Breer talks about Gase (and Tannehill; oh, and Darnold)

[bigdog10]

4 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

The team can restructure his deal so that it's basically a little over eleven and a half million per year for the next two seasons.

Yeah, I’m talking about an extension. We better know for sure after these 34 games whether he can play before giving him a 4-5 year bank buster deal. 

Edited April 7, 2021 by bigdog10

[Shotgun]

1 minute ago, bigdog10 said:

Yeah, I’m talking about an extension. We better no for sure after these 34 games whether he can play before giving him a 4-5 year bank buster deal. 

We will absolutely know the answer by the end of the season.

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, bigdog10 said:

Yeah, I’m talking about an extension. We better no for sure after these 34 games whether he can play before giving him a 4-5 year bank buster deal. 

I don't necessarily think next offseason is the deadline. I do believe you can give him two years.

Might even be wise to do so. Suppose he looks good after the first year but not so good after the second one?

[GoobyPls]

5 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Oh sure, those are easy to find. Hell, most successful teams just get the best quarterback they can find and don't bother putting jack sh-t around them.

I mean if they need stuff like receivers, offensive linemrn and a run game to be good, are they really worth it?

They are not easy to find, that’s why you keep drafting them and not settling for reclamation projects. That’s why the jets got rid of Darnold, why the Niners are getting rid of Jimmy, Rams with Goff, Cards with Rosen and so on. 

[Mr. Scot]

6 minutes ago, GoobyPls said:

They are not easy to find, that’s why you keep drafting them and not settling for reclamation projects. That’s why the jets got rid of Darnold, why the Niners are getting rid of Jimmy, Rams with Goff, Cards with Rosen and so on. 

We call that the Jon Gruden approach.

Quick Tip: It doesn't work.

See Also: The Cleveland Browns

Edited April 7, 2021 by Mr. Scot

[KatsAzz]

9 minutes ago, GoobyPls said:

They are not easy to find, that’s why you keep drafting them and not settling for reclamation projects. That’s why the jets got rid of Darnold, why the Niners are getting rid of Jimmy, Rams with Goff, Cards with Rosen and so on. 

Teams that constantly recycle quarterbacks are often teams that draft bad or hire poor coaches. That is why the grass is greener, quarterback recycle doesn't always work .

[GoobyPls]

6 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

We call that the Jon Gruden approach.

Quick Tip: It doesn't work.

See Also: The Cleveland Browns

wrong

Actually the Jon Gruden approach is signing castoff QBs, Gruden has only drafted 3 QBs ever and all have been after the third round.

try again though

 

Also since drafting Baker in 2018 the browns have had a better record then us and way better offense then us. So don’t be throwing stones living in glass houses

The Browns have their franchise guy, we are out here with Teddy and Sam

[Mr. Scot]

2 minutes ago, KatsAzz said:

Teams that constantly recycle quarterbacks are often teams that draft bad or hire poor coaches. That is why the grass is greener, quarterback recycle doesn't always work .

I call it the lottery approach because it's a lot like trying to get rich through buying lottery tickets.

"Maybe this quarterback's a winner. Oh wait, he wasn't? Well let's get another one and maybe that one will be a winner."

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, GoobyPls said:

wrong

Actually the Jon Gruden approach is signing castoff QBs, Gruden has only drafted 3 QBs ever and all have been after the third round.

try again though

Also since drafting Baker in 2018 the browns have had a better record then us and way better offense then us. So don’t be throwing stones living in glass houses

The Browns have their franchise guy, we are out here with Teddy and Sam

Gruden kept shifting quarterbacks rather than sticking with one and developing them. That's basically the approach you're advocating.

And seriously, if you want to emulate the Browns, you'd best be prepared for this:

 

[GoobyPls]

7 minutes ago, KatsAzz said:

Teams that constantly recycle quarterbacks are often teams that draft bad or hire poor coaches. That is why the grass is greener, quarterback recycle doesn't always work .

And teams that sign castoff end up in nfl purgatory with 5-11 record lingering around being irrelevant never finding a true franchise QB

[Mr. Scot]

4 minutes ago, GoobyPls said:

And teams that sign castoff end up in nfl purgatory with 5-11 record lingering around being irrelevant never finding a true franchise QB

Yeah, like that Brees guy. What did he ever win?

Same with that guy the Packers picked up that had a funny last name. Brett something...

Edited April 7, 2021 by Mr. Scot

[PNW_PantherMan]

2 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Gruden kept shifting quarterbacks rather than sticking with one and developing them. That's basically the approach you're advocating.

And seriously, if you want to emulate the Browns, you'd best be prepared for this:

 

You also get in a perpetual loop by tanking in football.  I don't really think its like the NBA where you can get 1 stud in the lottery and you're in much better shape.  If you draft a good QB prospect on a dumpster fire of a team, he could easily get killed from no protection or not perform very well ever.  You could be looking at decades of poor play before you get something going.

Instead of trying to find someone that can develop and win on a decent football team, you're looking for someone that shows flashes in a dumpster fire.  Not the best approach in my opinion.

[GoobyPls]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

Gruden kept shifting quarterbacks rather than sticking with one and developing them. That's basically the approach you're advocating.

And seriously, if you want to emulate the Browns, you'd best be prepared for this:

No I’m advocating for us to draft a rookie QB in the first round, you know like the overwhelming majority of SB winning teams  have done. Your the one that wants the Gruden approach with Darnold.

Again the Browns are better team than us, also the majority of those guys were t drafted by them, so keep fueling my argument 

[Toomers]

19 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

The team can restructure his deal so that it's basically a little over eleven and a half million per year for the next two seasons.

Why would the Panthers put even more money onto this year? Its the same 24M either way. 
 

  I still have a hard time believing the Panthers are exercising the option before the draft. I know it was reported, but they have until the 5/3 to officially do it. Maybe they put it out there to make teams think they don’t want a QB at 8? As many on here have thought. It makes much sense if it’s a smokescreen. 

  The trade, IMO, wasn’t bad. I wouldn’t have given a probable top 40 pick, but it wasn’t a ridiculous overpay by any measure. It’s the option. There is not one good reason to guarantee him 19M based off anything he’s done up until now.