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!

     

If you're going to bench Clausen, start Armanti


frash.exe

Recommended Posts

My first choice to start would still be Clausen, I think he needs a continuous string of starts if he's going to make some progress.

attachment.php?attachmentid=33552&stc=1&d=1286916620

Other than him though, Edwards has a style all his own on this team and might provide the offense with a bit of spark playing QB, given his mobility. He might be able to roll out and keep defenses from just attacking the pocket. If he ends up throwing 7/20 for 40 yards, i mean, it's not like we haven't seen that before.

attachment.php?attachmentid=33554&stc=1&d=1286916806

I guess you could go with Lurch but if we bench Jimmy it should be because we're trying to change the offensive approach completely, and Edwards is the only one that really provides that.

attachment.php?attachmentid=33555&stc=1&d=1286916943

In lieu of starting Jimmy, Armanti, and Tony, why would you go with Wembley? He's a f**king fraggle, defenses won't know what the hell he's doing on the field, and that might distract them long enough for him to run a play and find the endzone.

attachment.php?attachmentid=33556&stc=1&d=1286917193

Of course if you're a neurotic conservative nail-biting fiend who's deathly afraid of trying anything different you go with Moore so he can miss wide open receivers 10 yards away and lose field position faster than the Twins lost the ALDS, but then again, that would've defeated the whole purpose of starting Jimmy in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

agreed, moore should be last choice. we know what we have there, lets try the others first and see what shakes out.

i still might put lurch in there ahead of edwards. not sure why. it might be because he might know the offense but then there isn't that much to know about it that all the other teams don't know.

i guess edwards would be alright. i just don't see davidson being creative enough or fox being wild enough to just let edwards do his thing unless there's only a couple games to go and we're screwed either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

agreed, moore should be last choice. we know what we have there, lets try the others first and see what shakes out.

i still might put lurch in there ahead of edwards. not sure why. it might be because he might know the offense but then there isn't that much to know about it that all the other teams don't know.

i guess edwards would be alright. i just don't see davidson being creative enough or fox being wild enough to just let edwards do his thing unless there's only a couple games to go and we're screwed either way.

Thank GOD, you don't make the teams decisions.

Atarting AE before looking at the other QB's is laughable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think starting Armanti would make us look even more like a joke. I'm not saying he shouldn't see a few snaps just to see how we could potentially use him. However he's been training all this time to be a WR. There's no way he'd be ready to start. Giving up on Clausen and Moore completely for our 3rd round WR would make us look like complete fools.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think starting Armanti would make us look even more like a joke. I'm not saying he shouldn't see a few snaps just to see how we could potentially use him. However he's been training all this time to be a WR. There's no way he'd be ready to start. Giving up on Clausen and Moore completely for our 3rd round WR would make us look like complete fools.

Wait!! You mean those four years at App State he was really a receiver?!?

Whoa! And they said he was a QB!

Always lies everywhere!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank GOD, you don't make the teams decisions.

Atarting AE before looking at the other QB's is laughable.

i don't want to Atart edwards before looking at the other QBs. i want to start him big difference (i assume).

we know what moore can do. lets see what the other prospects can do. the season is a wash anyways. lets see what works and if it doesn't then we go with another untested one.

we've already looked at moore, right? not impressed with his being "the man" enough to give him the job back.

go start another thread about it, though. you know you want to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You start Clausen the rest of the year no if's and buts about it. You made the choice to go to him on week 3, now you gotta follow throw. A carousel at QB is not going to improve anyone, and your still not gonna know what you got at QB.

Clausen needs to start the rest of the season, and you hope that by the last few weeks of the season he starts showing his true potential.

As unfair as it was to Moore, 3 starts doesn't make a career, and you have to let the kid take his lumps and grow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You start Clausen the rest of the year no if's and buts about it. You made the choice to go to him on week 3, now you gotta follow throw. A carousel at QB is not going to improve anyone, and your still not gonna know what you got at QB.

Clausen needs to start the rest of the season, and you hope that by the last few weeks of the season he starts showing his true potential.

As unfair as it was to Moore, 3 starts doesn't make a career, and you have to let the kid take his lumps and grow.

Obviously you didn't see that the Panthers have Wembley the Fraggle on the roster. Jimmy Clausen is a waste of my time as a fan, if a Fraggle is on the roster.

Get that little bastard on the field!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • if  ANYONE actually goes & looks at the FACTS on rookie Qb's after 2 full seasons as a starter in the NFL & they are still well below average do they rarely ever actually become top tier Qb's & instead most likely either do not recieve a second contract & or become life long backups...just saying 
    • So he became GM and decided not to address the weakness in the QB room following one of the worst rookie QB performances in NFL history?  There were options last season other than signing Dalton to a 2 year deal. Brissett and Jones by a wide margin, both of whom outplayed Bryce, Wilson, Winston, hell even Rivers off the couch was more exciting at the QB position. The time to address the failure in the QB room was last year but instead people on the Huddle cheered when we brought Dalton back then cheered when we were able to get anything for him after they finally realized he was washed up like a few of had been saying all along and got poo'd for even mentioning.  This year, the options were more limited obviously, especially since we lost Icky. It changed the dynamic of our draft. I think we were stuck this year keeping Bryce, but i still think giving him a 5th year option for what has amounted to replacement worthy performance was the wrong move. Why guarantee 25m if you're planning to replace him? You think he's going to want to be a bridge QB? Hell no. He's going to want out and we'll end up cutting him if he has another lackluster season because no one is trading for him with that price tag.  Were there better options as far as production available. A couple. Were there guys available with more physical tools than Bryce, Pickett or Grier, you damn well better believe there were. I've been saying all along, you always keep looking for your 1b. Bryce has yet to prove he can be a starter. Keep looking for someone who may. Put competition in camp. Let the best QB lead the team. Stop settling for less than mediocre. 
×
×
  • Create New...