What's the worst case scenario with Sam Darnold this year?

[ericr0319]

worst case scenario is he blows

[YourLastThought]

Worst case is he stinks it up and isnt over the issues in New York. Odds are against him that he will pan out but i will remain optimistic though i believe we will be looking for a QB1 at the end of this season AGAIN.

[onmyown]

16 hours ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

Hyperbole much? I know you were trying to be smug. But you don't have to insult a large portion of the Huddlez to do so?

Guess what I meant was large compared to the amount *I’d imagine* would believe that which is like 1 out of 6,765,234 people, so yea like 2-3 being here on this site blows my mind.

Edited July 29, 2021 by onmyown

[SBBlue]

If Sam can't stay on the field we move on. 
If Sam plays like he did in NY, then it was him all along,  we move on.
If Sam plays on par with  Teddy, we move on.

If Sam plays much better than Teddy,  >4000 yards, >25TDs , ~12 ints, we have our guy.

We can get a good QB.

TB went 7-9 and got Brady. 
The Bears went 8-8 and got Fields.  
With Teddy level play, WE could have had Fields.

 

Worse case scenario is Sam plays like he did in NY.  We suffer through a season of crap.

This negative energy we keep projecting is not good for us, or the team.   I'm looking forward to see what the kid has got.  

 

 

 

 

Edited July 29, 2021 by SBBlue

[glitchh8]

On 7/27/2021 at 7:45 PM, 1of10Charnatives said:

I just want to throw this out there:

The best case scenario is quite obviously he plays great on a new team with a fresh start and quality skill position players around him. That's a no brainer and what I'm sure we're all hoping for.

But after that I think it gets a little interesting. I don't think the worst case scenario is Darnold flops hard. If he does, we go back to the drawing board and yeah it sucks, but we'll have a high pick in the next draft if he does and we're only out meaningfully a 2nd rounder. Even if Darnold fails fast and obviously, that was worth the shot.

I think the worst case scenario is if Darnold plays well enough to give us a middle of the road record with a rapidly improving roster around him, but not well enough that it's obvious he should be the guy we build around for the future. What if Darnold shows flashes this year and teases everyone and is able to show just enough that he *might* be the guy, but then gets hurt somewhere middle to the later part of the season, say after we've won six games or so. That's the one that keeps me up at night remembering the endless parade of 7-9, 9-7 seasons that we've been stuck with far too often.

Don't get me wrong, I want him to succeed. But if he doesn't or can't, I'd rather him fail hard than tease us and the coaching staff. What worries me is my own perception that this coaching staff might be overvaluing it's ability to coach guys up and overemphasizing raw physical traits and talent which they can't coach. Maybe they turn out to be great at that at the pro level, but at this juncture I say it's still an open question that could lead to us getting stuck in a very familiar feeling rut with a talented roster but a middling qb.

These are the kinds of thoughts I have when I'm bored and I've already watched all the pr0n.

That's right.

All of it.

Except that weird @#%$ with furries. If you like that you need therapy. And probably a cattle prod.

Fits and company did far too little to fix the OL so if they turn out to be the second coming of the Jets OL the past two years, we will then get too little opportunity to see USC Sam, third overall draftee.

[The Huddler]

Tepper will never allow us to be in QB purgatory 

 

we will have a QB one way or another

[iamhubby1]

5 hours ago, glitchh8 said:

Fits and company did far too little to fix the OL so if they turn out to be the second coming of the Jets OL the past two years, we will then get too little opportunity to see USC Sam, third overall draftee.

 

We brought in 3 FA Linemen, drafted 2, and brought in 1 UDFA. Care to reevaluate your claim?

[KSpan]

5 hours ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

We brought in 3 FA Linemen, drafted 2, and brought in 1 UDFA. Care to reevaluate your claim?

Quantity doesn't automatically equal quality. Also, unless I missed something (always possible) Carolina only signed 2, Erving and Elflein, and both are higher risk/reward signings that might not pan out. I think they were wisely selected to try to minimize downside but it's not like Carolina added proven guys like Brown and Thuney.

IMO signing Reiff instead of Erving for nearly the same money would have been better on paper, but Erving is younger and they seem to be valuing versatility. For all I know they did try to get guys like Reiff but those players opted to go elsewhere.

[iamhubby1]

3 hours ago, KSpan said:

Quantity doesn't automatically equal quality. Also, unless I missed something (always possible) Carolina only signed 2, Erving and Elflein, and both are higher risk/reward signings that might not pan out. I think they were wisely selected to try to minimize downside but it's not like Carolina added proven guys like Brown and Thuney.

IMO signing Reiff instead of Erving for nearly the same money would have been better on paper, but Erving is younger and they seem to be valuing versatility. For all I know they did try to get guys like Reiff but those players opted to go elsewhere.

 

First you say we did far too little. Now you want to quantify that by say we didn't bring in anyone worth having. Moving the ol Goal Posts are we? lol

 

Also, we brought back Miller. So that's 3 FA Olinemen. 

[KSpan]

18 minutes ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

First you say we did far too little. Now you want to quantify that by say we didn't bring in anyone worth having. Moving the ol Goal Posts are we? lol

 

Also, we brought back Miller. So that's 3 FA Olinemen. 

I didn't say anything originally about the OL - you were responding to a different poster in that comment. With respect to Miller bringing a player back isn't the same as bringing in someone new to address a weak position. He's a known quantity who started for a line that many perceive as weak last year. Is such a signing really addressing the position?

Edited July 30, 2021 by KSpan

[rippadonn]

What I like about Sam:

Much more mobile and a big run threat at QB. He can get yards on his own on the ground, he's fast, shifty fast and he's good at it.

Gunslinger mentality like Farve, Jake Delhomme. It's all or nothing baby. He's more Farve than Jake with his arm strength though.

6'3", Good height for a QB, solid build.

Best case: Brett Farvre

Worst case: Jake Delhomme

Thus, I don't see him being this teams downfall.

 

 

 

[rippadonn]

Aside from that, he has to stay healthy. If he doesn't, we don't have Fields and we're f'd.

Tankathon.

 

[SBBlue]

8 hours ago, KSpan said:

Quantity doesn't automatically equal quality.

True. 

Draft position doesn't equal quality (LIttle). 

Pro-bowl status doesn't equal quality (Matt Kahlil, Okung).

Apparently we looked for wide-zone fit and versatility in our FAs.  We looked for wide-zone fit, lack of injury, and multi-season experience for our rookies.

I agree that FAs don't want to play for a team in the throws of a rebuild and their services are in high demand.  It looks like it limited our choices and may have forced us to pay a premium.

We invested in our O-line thru the draft and FA, some say not enough and they may be right.  Lets at least gets pads on before we determine that.

 

 

[glitchh8]

22 hours ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

We brought in 3 FA Linemen, drafted 2, and brought in 1 UDFA. Care to reevaluate your claim?

NO! Three second rate FA, drafted two lower than he should have, a so what, UDFA. Maybe it's you who should reevaluate, get the stars out of your eyes boy. Only time will tell how good those draftees will be.