For the Tank for Trevor/Justin/Lance Crowd

[top dawg]

Just now, iamhubby1 said:

 

    It really is a win-win for us. IF Teddy plays well, and leads us to respectability. We can just keep building around him. IF he isn't up to the task, and we have a bad year. We are in shape for that QB of the future.

 

    Teddy deserves the chance to show what he has. Just ask his accountant. If he can get this rag tag team to play  as well, or better than today. We may be able to live with that.

I hear you. I was all-in on Teddy, until I started seeing some limitations. He really doesn't have a strong arm, especially to be so young. I think it reflects limited strength, ability to escape pressure, and ability to actually put the team on your shoulders and will them to victory (although I think the last two are debatable). I don't have to have a flashy guy, but I would like a dynamic guy, and I think Teddy's dynamism is suspect. That being said, I think he's a good QB, and I will support him. But, I'm not all-in on him. I just can't be after seeing a couple of the guys presumably coming out this year.

[iamhubby1]

3 minutes ago, top dawg said:

I hear you. I was all-in on Teddy, until I started seeing some limitations. He really doesn't have a strong arm, especially to be so young. I think it reflects limited strength, ability to escape pressure, and ability to actually put the team on your shoulders and will them to victory (although I think the last two are debatable). I don't have to have a flashy guy, but I would like a dynamic guy, and I think Teddy's dynamism is suspect. That being said, I think he's a good QB, and I will support him. But, I'm not all-in on him. I just can't be after seeing a couple of the guys presumably coming out this year.

 

    See, that's the rub. The game of football has changed. You no longer need a superstar QB. Spread Offenses can be effective without them. Sure, it is great for fans when you air it out.  But it is not an end all be all for an Offense. IF you have a complementary team, you can compete. 

 

    That said, Teddy basically has this, and maybe next year to show out. I really don't see us taking a QB this year. Unless Teddy just implodes, or we luck into Trevor. But next year? All bets are off. 

[Varking]

Teddy isn’t it. And that’s okay. He’s a great backup to have but he’s a bottom tier starter. He’s played in three games this season and he has 2 passing touchdowns and two interceptions. He’s the king from 20-20 on the field but he can’t punch it in once we are in the red zone. We won the turnover battle today like 4-0 and Teddy got us just 21 points to show for it. A struggling, young defense gave the offense the ball four times and we had to settle for field goals almost every time. The only time we didn’t was after Teddy stalled a drive like normal near the red zone, their defense jumped offsides on a field goal attempt for an encroachment penalty that gave us a new set of downs. 
 

Two passing touchdowns and two interceptions in two games with no real threat to run isn’t going to cut it long term. 

[top dawg]

5 minutes ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

    See, that's the rub. The game of football has changed. You no longer need a superstar QB. Spread Offenses can be effective without them. Sure, it is great for fans when you air it out.  But it is not an end all be all for an Offense. IF you have a complementary team, you can compete. 

 

    That said, Teddy basically has this, and maybe next year to show out. I really don't see us taking a QB this year. Unless Teddy just implodes, or we luck into Trevor. But next year? All bets are off. 

Huddlers keep saying that, but it's the Superstar QBs that still dominate the representation of the Super Bowl champions. Sure, there are outliers every once in awhile, but the clearest and (dare I say) "most effective" way to not only win the Super Bowl, but ensure your place among the NFL's elite franchises is to have a Superstar at QB. 

[stbugs]

42 minutes ago, top dawg said:

I haven't heard anyone say tank for anyone except Lawrence.  

Notwithstanding our win, I think it takes an act of God for us not to be within the bottom fourth of the league, so a QB will not be out of the question.

You haven't read much or you just don't like Lawrence. There's already two threads on Fields. Fields and Lance have come up many, many times in the top pick discussions. I've said multiple times that I wouldn't mind Fields or Lance if that's who we like. I prefer Lawrence, but don't think we have any shot at him with the poo ton that's at 0-3 already. Most of the "tank" guys just want a viable high ceiling franchise QB. We want a real Cam replacement, not a game manager.

[stbugs]

6 minutes ago, top dawg said:

Huddlers keep saying that, but it's the Superstar QBs that still dominate the representation of the Super Bowl champions. Sure, there are outliers every once in awhile, but the clearest and (dare I say) "most effective" way to not only win the Super Bowl, but ensure your place among the NFL's elite franchises is to have a Superstar at QB. 

100% agree. Mahomes was still a top 10 pick and only went lower because Mike Leach QBs haven't produced in the NFL. Kind of like Tedford QBs weren't good in the NFL until Rodgers came along. Also, it's OK to build around a superstar QB too. We don't have to ignore team building if we move on from Teddy.

[top dawg]

4 minutes ago, stbugs said:

You haven't read much or you just don't like Lawrence. There's already two threads on Fields. Fields and Lance have come up many, many times in the top pick discussions. I've said multiple times that I wouldn't mind Fields or Lance if that's who we like. I prefer Lawrence, but don't think we have any shot at him with the poo ton that's at 0-3 already. Most of the "tank" guys just want a viable high ceiling franchise QB. We want a real Cam replacement, not a game manager.

