BrianS

This. This right here. This is exactly how teams convince themselves they can compete now. Instead of taking the time to build an organization like the Steelers or Patriots or . . . pick your consistent contender. Teams who convince themselves that can juggle things for a couple years to challenge inevitably wind up failing to become consistent. Terrible, terrible thinking. That's what creates the rollercoaster of good years / bad years. That has to stop if we want that consistent winner, consistent challenger. What do you want? Do you want to see us in with a chance EVERY year or push for "win this year, don't care about next". In the last 30 years, the Steelers have had four losing seasons. They've made the playoffs NINETEEN TIMES. They've been to four Super Bowls, winning two. That's the kind of team I want us to have.

All the Stafford talk is dumb. Bringing him here will not bring us sustained success. I say this as a fan of Stafford. The only way we bring in Stafford is by making TB5 part of that. And who in their right mind is taking TB5? Oh, and bringing in Stafford will likely cost us Moton. And Samuel. And a first round pick. Minimum.

It's this kind of thinking that has kept us on a rollercoaster for our entire existence. We as fans need to stop thinking this way. You don't build a championship organization in a year or two. Stafford is a great QB who I rate very highly. But getting him may give us one or two good years, and then we'll suffer for three or four as we clean up the mess we made by bringing him here and trying to replace him. Stop the madness. Build the team through the draft, develop the players with the coaches and begin creating an organization that wins consistently. We as fans need to stop seeking that instant gratification, because our mood can unfortunately influence the organization.

This offense doesn't value the TE spot. Our underneath / check down stuff all goes through CMC because he turns those into big plays. Brady / Rhule have a very clear preference to use the TE to move players out of lanes, to block a blitz or otherwise do the dirty work. You don't draft a guy at eight to do that.

Don't sleep on Trask's mobility. Watch his movement in the pocket, good ability to slide and climb. He's more Big Ben than Russell Wilson, but he has good feet, good awareness and enough mobility to extend a play.

That's even scarier. You've got a rookie first rounder who can't even get on the bench. It's exactly the sort of thing that terrifies me about Trey Lance.

This isn't a terrible idea . . . but the dude hasn't thrown a pass. I really would have liked to see him do some mop up duty this year. There have been many two score+ wins for the Pack where he could have gotten some snaps. Might be reading too much into it, but I really would have liked that.

If you want to lessen the Brady effect, just look at BOTH QB's in each SB. Think of it like this: If you get to the SB, there's a 50/50 chance you win it. Those SB "losers" got their team there and gave them a chance. That's all you can ask for.

Exactly. The Jets will either: 1. Pick a QB at number two or 2. Trade with someone who WILL pick a QB at number two There is no version of this where we stick at eight and four QB's are not gone already. The order might go into a blender between Wilson, Lance and Fields after Lawrence but those guys are gone at eight. Either the teams currently from one to seven take those guys - and with the Jags, Jets, Falcons and Lions up there it's easy to see how - or someone trades up to grab one of those guys.

I disagree. I would not be AT ALL surprised if four QB's are gone before pick eight. The first thing to keep in mind is that this draft is considered the best QB draft in a long, long time. That informs everything that will happen. Now, the Jags and Jets are definitely going QB. It's not even a question. Atlanta will go QB with Ryan turning 36 before the season starts and his contract getting out of hand in a couple years. Perfect opportunity for them. The fact that Detroit is shopping Stafford should give you a pretty clear indication of what their thinking may be. So that's an EASY four to project. And this doesn't even consider the multitude of QB needy teams who may be willing to trade up with Miami, Cincy or Philly. Teams like the Broncos, Patriots, Colts, Bears, WTF are all in the market. There will be six QB's in round one. I know, most people think I'm crazy. Maybe I am. But consider, there is this perfect storm brewing. Good QB draft. Massive need across the league. Salary cap decrease. Only six teams with 30 million (or more) in cap available next year. It wouldn't be all that shocking to see 12 QB's in total across all rounds.

Sounds like something PFF would have, but it's probably behind a paywall.

We didn't undervalue the position at all. We simply got our underneath / checkdowns from a back instead of a TE. It would have been even more obvious with CMC healthy.

There's gonna be six QB's in round one this year. Take it to the bank. I would even go so far as to say there will be six QB's gone by pick 21. If we trade down, we won't be getting a QB.

If this year is what tanking looks like I hate to see what happens with a healthy CMC. It just won't matter who is taking snaps for us next year, we're gonna be a game or two better just with a real offseason and CMC back.

