Sgt Schultz

My problem last year was we showed no real progress from the year before, and probably took a step backwards. I don't necessarily think that is across the roster, but it was certainly at OL, QB, and probably WR. We chose to move players out of position and not look at some of the players we drafted when it was obvious the season was toast. Even if it wasn't, the guys we apparently thought were in front of them on the depth chart weren't producing (especially on the OL). That is all coaching. As for Darnold, unless we can grab somebody late that can take over the #2 spot (and who knows, possibly work into being a contender for the starter, but that is a longer shot), we should roll with him and PJ. Given the options I see, use our resources to fill other pressing needs is our best bet. Darnold has spent four NFL seasons in some of the worst environments for a QB one can imagine. If he is shell-shocked by being constantly under siege, I can get that. Even the argument the he looks bad or worse when he has time is hurt by that, because the clock in his head that is based on experience and is going off whether the pocket is clean or not. The 2-ton gorilla in the room is after four years of that, can the effects on him be broken? Can the mental clock be reset. At this point, I seriously doubt it. But, we got ourselves into this mess when we exercised the 5th year. Almost $19M is not bad for a starting QB, but right now it is probably 3-6 times what he has proven to be worth, based on comparing him to what I see in a QB 2022 earnings sort on Spotrac. My expectations for 2022 are not high and should not be hard for them to surpass. Basically, we are in the same place entering 2022 we were entering 2021. Our roster is probably better on paper, but there are just as many unknowns and gaping holes. The whole thing could come together, or the rest of the team could come together and look good despite our QB room. Or we may have a lot more work to do. The problem is we provided no answers or clues in 2021. The jury is out, and neither the prosecution nor the defense has any idea what that jury is thinking.

Here I thought I was about to read that we are in love with a long snapper or some guy who can play 4 of the 5 OL positions, but none of them well.

Ekwonu gets my seal of approval. For once in our lifetimes can we solidify the LT position?

Well, that clinches it. Superb Owl here we come.

Yeah, I don't see anybody taking Darnold at this point. He's ours this year, whether anybody likes it or not. Roughly $18.5M reasons. Luckily, unless we do something epically stupid, it is one year. While PT Barnum was correct (and probably an optimist), it is going to take a day's worth of suckers to find one big enough for Darnold's salary.

That (Jettisoning Darnold) would be the only way I would do something like this, with the possible exception on Minshew on the cheap. Even then, it would be only because we have zero QBs on the roster who are under contract after this season, and thankfully so. Filling the entire QB depth chart at once is a tall order, which may be Rhule's replacement's first major lift. But, barring a bargain-basement deal for somebody, let's stop throwing good money after bad. While our QB room is not at all expensive by NFL standards this year, the return on that investment is extremely poor. It will probably be negative, unless Darnold harnesses his inner Marino. Right now, his only inner Marino is Luigi, not Dan.

What makes him think anybody cares who he wants or doesn't want? This is not exactly Jerry Rice, Calvin Johnson, or Larry Fitzgerald offering wisdom. The old commercials about "when EF Hutton speaks, people listen" do not apply to him.

When you have no idea what to do about the actual problems, you invent a problem you can solve. If nothing else, it creates controversy and diverts attention from the real problems that are still sitting there. Call it sleight of hand.

This reminds me of Coca Cola fiasco in 1985 when they proudly announced they were changing formulas. After receiving 5,000-8,000 angry calls a day, having to hire more operators to field those calls, and getting completely lambasted in the press for 79 days, they brought back the old formula. It has been used as an example of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Since they don't have a clue how to fix the myriad of things that are broken, they muck with something that isn't......and eff it up.

I get it. Keep Pounding was outdated.....it no longer was appropriate image for this team. They should have changed it to Start Pounding. Or as my high school baseball coach would yell at us 45 years ago, Act Like You've Done This Before.

They need a more appropriate brand.

That was my thought exactly. My second thought was:

Like Linville, this was one of my biggest frustrations about this past year. Even if somebody was a wild optimist, we were 5-7 by the bye week and had five games left. Our OL stunk. At that point, if not before, BC should have been trotted out as the LT and Brown should have gotten plenty of snaps at G. It sure would be nice to know exactly what we got in last year's draft. But, we do know that BC is versatile, which apparently is more important than being decent - good - great at one position. One minor position, like, oh, I don't know, LT.

