Cheese Curds - News Around The League 2025

[Pckfn23]

Chiefs are 3rd worst in yards per carry on the ground. They are 11th worst in total rushing yards.

Hunt had the 31st most rushing yards in the league and a 3.6 yard average. The worst average among the top 50 rushing leaders. Pacheco wasn't much better at 3.7.

[go pak go]

Strong disagree. They have the best QB in the league. They have the best C in the league. They have arguably the best DT in the league. McDuffie is one of the best CBs in the league. They have two of the leagues better OGs in the league with Thuney and Smith. Travis Kelce is still one of the leagues better TEs despite on the backside of his career. Then you go across the board and they just have a lot of other solid players. Leo Chenal, Nick Bolton, George Karlaftis, Isaiah Pacheco, Justin Reid. They dont have league worst position groups that kill them like the Packers have had in recent championship pushes.

I'll give you McDuffie, but I otherwise stand by my take. Humphrey arguably is the best in the league sure but C is not a super impactful position. Bolton, Pacheco, Reid, etc. are all nice players but not field-tilters IMO, or anyone you have to gameplan around.

KC certainly is a solid all-around team, which is impressive in a sense, but I think the intangibles is more what makes them great.

If I may interject here. A solid all-around team with a few star players- preferably a star QB, and smart coaches are what a team needs to win a Super Bowl. Most importantly, the team must have no weaknesses.I am convinced that if a team has a weakness at any position group, that weakness invariably will be exposed in the playoffs. So, in summary, I don't think you need a roster littered with field-tilters. You just can't suck anywhere.

I have done data research of SB winners the last 20 years (I've posted this a few times on this board) and looking into if it is better to have a top flight offense or top flight defense.

My findings were that offense or defense didn't really matter. What mattered most was:

1. SB winning teams generally has a top 5 something (offense or defense) and more importantly a top 10 of the other thing.
2. SB winning teams were never in the bottom third in any category (offense, defense, STs).

There are exceptions. The 2006 Indianapolis Colts were bottom in the league in defense but then exploded out of nowhere in the postseason. Also had the 2000 Ravens that was completely carried by a historic defense. 2015 Broncos were similar.

So yes. Usually you need to be pretty good in one facet but then just not belew average in any other facet.

[Yoop]

I'll give you McDuffie, but I otherwise stand by my take. Humphrey arguably is the best in the league sure but C is not a super impactful position. Bolton, Pacheco, Reid, etc. are all nice players but not field-tilters IMO, or anyone you have to gameplan around.

KC certainly is a solid all-around team, which is impressive in a sense, but I think the intangibles is more what makes them great.

If I may interject here. A solid all-around team with a few star players- preferably a star QB, and smart coaches are what a team needs to win a Super Bowl. Most importantly, the team must have no weaknesses.I am convinced that if a team has a weakness at any position group, that weakness invariably will be exposed in the playoffs. So, in summary, I don't think you need a roster littered with field-tilters. You just can't suck anywhere.

I have done data research of SB winners the last 20 years (I've posted this a few times on this board) and looking into if it is better to have a top flight offense or top flight defense.

My findings were that offense or defense didn't really matter. What mattered most was:

1. SB winning teams generally has a top 5 something (offense or defense) and more importantly a top 10 of the other thing.
2. SB winning teams were never in the bottom third in any category (offense, defense, STs).

There are exceptions. The 2006 Indianapolis Colts were bottom in the league in defense but then exploded out of nowhere in the postseason. Also had the 2000 Ravens that was completely carried by a historic defense. 2015 Broncos were similar.

So yes. Usually you need to be pretty good in one facet but then just not belew average in any other facet.

awesome post, the thing is, as Papa, Others, and your investigation show, is that a team with weak position will get exploited and the team overall has to be very good

we hear often that defense wins championships, but that's dependent on the offense and ST's getting them off the field for some rest, or they will get gassed just as ours has at times

[go pak go]

If I may interject here. A solid all-around team with a few star players- preferably a star QB, and smart coaches are what a team needs to win a Super Bowl. Most importantly, the team must have no weaknesses.I am convinced that if a team has a weakness at any position group, that weakness invariably will be exposed in the playoffs. So, in summary, I don't think you need a roster littered with field-tilters. You just can't suck anywhere.

I have done data research of SB winners the last 20 years (I've posted this a few times on this board) and looking into if it is better to have a top flight offense or top flight defense.

My findings were that offense or defense didn't really matter. What mattered most was:

1. SB winning teams generally has a top 5 something (offense or defense) and more importantly a top 10 of the other thing.
2. SB winning teams were never in the bottom third in any category (offense, defense, STs).

