Sgt Schultz

This. I can accept Tepper was initially giving both Hurney and Ron the benefit of the doubt. Was the problem one or both of them, or were they trapped in an organization controlled by the owner? It was a fair question, although I think we knew the answer (the problem was all of the above). But firing Ron, while completely justified, and putting the coaching resulting search in the hands of a guy whose ability and fate is, at best, in front of the jury, and at worst, awaiting a date the the executioner, still has me scratching my head. In a perfect world, Hurney would have been shown the door before Ron. In the first runner up world, Hurney would have had absolutely nothing to do with the search despite the fact he was still here.

From everything I've read (which could be completely wrong), they only liked Lawrence and Wilson in the draft, so you are correct, Darnold was never insurance in case they missed out on either of them....because unless they traded the farm to move to #2 or #1, missing on them both was a virtual certainty and they knew it. The panic was the situation they created by engaging in a public tit-for-tat with Bridgewater for daring to criticize Camelot. It torpedoed the original plan of starting him for a second year, or even a third. Suddenly, they realized their QB was PJ, Grier, the non-existent chance they were going to get their hands on Lawrence or Wilson, or a FA/trade. Add the delusion that we were a playoff team if we just had a better QB. It is at that point where I believe reality and panic set in. They now had to get their hands on a QB, and looking at the options above, the answer was not PJ, Grier, or the availability of Lawrence/Wilson. That left a trade or FA. I'm sure they sat down, discussed, and did weighed the pluses and minuses of Darnold and others. That part of the decision was calculated. It wasn't even a horrible gamble, because on the surface all they were doing was swapping out the second year of Teddy for Darnold in the original plan. Fair enough. If Darnold works out, it was the same as Teddy working out. If not, they buy time to find the next temporary or long-term solution. It was still a reasonable situation. But they made it unreasonable when they overpaid for him in the trade and then exercised the 5th year. All because they thought he was a modern day $6M Man, adjusted for inflation, given their impeccable coaching. So, the process of settling on Darnold was not panic. The fact that they had to use that process was. And again, self-inflicted. Truth was, Teddy's criticisms were largely correct. Instead of launching the nukes, they could have kept their mouths shut, decided he was not going to see the third year, and gone about the business of finding somebody to replace him after his second. Pretty much exactly where they are right now, only $18.5M of cap and a few draft picks better off. But they were much too clever for that.

Most of us did, me included. He was a breath of fresh air after seeing the same game plans every week and speeches about missed opportunities.

That was completely understandable mistake. The Panthers overperformed in 2020, despite only having 5 wins. 2 would have been about what most of us expected. What none of us knew was that Rhule chiming in was not about sticking up for Brady, but his own insecurity or narcissism.

Darnold was a panic move. They burned the bridge with Teddy publicly (to the applause within the Huddle), swung and missed at a couple of veterans who wanted to win now, and apparently only liked Lawrence and Wilson in the draft class both of whom were going to be long gone by the time the #8 pick came around. That left very few options. Tannehill did become better as time went on, and Gase was horrible. That does not mean Darnold can follow what Tannehill did, and Gase being horrible may have only added to Darnold's deficiencies, not been the root of all of them. Our coaching staff liked what they saw of his raw talent and had some misguided belief that they were good enough to resurrect him. The real problem was entering into a pi$$ing contest with Teddy publicly rather than just sticking to the original plan. The Huddle would have rioted had Teddy been the starter last year, but the Huddle riots over a lot of things. The Huddle would have turned into Chernobyl had the drafted Jones, too, despite some saying we could have drafted him if we didn't like Fields. The second problem was thinking we were only a QB away from being a "playah." OL is also on the list of our worst problems, but that and QB are not our only problems. The third problem was exercising the 5th year option on Darnold. This one compounds the other two.

I don't disagree with you on a couple of points. Darnold often sucked in his limited time last year behind a line that would have made Tom Brady retire immediately, and with an offense that generally regressed. Maybe the overall regression was on him, or maybe it was the game plans, maybe it was a scheme he is ill-suited for (likely), or maybe everybody just regressed, or, most likely, it was some combination of all of the above and then some. I also agree with not throwing more money into the abyss until we improve our OL to at least mediocre. Not only will we get another QB killed back there, but we need to figure out whether the other pieces are keepers or not. Right now, even CMC is in question since he has been out most of the last two seasons. The offense is generally a wreck. Not to mention, we have not proven any good at tossing money and ideas against the wall. The optimist will say Darnold has played on two gawd awful teams and taken beatings accordingly. Maybe if he is not behind an awful line he might improve. The realist says he has been beaten to death for four years, and at some point even if he was the second coming of Marino, he will have to be deprogrammed from the effects and rebuilt. That will take time and may not work. The pessimist notes the road is even tougher. He is has a gunslinger mentality and he will always make questionable decisions and take bad risks. Favre did, Romo did, Kelly did, and he does and on top of four years at the helm of doormat offenses, he is not worth the time. But, I agree, given all our problems, trot him out there in 2022. Not for his own rehabilitation, but to make sure the next guy has a fighting chance.

