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!

     

Meanwhile in other camps...

Mr. Scot

By Mr. Scot,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

trueblade Grand Master

trueblade

Posted
Posted
16 hours ago, bythenbrs said:

I will respectfully disagree.  Darnold plus either Sewell or Horn was the low risk decision.  Before either steps on the field, you have to allow for the possibility that Fields may bust.  Darnold may also bust but in selecting either Sewell or Horn, you have two chips in the game (Darnold +), rather than just one (Fields).  And this fits with Fitterer's philosophy of trading down to get more players, which is more opportunities to succeed in the draft.  Given the flop rate of first round QB's, choosing Fields is equivalent to pushing all your chips in on your current hand.  You will win big or leave the game.  I don't think Fitterer or Rhule were willing to risk that outcome.  Just my opinion, your mileage may vary.

I don't think the flop rate of first round CBs is much better than QBs. Both seem like risky positions. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldhamA Grand Master

OldhamA

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Proudiddy said:

FWIW, I had some good exchanges with Omar Kelly, Miami's beat writer, back in the day when I used Twitter more, and I've been following him ever since...  they're having joint practices with Chicago and he tweeted this after the first one:

 

checking blood and oil GIF

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Proudiddy said:

FWIW, I had some good exchanges with Omar Kelly, Miami's beat writer, back in the day when I used Twitter more, and I've been following him ever since...  they're having joint practices with Chicago and he tweeted this after the first one:

 

Teddy had accuracy and anticipation too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
iamhubby1 Veteran

iamhubby1

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Proudiddy said:

FWIW, I had some good exchanges with Omar Kelly, Miami's beat writer, back in the day when I used Twitter more, and I've been following him ever since...  they're having joint practices with Chicago and he tweeted this after the first one:

 

 

That's too bad about Fields. Most of this board are hoping he can prove Rhule, and Fitz wrong. I'm sure he will get better? Right?

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
frankw Grand Master

frankw

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, iamhubby1 said:

That's too bad about Fields. Most of this board are hoping he can prove Rhule, and Fitz wrong. I'm sure he will get better? Right?

He got no favors from the universe in going to Chicago. He and Zach Wilson face quite the uphill battle but that's the downside to going in the top 10 as a qb you know you're going to a crummy situation. Ask Burrow.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
iamhubby1 Veteran

iamhubby1

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, frankw said:

He got no favors from the universe in going to Chicago. He and Zach Wilson face quite the uphill battle but that's the downside to going in the top 10 as a qb you know you're going to a crummy situation. Ask Burrow.

 

Excuses for Fields. Wow, who'd a thunk it. Folks will give Fieldsv a pass, but rip into Sam? What is wrong with this picture?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, frankw said:

He got no favors from the universe in going to Chicago. He and Zach Wilson face quite the uphill battle but that's the downside to going in the top 10 as a qb you know you're going to a crummy situation. Ask Burrow.

Truth. Virtually every high pick QB ends up in a shitty situation. It's just the reality of being a high pick QB. Trey Lance got really lucky.

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
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Joe Bear
      Okay, now face the facta guyd

      By Joe Bear · Posted

      No, it will be a raw 6'7" 17-year-old European who just played basketball for the first time in March and who the idiot GM "had first on our board." He'll play the whole G-League season, get in 42 games for the Hornets and average 1.1 ppg on 35% shooting. Been there, seen that.
    • ForJimmy
      JJ Jansen on tanking

      By ForJimmy · Posted

      We missed on Burns at his peak value. That’s the problem with trading for picks 2-3 years away (which people were convinced the Rams would suck by now and these would be higher picks btw). Each year away the pick is the further in value it drops. Fitt was clearly hired based on turning us around quickly. It’s one of the many reasons tanking isn’t really a thing as our player JJ is telling you in this original article. It would take the whole organization from the owners down admitting they aren’t winning soon with Burns and picks 2-3 years away having more value because that’s when we are still rebuilding. It would only make sense if Fitt had a longer leash and would more than likely be the ones making these picks anyway which you wouldn’t want. The question is would you rather have those Rams picks with the strong possibility of Fitt still being here or would you rather Fitt try to “win now” like he did and expedite his firing? Altering the timeline would affect more than just the Rams picks. 
    • HaricotVert
      Potential changes to playoff seeding

      By HaricotVert · Posted

      I dont buy the idea that it would create more competitive games Given this: Seed Current Format Record Proposed Open Seeding Record 1 Lions 15–2 Lions 15–2 2 Eagles 14–3 Eagles 14–3 3 Buccaneers 10–7 Vikings 14–3 4 Rams 10–7 Commanders 12–5 5 Vikings 14–3 Rams 10–7 6 Commanders 12–5 Buccaneers 10–7 7 Packers 11–6 Packers 11–6 That would mean Wild Card round would have been Eagles (14/3) v  Pack(11/6) Vikings(14/3) v Bucs(10/7) Commanders(12/5) v Rams(10/7) Instead of Eagles (14/3) v  Pack(11/6) Bucs(10/7) v Commanders(12/5) Rams(10/7) v Vikings(14/3) Then with the reseed it would mean that highest remaining seed would always draw the lowest remaining team.
×
×
  • Create New...