Someone's not gonna be happy

[mrcompletely11]

Just now, joeyxfresco said:

I’m okay with picking up his 5th year and playing out his contract before making a decision. He hasn’t done enough to warrant the money that we will have to play him if we decide to extend him but he’s been good enough to play out the next two years to give our FO time to make a decision 

Nobody in their right mind is just going to play into his 5th without an ext.  If you dont know by the 4rth (really 3rd) then why in the hell should you run it one more year to see if it clicks?

[electro's horse]

1 minute ago, joeyxfresco said:

I’m okay with picking up his 5th year and playing out his contract before making a decision. He hasn’t done enough to warrant the money that we will have to play him if we decide to extend him but he’s been good enough to play out the next two years to give our FO time to make a decision 

In the name of god what 

[strato]

1 hour ago, cranky said:

Read it and weep

https://www.nfl.com/news/weighing-fifth-year-options-for-2023-nfl-draft-s-first-round-selections

Did you write that? Nice job. 

[Navy_football]

2 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Money and draft capital are big factors. We shouldn't be spending wildly in either case unless we are making a long term commitment and the target is worthy of such. I would be nervous to see this coaching staff and FO do that because I question their competence.

I will also say I don't think it even has to be about this idea of "competition" or a "camp competition." If you even go into 2026 with a new QB(or QB's) as depth, they need to be better than or potentially better than Bryce. That should be the case if for no other reason than when Bryce fails, we have some sort of viable options still available to try. What does Dalton accomplish?

I would gladly take Willis.....details depending. It definitely isn't going to be on a long term, high value contract. That's crazy.

His ceiling is astronomically higher than Bryce and in his limited action in GB this year, he was significantly more effective than Bryce. Smaaaaaall sample size, though. And 0-2 in that sample size, as well. Not someone that anyone should be hyping as a long term answer.

That's an overly optimistic take. Particularly because of the limited action part. To say you'd take that guy over any 3 years starter in the NFL is a tough one. The devil you know is better than the one you don't. We have no idea who Malik Willis is or will be because he hasn't played enough. 

[PNW_PantherMan]

This is why I like taking another QB super late if you do take a QB really early.  It worked out when Washington took Kirk Cousins after RG3.  And recently when Purdy was taken with Lance.  A 6th or 7th round pick that doesn't make the team isn't gonna kill you.  But if you get a low end starter guy out of that its pretty valuable.  And it lets you move on if the original pick is a disaster for whatever reason.

[Pejorative Miscreant]

9 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Yep we are in a fuged spot regarding the 5th, personally I dont see one iota of benefit in doing so

I think it is being done as an "are we actually sure he cant be the guy"  Thats a nice way of saying that we are throwing good money after bad.  Like I've said before, the only reason we are clutching pearls over BY the player is because he was a #1 pick.  If he were a later round pickup/flyer he would likely be gone by now and we would barely remember his name. 

Caveat this by saying I can only hope that this is the mindset of the organization at this point.

[electro's horse]

2 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

We have no idea who Malik Willis is or will be because he hasn't played enough. 

Wouldn’t want to risk starting a mid 20s tier qb 

[Navy_football]

6 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Yep, need some qb, defensive help, couple of lineman and we are middle of pack at worst

Plus a couple of stand up LBs, and a couple of offensive guys that make defenders miss in the open field (WR, RB or TE), a real Nickel and a true FS type that can cover. Other than that, we're pretty good. 

[PNW_PantherMan]

2 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

That's an overly optimistic take. Particularly because of the limited action part. To say you'd take that guy over any 3 years starter in the NFL is a tough one. The devil you know is better than the one you don't. We have no idea who Malik Willis is or will be because he hasn't played enough. 

Bold strategy Cotton.  But seriously sometimes the devil you know is a completely non viable option.  There's almost 0 risk going with a different option.

If we don't bring in someone else next year I think there's a very high likelihood the team regresses and the house gets cleaned.  So its kind of a big deal to the guys running the show right now, whether they realize it or not.

We got incredibly fortunate to win 8 games, as we got a lot of bounces this season.  Typically the luck index bounces the other way the following season.  We'll need more than luck to make it back to the playoffs next year.

[cranky]

5 minutes ago, strato said:

Did you write that? Nice job. 

No, but needless to say I do not disagree with him.

[coffee]

Since Tepper, we've tried every way imaginable to get a make-shift QB and hope he turns out OK.  I want off that merry-go-round.

At this point, I'd rather just keep building a better team around the QB.  We are certainly not there yet, but making nice strides.  If that makes Bryce passable, we go with him.  If not, we'd have made this team appealing to a proven QB that's fed up with their current team.  Either way, yes, pick up the option.

[strato]

2 minutes ago, cranky said:

No, but needless to say I do not disagree with him.

Yeah, it reads as if you could be the author. 

[kungfoodude]

10 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

Its not that bad of a roster anymore.  Its not great but its improved.  "Consistent contender" is more about process than current state.

It's still a bottom 5 roster. It was the worst in the NFL last season and it didn't make a massive leap to NFL average, despite how well the offseason went overall. The point being, it did get better. That and we answered some important questions about the core of the roster moving forward.

Consistency is the goal. You want to be the Steelers/Ravens/49ers/Packers/etc. Smart, effective roster and contract management that avoids rebuilding and is constantly retooling so that your valleys are never very deep. You always want to fluctuate between a fringe SB contender to strong SB contender.

Now we have been consistent under Tepper but it's been chaotic and losing(8 straight). That's our consistency.

Hence why I would rather move on from Bryce. He is a lateral movement or backwards movement when it comes to building a consistent roster.

[Navy_football]

1 minute ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

Bold strategy Cotton.  But seriously sometimes the devil you know is a completely non viable option.  There's almost 0 risk going with a different option.

If we don't bring in someone else next year I think there's a very high likelihood the team regresses and the house gets cleaned.  So its kind of a big deal to the guys running the show right now, whether they realize it or not.

We got incredibly fortunate to win 8 games, as we got a lot of bounces this season.  Typically the luck index bounces the other way the following season.  We'll need more than luck to make it back to the playoffs next year.

Not bold at all. Actually very conservative. Malik could become worse than Bryce on his worst days for all we know. Picking him up as a backup with backup money and expectations is fine (with an opportunity to win the position), but penciling him in as the starter over BY is probably not prudent.