ForJimmy

I don’t think it’s more creative. The plays in the first quarter actually looked good. WRs were running wide open. Plummer just couldn’t get through his reads. He looked very slow processing then. Luton has a much better feel and gets the ball out quicker.

lol yep

We just signed Luton. He probably only knows a handful of plays.

There is Luton @Jackie Lee. He got a first down right away. Yeah Plummer might be done…

The actual plays? I don’t think he knows the playbook yet. Blockers and WRs can still get graded right now even if the QB is bad.

Does Luton even know the offense yet?

29 about had a pick 6

Raym. Undrafted rookie center

I’m seeing some WRs getting open quickly. The play designs and routes look good.

Keep Pounding Mr Scot! You got this!

But if you compare him to Mahomes he falls short (pun wasn't intended but I'm rolling with it)....

Thank you Juan.

Limited. He was hard on himself and I feel like his reps were limited on the 1s. Started looking better before he got hurt. Also Chase looked bad in camp his first year. You know who always looks great? TMJ. The moral of the story is don’t overreact to TC. Didn’t Stroud struggle last year in TC as well?

That sounds like 90% of camp reports. Remember last year we looked great at camp?

Coleman isn't listed as a starter either and they have a weak WR group in Buffalo. https://sports.yahoo.com/keon-coleman-second-string-bills-144306159.html

Hoping the OL can gel a little before through out QB out there makes some sense. I wouldn’t be against playing them some against the backups in week 3 to kind of get some rhythm going…

It will be interesting to see how many series the starters for other teams play this week.

Yep Burrow didn’t throw either. Throwing against Herbert wouldn’t have helped him in any way.

Ryans still won’t say Stroud was his top QB in that draft. If he was, why not say it now? He went back to Young and Stroud were the top 2 QBs in that draft. Also we were willing to move up to 2 for Stroud, but they knew we would take Young at 1? Seems like a bold gamble for a QB that wanted and thought was best in the draft. Now we have Ian claiming most teams had Young at 1. It appears Houston preferred Young, but we’re happy staying at 2 for Stroud and trading for Anderson.

The 2024 pick being the first was a result of us failing after the trade was made. At the time of the trade, what Chicago was wanting wasn’t that bad IMO. We navigated it poorly and then stumbled into the season with no clue what we were doing.

Regardless SF just traded 3 firsts for the QB3 of a draft a couple years prior. The only thing we would be missing this coming draft would be our 2nd (which we have one now). That makes it easier to move on if needed IMO. You eventually have to take that shot for your guy. Maybe we missed, maybe we didn’t, but if you hit it’s 100% worth it.

The value they wanted for the top pick wasn’t as crazy as other years because there wasn’t a Burrow/Lawrence/Luck. I guess that’s what I’m trying to say. How we maneuvered it was dumb. Giving up our only weapon and drafting a QB that was an outlier with the pick made it more of a gamble. If I’m the GM and I’m convinced a player is my next franchise QB, two firsts, a player and a second isn’t that crazy to secure him. If we all felt confident Young was our future, we wouldn’t be upset about that trade.

Even after Ian said she wanted Stroud. They go into full denial mode…