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!

     

Maycock suggests we take a QB


teeray

Recommended Posts

The throw to Lafell vs Cleveland was a heck of a clutch throw for example. There are other examples--my point was he was not turned loose or supported--do you not get that?

You are blaming Clausen for losing a race when they gave him the keys to a Gremlin. Of course you dont care that Sanchez almost threw 30 pics this season--that would make you wrong.

You will see, unless Clausen was damaged by the train wreck we had here

Pretty good throw. Better catch. :cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The throw to Lafell vs Cleveland was a heck of a clutch throw for example. There are other examples--my point was he was not turned loose or supported--do you not get that?

You are blaming Clausen for losing a race when they gave him the keys to a Gremlin. Of course you dont care that Sanchez almost threw 30 pics this season--that would make you wrong.

You will see, unless Clausen was damaged by the train wreck we had here

By all means, name those other examples.:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we need a franchise QB. but you can't force a franchise QB. a lot of teams have gotten in trouble for that.

there is no franchise QB in this draft.

newton and gabbert (even as much as i don't like him) will be franchise QBs. there may be another as well.

the above has just as much a chance of being true as saying that there are no franchise QBs in this draft...probably moreso.

people keep saying that "there are no franchise QBs in this draft" and talking like it's a fact, but really its just an opinion by people who aren't really willing to look further into these guys. they got some assumption a while back and have stuck to their guns thinking that they already knew everything and can tell the future.

know one knows until the fat lady has sung, and she isn't anywhere near the stage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The throw to Lafell vs Cleveland was a heck of a clutch throw for example. There are other examples--my point was he was not turned loose or supported--do you not get that?

You are blaming Clausen for losing a race when they gave him the keys to a Gremlin. Of course you dont care that Sanchez almost threw 30 pics this season--that would make you wrong.

You will see, unless Clausen was damaged by the train wreck we had here

You mean that throw where Clausen threw up a prayer and LaFell made a phenomenal catch? If so, that was all on LaFell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Um, no, just no. Bills, Chiefs, Chargers, Ravens, Bengals, Texans, Eagles, Commanders are 8 teams that it's not even a debate, they aren't trading their QB for Purdy. Patriots, Broncos, Titans, Giants, Bears, Vikings, Falcons are 7 more teams with QBs drafted in the last 2 years that also would rather stick with them than trade for Purdy as they all have more upside than he does. Lions, Packers, Cowboys, Bucs are 4 more that would likely keep their QB's as well, age aside for Goff, Dak, and Baker. Panthers and Colts are two teams in the same situation, QB's who have both struggled and shown flashes to where the teams probably stick with them because they drafted them, but in a re-draft of all QB's, they probably take Purdy over the guy they currently have. Jags, Cardinals, Dolphins, are 3 more with QB's who probably have a higher upside than Purdy but come with their own question marks, so debatable if they'd take Purdy over who they already have. That leaves Jets, Raiders, Steelers, Browns, Saints, Seahawks, and Rams. Rams would take him over Stafford for the future of course, but not for 2025, and I'd think the Seahawks would take him over Darnold, but honestly not sure if they would take him over Milroe at this moment as they really like his potential and have him for 4 years really cheap. That leaves 5 teams that I see who would absolutely take him over their current situation right now, and a handful of others who MIGHT take him over their current guy, a far cry from your 20.  
    • Agreed. Also as soon as they received the top pick in the next draft it was over. Bears won that trade. Gave up a top overall pick got one the next year plus pick 9, a couple 2nds, and DJ Moore a proven young WR. Had their 2024 pick from us be in the late teens or later it would be more debatable IMO. 
    • Option A:  Pay your starting QB starting QB money. Option B:  Look for a starting QB for 4-10 years (or longer) while wasting the talent at every other position.    How many of the top 20 QB's do you think are worth what they are being paid?   When you factor in the last year of his present deal his contract is really an average of 45 million per year which in today's QB market is a very, very good deal. I wish we'd had found a Brock Purdy to pay 50+ million a year right after we parted ways with Cam.  Ya'll go ahead and live in fairy tale land where good to great (much less elite) QB's are available to pay. Just the fact that they had the chance to pay Brock after the disaster of trading up for Lance is a testament that when you find a quarter back you can win with, complete in the playoffs and superbowls with, you pay him.  
×
×
  • Create New...