Mitch Trubisky

[kungfoodude]

3 hours ago, ECHornet said:

I think you’re way off on

 

lol. Tannehill played in the AFCCG year before last. 

I am way off on what we should pay him? Absolutely not. He may get that, I just hope we aren't the dumb franchise that does it.

He has one more NFL stop where people see "potential." After that he will just be what he has been, not an NFL caliber starting QB. Basically the same thing Teddy was for us in a different form. 

People like to quote the Tannehill scenario but that is a big outlier. There are way more guys that got a big contract to be the guy and ended up being backup/journeyman QB's(Foles, Flacco, Bradford, Glennon, Teddy, Cassell, etc). There are even more guys that were ruined after they were initially a bust with the team that drafted them in the top 10. 

Those are two big examples of why you don't want to gamble big on a reclamation project. They very, very, very rarely pan out. Especially with a guy like Trubisky who, although clearly talented, has never shown any ability to be consistent nor really improve. 

I'd love to have him as an upgrade over Walker or Grier as our backup but I am not going to pay Taysom Hill money for a backup.

[The Huddler]

 

@ECHornet

[The Huddler]

In the end I don't care what you neck beard and side tit fold dudes say

 

We can do better than Mitch and I know the Panthers front office agrees and they will get us a legit QB one way or another. 

Edited March 11, 2021 by The Huddler

[ECHornet]

10 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

I am way off on what we should pay him? Absolutely not. He may get that, I just hope we aren't the dumb franchise that does it.

He has one more NFL stop where people see "potential." After that he will just be what he has been, not an NFL caliber starting QB. Basically the same thing Teddy was for us in a different form. 

People like to quote the Tannehill scenario but that is a big outlier. There are way more guys that got a big contract to be the guy and ended up being backup/journeyman QB's(Foles, Flacco, Bradford, Glennon, Teddy, Cassell, etc). There are even more guys that were ruined after they were initially a bust with the team that drafted them in the top 10. 

Those are two big examples of why you don't want to gamble big on a reclamation project. They very, very, very rarely pan out. Especially with a guy like Trubisky who, although clearly talented, has never shown any ability to be consistent nor really improve. 

I'd love to have him as an upgrade over Walker or Grier as our backup but I am not going to pay Taysom Hill money for a backup.

I didn’t realize that posted. Thought I had deleted. 
 

I was going to say I think you’re off on what Trubisky will sign for this offseason. We shall see. 

[ECHornet]

8 hours ago, The Huddler said:

In the end I don't care what you neck beard and side tit fold dudes say

 

We can do better than Mitch and I know the Panthers front office agrees and they will get us a legit QB one way or another. 

Far from side tit, but my neck hair game is strong atm. 
 

I never said we couldn’t do better than Mitch. We could do worse though which you seem to disagree with. 

[LinvilleGorge]

20 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

I would not want to pay him $8.3 mil. At that rate, let him go elsewhere. I was thinking more in the $4-5 mil range. 

I would. Honestly, if I could get Trubisky in the $8.5M range, I'd do that even if my plan was to be aggressive in the draft. That's a good insurance policy in case the draft doesn't fall our way and also insurance against forcing ourselves to put the rookie on the field from day one if he isn't ready. This would be on par with what the Raiders paid Mariotta last year to push Carr and ultimately be a backup.

[kungfoodude]

15 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I would. Honestly, if I could get Trubisky in the $8.5M range, I'd do that even if my plan was to be aggressive in the draft. That's a good insurance policy in case the draft doesn't fall our way and also insurance against forcing ourselves to put the rookie on the field from day one if he isn't ready. This would be on par with what the Raiders paid Mariotta last year to push Carr and ultimately be a backup.

I think that is just basically making the Teddy mistake all over again. Tubisky should be looking at a Cam/Winston contract and not a Mariotta contract.

We can't keep throwing away money mindlessly as a franchise. If anyone wants to pay him $8+ mil, they are welcome to him.

[LinvilleGorge]

3 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

I think that is just basically making the Teddy mistake all over again. Tubisky should be looking at a Cam/Winston contract and not a Mariotta contract.

We can't keep throwing away money mindlessly as a franchise. If anyone wants to pay him $8+ mil, they are welcome to him.

The Teddy deal included $33M in guarantees. We're talking about a quarter of that.

FTR, I'm only interested in doing this if we've essentially given up hope on landing Watson and have put all our eggs in the draft basket. This would be a solid hedge on that bet.