I'm not surprised by that. Everybody knew Lance was raw when he came out. The 49ers did a good job of taking the first step of getting him ready. Realistically, the job may have been bigger than one year, at least to do it right. So far, I think they have done it right so there is no point in pushing all the chips into the center of the table just yet.

Three long snappers complements the twin punter formation quite nicely. After a stuffed run, batted down pass, holding penalty, and sack it will keep the opposing punt return team on their toes. Opponents would never know which of the long snappers would line up over the ball and which punter the one over the ball will snap it to. It could be our most effective offensive play. Think of the versatility!

That was one of a couple of bad assumptions I read. Then add the assumption that Fitterer is the guy making the call on this.

I don't think the logic is that deep. 1) Who wants to be/remain a starter bad enough to disregard the fact there could be a coaching change after their first year? I don't think success is associated with this situation at all.

This confirms the existence of a Huddle's Prayer. "Give us this day our daily Watson thread."

I don't know about that, but the latest date for the next thread saying we are all-in for Watson is about 3 hours after this one leaves the first page of threads.

Other than that, the cap, the trade implications, and the fact we are more than a QB away from being a "contendah," he is perfect.

What would be more amazing would be having it fall that way and then we pick some undersized guy from Northeast Southwestern Louisiana Tech State who played G, C, MLB, but most importantly, he can kick.

I actually don't think that is an awful plan. If we were drafting somebody as a starter or the heir-apparent, it would be a wasted, if not counter-productive year assume Rhule gets the axe. But there is limited damage for a guy who expects to carry a clipboard all year. And given our QB depth chart heading out o 2021 is basically two guys who have very low expectations about seeing 2023, having somebody that will be around is not a bad idea. It also means that if things play out, we have two faces on the roster that are not there today. Given our QB play, that has merit.

This. Had we stuck to the plan to use Bridgewater to fill the gap and audition for the role, we'd be in a different position. I realize this place would have turned into Chernobyl had they brought him back for 2021, but 2022 was the decision year for him, the way his contract was structured. If I remember the details right, his salary would have been big, but his residual bonus relatively small (in the area of $5M). Then they got in a public pi$$ing contest with him and had to abandon that plan. That created an urgent need/panic for another QB. They compounded that by thinking we were only a QB away from showing something, but with our OL we were farther than that and we had a mass regression in 2021, anyway. Had we not felt the need to go tit-for-tat when Bridgewater complained publicly, we would be 1) sucking up his third year which was only intended to be used if he was the answer, 2) breaking in our new long-term starter, either via trade or the draft, or 3) shopping for a new placeholder with little cap money tied up in the position. Instead, we are sucking up a year of Darnold at $18.5M while trying to do what is behind door #2 or #3. And our options for #2 are not great, either because of what is available or what is available at a price we can afford. The old saying about what to do if you find yourself in a hole applies. Unless something falls in our lap, suck it up and put the next QB in a position to succeed by building the OL. That does not bode well for 2022, but IF the OL is addressed and gels, and IF CMC stays healthy, and IF Darnold upgrades his play toward mediocrity, maybe we can get to where we had hoped to be in 2021. Otherwise, hand the reins to someone else (at QB and probably HC) next year. But let's stop lunging at anything that could remotely be an upgrade, unless it does not distract us from trying to put a QB in a position to succeed. In fairness to Darnold, he may not have that in him, but in our current situation, he can't prove it even if he did. I see Kyber just posted some very similar thoughts.

PFF doesn't know what they are doing. They did not consider versatility in their ratings and we excel in versatility. I think we have players worthy of being on the list. The problem is our coaching staff put them in positions where failure was not only a likely option, it was pretty much inevitable. It's amateur hour on our sidelines.

I agree with you. Our offense specialized in 3 and outs, it seemed. Even if the defense got off the field, having to go out three plays and a punt later didn't do them any favors. Add it to the list of things that is pretty hard to gauge because the team was so inept in so many phases.

Philosophically, it is not as easy as one or the other. You have to look at the players involved, their cost, how fat or thin you are at the position, if you think they will still be productive in 3 years, injury concerns, what you honestly think you will get in return, etc. It is really a case-by-case basis. I'd generally prefer to hold onto our own talent, but that doesn't always make the most sense. This situation is more of a mess because our defense also regressed after about week three of last season. That makes it a lot tougher to evaluate.

