ForJimmy

If Darnold busts they clearly overvalued him. Overvaluing a player at a position as important as the QB will lead to a lot of “dumb” decisions at least in appearance to us fans…

You are talking about drafting another RB to install our double trouble run heavy offense. Both players got plenty of touches. It doesn’t really work that way with QBs and some other positions. You can double down on WRs too in the right offense. Most teams don’t ignore glaring needs to have these luxury picks. I kept hearing that TE Pitts was the best player in the draft, yet he went 4 because the top 3 teams had more pressing needs. So if the Jags acquired Watson in the offseason with no legal issues they still take Lawrence? We obviously value Darnold very highly and feel he addresses our need at the position. If we didn’t acquire him we could have drafted a QB. Had we had the 3rd overall pick maybe we would have waited on the draft and not traded for him. So you don’t think off-season additions (especially via trade) don’t change a team’s draft board? That seems ridiculous…

Yeah Stewart was definitely young and in his prime when we got CMC…… talk about a stupid point. Beason lasted how long after Luke? Take Fields out of the picture for some reason that’s a weird issue for you. If a need is addressed in the offseason by a trade because of doubt that position would be there at your pick it absolutely changes your plans for the draft. If we traded for Orlando Brown because of doubt Sewell would be there at 8 and he fell to 8, I doubt we would have drafted him and had a young Brown, Moton, and Sewell with a ton of other needs. Had we had the 3rd pick maybe we don’t trade for Brown. You made a statement about why wouldn’t you draft someone at 8 you thought about at 3 and AU answered it. Draft positioning effects how you address needs in the offseason which in return changes your needs in the draft. Needs effect how teams draft. No one is even saying this is how it happened for us. It’s just an example of how quickly player ranking in drafts can change before and after free agency and how free agency is done in relation to draft picks. It’s all connected.

It’s really not flawed you just aren’t grasping the full concept. The Bucs would have probably drafted a QB before they signed Brady, the Colts before they signed Wentz. It’s why every analyst didn’t think the Bengals were a threat to draft a QB. They may have liked Mac or Fields, but did not have a need for a QB since they have Burrow. Do you think there was no RB we liked until we drafted Hubbard later in the draft, or maybe we didn’t want to spend an early pick on one since we have CMC there already? He wasn’t even saying their hearts were set on Fields. AU simply stated if we were picking 3, we may not have traded for Darnold knowing a top 3 QB would definitely be there. All he was saying is us picking at 8 vs 3 probably changed out approach to acquiring a QB. Stop being so defensive over every Fields comment. His had logic behind it.

Hey what kind of a thread do you think this is?!

You are missing a huge part of his equation in Sam Darnold. Not thinking a QB like Fields would be there at 8 could have been part of the equation that got us Darnold making the need for a young QB no longer a need. If we had the pick at 3 we would have known Fields would be there (assuming the Jets were as public about Wilson as they were) so we wouldn’t have traded for Darnold. It’s not that hard to grasp what he is saying.

I think we are on the same page. Acquiring Darnold made our staff much more satisfied with our QB position and they obviously feel he is very talented (which is is) and able to become our franchise QB (not sure on this one). Gambling on a rookie QB (yes it’s always a bit of a gamble) with a first round pick which you have someone you feel is the guy and is still very young seems like an unnecessary risk to take when we have so many other needs. Not saying I agree with these opinions, but the thought process makes sense. They could even rank 1. Lawrence 2. Fields and 3. Darnold, but number 3 cost way less resources to acquire than number 2. There are a number of ways it could happen, but yeah if we still had Teddy as our QB we would have rejoiced at Fields dropping to us (or maybe Mac Jones). There is little doubt in my mind we would have drafted one without acquiring Darnold. It all goes back to Darnold plus Horn is valued higher than Fields plus the future 2nd and 4th AND we weren’t sure Fields would even be there at 8. So a GUARANTEED young QB in Darnold plus the number 8 pick is valued higher than POSSIBLY getting Fields and the future 2nd and 4th.

Saints…

The first rule of the Huddle is we don’t talk about the rules of the Hiddle.

I’m not the biggest Sam fan, but yeah he was screwed. So it sounds like he progressed from year one to two and got screwed and injured in year 3. That kind of makes me feel more optimistic about next year…

Darnold got hurt last year. He had a shoulder injury and missed several games because of it.

And progressively got worse each year under Gase?

So better than his rookie year and year 3 of Gase with an injured throwing shoulder?

Didn’t Darnold get mono in his second year and injure his throwing shoulder last year (year 3)?

#Chinning

He is the Chuck the Huddles deserves, but not the one it needs right now. So we will poo him. Because he can take it.

So ummm is Christensen going to be a G or T for us in the future?? Personally I think GB shouldn’t have drafted Love and we should have drafted Fields. PS how about that vaccine?

I’m writing him everyday for a year! Damn it we belong together!

It’s so hard to tell. If we were picking 3, we might have signed a solid CB in FA or traded for one knowing we would absolutely get a top 3 QB in the draft. 8 was a tough spot to stand put and leave the QB position in limbo. That’s just me reaching though. The QB position is just so crucial I would think we would have still drafted him at 8…

Oh there is no comparison between the two. The Packers have been heads above us as an organization. However as a fan of football I can still be critical. Going for the FG in the NFC Championship Game was a dumb decision, see I did it again. I also think the Pats look bad parting with Brady. Are both organizations better ran than ours? Yep, but we can still be critical of certain decisions. I still make fun of the Seahawks for not handing the ball off to Lynch and throwing a pick on the one yard line.

It was also year two of a new system with a new coach. That’s usually when jumps happen. Had they got him a weapon with the Love pick who knows if they beat the Bucs in the NFC game. I just don’t think HoF QBs need a rookie to re-energize them. The whole Favre thing was a mess also and he jumped ship and led their rivals to the playoffs. Rodgers might be doing something similar next year.

I agree with 99% of what you post, but not this. Rodgers wasn’t struggling or needing to be “re-energized” and you don’t use a first round pick to do that. He wanted more weapons and they traded up to draft his successor in the first. I mean GB was knocking on the door of the Super Bowl the past few years (they were in the NFC championship game the prior year). Love has contributed nothing so far and now Adams is wanting his money now because he knows this might be Aaron’s last year. They had to have an emergency meeting with their shareholders and rework Aaron’s contract. The whole thing was a botched poo show. Meanwhile TB gave Brady what he wanted, loaded him up with weapons and won the Super Bowl…

On a serious note, what ranks Wilson above Fields? Arm talent is a wash, Fields is bigger and had more success against better competition for a longer period of time without the shoulder injury. I can’t figure out why a lot of people have Wilson so much higher than Fields. Not really Panthers related, but just confuses the hell out of me…

Enter Greg Little!! Kidding… kind of,..