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!

     

Albert Breer also has us taking Fields, believes Tepper is pushing for it.


GoobyPls
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, trueblade said:

Even if Darnold is bad, the Panthers are still probably picking in the teens instead of the top 10 meaning it will be all the more expensive to move up for a QB.

What is the basis for this assumption? I have seen it several times. Carolina picked 8th with an able but not very good game manager of a QB. If Darnold is genuinely bad, what are the chances Carolina is picking outside of the top 10-12? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Smittymoose said:

What is the basis for this assumption? I have seen it several times. Carolina picked 8th with an able but not very good game manager of a QB. If Darnold is genuinely bad, what are the chances Carolina is picking outside of the top 10-12? 

well, Darnold won 7 games the last time the Jets actually tried.  So I don't think he is going to come in and implode us. 

our D should continue to improve IMO.  We should get a healthy CMC this year.  So I think even if Darnold is meh.....we should hover around 8-8. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

If you pass on one you believe is the guy at 8 and gave a decent roster, it’s going to cost a lot more than one first to get your guy next year.

If you believe he's the guy, you don't pass on him. If you don't, then you do.

Of course if you're wrong, and in doing so you bypassed someone who could have been "the guy" at another position, you've screwed up big time.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mr. Scot said:

If you believe he's the guy, you don't pass on him. If you don't, then you do.

Of course if you're wrong, and in doing so you bypassed someone who could have been "the guy" at another position, you've screwed up big time.

Agreed. Some positions are worth this risk and QB could be one of them. Hell the Niners are dropping 3 first round picks on a guy they believe is the answer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, CRA said:

well, Darnold won 7 games the last time the Jets actually tried.  So I don't think he is going to come in and implode us. 

our D should continue to improve IMO.  We should get a healthy CMC this year.  So I think even if Darnold is meh.....we should hover around 8-8. 

There's a difference between meh and bad. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ForJimmy said:

Agreed. Some positions are worth this risk and QB could be one of them. Hell the Niners are dropping 3 first round picks on a guy they believe is the answer. 

I'm a little more pragmatic on the topic of team building.

If you get it wrong, you get it wrong. Good intentions don't mean sh-t.

Lord knows Marty Hurney had plenty of good intentions. Doesn't make me feel any better about the fact that he sucked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, CPcavedweller said:

Hurts isn't the answer in Philly...let's not kid ourselves. 

Not only that, his Packers example is even worse. Taking Love was an enormous blunder. You think someone like Tee Higgins or Jeff Gladney could have made an impact for them at 30 while Love was standing their on the sidelines watching them lose to Tampa with a trip to the SB on the line instead? I sure do. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'm a little more pragmatic on the topic of team building.

If you get it wrong, you get it wrong. Good intentions don't mean sh-t.

Lord knows Marty Hurney had plenty of good intentions. Doesn't make me feel any better about the fact that he sucked.

If you get it wrong you are set back like any first round pick. Sewell could end up like Matt Kalil, there is always a risk. However, if you don’t have a QB your team wont be doing too much anyway. You got to have one to stay relevant in the playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jayboogieman said:

How many of you competition breeds competitiveness guys wanted the Panthers to draft first round QBs when Cam was here? That's just a line you guys are saying as an excuse to want a first round QB this year

Probably because at that time the other option was Jimmy pickles. It's no execuse. The circumstances are different. We're bringing in a guy with potential, but no proven track record. To be honest, we should have considered drafting a QB as soon as Cams shoulder was destroyed as a contingency. We could've done so with plenty of guys. But our FO decided to wait or draft a LATE round flyer. 

Tom Brady and Drew Bledsoe

Aaron Rodgers and Brett Fabre

Steve Young and Joe Montana.

I could list examples all day with teams taking this approach. And they've been far more successful than the Teams that took the Trent Dilter route. And let's keep in mind all the guys you point too are from a different era when defenses weren't hamstrung by the rule book. Shoring up the QB position in this day and age of the NFL is by far the single most important piece off the franchise. To remain perennial contenders anyway. Sure we could draft a tackle and I'd be ecstatic, but then the Darnold could darnold and we're back at square one.

