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!

     

Darnold part of the draft day strategy


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, JawnyBlaze said:

I think it’s entirely possible that in addition to hedging our bets with Darnold in case a top four QB doesn’t drop to us, it could also have been a strategy to make teams behind us think we’re not going to draft a QB and therefore have no reason to trade ahead of us. Fitterer’s comment about changing nothing on our board might be next level gamesmanship, causing teams behind us to think that if that’s what Fitterer is saying publicly then his real plan is not to get a QB, making it more likely a QB falls to us. 
 

if that’s the case, then it was a cheap price to pay to increase the likelihood our guy falls to us. If not, it was a cheap price to pay to take a chance on a guy that’s never been put in a situation to succeed and then surround him with talent. 

I don't think we expended future draft capital as a smokescreen. They believe Darnold could be the guy and they know Teddy cannot, so they made the trade. 

I sincerely hope that they haven't put all their eggs in the Darnold basket and would pass on one of the top 4 QB's that drops(save them just not liking them as a prospect). 

  • Pie 7
  • Flames 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JawnyBlaze said:

And if we do end up taking Fields or Lance, Darnold is also a cheap placeholder til the rookie is ready, sparing us having to suffer through Teddy during that adjustment period. 

And if Darnold plays well in 2021 we could trade him for a 3rd and make up for some of that lost draft capital. 

  • Pie 2
  • Poo 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

And if Darnold plays well in 2021 we could trade him for a 3rd and make up for some of that lost draft capital. 

If Darnold plays well, I would think that we are not very likely to trade him unless whichever rookie on the roster is clearly better(which would make me assume they might be starting towards the end of the season). 

  • Pie 3
  • Beer 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

If Darnold plays well, I would think that we are not very likely to trade him unless whichever rookie on the roster is clearly better(which would make me assume they might be starting towards the end of the season). 

True

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

True

I would think that scenario isn't very likely but it also would have us in a "win-win" situation at QB which would be much more valuable than a 3rd round draft pick. I am definitely okay with that result. 

  • Pie 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

His familiarity with Robby Anderson could be a very strong point in his favor. The kid had the tools and experience coming out of college.

Can our coaching staff repair the damage the Jets did and get him to reach his potential or is he just a placeholder for a year or two?

As usual, Rhule and Co. have left us with some head-scratching to do until the season starts.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

To me he is our backup plan in case no other QB falls that we like and the capital is too much to go up and get one (thanks Niners). If one falls and we draft them no one will care about our 2nd next year and if they all go above us, we will be happy we traded for Darnold. It really makes sense. It’s like the GM that helped Seattle be a consistent, competitive team knows what he is doing...

  • Pie 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JawnyBlaze said:

I think it’s entirely possible that in addition to hedging our bets with Darnold in case a top four QB doesn’t drop to us, it could also have been a strategy to make teams behind us think we’re not going to draft a QB and therefore have no reason to trade ahead of us. Fitterer’s comment about changing nothing on our board might be next level gamesmanship, causing teams behind us to think that if that’s what Fitterer is saying publicly then his real plan is not to get a QB, making it more likely a QB falls to us. 
 

if that’s the case, then it was a cheap price to pay to increase the likelihood our guy falls to us. If not, it was a cheap price to pay to take a chance on a guy that’s never been put in a situation to succeed and then surround him with talent. 

I like the double double reverse psychology but you don't give up next year's 2nd  just in hope of tricking someone. We've seen plenty of examples where teams traded up to get 'their guy' when no thought they needed to.

Edited by Little Goody Two Shoes
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, LondonderryPanther said:

I'm sure Fitterer said in his 1st press conference that he has a preference for taking a QB at some point in every draft whether that bd in the 1st, the 3rd or late day 3

He already used a draft pick to secure a QB this year.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We are not taking a QB at 8.  It's over, stop with the dreaming.  It's more likely we use 8 on the best LT or trade back if they can get a good haul.  If a QB is sitting there they will easily get a 1st and 2nd,  making losing next years 2nd an after thought.

  • Pie 3
  • Beer 1
  • Poo 1
Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...