but those DB's sure are. Yeah, they get talked about, but most of the resentment goes towards freeman, and that isn't right.

Say it with me now everyone...... "the DB core is BAD! ...No QB with be able to win often with the defense that is this BAD on the PASS!"

(There. Now hopefully they remember.)

The Skins defense gave up 15 less pass yds/game than the Bucs defense and they made the playoffs as a division winner and 4 seed.

The Pats defense gave up 26 less pass yds/game than the Buce defense and they made the playoffs as a division winner and 2 seed.

And for the kicker, the Packers defense gave up MORE passing yards (38 more on the year) last season than the Bucs did this season and they made the playoffs AS A DIVISION WINNER AND THE #1 SEED.

It's possible...as I've said over and over and over again...in today's NFL, it's easier to overcome bad defensive play than it is to overcome bad QB play.

[1sparkybuc]

2. The people attacking freeman apparently don't understand the team concept, or just don't get the idea that there were parts of the team that faired much, much worse than free. Is it wrong of me to want posters to mention the CB argument every time they open there free-hating mouth?

When will people go after the failures on this team?? Freeman is no failure, but those DB's sure are. Yeah, they get talked about, but most of the resentment goes towards freeman, and that isn't right.

Say it with me now everyone...... "the DB core is BAD! ...No QB with be able to win often with the defense that is this BAD on the PASS!"

(There. Now hopefully they remember.)

I have yet to see a poster here defending the play of our DBs. Actually, i feel pretty safe in saying as a whole, our secondary sucked. Difference is, we all know that and acknowledge that a complete overhaul is imminent. My question to you is if we aren't going to settle for mediocre at that position, why should be settle for mediocre at the most important position on the team?

Freeman is anything but mediocre. He is either amazing or terrible, and he is streaky. Still, the Bucs would have been a playoff team if only they had had a mediocre pass defense.

Drew Brees had a similar problem with the Saints, only their run defense sucked too. The Saints only beat five teams. At least the Bucs managed to beat six, and have fewer issues that need to be fixed.

[jhop88]

Whats funny is that I dont even think of them as "excuses" (age, second year in system, bad coaching early in his career) but as realistic reasons for why he could turn his game around. Call me the "excuse man" all you want but they are legit reasons for why the guy could turn his game around.

I have said since the 2009 draft that Freeman was better than Mark Sanchez. I still believe that. Even with two years experience under his belt, Sanchez has shown he can't overcome a bad team. He would have totally sucked four straight years had the Bucs drafted him. The Jets would still be in trouble with Freeman now, but I believe they would have at least made it to the SB once with him. Situations do make a difference no matter how much the haters want to ignore them.

Add Sanchez to the list.

Yes, Josh Freeman is better than Mark Sanchez!!! I feel much better about next season now!

[jhop88]

He's about as good as we're gonna get for now.

SMH @ this continued sentiment on here...which is still wrong btw.

[jhop88]

2. The people attacking freeman apparently don't understand the team concept, or just don't get the idea that there were parts of the team that faired much, much worse than free. Is it wrong of me to want posters to mention the CB argument every time they open there free-hating mouth?

When will people go after the failures on this team?? Freeman is no failure, but those DB's sure are. Yeah, they get talked about, but most of the resentment goes towards freeman, and that isn't right.

Say it with me now everyone...... "the DB core is BAD! ...No QB with be able to win often with the defense that is this BAD on the PASS!"

(There. Now hopefully they remember.)

I have yet to see a poster here defending the play of our DBs. Actually, i feel pretty safe in saying as a whole, our secondary sucked. Difference is, we all know that and acknowledge that a complete overhaul is imminent. My question to you is if we aren't going to settle for mediocre at that position, why should be settle for mediocre at the most important position on the team?

Still, the Bucs would have been a playoff team if only they had had a mediocre pass defense.

Or a great QB.

[1sparkybuc]

Whats funny is that I dont even think of them as "excuses" (age, second year in system, bad coaching early in his career) but as realistic reasons for why he could turn his game around. Call me the "excuse man" all you want but they are legit reasons for why the guy could turn his game around.

I have said since the 2009 draft that Freeman was better than Mark Sanchez. I still believe that. Even with two years experience under his belt, Sanchez has shown he can't overcome a bad team. He would have totally sucked four straight years had the Bucs drafted him. The Jets would still be in trouble with Freeman now, but I believe they would have at least made it to the SB once with him. Situations do make a difference no matter how much the haters want to ignore them.

Add Sanchez to the list.

Yes, Josh Freeman is better than Mark Sanchez!!! I feel much better about next season now!

You should, but I doubt you could reason that far at your level of compre........understanding.

[Hate]

Freeman is anything but mediocre. He is either amazing or terrible, and he is streaky.

And you're content with that?

Still, the Bucs would have been a playoff team if only they had had a mediocre pass defense.

Drew Brees had a similar problem with the Saints, only their run defense sucked too. The Saints only beat five teams. At least the Bucs managed to beat six, and have fewer issues that need to be fixed.

Please, please, please stop comparing Freeman to Brees. Its hard to take any post seriously once that happens.

[Morgan]

Mike Sullivan to stay with Buccaneers

Guess we're married to our OC for at least another season since Trestman was hired by the Bears.
Continuity as least for Freeman should be a good thing.

[DonkeyHunter]

For all the ones berating the supposed "Freepologists", I've yet to hear of a realistic and viable replacement.

[chace1986]

Freeman is anything but mediocre. He is either amazing or terrible, and he is streaky.

And you're content with that?

Still, the Bucs would have been a playoff team if only they had had a mediocre pass defense.

Drew Brees had a similar problem with the Saints, only their run defense sucked too. The Saints only beat five teams. At least the Bucs managed to beat six, and have fewer issues that need to be fixed.

Please, please, please stop comparing Freeman to Brees. Its hard to take any post seriously once that happens.

"Dude"s ass must be torn to shreds....cause he keeps pulling anything and everything out of it to attempt to defend any criticism of Freeman.

[danimal09]

For all the ones berating the supposed "Freepologists", I've yet to hear of a realistic and viable replacement.

+1 People can whine all they want but there isn't one option better than Freeman that I have heard from any poster. I would love to hear some, not trolling, I actually would.

[JDouble]

Freeman sucking, and having a viable replacement right now are two entirely different subjects. Why do some of you keep trying to make them the same thing? Just because there is no one to replace him with at the moment, doesn't mean he sucks less. Two different discussions.

[Dolorous Jason]

For all the ones berating the supposed "Freepologists", I've yet to hear of a realistic and viable replacement.

+1 People can whine all they want but there isn't one option better than Freeman that I have heard from any poster. I would love to hear some, not trolling, I actually would.

You already would have , if they existed . They don't...