Sam old Sam ...

[ncfan]

[Call Me James]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

Bridgewater wouldn't have thrown as many picks because he didn't have the balls to try risky throws.

Throwing two yard passes when you need six or seven yards may not turn the ball over, but it doesn't exactly win games either.

It would have yesterday 

[Mr. Scot]

2 minutes ago, Call Me James said:

It would have yesterday 

Nah.

[Waldo]

If you are thinking that Bridgewater is in anyway the answer then you are completely missing the point. 

A lower ceiling is a lower ceiling and when there is as much tape on both as there was before coming here, it is not at all surprising. Why can't we see reality and set these guys up for where they can perform at their ceilings? That's the concerning part. This is the NFL, great teams make do with less and dumb teams play pretend. Hopefully Rhule and Fritts wakes up and changes their evaluation and support processes going forward. 

[Call Me James]

25 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Nah.

[SCO96]

32 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Bridgewater wouldn't have thrown as many picks because he didn't have the balls to try risky throws.

Throwing two yard passes when you need six or seven yards may not turn the ball over, but it doesn't exactly win games either.

I get what you're saying. But, I didn't see Sam make any really risky throws yesterday. He didn't make any throws "yesterday" that Teddy couldn't have made.  I just several really bad one throws and missed chances. Those INT's were off target/behind the receiver. He also missed some down the field opportunities. 

I only made my point because we wouldn't have had to give up a 2nd choice if we had kept Teddy, thus giving us more draft capital going forward. That said, I never have thought Teddy B was a franchise QB.

Edited October 11, 2021 by SCO96

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, Call Me James said:

You wouldn't understand it if I did.

[Italianpantherfan]

We need an oline , Sam’s not a franchise but he could be here for years . Seasons not over we just need mccaffrey back this is a different offense with him playing and we can’t play without him . 2 rough losses but not like we got blown out 

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, SCO96 said:

I get what you're saying. But, I didn't see Sam make any really risky throws yesterday. He didn't make any throws "yesterday" that Teddy couldn't have made.  I just several really bad one throws and missed chances. Those INT's were off target/behind the receiver. He also missed some down the field opportunities. 

I only made my point because we wouldn't have had to give up a 2nd choice if we had kept Teddy, thus giving us more draft capital going forward. That said, I never have thought Teddy B was a franchise QB.

I'll take a quarterback who takes risks over one who plays it safe tem times out of ten, even in a WCO.

[Call Me James]

Just now, Mr. Scot said:

You wouldn't understand it if I did.

Probably not because you aren't very smart or good at articulating yourself. 

Maybe you can find a tweet though. 

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, Call Me James said:

Probably not because you aren't very smart or good at articulating yourself. 

Maybe you can find a tweet though. 

Nah 

[Call Me James]

3 minutes ago, SCO96 said:

I get what you're saying. But, I didn't see Sam make any really risky throws yesterday. He didn't make any throws "yesterday" that Teddy couldn't have made.  I just several really bad one throws and missed chances. Those INT's were off target/behind the receiver. He also missed some down the field opportunities. 

I only made my point because we wouldn't have had to give up a 2nd choice if we had kept Teddy, thus giving us more draft capital going forward. That said, I never have thought Teddy B was a franchise QB.

A dominant defensive performance where all you need to do is manage turnovers and get your team in scoring position and keep the other team playing the long field is exactly the type of game Teddy wins you. 

You don't have those games every week and when Teddy needed to do more he failed which is why we moved on, but I don't understand the need for folks to stubbornly deny a fairly mild take. 

[Pantherxtreme]

3 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'll take a quarterback who takes risks over one who plays it safe tem times out of ten, even in a WCO.and 

And I'll take a QB that protects the ball when I have a defense that's playing great and I'll beat your risk taker 9 out of 10 times. 

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, Pantherxtreme said:

And I'll take a QB that protects the ball when I have a defense that's playing great and I'll beat your risk taker 9 out of 10 times. 

How'd that work out last season?

What Bridgewater does isn't "protecting the ball". I could get behind that.

Playing scared? Not so much.

Edited October 11, 2021 by Mr. Scot