There are exceptions. The 2006 Indianapolis Colts were bottom in the league in defense but then exploded out of nowhere in the postseason. Also had the 2000 Ravens that was completely carried by a historic defense. 2015 Broncos were similar.

So yes. Usually you need to be pretty good in one facet but then just not belew average in any other facet.

awesome post, the thing is, as Papa, Others, and your investigation show, is that a team with weak position will get exploited and the team overall has to be very good

we hear often that defense wins championships, but that's dependent on the offense and ST's getting them off the field for some rest, or they will get gassed just as ours has at times

lol. This is so funny to me.

Because the numerous times I posted this before you hated my analysis as it didn't fit your "offense wins championships" agenda.

[Labrev]

Rumor: McCarthy underwhelmed in his NO interview, unlikely to get HC gig there.

https://wisportsheroics.com/packers-mik ... ints-2026/

[Yoop]

I have done data research of SB winners the last 20 years (I've posted this a few times on this board) and looking into if it is better to have a top flight offense or top flight defense.

My findings were that offense or defense didn't really matter. What mattered most was:

1. SB winning teams generally has a top 5 something (offense or defense) and more importantly a top 10 of the other thing.
2. SB winning teams were never in the bottom third in any category (offense, defense, STs).

There are exceptions. The 2006 Indianapolis Colts were bottom in the league in defense but then exploded out of nowhere in the postseason. Also had the 2000 Ravens that was completely carried by a historic defense. 2015 Broncos were similar.

So yes. Usually you need to be pretty good in one facet but then just not belew average in any other facet.

awesome post, the thing is, as Papa, Others, and your investigation show, is that a team with weak position will get exploited and the team overall has to be very good

we hear often that defense wins championships, but that's dependent on the offense and ST's getting them off the field for some rest, or they will get gassed just as ours has at times

lol. This is so funny to me.

Because the numerous times I posted this before you hated my analysis as it didn't fit your "offense wins championships" agenda.

Whaaaaaa? that's a bold faced fib, bordering on outright slander haaaa, I would always disagree that defense wins championships, always, simply because it takes points to win PO games, and typically the last team with the ball, wins

[Yoop]

Rumor: McCarthy underwhelmed in his NO interview, unlikely to get HC gig there.

https://wisportsheroics.com/packers-mik ... ints-2026/

what a twisted report, no way a coach of McCarthy's caliber or tenure will give up control of coaches under him, Loomis is off his rocker if this report has any truth to it, it's the worst situation for McCarthy or any prospect to take, the chance that team wins anything the next 3 years is a guess at best, McCarthy will sit this year out and be a prime candidate next year.

[BF004]

No one answered my question yet, why would Seattle have any interest in trading Metcalf?

[lupedafiasco]

The funniest thing would be the Packers trading for DK Metcalf or Jeffery Simmons when they should already be on this team anyways.

[lake shark]

No one answered my question yet, why would Seattle have any interest in trading Metcalf?

Mainly because he doesn’t have good chemistry with Geno Smith, gets paid a lot, is prone to dumb penalties and has good trade value.

[NCF]

No one answered my question yet, why would Seattle have any interest in trading Metcalf?

Doesn't that chart answer your question? $11M cap savings for Seattle on a tight, messed up cap. That team should be exploring a rebuild, too.

[lupedafiasco]

the Seachickens made the unforgivable mistake of paying big money to a non elite QB. Anytime you do that you flounder in mediocrity. Dak Precott, Andy Dalton, Trevor Lawrence just a few recent examples. A QB good enough to win games in the regular season but never good enough to win in the playoffs against a better QB and defense.

It’s a waste of time and money.

[Papa John]

Chiefs are 3rd worst in yards per carry on the ground. They are 11th worst in total rushing yards.

Hunt had the 31st most rushing yards in the league and a 3.6 yard average. The worst average among the top 50 rushing leaders. Pacheco wasn't much better at 3.7.

So the question then, in my mind, is this. If you are the Eagles, how do you exploit this weakness to the extent that it tilts the game in your favor? Does it allow you to add an extra DB on most plays to defend against the pass (which will be useful against Mahomes)? Perma-spy Mahomes with a linebacker? Move your linebackers closer to the edge of the box so as to shut down the sideline throws? If you are the Eagles, there has to be some way to take advantage of this. Will it yield a game-changing result? IDK. Having one of the best QB's of all time can mask some deficiencies, I'd imagine.

[Cdragon]

Rumor: McCarthy underwhelmed in his NO interview, unlikely to get HC gig there.

https://wisportsheroics.com/packers-mik ... ints-2026/

what a twisted report, no way a coach of McCarthy's caliber or tenure will give up control of coaches under him, Loomis is off his rocker if this report has any truth to it, it's the worst situation for McCarthy or any prospect to take, the chance that team wins anything the next 3 years is a guess at best, McCarthy will sit this year out and be a prime candidate next year.

