1of10Charnatives

What are these "envelopes" of which you speak?

Yes, you are right. Decision making is a huge component of being an effective NFL qb. PJ's decision making does not seem remotely up to the standard. History shows that's unlikely to change. Quarterbacks who consistently make bad decisions with the football don't tend to change and suddenly become Pro Bowlers.

Thread title is not saying much. Bar is lower than 4Corners IQ.

True, but does not change the fact that the further back you go in the draft, the worse and worse your odds get of obtaining a quality qb. Just because the odds are not great drafting top ten does not mean they're not still better than the horribad odds of anything outside round 1. The bottom line is quality qb's dont grow on trees. If you think about the fact there are generally single digit quality qb's (qb's that give your team an above average chance to win) in the league at any one time, and the ones that do generally have careers spanning over a decade, it's pretty easy to see that on average each draft produces one quality qb or less. Yet most drafts have at least half a dozen prospects touted as good to great prospects at the position. The reality is this is media hypebullshit. Look at the results, not the hype. Also look at the fact most of these quality qb's do indeed get drafted in round one.

You guys are watching the same PJ Walker that I'm watching right? The same not remotely a starting quality qb, barely an acceptable backup who makes horrible throwing decisions numerous times a game yet has managed to eke out a winning record as a starter? This winning record as a starter thing, that's your best argument? I can beat it with a single phrase. Say it with me. Small sample size.

This tendency in the NFL, not just with GM's but all over organizations to hire the guy you know because he's the guy you know drives me nuts as a fan. It is the same risk avoidance behavior that most often denotes a willingness to settle for mediocrity as long as it's comfortable mediocrity.

I think this has a very simple and reasonable explanation. Tepper came from being a minority owner of the Steelers. The Steelers have more Super Bowl wins than any other franchise in the NFL, so arguably they are doing something right. The one thing that the Steelers do noticeably different from most other NFL franchises is fire head coaches very rarely. From 1969 to present, a span of 54 years, they have had 3 head coaches. Given that, Tepper went into his first head coaching hire with the mentality of letting it play out fully. He did that. Tepper may prove to be a poor judge of coaching talent going forward, or it may be he just whiffed on his first one. The instinct not to fire quickly is fundamentally sound, but the flip side is you better get that hire right. So far he hasn't, but he's only done it once. Let's see how the second hire goes.

This. If the Panthers hire Payton, I will not follow or pull for the team as long as he is here. My life does not revolve around football and the Panthers are now in the position of earning back my loyalty as a fan. That cannot be done with Sean Payton owing to Bountygate. That is my line in the sand. They can hire whom they choose, I can follow what I want.

He's elite on talent. He's not elite at production because availability is a skill in the NFL, one he doesn't really have over the course of his career. He's also not elite on value, and is unlikley to be elite by the time any franchise qb we develop is ready to lead us into competitiveness. At that point CMC's ability is likely to be in decline and it's highly likely he'll be overpaid if still with this team.

Not the worst idea I've ever heard. Who do you genuinely say needs to be kept on this roster right now?

You know what? You're both right. Fug it. Let's make a bajillion threads. Just to celebrate being shed of the guy. My interest was genuinely tanking. Now I might watch.

I don't think we have enough threads about it.

Cherrypicking data does always make for fun speculation, doesn't it?

This is only true because fans continue to act on balance like addicts instead of like paying customers demanding a quality product. If the majority of fans changed their behavior, you would see things change rapidly. I'm changing my behavior because it makes sense for me personally. Others should do as they feel is best, but don't assume things will always continue to be as they have been in the past. There is no law that says the NFL must be popular. Everything you said about NFL teams being profitable while losing is contingent upon TV revenue deals that only persist as long as overall fan behavior remains unchanged.

It's funny to see you guys post this, because this morning I was just thinking about some basic realities of pro sports. A minority of teams are going to make the playoffs every year. That's just math. Only one team out of 32 wins the Super Bowl, so obviously that's rare. What is the real problem? Systemically, pro sports that have salary caps and player drafts and revenue sharing are setup for a level playing field, so the problem is teams that get stuck in perpetual losing. This obviously traces back to poor decision making at the top of these organizations. Stop watching. The way to send the strongest possible message to David Tepper is to ignore his product. I have been a fan since that first season in Clemson, and even during bad seasons I watched and supported the team. But I've come to a conclusion about this: This is not the behavior of a fan. It is the behavior of an addict. As business owners, NFL team owners care most about their bottom line. That is what they are incentivized towards. They can talk about caring about winning, and I'm sure at some level they do, but ask yourself this: What matters to you more...your paycheck or your team winning? Exactly. NFL teams make massive revenue off of TV, so massive that losing teams that have been losing for years are in the black even if they have to play third string quarterbacks or let a losing coach go on losing year after year because the cost of admitting his contract was a mistake is less than moving on and giving your team a chance to win. The only way this will change is if fan behavior changes. So stop watching if your team sucks and isn't getting better. I did. Life is too short to invest your time in unproductive one sided relationships this way anyway. Do you honestly believe David Tepper is doing everything he can to make your fan experience better? Is he even remotely willing to consider cutting ticket, merchandise or concession prices to put them in line with the quality of product he's putting on the field? No? Then why are you continuing to support his team when it's obvious your support is being taken advantage of? When the team gets better, they will find me watching and cheering and going to games again. Until then, I have better things to do with my time. I don't mean they have to win the Super Bowl, but they do have to show me that they're competitive and from the top down they're not okay with perpetual losing.

Post of the week. Right here.

Go read Sandman and tell me it's juvenile, or the X-men graphic novel God Loves, Man Kills. But overall, yeah, point taken. Seriously Sandman is amazing, and not remotely juvenile. Even the tv show on Netflix is good.

Shut up stupidhead!

4Corners huddle poster appreciation thread.

Dammit Rayzor! I've got perfectly good popcorn here. Don't you go making it go to waste with your sensible moderation.

TMI

FIFY

Do not eat any ham products there. Trust me.

As a finance guy, he should already be familiar with this: How the Sunk Cost Fallacy Influences Our Decisions • Asana

Unimpressed.