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!

     

Kyler Murray?


ncfan
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, unicar15 said:

Lamar Jackson has had a 3k yard passing season ONE TIME, has never been as accurate as Murray, and his playing style is WAY more dangerous than Murray. Kyler Murray is a top 10 QB. In 2-3 years he’s going to be top 5. If he’s available for trade we’d be dumb not to inquire.

This is very true. However I have a feeling all this scuttlebutt about a trade was released by Kylers agent to put pressure on the Cards for a new contract. He’s not going anywhere. Lamar is a more realistic option IMO and he’s probably not going anywhere either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jb2288 said:

Fair enough. I have Kyler above Jackson, Herbert, and Prescott 

Thats fine, but I am not sure why. Dak and Herbert are better passers, Lamar is a much better runner, Kyler is somewhere in the middle. Decent passer and runner. 

Lamar has won a MVP and carries that Raven offense. 

Edited by PootieNunu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, PootieNunu said:

Thats fine, but I am not sure why. Dak and Herbert are better passers, Lamar is a much better runner, Kyler is somewhere in the middle. Decent passer and runner. 

Lamar has won a MVP and carries that Raven offense. 

Lamar won an MVP 2 years ago. Hasn’t really been even remotely dominant since then. Disagree on Dak and Herbert. Kyler has thrown for 4000 yards the past 2 seasons while also doing what he does with his legs. I do think Herbert will be better however, he’s just younger. Dak is just what he is at this point

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weird that this is an even a debate. If there's a chance at bringing the mighty mouse in, you do it and don't think twice. Seems that some here would've said no to Brees too because he had a huge injury and couldn't see over his OL.

This franchise has had ONE QB of note in almost three decades. Maybe we just don't know one when we see one. 

Then again, if you've spent basically your whole existence with Chevettes, maybe you would spend more time dismissing a Porsche because it has no back seat.

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 going to be real, the reason that vote ended up so lop-sided by the end was directly due to my programming. So there's nothing tongue in cheek about it. Also I left PFF after the Collinsworth acquisition (didn't want to move to Cincy) but have stayed involved in analytics via backdoor channels, but I can absolutely say that the experience was eye-opening, not because those guys are unquestionable football savants and that I became one by proxy, but because the amount of information that becomes available outside of what the typical fan has access to is revelatory and also really drives home how much context is still being missed even with all of that information. You don't discover that you know everything, you discover how much you still can't know no matter how hard you try, hence my point about the NFL not being able to figure out what makes a QB good. There's a lot of AI work going into that now and even that only seems to further confuse things vs. actually enlighten the problem. In the professional realm teams don't really talk about quarterbacks as A strictly being better than B, but how A can potentially perform better than B given a specific context of C. Of course those contexts may be wider for A than B, but there's also contexts where B can outshine A, even with lesser talent surrounding them. So what good teams strive to do is ultimately define a process of how they want their entire team to operate under schematically, find players that fit that scheme, and hopefully find a guy whose skillset will be maximized running that scheme with those players. Where bad teams fall of the wagon is constantly shifting those schemes and chasing bad fits or fads vs. sticking with a core identity and developing it.
    • there is a 100 mile long list of NFL players and coaches going to bat and defending horrible play from teammates.   
    • In 6 games, we've only had 6 hurries??? ... that can't be accurate
×
×
  • Create New...