Take QB out of the equation

[AU-panther]

5 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

What was actually being said was that Darnold was only a just in case / last resort / insurance pickup because the team didn't believe any of the top five quarterbacks would fall to them.

Clearly, that turned out to be wrong seeing as two of the top five were available to us and we passed on both.

Uhh, apparently you hear what you want, just to be able to argue.

What I read said otherwise, basically that Darnold wouldn’t stop the tram

from taking a QB they really liked. 

Hey LinvilleGorge, did you ever say they would take any of the top 5 QBs? 

[Mr. Scot]

24 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

Uhh, apparently you hear what you want, just to be able to argue.

What I read said otherwise, basically that Darnold wouldn’t stop the tram

from taking a QB they really liked. 

Hey LinvilleGorge, did you ever say they would take any of the top 5 QBs? 

Look in the thread about Albert Breer mocking Fields to the Panthers.

You'll see multiple posters calling Darnold a fallback plan or "insurance". Also stating that it's so obvious they can't imagine how anybody doesn't see it.

Edited April 30, 2021 by Mr. Scot

[AU-panther]

Just now, Mr. Scot said:

Look in the thread about Albert Breer mocking Fields to the Panthers.

You'll see multiple posters calling Darnold a fallback plan or "insurance".

He was our fallback plan.

We couldn’t get Stafford, we couldn’t get Watson, after San Fran traded up we probably felt like we couldn’t draft a QB  that we really wanted so we signed Darnold.

The team felt like he was our best option that was realistic.  That doesn’t mean they wouldn’t have took a QB they really liked it by the small chance he fell.

Also by calling him insurance doesn’t imply the team would have took any of the top 5 QBs.  Nobody said that. 

Honestly we would have preferred Stafford, or Watson, Trevor, probably Wilson also.  Since they tried to trade to 3 there is a very good chance they liked a third QB, apparently not Fields.

None of us know for sure, what if the Jets took Fields, and Wilson fell.  Maybe we were high enough on Wilson to take him with Darnold on the team. 
 

That is all people were saying, that the cost of Darnold wouldn’t prevent the team from taking someone if they really liked them.  Not sure why you all argued about that as much as you did.

 

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, AU-panther said:

He was our fallback plan.

We couldn’t get Stafford, we couldn’t get Watson, after San Fran traded up we probably felt like we couldn’t draft a QB  that we really wanted so we signed Darnold.

The team felt like he was our best option that was realistic.  That doesn’t mean they wouldn’t have took a QB they really liked it by the small chance he fell.

Also by calling him insurance doesn’t imply the team would have took any of the top 5 QBs.  Nobody said that. 

Honestly we would have preferred Stafford, or Watson, Trevor, probably Wilson also.  Since they tried to trade to 3 there is a very good chance they liked a third QB, apparently not Fields.

None of us know for sure, what if the Jets took Fields, and Wilson fell.  Maybe we were high enough on Wilson to take him with Darnold on the team. 

That is all people were saying, that the cost of Darnold wouldn’t prevent the team from taking someone if they really liked them.  Not sure why you all argued about that as much as you did.

Yeah, sure

I'm not interested in talking in circles with you dude. Spin it however you want. The team is committed to Darnold.

[AU-panther]

49 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Yeah, sure

I'm not interested in talking in circles with you dude. Spin it however you want. The team is committed to Darnold.

I’m not the one spinning, but you are correct, this is pointless.