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!

     

Darnold outta here?


Zod
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Jackie Lee said:

I think Teddy actually restructured just to get out of Rhule world actually now that i'm looking at it. If that's the case and the 5th year option is all or nothing and I"m another GM I want Chinn w Darnold or I have zero interest. 

 

 

yeah no thanks on that from our perspective

 

if thats the caliber of young player

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Howell had one of the worst college OLs I've seen in recent years this year and only one legit receiving target. It's real obvious when these analysts have only watched games from this season. Of course he was one read and bolt. He had to be.

The UNC bias is thick.  Howell looked extremely average this year without NFL WR’s and RB’s surrounding him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Eazy-E said:

The only thing that makes sense in my mind is a Darnold for Jimmy G swap. Obviously we would have to add a young player or a pick but really nothing else seems realistic.

That's what I was thinking. 9ers are motivated to unload, we have the cap space.  We can still draft a QB and sit him behind Jimmy.  We need a LT.  Cmon Fit, dont  fk this up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Pakmeng said:

Trading Darnold shifts his entire cap hit to the other team no? Looks like it according to the normal cap sites.

Sure we might give up Hubbard in that deal but who would be the other side? 

 

Losing Hubbard would be a dream come true.  You need hands as a small back in this league. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Jackie Lee said:

Not sure if 5th year options are different but we paid 70% of Teddy's salary last year for him to play for the Broncos, otherwise we were probably stuck with him

I think it was what was agreed upon with the trade. 
Probably was the only way the Broncos would have accepted the trade. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, The Huddler said:

huh?

 

why wouldnt we use that 18 mil?

 

depends on what we give up, but getting 18 mil in cap space would go a long way. 

I'm just saying, at this point in FA, I'm not sure where that extra 18M would go wisely with what's left out there?  We already have the most cap space in the NFL after the CMC restructure, and haven't spent much of it.  With all of that space, there's been no movement at LT, in bringing Gilmore back, adding another (new) safety, or adding edge rush help to help with Reddick's departure.

I just don't see the urgency in needing that cap space right now...  Not unless there's another big move for a QB we're not seeing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Snake said:

Yeah that was an epic failure. They also passed on a Rookie Pro Bowl LT. For Horn who could have a reoccurring injury. 

I have no beef with Horn it was just a terrible pick if we wanted to maximize value. A QB or LT made the most sense, either to increase Darnold’s chance of success by beefing the OL or by covering our bases if/when Darnold failed by having a promising rookie QB on the wing to groom.

Imagine how different our outlook going into this years draft would be if we had a promising young QB to work with.

I thought we would maximize the value of our draft picks when Hurney left but we’re still doing the same stupid poo.

Edited by firefox1234
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, firefox1234 said:

I have no beef with Horn it was just a terrible pick if we wanted to maximize value. A QB or LT made the most sense, either to increase Darnold’s chance of success by beefing the OL or by covering our bases if/when Darnold failed by having a promising rookie QB on the wing to groom.

Imagine how different our outlook going into this years draft would be if we had a promising young QB to work with.

I thought we would maximize the value of our draft picks when Hurney left but we’re still doing the same stupid poo.

If we had fields then we would be all in on building the line this season instead of trying to build the line and still trying to find the qb

 

If we drafted Slater then we could be all in on a qb this year instead of trying to build the line and still trying to find the qb

Edited by mrcompletely11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Snake said:

Yeah that was an epic failure. They also passed on a Rookie Pro Bowl LT. For Horn who could have a reoccurring injury. 

This is what concerns me about the push to get Darnold off the books now...  Teddy was a bad investment, but could've been a useful one had they just ate their mistake after the first season, kept him as a mentor and drafted Fields or just waited to draft a guy this year.  But nope, they knew they flubbed so they scrambled to get rid of Teddy and in their haste, compounded the original problem by trading for Sam's sorry ass and trying to make a reclamation project out of him when everyone with two eyes and a brain knew he sucked.  And now, here we are again...  instead of just eating that salary for one more year, we're talking about trading assets to get rid of him now.  

As I said in another post, if they have another move for an established, proven QB (requiring that cap space immediately) that I'm not seeing, I don't understand the point.  Send him away from the team, release him, idgaf...  his NFL career is probably over, he won't be playing here anymore, and he's in his last contract year, so why trade something to get rid of him unless you have a greater plan?

I mean who realistically is out there they would need that space for now to upgrade the position?  All the other spots of question, I think they could fill with the current cap space with Darnold on the roster.  So what am I missing?  Daniel Jones?  Jalen Hurts?  Maybe Derek Carr?  That would be dope.

I will say, I think it was Fitt last season that said the goal is to fill all your needs before the draft so when the draft comes around, you can draft the BPA.  If they find a way to magically fill QB before that and we get a LT, that would be amazing, but I'm not seeing it...

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

If we had fields then we would be all in on building the line this season instead of trying to build the line and still trying to find the qb

I’m no professional nor would I equate myself to them but getting a QB is like a basic tenant of squad building yet this administration has failed massively. 

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

    • LOL... Yet again proving you can't look below anything than what you see on the surface Mock drafts ARE NOT draft grades They are what people think will happen.  They are mocking teams taking QB's in the top 5 of the draft because that's just historically how drafts go regardless of the grades on the QBs.  Almost every draft expert, even those mocking QB's going high, have said time and time again that none of these QB's actually grade out as those type of picks. This is again, where I say you don't like to actually read what I have to say, because I already explained it. 2022 the exact same thing happened, mock drafts had guys like Pickett and Willis going in the Top 5 because that's just what teams usually do, but GM's listened to their prospect grades and knew they weren't worth taking that high, so they didn't. It's not to say QB's won't go that high this year, but it's to say that they aren't graded out as elite QB prospects.  Mock drafts 
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...