CRA

Tony Romo had some weird magic/escape skills in the pocket though that frankly rank pretty high up there. Too consistent to chalk up to luck but he looked pretty dang lucky.

you gotta think there is some "consulting group" just rolling in the dough taking their sweet time helping Washington with something a twitter poll likely could solve.

makes sense. You gotta think the Texans are going to want to hold off as long as possible and try to work something out. If they can't get him to budge then I think draft is where Watson would get moved if it happens.

maybe I have been too wordy and explained my position poorly. Everyone on O gets the stomach bug. We only have 3 humans we can send on the field on offense. Maybe that's illegal and we have to forfeit but let's play it out. A center, DJ Moore, and Watson. 3 vs. 11. We probably score a TD in a maximum of 3 plays. I'll give the benefit of the doubt the D could make a play or two. Was tempted to say in 2 plays. But I don't want to get too crazy.

I'm down with picks. I'm down with CMC and Teddy. That's always been my position. Getting rid of that doesn't present the Jonathan Stewart assertion. We didn't even have CMC last year and competed with everyone but the Super Bowl champ. and if we threw in one more player? Depends on who it is.

Well, I am a big believer Cam Newton was a unicorn and has no comparison in the NFL. The NFL game isn't exactly rigged for Cam's style like it is other QBs. Plus, he was Cam which always came with a unique bias IMO. I think Cam is a HOF worthy QB. Huge fan. But even at his prime (which was the best player in the NFL), Cam was never a consistent passer.

I'm only really an advocate for trading draft picks. Not bodies. RBs and Teddy not included. We got talent for Watson to work with here and a young and improving D.

but again, Brady's 20 year career in NE tells the other side of that story. He didn't always have the weapons and the OL. But they were going to win. Maybe they aren't the 15-1 Moss Patriots. But they were still the double digit winning playoff Patriots. and you can look at Rodgers, Wilson, etc. Elite QBs win with or without the well built team. Odds just improve when you give them good teams.

again, Watson has one losing season to his name. Pros. College. HS. He puts teams on his back. To quote the great Dabo Sweeney, he is Michael Jordan. Watson isn't enough to overcome an owner/GM that make a place miserable and where teammates are no longer working. That's NFL great JJ Watt talking. But that is all you got to hang your hat on IMO.

I mean, JJ Watt called out the team for basically not even putting in the effort last season....in season. People putting all their stock in this ONE season where the franchise literally created a place where people didn't want to be and work. The culture is well documented. So yeah, it is a team sport. You need people bought in. Working hard. But Watson has proven at every level....he is enough to put a team over pending the basic elements are there.

in simple terms? Yes. The team that has Watson will be winners overall. Just like the team who had Brady, Manning, Rodgers, Wilson, etc. The team who has certain QBs is going to overall win. Because the game is literally designed for them to be winners.

they had a losing record. Watson's only losing season. Pros. College. High School. but I am sure it had nothing to do with the shitshow going on with that franchise that is well documented during a COVID year. Watson just isn't a big enough difference maker.

but they didn't always invest and get good OL talent in NE. Some real weak ones existed over the 20 years. They always simply had a good QB. So when OL talent got weak....and it did get weak in NE. Brady could still compete for Championships. I'm not arguing we shouldn't invest in our OL. We should. QB just a team and game changer. On every level.

Watson wins. Russell Wilson wins. You give certain players good OLs and they will still take hits that a Tom Brady won't. Because they believe they can make plays Brady knows he can't. Not all of it...but QBs most certainly factor in the hits they take. and all this aside. Just so you know. Real talk. My money remains on Teddy being our starter next year. Now, forget I said that. As, I like dreaming about my boy Watson. Who is my favorite player.

Tom Brady went to the Super Bowl with the loaded Bucs roster and with some very vanilla Patriot rosters. Every team is essentially a QB away IMO. Pending you have a good coaching and a decent FO. It doesn't take long to be legit when you have a QB in today's NFL. We were right there with the Patrick Mahomes super squad....with freaking Teddy Bridgewater, no CMC, and holes all over the roster.

but that isn't actually why Cam's career likely is cut short. Reality, is 95% of fans say their OL sucks because the job is impossible in reality. The Miles Garret's or Julius Peppers of the world simply are going to win too much. The talent disparity on the lines is pretty big in terms of athletes. and look at the most unathletic QB probably in the NFL today. NE didn't have a dominant OL in for 20 years. Nor did they even have above average talent on the skill positions. They were going to win 10 games....simply because they had a great QB.

well, the Rams should be a deserted island I guess by that logic...that makes Uncle Phil's empty home look like a rave party. Draft picks are worth a legit stud QB. IMO. Question is would Watson actually deliver and be that dude. That is the great debate. Could he deliver. If you knew for a fact he would be that, it wouldn't be a debate IMO.

CMS to close before and after school programs, lay off staff | Charlotte Observer I think this is a more informative article than the other about the situation. I don't like the headline. CMS is doing the right and only thing they can do probably.

no but the better the QB, the better the OL talent looks. but the point I was making is, is the mega deal crippling. Clearly not. Rams still have to invest in offense regardless. QB. OL. WRs. They have to invest on the defensive front that playing in front of Ramsey. After that mega deal.....they went right out and made another mega deal. If the player gives you the impact you want or not is what makes the deal good or bad. That's really all that matter. Mega trade is like a draft pick. Hitting on the player determines if it was good or bad. We can reference all the trades we want. All trades are bad when the player doesn't give you what you expected. if Watson delivered, he would be worth it. If he doesn't? It would be a horrific trade other teams talk about. That's how it goes.

program was running a 4.3 million deficit this school year due to a lack of participants. And only some sites are closing per the article. I think it is also largely funded by federal dollars, grants, and parent fees.

real question is can a team survive and improve despite the cost of a major acquisition IMO. and in recent times we have seen teams do legit blockbuster mega trades for less important positions (Mack, Ramsey) and it work out well for them.

Cutler - 2 first, 3rd, Orton Mack - 2 first, 3rd, 6th

you either commit to a rookie or you have him learn from the sideline behind a vet. They wanted both IMO. Rookie gonna take some lumps. The bar isn’t to be the ROY or be benched.

I don't think Tua underperformed. Think he looked like a rookie with a staff that didn't really know what they wanted to do. You want to try to win as many games and let Tua have a learning season from the sideline or you want to go ahead and start grooming Tua. They waffled in no man's land IMO.

I think recent history.....Ramsey and Mack are the monster blockbuster trades. Superstar. Mega cost. They just aren't QBs. But from what we have seen have been good for the teams that acquired them. All other deals in recent history are big names and low/reasonable cost. All the super duper deals gone bad are from a different era of the sport and largely involve RBs. So given there is no example in recent history similar to Watson showing why we shouldn't do it....there is only one logical conclusion.