Part of his success in San Francisco was he was simply the right guy for that situation at the time. They had a strong defense, decent offense with a good running game, and they were an experienced group. I'm not saying anybody could have gotten them to the level of success they had (Singletary could not as HC), but it was not a rebuild or even a huge retool. His demise there was more about Baalke and the York's thinking they didn't need him, and he was somehow beneath them. But, the question of what would have happened had he stayed and the team began to age out is a concern. Carroll certainly has shown diminishing returns as the initial group started to age out or move on. Harbaugh may not be the guy to build a team, but the guy who can take one that is mostly built, figure out the last piece or two of the puzzle, and get them to the next level. Those are usually very distinct talents. If he is the latter, I'm not sure our situation is for him. A lot depends on who we add this offseason and whether nearly the entire 2021 class year two slump was just a slump or something worse.

First, let me say that anybody on the roster is available for the right price. However (a word defined as "disregard everything before this word"), unless I have been eyeing a WR in the draft that had me drooling, what is the point? We would be creating a big hole that we struggled for years and multiple drafts trying to fill. Is DJ perfect? Nope. Can he be better? Yep, especially if we get somebody who can get the ball to him reasonably well. Like I said, everybody is available for a price. But, the price for somebody who is a good talent in a position we are not convinced we have a ton of younger talent already available, meaning I then have to try and replace him......well, that would be a bit on the salty side.

The guy that asked, asked if we had a source for that. I don't remember seeing one. If you have one, it'll answer his question.

It was a rumor making the rounds when they switched to the 3-4. I don't think I ever saw a source for it other people connecting dots that they decided to switch to the 3-4, Tepper was part of the Steelers who played the 3-4, therefore it had to be his idea. Who knows what really happened? My guess was when Tepper asked the obvious question about fixing the defense, and when there were no good answers to be found he brought up the idea of the 3-4. Given both felt their jobs were on the line, they took it as more than an idea. Never mind we didn't have the personnel to make that change and getting the personnel was going to take more than one offseason. But given Hurney, it is just as likely he thought that would impress Tepper and suggest the idea himself. There may have been more than speculation that the decision came out of those post-season meetings with Tepper, but I don't remember anything solid saying the decision came from Tepper.

I am not a Rhule apologist by an means and I don't see a lot of hope for this scenario ending well, but I will say this for the situation Rhule inherited: He cam into an organization that needed to be stripped down to the studs, which happens. Then he was dealt the "great pandemic offseason" in which to build a staff and team. That gets us to a fundamental question: Did he select coaches he worked with because that is who he wanted from past exploits, or did he select them because of the familiarity and difficulty of finding more qualified people? My own opinion, for whatever that is worth, was he brought people he was familiar with because they were part of "the program." The lockdowns were simply an impediment/excuse against hiring others with NFL experience. Given the zero expectations and an owner advertising this was going to be long, slow, and painful, things looked okay after year one. They even had a convenient scapegoat QB for logging 5 wins vs. 7 or 8. As it turned out, the QB was not the only thing limiting success. The coaches from "the program" also hit their NFL limits in year one. Which leads us to the same fundamental question two years later: Did he realize the coaches he brought in initially were not up to the task, or did the owner bring him to that conclusion? If they turn this thing around, I will gladly change my thinking about Rhule. But right now he is yet another college coach with "a program" or "a system" that either does not translate to the NFL or gets figured out by opposing coaches, and he does not know any other way. He now has to prove he can figure out another way and adapt to the NFL. I'm not betting on it, but stranger things have happened.

A lot of IFs in this equation. Too many to really break down the possibilities. It really all boils down to this. IF the tea leaves all lined up and we had nearly the best possible outcome, that shifts where the focus goes to try and reach the next level. IF an improved Darnold is decent enough to get us to 9 wins but no further, that should be relatively obvious. The only additional IF is whether the organization wants to get to the next level or it is content winning 7-11 games every year (2 either side of what was proposed). IF the answer to that last IF is they are satisfied being a consistent playoff contender/entrant but not getting to the next level, they run with Darnold. IF they want to get to the next level, they pull an LA Rams and try to trade for an existing QB that can get them to the next level, or a KC (and maybe SF) and trade up in the draft to grab whoever has caught their eye at the QB position and see what happens. Both models can work, one just potentially mortgages more of the future (if nothing else, it costs more of the salary cap) than the other. But again, all that is based on everything else aligning almost perfectly. Almost everything regressed last year. As BlitzMonster said, IF somehow all that happened my opinion of Rhule would change because it would mean he actually learned and adapted. Or he got extremely lucky, but if that was the case he should be buying lottery tickets while on that roll. I don't see that happening, but it is not an impossibility. Just highly improbable. Probably not as improbable as all the other IFs materializing, but improbable nonetheless.