TD alt

Bringing in old Joe or Jameis to battle for your QB1 is a lost cause. Why would you put limitations on Lance? There is no good reason to. In a true competition, you let the play, pure and simple, determine the job status. Too many times, coaches and execs are taking all these additional things into account while QBs battle in a farce of a competition, because the starter has virtually been slotted in the top spot from the beginning.

Set in their ways? How about just plain idiotic?

It is way too early to call Lance a bust. That's the whole point. Lance has ONLY had FIVE starts in his career. He was very very young and inexperienced coming into the league. He never had to play with the big dogs until in the NFL. He never had any business being drafted on day one (and maybe at all). That being said, he showed progress this past preseason, of course in limited work. If you want to label him a legit bust, then some of the retreads you're thinking about have to be busts also. We know what they are however, and unless someone is lying, no one really knows what Lance is yet. If we can acquire him, we can find out what he is during the same time that the Saints are finding out what Shough is and the Falcons are finding out what Penix is. I'm not suggesting that he is a future starter, but I'm saying that we don't know what he is due to his circumstances coming into the league. Being over-drafted does not set up a young, inexperienced QB for success in any shape, fashion or form. I am loath to desire a retread, who will likely win largely meaningless games, and perennially screw up our ability to get a legit QB organically in the draft.

It's the "me-to-you" factor. Bryce doesn't trust his receivers. The chemistry isn't there. In essence, Bryce won't let the ball fly because he's scared of fuging up. The offense is disjointed and ineffective because the right spots aren't being attacked. Bryce's reluctance is not allowing the team to take what the defense is giving. This is what DC is saying in so many politically correct words.

I'm not bashing X too much. I've tried to stay solely critical based upon ball. I'll only say that maybe he's too much of a project to be saddled with the likes of Bryce.

I think he's existing. I mean, I guess it's relative thriving. I can only imagine what he'd be doing with a budding star or at least an above average QB.

Are they? They've been unwilling to rip the Band-Aid off for months going into years.

Trey Lance, aspirin, alcohol and patience. That's a decent option. Add Sam Howell and/or Will Levis into the mix for some variety.

I wonder who is "prohibitively bad at the position" if it isn't Bryce.

Nope. And fug David Tepper for putting any reporter in that position. The media presence and total fan interactivity is worse since he's been the owner. He ought to be glad that anyone wants to even follow and cover the team.

I mean, didn't you have those fleeting thoughts about 7-4 and a possible playoff bid? Oh, I know, you're smarter than all the rest of us, so unaffected. I can tell you that the media guys in Raleigh don't really believe in Bryce and aren't actually sold on Canales and company either, they just deal with what comes like all the rest of us.

Which is what I said two posts above. We're on the same page about that.

I understand, but look above. I'm not into Bryce under any circumstances.

General and not specific. But, I understand, I guess generalities are the order of the day considering the circumstances. I'm not into old ass retreads. Don't lose draft position with Joe Flacco, for example, every single year winning meaningless games. Give me Lance, Howell, and/or Levis and draft a guy in whichever round, but don't spend ones and twos---valuable draft capital---to move up, if you move up at all.

Everybody suggesting Jameis...There really wouldn't be any need to watch the Panthers next season.

I got two threads on Goldilocks. But desperate times...

QB whisperer? None of us would bet our life savings on that.

That really didn't answer the question...

I've seen QBs come back and succeed. If Darnold and Mac Jones can do it, Howell isn't necessarily dog poo. I'm not saying he can thrive, but I'm also not saying it's impossible. Many of the problems these kids have are based upon the fact that they are immediately thrust into the spotlight before they're ready. They should be sitting, just like in the old days. They should primarily be sitting and learning, not being put under a buzzer where the primary focus of the higher-ups is throwing poo at a wall and seeing what sticks before a rookie contract runs out. I think this is definitely the case where it's obvious that it's a mind thing--bad decisions and/or learning at a slower pace--than a lack of physical tools. Sometimes different people, theories and concepts are coming so fast that the kid is screwed from the start, and we never get to see a legit sample size because things keep changing too fast. So I'm not necessarily phased by being passed around "like candy." If they're some good bones there, we may as well take a look. Being in QB hell, you shouldn't dismiss QBs out of hand. Some of these guys are still young. I would bet that if Howell were in Minnesota or Green Bay, he'd be better. Darnold is legit better, and Malik Willis looked like a different QB the last time that we saw him. Lance, Howell, Levis, they're all guys I'd look at. To the OP's greater point, I just think they're actually are some guys in this class that could possibly be legit, and it's not as bone-dry as some are assuming. Even Drew Allar might one day be legit.

You might as well give it a listen. At least they're saying what some of us have been saying for weeks. So much truth. Canales out-coached, defense halfway good, Rico was a Band-Aid for a bottom three passing offense, the offense is unsustainable, "five yards per attempt," we have a big enough sample size, they dared to dream like the rest of us after a victory at Lambeau, they feel the pain,[yada yada yada]... For me, it's therapy.

I don't give a flying fug what anyone thinks, Dave hasn't demonstrated that he can adapt to a situation on the fly. He tries to have the same gameplan every week. Now I'm giving him grace due to a highly ineffective QB, but it's not like he's demonstrated that he's Kyle Shanahan or Ben Johnson.

High day two is a "higher pick." I started a thread maybe three or four weeks ago and it was basically based upon Ladd, X and how we drafted the wrong guy. So, yes Ladd was actually a "lower pick" than X (but still a high second round pick), but not only was he the more polished route runner, he was just as fast, but quicker on his feet and simply more fluid, but also had better hands. Perhaps the worst thing is that he was better suited for Bryce. I was open to X at the time because I knew we were perhaps swinging that way, but, as a Georgia alum, if I were picking of course I would've picked Ladd. He was really always my first choice. I think he was a legit first round talent. Turns out, he may have been the best one (and that's just not the homer in me). Some will call it hindsight, but if you look at it critically, there was no way the likes of X, Xavier Worthy, Keon Coleman or A.D. Mitchell should've been in the discussion with him. It just goes to show, like with QBs there are legit options at receiver on day two on the regular.

I mean Coker is fine, but it's way past time for us to get another dynamic receiver on the field. I'm skeptical of UDFAs and day 3 picks to be honest, though I'm well aware that there are Puka's out there.

I mean, I think Legette is probably a bust also, and that's after trying to defend and rationalize about him, but I'm not gonna use that play. He did stock his hand out there, but the ball was just too off target. That being said, I've never seen a guy who is supposed to have the potential of a star just disappear in games like he has. There are UDFAs that do more than he has with the number of snaps he's gotten. His only saving grace is that he plays in a largely inept passing offense, so there still may be a sliver of hope that the offense is so disjointed that maybe it's to difficult for him too succeed. That's probably wishful thinking though. We need a higher pick at receiver for the third draft in a row. Honestly, with needing a QB, a WR, a defensive back or two, a linebacker, and whatever else, who knows when we'll actually be viably competitive. And to think, people were trying to get after me a few weeks ago when I basically said that we drafted the wrong guy(s). Hopefully Dan has learned some huge lessons about drafting the past couple of years. As the merry-go-round spins...

I know better. You've invested decades, including more than a couple in this place, just like many of us. That's big picture, Scot.