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!

     

Today's Game


Catsfan69
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, MillionDollarCam said:

They get an entire offseason… not three days of practice.

Scouts say all the time that the practice is more important because they can judge a players intangibles and ability in a one on one setting.

None of these guys are going to come in and save a franchise right away but that doesn’t mean Willis, Howell, Pickett, etc. aren’t capable of becoming an NFL QB based off of this game.

An entire offseason, plus most rookie QBs struggle at first. The only one who looked ok early was Mac last year in a “loaded” QB class (and he ran a basic run first offense).  These scouts are looking at their mental and physical abilities and seeing if some of the best minds/coaches in sports can help mold them into NFL stars. I agree 100%. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ECHornet said:

If you want the #1 overall pick in 2023, start Cam next year. 
 

The upside is high draft picks and can probably resign DJ for cheap bc he’s stats would be terrible. 

This is why Cam should be the QB.

You either get the top '23 pick or he gets back to MVP form like we saw vs. Washington this year, but brings that each week

  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ForJimmy said:

An entire offseason, plus most rookie QBs struggle at first. The only one who looked ok early was Mac last year in a “loaded” QB class (and he ran a basic run first offense).  These scouts are looking at their mental and physical abilities and seeing if some of the best minds/coaches in sports can help mold them into NFL stars. I agree 100%. 

Going back to what you were discussing before, if you're given the choice between "consistently good" and "occasionally great", always take "consistently good".

I've seen "consistently good" turn into "consistently great" way more frequently than I can recall seeing "occasionally great" morph into "consistently good" and eventually become "consistently great".

If you want an example, the hope of "occasionally great" turning into "consistently good / great" is what Matt Rhule was banking on when he picked up Sam Darnold.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The big losers in this game have been the offensive linemen. I get that this is format is unfairly biased to the defense. The OL and QBs/WRs need more communication work then the defense by and large, but the pass protection and run blocking both have been a struggle on both sides of the ball the majority of the game. Not good for the OL involved.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LinvilleGorge said:

The big losers in this game have been the offensive linemen. I get that this is format is unfairly biased to the defense. The OL and QBs/WRs need more communication work then the defense by and large, but the pass protection and run blocking both have been a struggle on both sides of the ball the majority of the game. Not good for the OL involved.

Might be more of a reason to take an OL early. The depth might not be there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Year of the Tiger said:

Hopefully you have the Bengal Tigers winning the Super Bowl in the Chinese Year of the Tiger. In the time of the China virus, when China Joe is President .. when the Bengals have Joe Burrow, and Joe Mixon. I think you need the help moron. 

Yep. It's him 🙄

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Going back to what you were discussing before, if you're given the choice between "consistently good" and "occasionally great", always take "consistently good".

I've seen "consistently good" turn into "consistently great" way more frequently than I can recall seeing "occasionally great" morph into "consistently good" and eventually become "consistently great".

If you want an example, the hope of "occasionally great" turning into "consistently good / great" is what Matt Rhule was banking on when he picked up Sam Darnold.

The Darnold move was more of Rhule banking on himself, thinking he was the smartest coach in the league. No one else was that interested for a reason and we were basically bidding against ourselves. The his arrogance jumps to a $18.5 million extension because he was so confident he could “fix” a QB the league had already given up on… If McAdoo really liked Allen and Mahomes the best in their class, he is liking the higher risk/reward QBs. If he is having any influence and we are looking at QBs, Willis probably has his attention. Rhule might be still thinking he can fix Darnold…

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 sure 19 is too high for Rodriguez anymore.  He looks to be moving up boards, but it could be smokescreens.  
    • I see XL this way---great athlete.  Good person.  When we drafted him, we knew he was raw.  One year of WR in college (starting) and in HS, he was a QB, I believe. We knew we would need patience with him.  I think year 3 will be make or break.  He is older, and I think that people with his athletic ability have always been better than those with less---but those with less can become more successful.  Why is that?  in my view, it is mental. XL can learn the mechanics and nuances of playing WR if he becomes focused on it and works at it.  I had the opportunity to talk to Armanti Edwards one day after OTAs (great guy) and he discussed how overwhelming it was.  He seemed shocked.  At that time, I knew that Fox hated the pick (I heard him mock Armanti to another coach when he saw Edwards drop a punt from a jugs machine--then I saw Armanti look back at Fox as if to suggest that he was feeling the pressure to please the coach. We forget that these are kids in their early 20s.  At the time, Fox was a lame duck.  Remember when he had Clausen as the #3 QB and was forced to move him up the ladder?  I liked Fox, but I think the climate and culture was influenced by the politics.  Currently, I see another Wr from SC who is struggling, but he is ina  very nurturing, positive culture. Let's see what happens with XL.  I am frustrated too---but XL was a second round talent who was raw and we traded up to get him.  He had 500 yards as a rookie--lets call 2025 a sophomore slump and see if we can't get at least 50 yards per game out of him.  If not, cut bait.
    • Sadiq feels like a lazy comp.  Sure he would be a big improvement over what we have but at a position we don't and maybe can't (midget qb) utilize.  I hope the staff puts together a list of players you automatically take at 19 (Freeling, Lemon, Downs, Faulk) and if none are there, trade back to look at (Thieneman, McNeil-Warren, Proctor, Lomu, Allen, Iheanachor, Banks, Woods).  I get the people that think an OT would be a waste because we temporarily patched that hole, and ILB and safety are a waste because that is high to take those particular positions, but by trading back we get extra picks to fill every need.  A draft that has an OT, S, ILB, slot WR, and C would really put us in a good position moving forward if we get an extra first three rounds additional pick.   
×
×
  • Create New...