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!

     

Which trade was worse 2nd for Darnold or 3rd for Henderson?


TheBigKat
 Share

Recommended Posts

I’d say 3rd for Henderson. This young man has been a HEALTHY scratch and is basically going to be out of the league by the end of the season

 

Darnold while proving to be likely our worst second rounder not named Everette Brown, he at least has a future in the Matt Leinart Clipboard Holding Academy as a backup QB

  • Pie 2
  • Poo 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both were awful.  Henderson just isn’t cut out for the nfl.  That trade hurts badly not only because we lost a 3rd rounder, but also the only TE on our roster worth a darn.  
 

Sams deal set us back a few years.  We passed on two QBs that are better than Sam and lost multiple picks.

 

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before hating on Henderson just remember how long it took josh Norman to develop, hell even Jackson wasn’t good at first. Some players just take a few years to develop. Henderson isn’t as bad as many 1st round CBs have been. He’s been okay but still has potential.

  • Pie 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darnold was a high risk, high reward shot. He has the physical ability, so it was a worthwhile risk. Not mad that they gave it a go and are trying to find the future franchise QB. 0-2, let’s see who’s next.

The only reason to be upset is if Darnold is the dude next year. right now is just a matter of living with this one until they can find the next option. with our needs at OL and QB, this is going to be a busy offseason.

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mother Grabber said:

Darnold was a high risk, high reward shot. He has the physical ability, so it was a worthwhile risk. Not mad that they gave it a go and are trying to find the future franchise QB. 0-2, let’s see who’s next.

The only reason to be upset is if Darnold is the dude next year. right now is just a matter of living with this one until they can find the next option. with our needs at OL and QB, this is going to be a busy offseason.

High reward? Lol o.k.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, rmoneyg35 said:

Before hating on Henderson just remember how long it took josh Norman to develop, hell even Jackson wasn’t good at first. Some players just take a few years to develop. Henderson isn’t as bad as many 1st round CBs have been. He’s been okay but still has potential.

Jackson was good his rookie season, Norman was a late round pick.

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...