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!

     

Corral dropping a dime


Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

He didn't and we moved on. I wasn't mad about that. Corral wasn't it. We're still all in on another one though because of the investment we made.

I'm not upset about it at all either. Just more of a statement about how much QBs actually regressed under Rhule. Rhule was something special, in a necrotic STD sort of way. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

I'm not upset about it at all either. Just more of a statement about how much QBs actually regressed under Rhule. Rhule was something special, in a necrotic STD sort of way. 

Rhule never wanted to develop a young QB. His college teams were always driven but good D and "good enough" offense. They were carried by defense. He wanted to do the same in the NFL. Just give me a vet who can be "good enough" and that'll be good enough. I really don't know how Tepper fell for him. Tepper has been an awful owner but he's right that NFL success comes down to GM, HC, and QB. Everything else is a want, but you NEED those three pieces of you want to consistently compete. He's just absolutely awful at identifying those three pieces.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

He never really had a chance under Rhule the fool. There was never any QB development for anyone under that idiot. 

Just think how many Huddlers who would've given up on Peyton Manning after his first season. I can almost see all the premature posts deriding one of the best ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, top dawg said:

Just think how many Huddlers who would've given up on Peyton Manning after his first season. I can almost see all the premature posts deriding one of the best ever.

This remains such an absurd assertion to make. Rookie Manning threw for 3700 yards and 26 TDs in the tail end of ground-and-pound, mug the receiver, rookie QB sits for a year or more before playing, 1990s football. He threw picks, sure, but he was very obviously an NFL QB most every week. His rookie season is in no way comparable to recent Carolina rookie seasons on the modern NFL.

On topic, that was a hell of a throw. Good for Matt.

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

7 hours ago, top dawg said:

Just think how many Huddlers who would've given up on Peyton Manning after his first season. I can almost see all the premature posts deriding one of the best ever.

If Young would have broken the rookie passing record like Manning we would all be excited.

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, KSpan said:

This remains such an absurd assertion to make. Rookie Manning threw for 3700 yards and 26 TDs in the tail end of ground-and-pound, mug the receiver, rookie QB sits for a year or more before playing, 1990s football. He threw picks, sure, but he was very obviously an NFL QB most every week. His rookie season is in no way comparable to recent Carolina rookie seasons on the modern NFL.

On topic, that was a hell of a throw. Good for Matt.

 

3 hours ago, Shotgun said:

If Young would have broken the rookie passing record like Manning we would all be excited.

QBs that throw more INTs than TDs are NOT going to start in this league for any appreciable time. They are going to take the express lane to the bench. 

I KNOW there would've been plenty Huddlers talking poo about Manning. He would not have been welcomed with open arms.

Edited by top dawg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, KSpan said:

This remains such an absurd assertion to make. Rookie Manning threw for 3700 yards and 26 TDs in the tail end of ground-and-pound, mug the receiver, rookie QB sits for a year or more before playing, 1990s football. He threw picks, sure, but he was very obviously an NFL QB most every week. His rookie season is in no way comparable to recent Carolina rookie seasons on the modern NFL.

On topic, that was a hell of a throw. Good for Matt.

100% this. He at least looked like he had a future in the NFL. Young never did.

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

    • 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?
    • Bro I don't mind debating you, but did you really have to write all that to get your point across.   This isn't Madden. If you have the #1 pick you literally control your own destiny. If nobody wants to trade which I have a hard time believing they won't then you obviously take the best QB.   I think we will have suitors. If that's Madden then so be it.
×
×
  • Create New...