 

But go ahead. Go off.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ForJimmy said:

If you get it wrong you are set back like any first round pick. Sewell could end up like Matt Kalil, there is always a risk. However, if you don’t have a QB your team wont be doing too much anyway. You got to have one to stay relevant in the playoffs.

And we might.

Drafting another one assumes we don't.

And again, we don't know that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

If you believe he's the guy, you don't pass on him. If you don't, then you do.

Of course if you're wrong, and in doing so you bypassed someone who could have been "the guy" at another position, you've screwed up big time.

If you bypass on the QB and he turns out good you screwed up big time even if you are correct on the other position if you are current guy doesn't become the guy.

There is no perfect answer here because we don't know who is going go be right.  What if the LT doesn't work out, and you passed on a QB that does, that is even a bigger screw up.

At the end of the day all you are doing is playing the  odds.  

Are you willing to take a chance with a 30% QB to take a 90% LT or would you prefer to take a 60% QB to compete with your 30% QB, and yes I made all of those percentages up, but really that is all the teams are doing.  The payout for being right about a QB is exponentially higher than that of any other position.  

Evaluating players is nothing but trying to figure their chances of success.

There is a very good chance the team might be willing to take OT1 over QB3, but maybe they would take QB3 over OT2.  

 

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

    • I’m not necessarily advocating sticking with Bryce. His highs show the ability is there, but there’s enough bad film out there to doubt that he can consistently enough play at a high enough level. But this video from Brett Kollman is a pretty good argument to give it a bit more time, whether that be rolling with Bryce just next year or picking up his 5th year option (not extending him).      The gist is that the structural (wider hashes) and rule (3 yd vs 1 yd thresholds for intelligible offensive lineman downfield penalties) differences in the college and NFL have led to wildly different play calling and scheme diets in college. There is much more shotgun and RPO calls in college and screen/quick throws. This simply doesn’t set up young QBs to be able to play under center, which is more preferred in the NFL due to RBs being able to more effectively run out of that formation.  They don’t know how to do it and have to learn. Yes, the NFL has trended more toward college style offense in the last decade or so, but it isn’t that pronounced and is more out of necessity than desire. And on top of all that, they ask the young QBs to do all this learning with coaching and other personnel churn going on around them.  Bad results lead to coaches getting fired and new ones with different ideas on scheme and footwork and different terminology and playbooks coming in. It makes it harder on those young QBs to learn.     So we may drop Bryce for a young QB starter in the draft and be in a similar situation. With a QB who is going to take years to learn how to operate in an NFL style offense and will struggle along the way.  So you have to weigh whether the struggles we see from Bryce are more due to this learning process vs solely physical limitations on his part. It’s almost undoubtedly a bit of both, but the answer to that question I think dictates your strategy at QB over the next few years. And of course, you have to consider what the alternatives available are.    I’m neither a Bryce hater or a Bryce Stan and I don’t have an answer to that question. But I do fear that if we move on from him, unless it’s for an established player, we’re just in for continued frustration on the QB front because it’s going to take a few years for a college QB to develop (Drake Maye’s don’t grow on trees). 
    • The defense has pulled that feat off this season though.  Multiple times. offense has not had a single good first half all season.  Only and good opening scripted drive paired with disappointing play.  defense has been the actual unit you can measure real and consistent improvement IMO.  Still holes and flaws to it that aren’t going away until new bodies get here but they really are the story of the season IMO
    • One thing about RB's and LB's is they are going to get hurt. It's inevitable. Having a fresh Chuba is not a bad thing.  My only criticism of this entire situation is that I wish our staff would adjust personnel to matchup a little better. I think Chuba is a lot better than Rico against the stacked boxes we've seen the last two weeks. They are very different backs with very different strengths, and I love them both. Rico is so good at identifying the hole early, and hitting it full speed early. He's much better at breaking the big run. Chuba is a much more patient back, and finds 3 yards when there's nothing there better than Rico.  It's in no way a criticism of either, but I think Chuba would have had more success than Rico the way the Saints and Falcons attacked us from a Defensive standpoint.  When you put 9 in the box, often times there is no hole to attack. 
×
×
  • Create New...