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!

     

Confused Why Some Seem to Think We Got Fleeced


Daddy_Uncle
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

i'm talking about the long term outlook for the drafted QB's success, which looks beyond merely this year's FA crop. I'd agree there is no immediate upgrade to DJ, but that does not mean quality FA WR's won't be available in the next couple of years.

I don't think anyone could reasonably expect whoever we draft to lead us to immediate SB glory next year, so thinking in terms of the next few years seems valid. in that regard, i'm concerned that we just gave away a substantial chunk of our assets that could help put offensive weapons in place, but acknowledging that there are still avenues to doing so. it's just that the margin for error got smaller. Miss on a FA next year, or first round WR the year after, and the risk you leave the QB you traded up to get with poor offensive weapons gets a lot bigger a lot faster.

There’s plenty of picks left. The problem is not one of them matters if the first one is the wrong one. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Carl Spackler said:

Paying whatever you have to pay to swing for the fences never fails. Look at Coach of the Year Matt Rhule. 

By the way, I haven’t seen anyone advocating for signing a vet retread again. 

How the fug could you say Rhule swung for the fences!?!?

He literally tried to keep it in the park by trying to pick up retreads.

You need to stop! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Carl Spackler said:

Paying whatever you have to pay to swing for the fences never fails. Look at Coach of the Year Matt Rhule. 

By the way, I haven’t seen anyone advocating for signing a vet retread again. 

Did I say it never fails? But it’s easily the best option over staying at 9 or signing a retread. 
 

And by the way, you haven’t seen anyone advocating for signing a retread? You must’ve missed the 42 different threads about Derek Carr. I’ve even seen folks on here say we should run it back with Darnold. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ForJimmy said:

I would be extremely surprised if it’s Levis at 1. If we trade back down to 3 (don’t see this happening) then Levis is a real option.

That in itself means Reich and his coaching staff already failed and need to be fired. Trading your best player and future picks for the right to trade down and land Tim Couch is a sub-Rhulean move. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Carl Spackler said:

Not necessarily. If it’s not Stroud or Young you can stop worrying about winning for the next 10 years. 

i'm comfortable saying that not even Stroud or Young is any kind of guarantee. The reality is we just traded up to give ourselves better odds of filling the most important position by far with talent. 

Not guaranteed success. 

Better odds. 

How much better is really anyone's guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, travisura said:

Did I say it never fails? But it’s easily the best option over staying at 9 or signing a retread. 
 

And by the way, you haven’t seen anyone advocating for signing a retread? You must’ve missed the 42 different threads about Derek Carr. I’ve even seen folks on here say we should run it back with Darnold. 

I didn’t pay hardly any attention to the Carr threads, because it was never going to happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Varking said:

There are folks who believe DJ Moore isn’t a true #1. If they are correct then we haven’t had a true #1 since prime Steve Smith. Maybe finding receivers is easier than finding a QB but for our organization we’ve sucked at finding both. 
 

A first, two seconds, and a player worthy of additional firsts or seconds is a fair trade to move up 8 spots. 

Teams have proven you don't need a #1 receiver to win a superbowl

You do need a game changing franchise quarterback though.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

we didn't.  According to the formulas and some interpretations of value (jeez) we actually came out on top by an estimated early third rounder.  (See the other thread about Quantitative analysis...)

I suspect the reason we didn't have to pay through the nose to move up is twofold:

1. Chicago was in the unusual position of having the first pick while having recently drafted a qb prospect they still have some confidence in.

2. The league wide consensus view is none of the QB prospects in this draft project as perennial pro bowlers. There's just not the excitement over them as a group or any one of them as an individual that creates a bidding war for that top pick.

  • Pie 2
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

    • Keep away from North Winston,  you should be fine. West Winston towards Clemmins is cool. If you're ever at the Peterscreek Walmart, the Pepsi guy is 😎. 
    • Game-winning drives have been credited to QBs since the beginning of time
    • A lot of people have been slobbing all over this last draft but I hate the way that Fitterer/Morgan have built this offense since drafting Bryce. Anyone with eyes knew our IOL was crap but we didn't invest there and instead took project receivers and an injured RB. If you want a lesson in how build for your QB wrong, IMO, this was it. Draft him, protect him, THEN get him weapons. Its pretty much a rule, draft interior linemen, pay tackles. We're paying everyone. We had the opportunity to draft a center instead of Brooks, or perhaps instead of trading up for XL, trade back and take 2 guards/center. We could have paid Lewis and still drafted 2, but Hunt at 100m was just an overpay. And it's not like the guys many of us were begging us to draft were long shots. They're solid starters from day 1. Injuries happen. That's why all your starters can't be high value players. You need rookie contracts mixed in to be able to absorb those inevitable losses on the line. An offensive line playing an entire season together is an abnormality.  Factor into that also paying Moton 44m this offseason with a huge signing bonus when we didnt need to do right now to do him a "solid".  Now we have to sign Icky and possibly Bryce and it's a mess with more money tied up in the offense, inevitable cuts and dead cap coming. That's not even factoring in shifting Corbett to C last year after major injury to start at a position he's never played for an NFL season. It's all stuff that was foreseeable and pretty easily avoided.  The $$ and picks we've spent trying to surround Bryce outside of Tmac (Mitchell and Horn are TBD) have been used inefficiently IMO. Smarter drafting and FA with the line could have let us get more reliable weapons than XL and Sanders in FA. It might not be popular opinion, but I'll take a Bersin with hands that can get 6-8 85% of the time vs a big play XL with greasy fingers.  The part about hitting guys in stride was more about placement, which Bryce has struggled with. Obviously not every route is run to be hit in stride, but they do need to have the ball placed well to give the receivers a chance to do something after the catch. I just used Hill as an example because he's the biggest YAC threat I could think of over the past 5 years.   Receivers can feast on dink and dunk if it's schemed right. But to make it work, that vertical threat has to be there, if not the deep pass then the high speed routes that can spring someone for the huge YAC to keep the safeties from cheating into that 20 yard box all game.  I hope DC and Bryce can keep up what they did in the last game and it isnt just an Atlanta thing. But no matter what, I really want to see some better long term strategy coming from the FO. 
×
×
  • Create New...