KSpan

For what purpose? There is zero to gain with such a signing.

I can't imagine why.

It's not there now but the original post said something about viewing 9 plays. I quoted you but didn't get my post submitted until a couple of minutes ago, which is why I wanted to ask.

Honest question to make sure I read this correctly - are you saying that this writeup is based on viewing 9 plays? You may have edited that comment out at this point.

No question that of those two options the team would prefer to trade but no one is trading for him and taking that full cap hit this year (or next for that matter); I'd bet that's been a hurdle in any talks thus far. Carolina is likely going to have to eat an appreciable amount of his contract this year, is not most of it, to facilitate a trade and the next team is likely only viewing it as a one-year deal where they'll have some dead money if they cut him. Not a great contract from the start that's unfortunately played out in a worst-case scenario fashion and certainly wasn't helped by the team's public negativity at the start of the offseason.

Pushing .40 now. Crazy.

Of all the things to criticize Teddy for this ain't really it. It might be above and beyond if he did but for all we know Teddy has already been told he's gone and it's just a matter of when, so why bother? IMO it would say a lot and be a classy move if he did but it's hardly an expectation.

The stat has nothing to do with the weekly schedule.

I'm not not relaxed. When stuff is posted that doesn't make sense it may be worth responding to, so I did.

Except that's not what I said anywhere. You're the one saying that and beating the dead horse. I just posted an unusual stat, the history there, and how others may factor in/compare.

Because there isn't yet any evidence that Brady is good in his own right. In fact, Teddy was worse in terms of 2nd half TDs here in Carolina. Is that a sign that Carolina's coaching/Brady is/was deficient as well? Brady still has a lot to prove IMO and while Teddy seemingly hasn't been good in this specific area across his career, that doesn't automatically mean that Brady didn't also underperform. Just not as clear-cut with only 1 year of film.

I don't need to really explain anything to you but since you're bringing it up I saw the 2 TD stat mentioned in a different discussion and, after looking it up for myself, was surprised. Looking into it further shows consistency with him, but since it's tough to separate Brady at this point and Darnold is the new guy I figured it was something worth noting for all 3 of them. I say nothing bad about Teddy, though I did and do own my opinion of him as a player (though I also have not stated it in this thread). I have said nothing good about Darnold, who has trended down in this area throughout his career; the numbers shared in my post show that. Brady also gets very little mention when the offense's performance is discussed and while Teddy has a lot of film to draw from, Brady only has 1 year as an OC. You're choosing to interpret things as you are.

If I missed where anyone had already pulled out Darnold's comparison in this area and cited Brady needing to be watched for it this year, please direct me there.

I don't recall seeing this mentioned from an angle of either Teddy or Brady and found it interesting. Robby's long-YAC TD vs the Raiders in Week 1 (3rd quarter) and a goal line throw in Week 4 (4th quarter) were the 2. 10 TD passes were in the 2nd quarter and 3 in the 1st (15 total) For Teddy, in his 2 years starting at Minnesota 5 of the 14 TDs he threw each season were in the 2nd half; only 12 of the 43 TDs he's thrown as a full-time starter were in the second half of games. In NO, however, the mix was 5 2nd half and 4 1st half (9 total), though 4 of the 9 total TDs were thrown against the abysmal TB pass defense that year. My opinion on Teddy is known and this supports it further for me, but it's also on the board to watch from Brady this year. Darnold, by comparison, was over 60% 2nd half his first year, 43% his second, and 33% his third. Screenshot of the stats.

Didn't respond to the rest because no one is trading for Teddy in hopes of salvaging a season. He has minimal value and waiting until the season starts, when he has no time in a new system, will make no difference. Carolina could easily guarantee some/all of his salary to facilitate a trade now but if that were actually an option it would happen pretty much now. They appear to be choosing to spend that salary money on a roster spot rather than keep a player who has proven they can't hack it. This staff and FO does not appear interested in keeping proven non-wimmers around.

