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!

     

Why Tommy Stevens will be the #3 QB


MHS831
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

Thanks bro.  I like to hear opposite opinions because we all get trapped by our own perspectives--love the arguments--they really make you smarter if your mind is open.  And we all know who the turds are and we try not to step in one.

I sometimes throw stuff out that I sorta doubt myself just to get a reaction--to convince me.  The bottom of the roster is important, and some of these folks do not get that the players we keep there are indicators of what we are going to do.  So I love the bubble drama this time of year.  Some people argue well, and I still do not agree with them, but I admire their justification of their perspective.  We all cherry pick data to support our positions--the people I despise are those who simply make a statement like "he's trash" without any reasons provided.  I do not give a poo about someone's opinion, unless they can support it.  If they cant, I assume they are limited or their middle school teacher told them computer time is over.

Ok reasons. His draft grade had him as a special teamer or backup. He has no experience playing these other positions at a high level of competition. There is no reason to believe he will even be serviceable at those other positions. He had 83 carries for 381 yards his last season in college. He has good straight line speed without much wiggle. 

I will double down, this guy will never play meaningful snaps for our team unless it as a special teamer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

 If you don't want to talk about the #3 QB, WHY DID YOU CLICK ON THE THREAD THAT CLEARLY DESCRIBES THE TOPIC AS THE #3 QB?

 

Why are you in all caps? I am just surprised to hear the guys name so much. If we did not know the saints ever wanted him how much attention would he get? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, PootieNunu said:

But but but, Tommy Stevens , the saints wanted him so bad so we have to make use of him right?

If we never found out the saints wanted this guy how much talk would we hear about him? 

Now we are breaking our necks to keep a spot for him? 

It was actually the opposite. Sean Payton (with his smug ass face) found out Joe Brady was talking to Stevens about coming on as an undrafted rookie and drafted him in the late rounds before we could sign him. 
 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/3063074001

 

I know it ruins your poo talking about our team/fans, but you gotta get your facts right.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, PootieNunu said:

But but but, Tommy Stevens , the saints wanted him so bad so we have to make use of him right?

If we never found out the saints wanted this guy how much talk would we hear about him? 

Now we are breaking our necks to keep a spot for him? 

You are the only person saying that.  The Saints had a player who can do what Stevens can do, so they tried him as a pure TE and drafted him because they knew we were going to sign him--gave up a sixth rounder.  We like athletes, and we are going to use him like the saints use Hill---The Saints already had a Hill, so it would be stupid to keep him and have 2 Hills--so their plans for him were different that ours will be simply because we will use him like Hill--this is not hard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MHS831 said:

You are the only person saying that.  The Saints had a player who can do what Stevens can do, so they tried him as a pure TE and drafted him because they knew we were going to sign him--gave up a sixth rounder.  We like athletes, and we are going to use him like the saints use Hill---The Saints already had a Hill, so it would be stupid to keep him and have 2 Hills--so their plans for him were different that ours will be simply because we will use him like Hill--this is not hard. 

@kungfoodude just replied to me and called him a JAG? 

I just dont get the man crush for Tommy Stevens. We have tons of young talent that actually will contribute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, PootieNunu said:

Ok reasons. His draft grade had him as a special teamer or backup. He has no experience playing these other positions at a high level of competition. There is no reason to believe he will even be serviceable at those other positions. He had 83 carries for 381 yards his last season in college. He has good straight line speed without much wiggle. 

I will double down, this guy will never play meaningful snaps for our team unless it as a special teamer.

Would you say the same for Hill?  I would.  Is he a special teamer?  And even if you are right--is Will Grier a better QB than Stevens?  Does Will Grier play special teams?  This has gone full circle now---

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MHS831 said:

Would you say the same for Hill?  I would.  Is he a special teamer?  And even if you are right--is Will Grier a better QB than Stevens?  Does Will Grier play special teams?  This has gone full circle now---

Ok Tommy Stevens can play special teams, I said that. As far as him being Taysom Hill 2.0 I will not hold my breath. I am not sure he will even play on the special teams, I have no idea if he is even willing to tackle. 

Taysom Hill is not some great all pro player, he is an ok gadget player that the saints love. If he was with any other team I question if he would ever see the field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

In the thread with his name in the title? No way!!!

In the thread where people are clicking the obvious title then whining when it's about the the team members and roster makeup.

Edited by Moo Daeng
  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

It was actually the opposite. Sean Payton (with his smug ass face) found out Joe Brady was talking to Stevens about coming on as an undrafted rookie and drafted him in the late rounds before we could sign him. 
 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/3063074001

 

I know it ruins your poo talking about our team/fans, but you gotta get your facts right.

Yes, and they felt they could convert him to a TE--maybe replace Hill and his contract, but that did not happen and they could not keep him.  We want him to be a player like Hill--not a pure TE, and both are listed as #3 QBs.  Obviously Brady loved his athleticism and Hill has value if used correctly--they just did not need 2 Hills in the big easy. We had no Hills, now we have a Hill.  At the very least he helps us prepare for New Orleans twice a year, but I sense he will have an expanding role like Hill does.  (Hill makes about $12m this year---who cares about the #3 QB?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

Yes, and they felt they could convert him to a TE--maybe replace Hill and his contract, but that did not happen and they could not keep him.  We want him to be a player like Hill--not a pure TE, and both are listed as #3 QBs.  Obviously Brady loved his athleticism and Hill has value if used correctly--they just did not need 2 Hills in the big easy. We had no Hills, now we have a Hill.  At the very least he helps us prepare for New Orleans twice a year, but I sense he will have an expanding role like Hill does.  (Hill makes about $12m this year---who cares about the #3 QB?)

Do you want Taysom Hill to play for us? He is an overpaid backup QB. The guy played 43 % of the saints snaps on offense last season and he has the 8th highest cap hit on the team. 

I dont know about you, but I dont want any part of that. 

Edited by PootieNunu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steven will get a look because he's a good athlete. If he can learn what the coaches want him to learn and prove useful in some way (Probably not a true QB or TE option) he will make the team. He will be used in special packages that add a little wrinkle to the offense. 

  • 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

    • Have you seen the mock drafts lately?   Most of them have us taking a QB. Just because you aren't high on these QBs doesn't mean the Panthers or other teams aren't.   If you want me to be real I just think you a Tmac homer and all you care about is us drafting him. It's why you get so defensive when people mention other prospects.   Be open to other people's ideas. Nobody in this thread is saying anything bad about your boy Tmac. 
    • Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
    • Sanders is with Tom Brady brand and that's his mentor. The Raiders owner was with Sanders taking pics at a Vegas game together.   It doesn't take much to connect the dots that Vegas will be interested in Sanders as their franchise QB. Oh yeah and guess who hasa small ownership stake in the Raiders Tom Brady.   I guess this is just another made up Madden idea by me huh?
×
×
  • Create New...