A GM will often hang onto young coaches they like. Of course the HC might look at those guys as possible rats. It somewhat depends on whether you are a new HC or somebody who's been around and has a ton of contacts you can fill your staff with. MM had several coaches held over from Sherman's staff. How many guys, who he may have wanted are already gone in this hiring cycle?

[Yoop]

Rumor: McCarthy underwhelmed in his NO interview, unlikely to get HC gig there.

https://wisportsheroics.com/packers-mik ... ints-2026/

what a twisted report, no way a coach of McCarthy's caliber or tenure will give up control of coaches under him, Loomis is off his rocker if this report has any truth to it, it's the worst situation for McCarthy or any prospect to take, the chance that team wins anything the next 3 years is a guess at best, McCarthy will sit this year out and be a prime candidate next year.

A GM will often hang onto young coaches they like. Of course the HC might look at those guys as possible rats. It somewhat depends on whether you are a new HC or somebody who's been around and has a ton of contacts you can fill your staff with. MM had several coaches held over from Sherman's staff. How many guys, who he may have wanted are already gone in this hiring cycle?

all true, I read a article which said that fired HC's that go to new HC job same year tend to do poorly, those who wait a year or so do much better, I think there's some truth to that, and it may have to do with ability to hire assistance, and also situation of the teams offering the job, do they have young talent, any talent, and are they in cap hell, I think that's 3 strikes against the Saints.

[NCF]

[Scott4Pack]

Chiefs are 3rd worst in yards per carry on the ground. They are 11th worst in total rushing yards.

Hunt had the 31st most rushing yards in the league and a 3.6 yard average. The worst average among the top 50 rushing leaders. Pacheco wasn't much better at 3.7.

So the question then, in my mind, is this. If you are the Eagles, how do you exploit this weakness to the extent that it tilts the game in your favor? Does it allow you to add an extra DB on most plays to defend against the pass (which will be useful against Mahomes)? Perma-spy Mahomes with a linebacker? Move your linebackers closer to the edge of the box so as to shut down the sideline throws? If you are the Eagles, there has to be some way to take advantage of this. Will it yield a game-changing result? IDK. Having one of the best QB's of all time can mask some deficiencies, I'd imagine.

I think that Mahommes can beat the Eagles with his legs, more than many people would think. The Eagles respect him enough to put a spy on him too. But are they gonna play a lot of man coverage and give Mahommes more room to run?

Given the EAgles are real good against the run, the offense for the Chiefs will be squarely on Mahoomes' shoulders. But good for them, he's shown an ability to carry that load.

[Raptorman]

I'll give you McDuffie, but I otherwise stand by my take. Humphrey arguably is the best in the league sure but C is not a super impactful position. Bolton, Pacheco, Reid, etc. are all nice players but not field-tilters IMO, or anyone you have to gameplan around.

KC certainly is a solid all-around team, which is impressive in a sense, but I think the intangibles is more what makes them great.

If I may interject here. A solid all-around team with a few star players- preferably a star QB, and smart coaches are what a team needs to win a Super Bowl. Most importantly, the team must have no weaknesses.I am convinced that if a team has a weakness at any position group, that weakness invariably will be exposed in the playoffs. So, in summary, I don't think you need a roster littered with field-tilters. You just can't suck anywhere.

I have done data research of SB winners the last 20 years (I've posted this a few times on this board) and looking into if it is better to have a top flight offense or top flight defense.

My findings were that offense or defense didn't really matter. What mattered most was:

1. SB winning teams generally has a top 5 something (offense or defense) and more importantly a top 10 of the other thing.
2. SB winning teams were never in the bottom third in any category (offense, defense, STs).

There are exceptions. The 2006 Indianapolis Colts were bottom in the league in defense but then exploded out of nowhere in the postseason. Also had the 2000 Ravens that was completely carried by a historic defense. 2015 Broncos were similar.

So yes. Usually you need to be pretty good in one facet but then just not belew average in any other facet.

Oh, I can't believe you missed the 2011 Giants. 9th in points on offense and 25 in points on defense. Well, maybe that year draws a blank for Packer fans..........

[Labrev]

It's official, Myles Garrett asks out of Cleveland:

[Labrev]

Jets hire DET pass-game coordinator for OC, Tanner Engstrand:
https://heavy.com/sports/nfl/new-york-j ... eturn/amp/

Runs an offense that does not really jive with Rodgers's tendencies. They probably part ways this year.