Mr. Scot

What would have happened had he not cut Newton is probably as interesting a question as what would have happened had he successfully acquired Stafford. Newton wasn't gonna be a long term answer either mind you, but you have to wonder what would have been different.

I doubt you'll see another guy who will do it for as long as he has. What things like accuracy, field vision, quick processing, intelligence and the like aren't that rare. It would be fair to say though that, at the college level right now, they are devalued over pure athleticism.

Fair, although the teams who drafted quarterbacks in the first round of the 2018 draft might raise some objections

I think you have to count Cam against Rhule because he could have had him but chose not to. As to who the next guy is inheriting, well we can't really know that yet because the season isn't ending today. The final roster for the 2022 season is a long way from being set and there's likely to be a lot of churn between now and then.

It was actually Gantt who suggested they could find a Russell Wilson type, but I don't think he met it in the strict sense of finding that guy in a later round, just someone of that talent level.

See there again though, you have to define what a top prospect is. Our buddy John Ellis prefers the guys who are superior athletes because "you can't coach tall / strong" and things of that sort. I want the guys who are known for passing accuracy, intelligence, field vision and things of that sort first and if they also happen to be good physical specimens, that's gravy. The argument is that you can coach the intangible stuff into the athletic guys. And that sounds great in theory, but the reality is that if they don't already have those other traits, it's pretty rare to be able to coach it into them. People go "oh but Josh Allen" to which I'd say there are a lot more instances of coaches who tried to make a Josh Allen and failed than there are ones who succeeded.

Specifically, the start of 2020. Take Luke Kuechly. You can't say Rhule ever had Luke Kuechly because he really didn't. Luke might have technically been on the roster at the end of 2019 but he decided to retire before it got to the 2020 period. On the flipside, it's valid to use Newton as a point of comparison because Rhule had the option to keep Newton but he chose not to. Where it becomes semantically complicated is when you look at guys who, for example, were set to hit free agency with the 2020 offseason. Do you count them because they were options or do you say they really weren't because they were not under contract?

He wanted to frame it as pre-Rhule versus post-Rhule, but it's a fair point that the roster we had when he first got here in 2020 might be the better comparison option.

Fair enough

What I'm never going to get over when it comes to that trade is that the idea started with the defensive coordinator.

Not exactly... It is true that he initially volunteered to sell the team himself after the NFL made it clear that they weren't going to let him cover up the scandal using his "internal investigation" idea. But down the road, when he was walking around muttering about how he didn't have to sell the team if he didn't want to, the NFL basically said "no take backs". They weren't about to allow him to back out of that process once the ball got rolling.

I'm guessing he meant Bravvion Roy. Is he "clearly" worse than Chandler or Franklin? I wouldn't be so sure of that. Remember one of the criticisms that came from outside the organization was that our roster was less merit-based than others. The Temple and Baylor guys were a big part of that perception. It may not even have been that they were useless themselves, but they may have been kept or chosen over at least potentially better options.

One of those "potential core pieces" on the offensive side is a pretty good illustration of why Rhule isn't here anymore. Rhule drafts Brady Christensen in the third round, then stubbornly refuses to play him at a position of need because "his arms are too short". A year later, we draft a guy with longer arms to specifically take that left tackle position, but he's forced to earn his spot because suddenly Christensen's arms aren't that big a deal after all. The dude was just a clown.

Hell, the team hasn't even put out a media guide this year.

Do you think any other team would have kept PJ Walker around this long? For that matter, a lot of teams probably would have been done with Robby Anderson after this season he had last year. Chandler and Franklin aren't exactly great either. More than one person questions whether either of them was better than, say, Kenny Robinson.

Damn, Robbie

Rhule wasn't completely useless. Hell, even Marty Hurney wasn't completely useless. Once the roster was built though, somebody had to coach it, somebody had to develop the players, and somebody had to put them in a position to succeed. Rhule didn't really seem to be able to do any of those things. When you're a head coach and you can't effectively do any of the things that are expected of your job, it's inevitable you're going to lose it.

If you're part of a cooperative group though, do you wanna work with that guy? For the NFL to function, they kind of need the teams to be at least reasonably civil to each other.

Which do you think would be easier though? To find an amazing physical specimen like a Cam Newton or a Josh Allen or find a guy with enough smarts that he could develop into another Tom Brady?

It's definitely not better at quarterback. A lot of other places though? Yeah. Gantt made the suggestion that it might just be a pretty decent overall roster to drop a good quarterback into and see what happens.

To be fair, I've heard the same about Tom Brady. He's arguably one of the least athletic quarterback prospects in the league. He's also one questionably the most successful. (and I don't buy that it's only because he's some kind of unicorn)

Don't know about Robbie specifically, but I do get kind of a sense that our overall ratio of Temple / Baylor players is probably gonna go down some.

Bledsoe might be a fair comparison, but less talented.

Help get me divorced? (or killed?)

From what I'd read a little while back (may even have been from the OTC guy, don't remember) what the Saints had done for years has now become more widespread. Teams are maximizing their cap on an annual basis and then adjusting on the fly year to year. I'm not a fan, but supporters of the approach of pointed out that some of the teams regularly carrying over large amounts of cap space are also putting crappy rosters on the field. So...