[BrianS]

1 minute ago, kungfoodude said:

I think that is just basically making the Teddy mistake all over again. Tubisky should be looking at a Cam/Winston contract and not a Mariotta contract.

We can't keep throwing away money mindlessly as a franchise. If anyone wants to pay him $8+ mil, they are welcome to him.

The only way we can get Trubisky is if we simultaneously dump Teddy.  You cannot have both of them here.

That said, it wouldn't surprise me if he got $8 million.  He's in a weird spot because of the contract Brissett got.  His numbers are in that area, but Brissett got a ridiculous contract.  Is he Mariotta?  That's $8 million worth probably.  If we're trading $8 million for $20 million, I think I'm ok with that.

Worst case scenario at $8 million he doesn't work out and the cost isn't crippling us.  He does work out, we still have plenty of cap.

[kungfoodude]

2 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

The Teddy deal included $33M in guarantees. We're talking about a quarter of that.

FTR, I'm only interested in doing this if we've essentially given up hope on landing Watson and have put all our eggs in the draft basket. This would be a solid hedge on that bet.

I understand but I don't think it is wise to have that kind of money tied up in a backup QB at the moment. I'd rather sign a cheaper veteran QB if we need a #2. 

Ideally, it would make sense to try and roll as much money as we can over to 2022.

I like Trubisky as a cheap backup, not a top 4 paid backup. 

[kungfoodude]

2 minutes ago, BrianS said:

The only way we can get Trubisky is if we simultaneously dump Teddy.  You cannot have both of them here.

That said, it wouldn't surprise me if he got $8 million.  He's in a weird spot because of the contract Brissett got.  His numbers are in that area, but Brissett got a ridiculous contract.  Is he Mariotta?  That's $8 million worth probably.  If we're trading $8 million for $20 million, I think I'm ok with that.

Worst case scenario at $8 million he doesn't work out and the cost isn't crippling us.  He does work out, we still have plenty of cap.

You can point to Hill too but I don't think you will see the situation of overpaying backup QB's be the norm. Brissett also got that contract to technically be the starter. Same as when Foles got his big deal or Glennon. They just proved to be something other than that and none of these big contracts for those kind of guys have looked good in hindsight.

Like I said, I see nothing about Trubisky that makes me want to make him a highly paid backup QB. 

[LinvilleGorge]

Just now, kungfoodude said:

I understand but I don't think it is wise to have that kind of money tied up in a backup QB at the moment. I'd rather sign a cheaper veteran QB if we need a #2. 

Ideally, it would make sense to try and roll as much money as we can over to 2022.

I like Trubisky as a cheap backup, not a top 4 paid backup. 

I wouldn't be viewing him as a backup. I'd be viewing him as 1) insurance against the draft not going out way and insurance to not feel the need to reach out of desperation and 2) insurance against feeling the pressure to force the rookie into action before he's ready.

If he ends up being a backup that's awesome! Everything went according to plan. But you can't count on everything going according to plan.

[kungfoodude]

Just now, LinvilleGorge said:

I wouldn't be viewing him as a backup. I'd be viewing him as 1) insurance against the draft not going out way and insurance to not feel the need to reach out of desperation and 2) insurance against feeling the pressure to force the rookie into action before he's ready.

If he ends up being a backup that's awesome! Everything went according to plan. But you can't count on everything going according to plan.

I don't really view a scenario of him starting here as a win for us, unless it is injury related. 

IMO, there is no reason to get desperate at QB unless we trade or cut Teddy and then whiff in the draft. I'd rather take a flier on a QB prospect in the 2nd round rather than pay a big salary for Trubisky. 

We basically know what he is. He's a low end gunslinger that cannot be consistent. He's a poor man's Fitzpatrick, basically.

[LinvilleGorge]

Just now, kungfoodude said:

I don't really view a scenario of him starting here as a win for us, unless it is injury related. 

IMO, there is no reason to get desperate at QB unless we trade or cut Teddy and then whiff in the draft. I'd rather take a flier on a QB prospect in the 2nd round rather than pay a big salary for Trubisky. 

We basically know what he is. He's a low end gunslinger that cannot be consistent. He's a poor man's Fitzpatrick, basically.

I'm not sure that we know what he is. We know what he is under Nagy, but I'm not so sure that Nagy isn't another Gase.

All I'm saying is that it's not difficult to imagine a scenario where Trubisky ends up being our best bad option or a decent stop gap for say a Trey Lance. If you draft Lance I don't think you can plan on him being your day one starter. Maybe he proves that he can, but I wouldn't want that to be the plan.