Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Dark horse QB option: Derek Carr?


FuFuLamePoo
 Share

Recommended Posts

I was listening to the Lombardi podcast from a few days ago and apparently the sense around league circles is that the Raiders would be interested in moving Derek Carr and rolling with the cheaper option in Mariota.

After seeing what Stafford returned they could be even more interested in trading him. What do you think he’d be worth? Honestly I’m not a big fan and his contract is still pretty large. He’d be an upgrade so I figured it would at least be worthy dialogue.

  • The D 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure where the worries about his contract are, would be two years with $19M a year on the books. He'd be earning less than Teddy. And I don't think Carr is a bad QB at all, but his coach has never successfully developed a QB.

There's a reasonable contract and player that might be worth taking a good look at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CRA said:

nah.  

Painful to say but I'd rather role w/ Teddy than dump anymore money into random vet QBs. 

Is he better than Teddy? Sure.  But he is just a slightly better band-aid.  Just wasted money and cap space IMO.   

 

I think I agree with this. I’d say he’s slightly better than guys like Garropolo and Goff who were recently in Super Bowls, but I think I’d rather just try to hit it big in the draft

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CRA said:

nah.  

Painful to say but I'd rather role w/ Teddy than dump anymore money into random vet QBs. 

Is he better than Teddy? Sure.  But he is just a slightly better band-aid.  Just wasted money and cap space IMO.   

 

This, sadly, is probably truth. And it is the worry when trading for any of the QBs that are going to be put out there to test the trade waters. Remember we were putting Cam out there last year and making big statements about how he was good to go and would be fine for any team. 

Yeah, this is the used car lot part of the offseason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

100% yes. Derek Carr is a solid QB and just needs weapons. He is mobile, accurate and solid arm strength. Just bc he is on a losing team doesn't mean he is a bad QB. poo, in 2016 Derek Carr was the reason they got to the playofffs. 

 

Plus his contract is affordable too and I can't imagine his price tag being higher than a 2nd round pick. I love this idea. Still want Watson though.

Edited by TheCasillas
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

One of the great unsolved mysteries of the world is how the hell Jon Gruden got a rep for being a quarterback guru.

I mean, he can talk it and it's obvious he knows the X's and O's part of it. He knows what great QBing looks like. He just cannot put it all together and develop someone at that position. It is his Achilles' Heel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It's honestly pretty interesting just seeing this pairing play out. Canales’ offenses (Seattle, Tampa) are run-first, under-center, play-action systems built around defined reads and intermediate/deep timing throws. That structure worked when he had QBs like Baker Mayfield or Russell Wilson in a system that created clear launch points and sightlines. His success has always been tied to a credible run game + play-action gravity. You can see that with the Panthers team building philosophy as well. Coker and TMac both are bigger receivers that won't get the best YAC production but thrive as possession receivers in contested scenarios. They're not the best in space and creating additional yardage in such, and would likely fair better systematically with a stronger armed QB who can create better opportunities on those boundary 1v1 matchups with stronger throws. Bryce, on the other hand, is a spread-native QB. His strengths are rhythm, spacing, quick processing, and off-script creation. Asking him to live in condensed formations with long-developing play-action concepts just hasn't been his forte. And well, his boundary throws are limited in velocity which takes a big chunk of the playbook off. And I mean a QB like Bryce can still work, it's just Dave's offensive philosophy and foundation is very much at odds with Young's physical limits and his own experience. So it's certainly still a learning experience for Dave to figure out how he can mesh his offensive philosophy with Young's strengths. He's very inexperienced with maximizing Bryce's strengths with his system. Would love to see us bring in an OC with spread experience and adaptability to implement a cohesive system with Dave to allow Bryce to thrive, as it's obvious we're sticking with him for a bit longer.   
    • Only thing I really agreed with is questioning why we didn’t take any timeouts on their last drive.  I know hindsight is 20/20, but I think it would’ve saved clock bc they were desperate to score as soon as the opportunity presented itself, but I also think it could’ve helped the defense regroup and maybe give us a better chance to stop them.
×
×
  • Create New...