Trade for Sam Darnold this offseason?

[X-Clown]

17 minutes ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

OK I'll give you Tannehill but Smith hasn't done much since he left.    He's more of a Game Manager than someone that can take you to the next level. 

Smith made the Pro Bowl 3 times after he left SF and was in the playoffs 4 out of his 5 years in KC. Before he blew out his knee for the trainwreck show in Washington, they were 6-3. I agree he's not and never has been elite, but to say he hasn't done much is a stretch.

[Jorgie]

was just thinking about this, id be game for it, snag a good young qb and hold onto our 1st rounder, sounds like a win win.

id imagine thered be competition for him Steelers/Colts maybe

[raz]

i really don't know.  the big thing in sam's favor is i think he is 23.  that's young.  beyond that i'd have to rely on the coaches.   he may need to sit a year like a rookie.  if brady thinks he's the guy i could get behind it.   the talking heads think it would take a 2nd

[t96]

1 hour ago, LinvilleGorge said:

The guy we've been talking about in this thread. Ryan Tannehill. You can throw in Alex Smith in KC too.

Tannehill didn't fail with his first team to anywhere near the degree Darnold has. Darnold's career passer rating is sub 80, in a new era where average passing stats have been getting higher and higher. Tannehill's career rating in Miami was 87, and much better in his last 3 seasons after he struggled early and trended up most of his time there. Darnold has trended the wrong way and his best season is still significantly worse than most of Tannehill's seasons in Miami.

 

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

Brees was the first pick in the second round.

There's an argument to be made that he fits the bill.

Brees obviously was great and had a unique situation with his injury, he didn't fail at all in San Diego. Don't see how he fits into this discussion at all. 

 

There aren't really any QBs who truly failed with their first team (i.e. were dramatically worse than their expectations) and then went on to have success somewhere else. I can't see Darnold being the first.

[Jorgie]

2 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

It also would mean that he's looked bad in an offense similar to what we run.

his best receiver is crowder, without looking it up whos the jets rb, theyre consistently playing from behind, and their oline gets constantly smoked.

The kid has talent, its unreasonable to expect him, or anyone else, to do it by themselves. Hes very far down the list of reasons the Jets are a dumpster fire

[raz]

19 minutes ago, t96 said:

Tannehill didn't fail with his first team to anywhere near the degree Darnold has. Darnold's career passer rating is sub 80, in a new era where average passing stats have been getting higher and higher. Tannehill's career rating in Miami was 87, and much better in his last 3 seasons after he struggled early and trended up most of his time there. Darnold has trended the wrong way and his best season is still significantly worse than most of Tannehill's seasons in Miami.

 

Brees obviously was great and had a unique situation with his injury, he didn't fail at all in San Diego. Don't see how he fits into this discussion at all. 

 

There aren't really any QBs who truly failed with their first team (i.e. were dramatically worse than their expectations) and then went on to have success somewhere else. I can't see Darnold being the first.

brees wasn't obviously great.  he was failing as a qb so they drafted rivers.  they wanted phillip to sit and that year drew played really well and they had a decision to make - then the injury.

[MHS831]

What do Sam Darnold, Cody Kessler, Matt Barkley, Mark Sanchez, John David Booty, and Matt Leinart have in common? 

[LinvilleGorge]

3 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

What do Sam Darnold, Cody Kessler, Matt Barkley, Mark Sanchez, John David Booty, and Matt Leinart have in common? 

People used to say the same about Cal QBs and it probably played a part in why Aaron Rodgers fell to the late 1st. A lot of GMs would probably like a do over on that one.

[Tbe]

1 hour ago, bababoey said:

Every rookie thinks he is going to be the greatest player to every play in the NFL.  You kind of have to if you are ever going to make it in the NFL.  The truth is half of them or more are going to play 3 years or less in the NFL and no one will remember who they were or who they played for.  The players agent has to think like that.  So if you have a chance to be the #1 overall pick in the NFL and go to the biggest market in the US any agent would be stupid to tell the player not to do that.

The money he can make in his 1st year in NY, even if he is terrible, is probably more than his entire signing bonus from his rookie deal and maybe more than his entire 4 year contract.  Now if he is as good as everyone thinks he will be and he wins a super bowl he could make that money at any team in the NFL.  

Look at Baker Mayfield,  has he had a good year yet?  But he makes all kinds of money in endorsements because he was a #1 pick, and he is in Cleveland.  Think how much more Lawrence could make in NY.  And if he is good in NY and wins a super bowl Lawrence could make more than 500 million in 10 years just from endorsements.  He can't do that in any other market.

Do Local NY businesses really give our big endorsement contracts?

I just looked at the highest endorsement earners in the nfl and all their money comes from big national and global brands.

Odell makes the most (Nike) and he’s been out of NY for a while now.

[Tbe]

30 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

People used to say the same about Cal QBs and it probably played a part in why Aaron Rodgers fell to the late 1st. A lot of GMs would probably like a do over on that one.

Yep. Everyone said that about Mahomes. Just another high scoring Texas QB who won’t make it.

[t96]

23 minutes ago, raz said:

brees wasn't obviously great.  he was failing as a qb so they drafted rivers.  they wanted phillip to sit and that year drew played really well and they had a decision to make - then the injury.

You're right that he started out poorly his first couple years, but his last 2 years with the Chargers he was 3rd and 10th in the league in passer rating. He was clearly the real deal and they were sticking with him over Rivers until the injury. Even after the injury the team offered him a 5 year deal. Not comparable to Darnold in any way. If Darnold all of a sudden becomes a clear top 5-10 QB for 2 years in NY then we can start talking. Good luck with that.

[thefuzz]

Trade?  Maybe a conditional 6th.  Maybe.

I think he has talent, but between the Jets and Gase, they likely ruined.

[Mr. Scot]

1 hour ago, t96 said:

Brees obviously was great and had a unique situation with his injury, he didn't fail at all in San Diego. Don't see how he fits into this discussion at all. 

There aren't really any QBs who truly failed with their first team (i.e. were dramatically worse than their expectations) and then went on to have success somewhere else. I can't see Darnold being the first.

Brees didn't exactly succeed in San Diego either. Injury or not, they drafted Rivers to replace him.

[t96]

12 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Brees didn't exactly succeed in San Diego either. Injury or not, they drafted Rivers to replace him.

He was 3rd and 10th in passer rating his last 2 years there before the injury. They did draft Rivers due to early struggles but Brees absolutely got to the point of being a tremendous success there his last 2 years. They would've kept him over Rivers too if not for the injury.