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!

     

Smoke screen to end all smoke screens


mickeye76
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, mickeye76 said:

If the chips fall the price to trade up for our pick of a rookie goes down. The more qbs go to a new home we are able to get a guy.  For instance if the Jets go big for Watson then fields should be there at three.  Trading up for a rookie gonna be cheaper than the Watson sweepstakes 

If the jets trade for Watson, then the pick they give the Texans will still be used on a QB, even if Darnold is part of the package probably...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mickeye76 said:

Exactly.  Maybe we like Fields.  Maybe that's the smoke screen.

That doesn’t make any sense.  You’re implying we like Fields as a prospect more than Watson as a proven commodity?  Even if that were true, driving up the price for Watson doesn’t benefit us in any way. In your scenario the Jets trade for Watson, the Texans then take Wilson, and it’s the same outcome as if the Jets just took Wilson in the first place. There is zero benefit to us 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, mickeye76 said:

Another benefit will be keeping 3 first rounders and some great players.  Y'all are overreacting much like how some wanted to fire Rivera before he could get a chance. Give Rhule three years before y'all get all antsy.  Lots of salary cap room in 2022. Another draft and off season this season we gonna have some pieces in place.  

LOL! Ron should've been fired at least two years before he was. 

We look to be exploring every option to upgrade the QB position and that's exactly what we should be doing.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, JawnyBlaze said:

That doesn’t make any sense.  You’re implying we like Fields as a prospect more than Watson as a proven commodity?  Even if that were true, driving up the price for Watson doesn’t benefit us in any way. In your scenario the Jets trade for Watson, the Texans then take Wilson, and it’s the same outcome as if the Jets just took Wilson in the first place. There is zero benefit to us 

I'm implying nothing. I am saying maybe we like our name in the hunt.  In my scenario we keep our picks and we keep our core players whether thats CMC, Burns, etc.  Y'all impatient.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pat on the back for myself.  So tired of the dozens of threads bout the Panthers trading for Watson.  I mean how many more can any of us stand.  If it happens cool for y'all.  I'll enjoy playing the hindsight game and talking bout the picks we traded.  We will see who was "stupid" one day.  Or we could win a super bowl every year Watson is under contract.  😆 I have my doubts.  Shid he never did it in Houston.  Hell how many playoff games did he win? That's par.  

  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mickeye76 said:

Unpopular opinion and personal pipe dream.  Watson is a smoke screen.  We are driving up the price and also keeping our profile high.  Smart move would be to let the chips fall where they may and reap the benefits of the market settling.  

Makes a LOT more sense than the Texans shipping DW under any circumstances...

  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

LOL! Ron should've been fired at least two years before he was. 

We look to be exploring every option to upgrade the QB position and that's exactly what we should be doing.

Not disputing that Rivera overstayed his welcome.  I'm talking bout how people were calling for his head one year before a coach of the year and 15-1 season.   

  • Poo 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, mickeye76 said:

Pat on the back for myself.  So tired of the dozens of threads bout the Panthers trading for Watson.  I mean how many more can any of us stand.  If it happens cool for y'all.  I'll enjoy playing the hindsight game and talking bout the picks we traded.  We will see who was "stupid" one day.  Or we could win a super bowl every year Watson is under contract.  😆 I have my doubts.  Shid he never did it in Houston.  Hell how many playoff games did he win? That's par.  

Or we could just stay the course and do what we've always done - hope to surprise with a good year a couple of times a decade. That's been going oh so well.

  • Beer 1
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

    • Would Morgan or Beason have been HOFers' if injuries hadn't derailed their careers?  I was not a close watcher of the game when Morgan was in his prime but I thought Beason had a few seasons at close to Lukes' level of play.
    • Franchise QBs feast when things are rolling and the tide that raises boats when things are going sideways.  Bryce isn't that. He's a complimentary player, that's it.  When the defense and STs are on point, he plays loose and it shows.  When we are in a dog fight and things haven't gone our way, he struggles.  It's that simple. He's not a horrible QB, but he's not top tier either.  So the question begs, is this worthy of a second contract?  The answer should be no.  It definitely is my answer. Bryce will never be a QB that can produce wins largely on his arm.  That's a FRANCHISE QB, any other QB is simply a placeholder at the starter's position until that guy can be found.   At some point the excuses of lack of weapons will be a straw man.  Heck, it's nearly there now.  I mean if he doesn't look even better than last year will we blame it on the TE position?  'Well if Bryce only had a player like Kelce, Kittle or Gronk on this team...'  Are we really going to do that?  
    • When I arrived at college, I was 18, not too much younger than some of these draft picks.  It was not a huge school, but there were guys on the team who were 21, 22, 23....playing ahead of me.  I was seventh on the depth chart.  Those guys have been through a few seasons, were stronger, more knowledgeable.  I was a better raw player than some of them, but those other factors matter.  As I grew stronger, more familiar with the playbook, and learned what it was like to play in college, I gradually improved and with that, I rose up the depth chart.  It took most of my freshman year for the light to come on.  Had the coach thrown me into the starting lineup day 1, I would have probably failed.    And that was college.  So I agree with you based on my experience on a much lower level.  Frankly, I think that is why so many kids drafted to fill huge gaps bust.  The teams are desperate.  Anyone who looks to fill vacancies in the starting lineup through the draft is desperate.  You draft depth to develop.  For this reason, I say, "Let Walker start for a while."  Maybe Brazzell can be our WR 4.  Throw Hunter into a rotation and ask him to do one or two things.  Freeling needs some strength and he needs to work on run blocking.
×
×
  • Create New...