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!

     

Remember those draft picks for Watson?


NAS
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, beo said:

there are two things we need to teach our offensive linemen

1. to start kicking the DL opposite them in the nuts and 
2. to have them trained to pull out assault rifles and immediately open fire on our qb if he dares leave the pocket

based on 2. i don't think lamar is a good scheme fit here

Everyone pooing and reporting this post... y'all realize it's sarcasm, right? 😂

  • Pie 1
  • The D 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone asked yet why the Ravens are balking at a new contract for him (not re-reading)? They must feel very strongly that they can do more with the draft capital than LJ at that price and they know him best. I would have to agree with the Ravens on this one. Being good on a rookie deal is a lot different then the good you have to be on a large guaranteed contract. I have no problem with the guy but I don't think he is worth a top 5 contract.

It's a smart move for the Ravens IMO but they also can't be idiots with his replacement. If they get a playable vet and a project QB they should be fine which says a LOT about that entire situation for them. This feels more like a Seatle/Willson situation for them and less Detroit/Stafford to me.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, NAS said:

Nah that was all Rhule but Fitt gets the stink for executing the trade

Fitterer has repeatedly said that the correct path is to draft a quarterback and build around him. He said it over and over this past offseason almost like he was pleading his case for the team to go that route.

With Rhule gone, I expect them to finally follow that strategy, whether it be by sticking with Matt Corral or using a high draft pick this coming offseason.

(option two is probably more likely)

If they do sign a veteran, it's likely going to be a stopgap type.

Edited by Mr. Scot
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Waldo said:

Anyone asked yet why the Ravens are balking at a new contract for him (not re-reading)? They must feel very strongly that they can do more with the draft capital than LJ at that price and they know him best. I would have to agree with the Ravens on this one. Being good on a rookie deal is a lot different then the good you have to be on a large guaranteed contract. I have no problem with the guy but I don't think he is worth a top 5 contract.

It's a smart move for the Ravens IMO but they also can't be idiots with his replacement. If they get a playable vet and a project QB they should be fine which says a LOT about that entire situation for them. This feels more like a Seatle/Willson situation for them and less Detroit/Stafford to me.

He wants a fully guaranteed contract 

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Fitterer has repeatedly said that the correct path is to draft a quarterback and build around him. He said it over and over this past offseason almost like he was pleading his case for the team to go that route.

With Rhule gone, I expect them to finally follow that strategy, whether it be by sticking with Matt Corral or using a high draft pick this coming offseason.

(option two is probably more likely)

If they do sign a veteran, it's likely going to be a stopgap type.

I am all for drafting a franchise QB if we’re convinced one is there at our draft position.  I think Lamar is a watch situation though 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Waldo said:

Then they are 100% correct to move along. It's a terrible move with a salary cap.

I think they’re going to franchise tag him and hope he comes to his senses.  Watson and Russell deals blew up the market

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NAS said:

I am all for drafting a franchise QB if we’re convinced one is there at our draft position.  I think Lamar is a watch situation though 

I don't.

For one, as stated I don't believe the team wants to go that route. But for another, if they balked at fully guaranteeing Watson's contract, why would they then turn around and fully guarantee one for Jackson?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, beo said:

kidding aside I like Lamar but that's a tough pill to swallow for any QB especially with a big payday due. it's hard to construct a team around a QB if the QB takes up so much of the cap and costed 3 1sts to acquire on top of that. If we're picking high in this draft I'd prefer just swinging at a rookie, having a good young QB on a rookie contract is invaluable in this NFL. 

Most well built teams build the team first and then get a QB on a Rookie deal. That's how KC was so dominate for so long. Now you can start to see the cracks in their game this year because they had to let players go because Mahomes contract is so large. 

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

12 minutes ago, NAS said:

I think they’re going to franchise tag him and hope he comes to his senses.  Watson and Russell deals blew up the market

And they both look like ginormous mistakes. I was wxpecting the tag but I don't expect him to budge until he test the market. 

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 think he did a solid job.  Honestly I liked his post game interview the best.  He gave himself a C and said he left a lot out on the field.  That kind of attitude can carry him far.
    • This is lacking a fairly considerable amount of context. For one, Adams(age 22) started 12 of 16 games, had 38 rec, 446 yds and 3 TD's on 66 targets(18 less, with 2 less games started). The main thing missing here is that the top two WR's for Green Bay that year combined for about 2800 yds and 25 TD's. Now if you want to throw a more accurate dart at Adams, take a look at year two. This year the production was spread around considerably and Adams didn't stand out from that pack(pun not intended).  So, if XL struggles mightily this season, I would probably keep that comparison in your quiver to counter argue. I would suggest that I don't think that scenario is probably very accurate for most HOF caliber WR's taken in the first round over the past 15 or so years. Adams was the 89th pick overall, as well. A little different hill to climb than XL, although not massively.
    • to clarify I am not referring to Will Levis.  Not knowingly.   I just made that up and tried to use a reasonable guesstimate of what else was done.  That sounded in the ballpark.  At one time I did look it all up and there were several teams that had much more successful days downfield.   If that happened to be Levis' actual numbers than it's more of a lucky coincidence.  If memory serves, it wasn't just Will Levis that brought the claim into question, it was SEVERAL teams had better days.  and you are missing my entire point of the subjective nature of it all.  If PFF employee Doug watched Bryce's film and then used his same unique subjective vantage point to grade all 31 other starting QBs.  Then dumped into into a spread sheet, it would a subjective Doug take but at least it would be a level uniform subjectivity.   The grades are done by various people.  All watching and applying their own subjective view to a play.  Everyone isn't going to grade incompletions out the same.  Or completions.   So when you dump it all into a spread sheet and hit sort.....it's not actually a statement of fact as portrayed.  Which is why you sometimes get some head scratching stuff.  I'm not reframing anything.   I don't think.  I just wasn't going to look it all back up so I was talking vaguely off the general issue I have with PFF and treating any random claim they make as the truth. 
×
×
  • Create New...