woahfraze

I don't understand how people aren't willing to give up a young talent to get Watson. The importance of a good QB cannot be overstated. The QB position is just so much more valuable than a WR, DE, or RB (yes, even when you have a do-it-all talent who does heavy lifting in the passing game too). Thought exercise: if you swap any one of DJ Moore, Brian Burns, or CMC for Watson and then compare the two rosters (pre-swap vs. post-swap) side by side, which roster would you rather have. You rather have the one with Watson 10 times out of 10. And yes, 1st round picks are important. And we've been pretty good at picking impact players with ours. But there's no guarantee that we find a star player or even a competent one with our first round picks moving forward. I'd rather invest that draft capital in a proven commodity at the most important position in football. No, I wouldn't trade two of our young talented core players for Watson. And yes, there is a limit on how much draft capital I am willing to unload for him. But some of you are really overvaluing our players and picks.

0 for 8.

I'm not a scout, but when I look at Wilson's highlights, I see a lot of impressive physical tools. He's got a strong arm and can make NFL throws that some college QBs can't--outside the numbers from the far hash with velocity, for example. He's got athleticism to escape the pocket and throw the ball accurately on the run. There's a lot to like. What's harder to tell from the highlights for us non-scouts/those who can't watch every play from an All-22 angle, is his understanding of offensive concepts and progressions. The highlights make it seem like he's fine in this regard, but they're highlights. We don't see the plays where he may struggle. If the coaches and front office feel like he's got the mental ability and he interviews well, I see no reason why someone with his physical tools can't be a franchise QB.

And? Jameis threw 30 picks to go along with those TDs. Watson only threw 12. He was far better by pretty much every conceivable metric.

People get paid to write three paragraphs of opinion that 1) is pure speculation and 2) doesn't provide any detailed supporting evidence for the assertion? I'm in the wrong line of work. He may be right or he may be wrong, but how about a breakdown of our available assets and analysis of why they wouldn't be enough? We have plenty in the coffer should we decide to use them. Just because Miami or some other team has more doesn't mean they are willing to use them all.

Oh, it's largely extreme right-wing nonsense. I just grabbed it from google because it succinctly showed that Neil Ferguson did not walk back his "doomsday" prediction. His original model covered a handful of different scenarios ranging from zero governmental and/or societal response to a China-style martial law-esque forced quarantine. The media obviously ran with the doomsday scenario for clicks. In his testimony, he discussed the model he felt most similarly described the UK's current response. Of course, rather than actually searching out the full details of the situation, some of those among us prefer to run with the first inciting or misleading tweet or blogpost that passes in front of their eyes because it confirms a certain worldview.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/coronavirus-pandemic-neil-ferguson-did-not-walk-back-covid-19-predictions/ Or you could rely on more than a second hand blog post for what Neil Ferguson actually said.