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!

     

Just throwing this out there..


WOW!!
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, WOW!! said:

We also watch that team barely beat a Titans and Raiders team with better Olines.. 

We also saw a San Francisco team with the worst QB in the Playoffs beat the best QB and best WR in the league at their house..

 

1 minute ago, TheCasillas said:

this is super old. RT are just as important as LT now in the league. Teams used to spend a lot of money on focusing on rushing the passer's blind side. Now it goes both ways. 

You have an argument, but your argument is a bit dated.

There is a story by Chris Trapaso under it as well did you read that..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, WOW!! said:

We also watch that team barely beat a Titans and Raiders team with better Olines.. 

We also saw a San Francisco team with the worst QB in the Playoffs beat the best QB and best WR in the league at their house..

“this team lost but they maybe could’ve won”

like lol what kind of argument is that

glad you mentioned the niners, the niners just traded away years worth of plug and play 1st round hog mollies because they knew they didn’t have an elite QB

the QB they did have cost them a super bowl

now they’re getting rid of him

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Growl said:

“this team lost but they maybe could’ve won”

like lol what kind of argument is that

glad you mentioned the niners, the niners just traded away years worth of plug and play 1st round hog mollies because they knew they didn’t have an elite QB

the QB they did have cost them a super bowl

now they’re getting rid of him

 

Yes they traded for a higher rated prospect more of a sure thing ..

You want to take a swing a lower level prospect based on desperation and position value.. Okay

But your taking a swing on prospect rated on the same level as the QB San Francisco is trying to get rid of...

Think about that..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, unicar15 said:

Definitely don’t think Love is a bust at this point. He’s been playing behind a 1st ballot HOFer who just isn’t ready to go elsewhere yet. Who knows…if he has an entire season to play maybe he puts together a good career. Problem is that at thus point he’s gonna go somewhere else to do it and so he’ll be learning all over again. 
 

BUT! He’s 6 mo younger than Pickett and has already been in the league three years. To me he’s further ahead of Pickett, has more natural arm talent, and would cost less. So to me if you’re not going to draft Corral bc of superior physical traits to Pickett (in a move down) then trading a mid round pick for Love isn’t the worst idea. 

Yup.  He was a first round pick by Green Bay, who happen to know a thing or 2 about picking good QBs, for a reason. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, WOW!! said:

Yes they traded for a higher rated prospect more of a sure thing ..

You want to take a swing a lower level prospect based on desperation and position value.. Okay

But your taking a swing on prospect rated on the same level as the QB San Francisco is trying to get rid of...

Think about that..

Lol trey Lance was a sure thing? Trey Lance was an FCS QB who didn’t even play his final season. that’s about as opposite a sure thing as you can possibly be.

they traded three 1’s to get him. 

Edited by Growl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TheCasillas said:

I know, that is why I said it was dated. The article is from 2013. That was almost a decade ago, and the league has changed quite a bit, along with positional value.

Okay either way .. let's go by your position value now... Is it smart to take a lower prospect at a higher positional rate or a generational talent at a lower positional rate??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, WOW!! said:

Okay either way .. let's go by your position value now... Is it smart to take a lower prospect at a higher positional rate or a generational talent at a lower positional rate??

I dont think there is a blanket answer there. Its competely situational. Cowboys have been drafting "generational" 1st round talent for years... and it really hasnt done them much other than eat cap space.

Hurney drafted BPA while he was here, and that didnt turn into anything.

Bills and Patriots always draft postion of need but they have different results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Growl said:

Lol trey Lance was a sure thing? Trey Lance was an FCS QB who didn’t even play his final season. that’s about as opposite a sure thing as you can possibly be.

they traded three 1’s to get him. 

Trey Lance by far would be the number 1 no question 1st pick in this draft... Him being in this draft alone would raise the positional rating of the QBS in this draft.. 

His physical talent alone makes every QB in this draft look like Chris ponder or Joey Harrington..

You can act like any QB in this draft is even close to the prospect Lance is but it wouldn't be true..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, WOW!! said:

Trey Lance by far would be the number 1 no question 1st pick in this draft... Him being in this draft alone would raise the positional rating of the QBS in this draft.. 

His physical talent alone makes every QB in this draft look like Chris ponder or Joey Harrington..

You can act like any QB in this draft is even close to the prospect Lance is but it wouldn't be true..

Why don’t you do an in depth breakdown of trey Lance the prospect for me then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Growl said:

Lol trey Lance was a sure thing? Trey Lance was an FCS QB who didn’t even play his final season. that’s about as opposite a sure thing as you can possibly be.

they traded three 1’s to get him. 

And there's a lot of talk but he's still not ready.

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

    • then we're stuck.  tbh, at this point i would settle for just making it interesting. forget winning a superbowl for now. just get a team that can win games consistently and hope that it's enough to get to the big dance.  we want superman. we aren't getting superman. we had him and we blew our chance with him.  find a way make it work and hope that we can with this little guy and quit wishing our lives away for the second coming of superman. it just ain't happening.
    • Gonna have to strongly disagree with you here. Here are the last 20 Super Bowls - only two of them IMO had QB that didn't play like Superman to get them there/win the game/both, and that was Peyton in 2015 and Ben in 2005. Even then they both had that ability, Peyton was just old and Ben young. That said, there were flashes in the pan like Foles in 2017 and (to a lesser degree) Flacco in 2012. But even counting that, it's 4/20. 20% odds aren't good enough and Bryce was absolutely drafted at #1 to be a guy that elevates an entire team and plays like Superman. If he can't do that then it's a failed pick, full stop. Being a poor man's Teddy doesn't cut it for a #1 overall and that's true for any team, not just Carolina.
    • the problem is if we're waiting for Cam v2, we're going to be waiting decades longer.  our best hope is that bryce is better than we all think he is and that canales is able to work some serious magic with him and the scheme to help him live up anywhere close to the potential we thought he had. he's a smart kid. we just have to be able to have a situation that allows him to use his smarts.  the truth with cam was that een he had to have a system tailored for his skillset coming into the league. the difference between him and luck (which was the debate in '09 when we thought luck was an option) was that with luck, he could be placed in any offense and it would work...hence the higher floor he had  than cam. cam, though, needed an offense that was built around him to reach his potential. he could have done alright in a more pro-style offense, but to reach his ceiling (which was seen by a lot of people as being higher than luck). i don't think having to have an offense tailored around what you can and can't do well is a problem for people who can develop around them...after they've truly identified what those can and can't items are. we didn't have that last year. i think we have that this year. we want a guy who can carry a team on his back, but those kind of guys are very rare. we don't need to spend our time trying  find that guy, because even when you have them there's no guarantee that they will be enough.  championships are won, quite often, by teams who learn to compensate for less than the greatest QB play. you have a great defense and can protect the ball while wearing out the other defense and you've got a chance.  we don't need Bryce to be superman (despite where we drafted him and what we paid to get him). we just need him to be able to run (manage) a good offense. 
×
×
  • Create New...