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!

     

How bad does PJ need to play to be removed as starter?


AlphabetsEnd
 Share

Recommended Posts

55 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

Sam and Baker each got 4 years to develop, PJ had 1 start in each of the last 2 years and now has 5. It looks like he's gonna be stuck with the same dangerous throws but it's been worth giving him a few games in a row to see if he can pull it together. We already know Baker and Sam aren't it and won't be back next year unless it's for like $2-5M

Are you seriously saying we didn't already know PJ wasn't it? Jesus Christ.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AlphabetsEnd said:

That's what's driving me crazy about this (aside from the fact I don't think tanking works (see 30 years as a former Brown's fan). It seems like Wilks is trying to win, or maybe he's tanking, or maybe he can't decide, but it seems like he's not doing either right. 

 

And yet he’s still done more than Rhule 😂 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Ravens are going to crush us. With that said PJ is the best QB we have right now. Darnold is just waiting this team out. Baker is terrible and doesn't need to cost us a 4th. We ride and die with PJ. Man I wish Corral would not have gotten hurt. Would have been nice to evaluate him. 

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

1 hour ago, AlphabetsEnd said:

I'd rather win and take a shot at the playoffs than play for draft position, when the best indicator of QB success is development, not draft position. Likewise, for 2-7th round picks. 

I think you're probably right about it being hard to bench the starter, but Wilks had his chance to not start PJ after one of the worst QB performances in recent history and didn't and could have again last game on his third dropped interception, but didn't.  

He wants to start PJ for other reasons, and none of them are about winning games.

PJ basically has an audition until Baker can't hit total of 70% snaps. After that, Baker becomes MUCH more likely to start.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He did enough to win. He's probably the best fit for our offense at the moment; run-first, play action, read option. And in a monsoon game, it's not surprising he didn't put up gaudy passing numbers.

The only reason Baker's stats were good last week is by the time he was in the game, the Bengals starters had already decided to leave early to beat traffic.

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, mav1234 said:

PJ basically has an audition until Baker can't hit total of 70% snaps. After that, Baker becomes MUCH more likely to start.

I've got zero interest in seeing Mayfield in a Panthers uniform again.

We should use the rest of the games to evaluate Darnold behind an actual NFL OLine.

We know Walker is terrible and won't be here next year. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, OldhamA said:

I've got zero interest in seeing Mayfield in a Panthers uniform again.

We should use the rest of the games to evaluate Darnold behind an actual NFL OLine.

We know Walker is terrible and won't be here next year. 

While that would be my preference, I could see Wilks going with Mayfield over Darnold. Hard to be sure though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Jackie Lee said:

Sam and Baker each got 4 years to develop, PJ had 1 start in each of the last 2 years and now has 5. It looks like he's gonna be stuck with the same dangerous throws but it's been worth giving him a few games in a row to see if he can pull it together. We already know Baker and Sam aren't it and won't be back next year unless it's for like $2-5M

We don’t know what goes on in the locker room. It appears the players like PJ and want him to have a chance. As long as I see the team effort I will go with Wilkes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, AlphabetsEnd said:

He's a good backup, and a great story, 
 

No.  He's not.  A good backup takes care of the ball and makes safe decisions.  The very things PJ doesn't do.

Teddy Bridgewater is a good backup.  He doesn't win games, but he doesn't throw them away either.

  • Pie 1
  • Flames 1
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

    • 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.
    • Sanders is with Tom Brady brand and that's his mentor. The Raiders owner was with Sanders taking pics at a Vegas game together.   It doesn't take much to connect the dots that Vegas will be interested in Sanders as their franchise QB. Oh yeah and guess who hasa small ownership stake in the Raiders Tom Brady.   I guess this is just another made up Madden idea by me huh?
×
×
  • Create New...