Our biggest fear is they are going to do that starting with #6. I agree with you on what we should be doing at #6. Even if we somehow trade down (and it better not be too far), I think the same need has to be addressed. If they trade down and pick up a 2nd or 3rd, then we can start looking at other positions.

In this draft, we can take a QB at 6 and miss out on both a LT and QB. If so, next year we could well be exactly where we are in both positions right now, except maybe with a backup QB on a rookie contract. I have no faith in this year's QB class, and even if I did, I have less faith in our ability to evaluate which of them might just turn into an NFL QB.

I remember thinking "what the hell do they pay you for?" If I remember, Rivera said the same thing about Cam. I had the same thought then, too.

That begs the response "that ship has already sailed."

I remember that game well. It was like Shanahan decided to leave him out there until the ambulance came and got him. While I am not for owners meddling, even I would have called down to the sidelines at some point and told Shanahan to either get RG3 off the field or I was coming down immediately to get him off the field. If I remember right, it was the age-old excuse "he didn't tell me he was too hurt to continue."

The ones that came to mind were Bisciotti, Rooney, and Kraft without the scandals (pure ownership perspective). Most owners evolve. Some start out like a kid with a new toy, that does not work and they figure out they make the same money whether they tinker, dictate, or watch and watching allows them to devote their time to other things, money-making or not. Then there is Jerry Jones. I have to admit I know almost nothing about Seattle's ownership. I don't hear much, so that is a plus. My belief on owners is that their job is to count money. The NFL delivers it in box cars, and owners should stay out of football operations and count the money. If they want, they can take their shoes off and wade into it. Otherwise, the less I hear the better. Tom Benson used to dance on the field after a Saints win, and that is a fine way to get a few minutes of "face time" that is harmless, unless the players have to avoid him while he is dancing and they are running off the field. But, that is about as much interaction as I think an owner should have with the football operations, other than holding the people that run the football operations accountable for the results.

My question is why I would want a "right-handed Michael Vick?" Vick could run....but he was not accurate enough of a passer to hit the broad side of a barn if he was standing inside the thing with the doors closed. And I would want a right-handed version of that to be my QB?

Absolutely. The concept of opportunity cost is lost on many people. You not only missed on who you took, you missed on who you could have taken. It's not like the LT that was sitting there or one of the other QBs you passed on was waiting for you in the second round. Oh wait, we don't have a second round pick. We have Darnold, instead, who was an example of what we are talking about for the Jest, and then again for us unless he magically finds his inner Elway.

People tend to miss something about overdrafting QBs (or any other position, really) in the first round. But especially with QBs, we hear "if it doesn't work out, you just try again." The premise is all it cost was a wasted first round pick. If you keep at it and keep missing, all of a sudden your roster has other significant holes that could have been filled quite well if the value of the talent pool at the QB position had been honestly assessed and you instead chose that stud LT one year. Ours already has those holes. One of them seems to mesh quite well with what is available in this draft. Drafting a QB at #6 does not mean you drafted a high first round QB at #6. Just like paying $30,000 for that 4 year old Nissan Versa does not make it a $30,000 car. It just proves PT Barnum's point.

Winning in the regular season, but going nowhere in the playoffs over several years gets old, too. Eventually the clock strikes midnight on the core of the roster, they have little to show for it, and the fans are just as impatient as we are. Ask Ravens or Cowboys fans how thrilled they are with that template, and how that translates to their view of Jackson or Dak.....or Romo (different style, but same results), for that matter. Just being one of seven teams out of 16 in the conference that makes the playoffs most years sounds attractive to those of us who support teams that are one of the other nine, but after a couple of years the fanbase is pretty much just as dissatisfied. The arguments just shift from "can't take us to the playoffs" to "can't get us over the hump," or "can't win in the playoffs." I like both Dak and Jackson but neither has proven they can get it done during the postseason.

There are plenty of seats. I think we have the makings of a new Huddle club: the Grumpy Old Men.

Snow and I will save a seat for you at the table. Not only do people tend to leave you alone, they also tend to not put you in situations that you don't want to be in to begin with. It has a lot of advantages.