Who cares if he goes to the Saints? They couldn't win anything that mattered with Brees - what are they gonna do with Teddy? The Saints are defined by their defense and have been for a decade now. I'd be more concerned (though perhaps not much) about Jameis figuring things out than Teddy.

Dude got his shot and was paid well, performed poorly (though exactly in line with his past performance), called his coaches out in public, got some frank candor back in public, and is getting replaced. It's possible there is more behind the scenes and perhaps he wasn't treated fairly but it doesn't appear that way, and any behind the scenes stuff could be him behaving poorly as well. This outcome appears a direct result of his own play and conduct and if he's pissed about that then it's just more deflection and external locus of control.

Is he the new Dorial Green Beckham and/or Duron Carter?

Majority of the salary is now a sunk cost (to what degree is variable across a spectrum), so the decision comes down to what the team values for that sunk cost. If they place higher value on the roster spot/flexibility in having other players potentially see the field/etc then that's what they're buying with the cost associated with the decision to cut/trade. If they place higher value on having Teddy on the roster for X/Y/Z reason(s) then that's what they're buying with the sunk cost of the decision to retain. My opinion is that while neither is optimal the team is better off in the former scenario, but there is a long time to go between now and the season. Teddy's presence itself is binary amongst the spectrum of possible financial outcomes. At this point the team seems fine with possibly being without Teddy even if, at a minimum, a good portion of the salary remains. It stands to reason they are leaning toward the former option rather than the latter, supported by the comments at the end of the season and start of the offseason.

I laughed. That's a 180 from earlier this offseason.

I've not pretended to know the prior times you trotted out this schtick and now is no different. Between the Darnold trade and all the comments to the media, both at the end of last year and about seeking a trade, there's a lot of writing on the wall and the message is pretty clear.

I bet there'd be plenty of teams that would have TB as a backup for backup money but yeah, no one is eagerly awaiting offering him a starter job.

You're rather patronizing for someone who has been pretty wrong about Teddy thus far. About that article - Jake isn't one to badmouth and is the team's radio analyst (or one of them), and Steve is an announcer with skin in the game. They aren't going to voice contrary opinions. Jake said Teddy was 'pressing', which is hilarious since he was even less bold as the season went on, and Beuerlein threw out the 'new system' card even though the corporate line was that Teddy had a valuable advantage in learning the system since he was with Brady in NO. They also both played the 'needs more weapons' cliche, which was nonsense last year. It's the QB coach's job to coach and Teddy may or may not have anything to offer. Given the friction that showed between Teddy and the staff he may not have been fully 'as advertised' off the field when things got tough. I also personally don't want a guy as a 'mentor' who has shown zero development after 7 years in the NFL. As I said, maybe (a big one) if a rookie was coming in, but that's not the case. With respect to evaluation Walker was 1-0 in his start and pushed the ball better than Teddy ever did. Future starter? Likely not, but possibly a better fit as a backup and certainly cheaper in the future. Teddy's salary is a sunk cost either way so if the backups were good enough last year, why not this year? Teddy has no upside and no future here, and the team is clearly moving on as they should.

I daresay that Teddy has no place on the current roster, particularly since the Darnold trade. Darnold needs to play for evaluation purposes, and if Darnold gets hurt then the team would seemingly benefit more from evaluating the backups (I'm assuming Walker and Grier) for the future. Might be different if the team had a rookie but at this point Teddy is a known-quantity expensive backup whom the team has already signaled has no future in Carolina and who would be taking snaps from players whom the team would be better off seeing on the field. That said, maybe the team will prioritize the potential 0.1-0.4 win % that backup Teddy could represent over the odds the other guys in that backup role might bring. I don't agree with that but is is a possibility and IMO the scenario where keeping him makes any real type of sense.

"He’s been a winner everywhere he’s been, and I think the guy’s a really good quarterback." Alrighty then.