With a QB who is better than TB5, we would have won 7-8 games this year. We were very competitive. Surprisingly so. Pleasantly so. But as others have pointed out here, and as I've said in other threads, we cannot afford a veteran QB unless someone takes TB off our hands as part of the deal. Which would make it even less attractive to us because everyone now CLEARLY sees who TB is. We really need to find our QB this offseason, because our draft capital is as high as it's likely to be, and the draft class is as good as it gets for a QB. If we don't take a shot at 8, we won't get a QB. There are just too many teams that need one. It seems increasingly likely that the top 4 will be gone before we're on the clock at 8. So group think is to trade back. Well, first of all that requires a partner. And not just any partner. One who still allows us to get a QB. Here's the thing: People are saying that Mac Jones and Kyle Trask are second round prospects. Maybe so in a normal year. But both the need and the talent are great this year. Denver at 9 is done with Drew Lock. Do you see them passing on Trask? Big arm, pocket passer . . . that's a John Elway QB. Coach Hoodie is at 15 and he just ditched Cam. You think Mac Jones gets by him? Jones is a quintessential Bellichek QB. If either of those guys survive you've got WTF, da Bears and the Ponies from 19 to 21 who ALL need a QB. There's going to be six QB's gone in round one this year, and it wouldn't surprise me to see four more through the draft. How do you trade down and get a QB? It's looking grim man. If we want a QB from this draft, we're gonna need to stick where we are and do our homework. If we don't get one in the draft this year, we're going to be picking over the scrap pile post draft for guys like Fitzmagic, Jacoby Brissett, Mitch Trubisky and Andy Dalton. Color me uninspired. We are in a really crap situation here. Thanks Ron, on so many levels.

+1

People still blame Remmers for that game and they are STILL WRONG. It was very (*&$@ing clear from very early on that we needed to give help on Von Miller. Our OC chose to not give help . . . at all. Instead of placing the blame where it belonged, on our staff, we chose to blame Remmers. Sometimes players just have an amazing game and you need to adjust for it. We didn't. Remmers has enjoyed a solid career since leaving us with the Vikings, Giants and Chiefs. The guy is now rostered and likely to play in his second SB. He's already started 12 games for the Chiefs this year. I expect he's going to get a ring this time. Andy Reid is far from Mike Shula.

Really? Who? Let's define "rebuilding" as 7-9 or less for the sake of argument and a "ton" of cap space as 50 million. So, Jacksonville qualifies. No chance there. They've got two QB's on the roster now and Trevor Lawrence waiting in the wings. Likewise, the Jets. With Darnold under contract and the second pick, they are positioned to draft a very talented prospect or trade for an established QB. No interest. Patriots? Cam won't be back, this we know. Why would coach Hoodie want a QB with less arm and less running ability. That doesn't even make sense. And that's it for teams that fit those criteria. This salary cap shrink is going to hurt everyone but the teams at the very upper end of available cap space. There are only 9 teams with more than 20 million available. Only six with more than 30 million. The cap is TIGHT for everyone, and when you start doing trades it has to fit for everyone. That's a tall order this year. We need a QB before we can truly contend. But a veteran is unbelievably difficult for us to work in. Our most likely path is drafting one and hoping we get lucky.

I agree with the basic premise, which to me is "We need a franchise QB". Our struggle is that we just aren't in a position to acquire an established franchise QB. I find it hilarious how many fans keep up the farce that we can. Our only path to an established QB is through a trade that SOMEHOW involves TB5. Can you see *any* of those teams saying "Sure, send us Teddy!" There is just no way. Likewise, with Bridgewater here there is just no way we can put an established QB on the roster.

How many of you Watson dreamers have looked at our cap? Any trade we do MUST include Teddy. I don't know how you make that deal work. Yes, we can cut KK - will cut KK. That will help. We'll cut Weatherly, and that will help a bit. But we have a (*&#TON of holes to fill. We have Moton to resign. We need a franchise QB . . . Watson is a franchise QB . . . unfortunately there isn't a lot we can do about it. DeShaun may be willing. The Texans may be willing . . . ish. What they won't do is take Bridgewater. They will rightfully want something much more meaningful. Two firsts and a player is the starting point. But we need to unload Bridgewater and they know that, so it will cost us EVEN MORE to do the deal with him involved.

Also, not a possibility. I would love to be wrong. I'm not.

This: Isn't nearly as important as this: When it comes to clutch "franchise QB" play.

This is completely wrong. Curtis being as good as gone here has nothing to do with what he did before this season and EVERYTHING to do with what he did in 2020. There is zero chance he's back. Curtis will command $10 million . . . even if it is just a one year deal. Funchess got $10 million and was never REMOTELY the threat that Curtis showed himself to be. SOMEONE will offer him the money and it won't be us.

Detroit / Holmes. What a (&*@# show that looks to be. I really feel for Stafford. Dude had all the tools but never the team.

And threw it fine this year.