Wait a minute, I did say Lawrence. That's the tank for name this year.

[top dawg]

9 minutes ago, stbugs said:

You haven't read much or you just don't like Lawrence. There's already two threads on Fields. Fields and Lance have come up many, many times in the top pick discussions. I've said multiple times that I wouldn't mind Fields or Lance if that's who we like. I prefer Lawrence, but don't think we have any shot at him with the poo ton that's at 0-3 already. Most of the "tank" guys just want a viable high ceiling franchise QB. We want a real Cam replacement, not a game manager.

But the tank-for threads have been for and about Lawrence. Fields is a consolation prize for some, but most don't even know who Lance truly is. There have been more than a few who want Lawrence or bust. That's what's been going on in the Huddle. You might be amenable to all three, but many are not!

[stbugs]

Just now, top dawg said:

But the tank-for threads have been for and about Lawrence. Fields is a consolation prize for some, but most don't even know who Lance truly is. There have been more than a few who want Lawrence or bust. That's what's been going on in the Huddle. You might be amenable to all three, but many are not!

That's because those threads are shooting for the top pick. Barring something bad happening, which I don't wish on any prospect, Lawrence is going to be the universal top prospect, so that's who most want. There are just as many people who think Lawrence is a bust because the only college football game they've watched was the NC. You seem hung up on the Lawrence talk because you like Lance more, so maybe you have a little bias there. I'd love to have Lawrence, but I think most just want to get back to a Cam level prospect. If that's Fields or Lance, I'll be happy. I think there's more risk with those two. We watch Teddy and go, that guy can't lead us to the promised land unless we somehow build an amazing team around him, but that team with a stud QB is a multi-SB contender.

[top dawg]

3 minutes ago, stbugs said:

That's because those threads are shooting for the top pick. Barring something bad happening, which I don't wish on any prospect, Lawrence is going to be the universal top prospect, so that's who most want. There are just as many people who think Lawrence is a bust because the only college football game they've watched was the NC. You seem hung up on the Lawrence talk because you like Lance more, so maybe you have a little bias there. I'd love to have Lawrence, but I think most just want to get back to a Cam level prospect. If that's Fields or Lance, I'll be happy. I think there's more risk with those two. We watch Teddy and go, that guy can't lead us to the promised land unless we somehow build an amazing team around him, but that team with a stud QB is a multi-SB contender.

I'm not "hung up on Lawrence talk." I don't mind Lawrence talk at all, but I think it's less realistic considering that the Jets really suck. And Minny and Washington and maybe even the Jags' are all in the running possibly. So talk about Lawrence all you like!

Don't get it twisted! My issue is with people who get upset with us winning and even trying to win. My issue is with people saying that we should tank (like pro franchises---players will play to lose)! I don't care for trading a king's ransom in draft capital either, but I don't have an issue with it, even though I don't necessarily agree with it. 

Stop trying to equate discussing college QBs with advocating for tanking! 

On the real, I decided to start a Lance thread because of the Fields thread! So, yeah, I'm pushing back against the notion that Lawrence or Fields is our savior, but Lawrence appears to be even less realistic than the other two after our victory, but that's because our defense showed signs of life, not because Teddy isn't a good QB. We could be 3-0 right now if the defense played like they did today in all three games, and that's despite Teddy's play against the Bucs!

[GoobyPls]

Colts are better than us and unless they get the first pick the jags are staying with Minshew 

[nctarheelreincarnated]

7 hours ago, stbugs said:

That’s a bunch of bunk. Did 1 and 2 win seasons really harm us? Nope, they set up our picking Peppers/Gross and Cam/Luke.

If you love Teddy or don’t want a QB this year, that’s awesome but I wish people would stop posting this BS culture thing that losses are so bad when our two SB runs started with two seasons with 3 total wins. In both cases it got us two studs in back to back drafts that contributed greatly to our SB runs. Good drafting when you are at the top of the draft is the difference between being Cleveland and having Cam and Luke. Cleveland was Cleveland (might not be horrible this year) because they kept having awful drafts, not because of a culture of losing. They’ve been more competitive lately because instead of taking Trent Richardson, they took Myles Garrett.

Hey, hey, hey, let’s stop bringing facts to an opinion party alright? Thanks. 

[Tepper's Chest Hair]

I am just here to see the people cheering for us to lose.

[Move the Panthers to Raleigh]

8 hours ago, stbugs said:

That’s a bunch of bunk. Did 1 and 2 win seasons really harm us? Nope, they set up our picking Peppers/Gross and Cam/Luke.

If you love Teddy or don’t want a QB this year, that’s awesome but I wish people would stop posting this BS culture thing that losses are so bad when our two SB runs started with two seasons with 3 total wins. In both cases it got us two studs in back to back drafts that contributed greatly to our SB runs. Good drafting when you are at the top of the draft is the difference between being Cleveland and having Cam and Luke. Cleveland was Cleveland (might not be horrible this year) because they kept having awful drafts, not because of a culture of losing. They’ve been more competitive lately because instead of taking Trent Richardson, they took Myles Garrett.