Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Is Mcadoo developing Darnold??


WOW!!
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, mrcompletely11 said:

That's the thing nobody is talking g about.   Are the Darnold lovers wanting a 3 year deal or what?   

I wouldn't consider myself a Darnold "lover" or "hater". I'm more of a Darnold "wait-and-see"-er. 

That said, the other veteran options aren't anything to get excited about. Free Agency happens before the draft so you don't know what rookie you can get. I'd see if his side would be open to a contract similar to what Mariota got (2 year, $18M, $6.75M GTD). 

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, mav1234 said:

I suppose it depends on how wide your tiers are. This year, Sam Darnold is miles better than PJ to date.  Career wise, they're both bad, but Sam is showing he may have a future as a backup.  PJ has done the opposite.

The Carolina Panthers have averaged 250 rushing yards per game (technically 248)  in the Sam Darnold wins.  

That’s what it is taking to make Sam look decent.  And yeah, a comparable QB to PJ will look better with that type rush offense going down.  Sam isn’t in another tier than PJ.  His career here and away has proven what Sam is.  And this praise of Sam is off a flukey couple games with insane rush numbers. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

2 yr 6 mil per

Teddy is making 6.5 (average annual salary) as a backup, Keenum is making 6 (3 year 18 million), Taylor and Rudolph are just over 5.  So you basically want to pay him higher end backup money.  I am ok with that if he is the vet QB we are wanting to roll with.  I'm not sure he takes that contract if he "takes us to the playoffs."  That also doesn't stop us from drafting a QB to compete with Corral for our future.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CRA said:

Nah.  That ain’t true.  Because Rhule would still be over the O.   

we had CMC and Rhule wouldn’t even get the run going like Wilks is doing with average joes at RB. Wilks makes happen what Rhule bullshitted about in terms of being a running team.  
 

 

I was thinking the exact same thing when I saw the post that if Darnold had not be injured, Rhule would probably still be here. 

I personally don't think a handful of games in an offense where the QB's job is to hand the ball off and not throw interceptions overrides four years of past performance.  Maybe he's learned, maybe he is the same, but I need to see a lot more to conclude he has turned a corner.

Regardless, had Darnold not been injured and if he has turned a corner, Rhule driving the train would have derailed it.  As exhibit A, we traded for a QB who operates best out of play action and roll outs.  Rhule talked about establishing the run, but when the games started, we threw on every down out of the chute and we didn't roll him out. 

Maybe you can pin that on McAdoo, but even if that was his stupidity, as the HC don't you pull him aside and ask him WTF he is doing and if he missed the discussion of running the football?

The Process either confuses talking with doing, he thought he was going to outsmart everybody else, or both.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only thing that's changed with Sam is he trusts his pass protection for the first time in his career. He may get better naturally as his confidence grows but McAdoo is doing the same sort of system we've been trying to implement since Cam's exit, it's just working now because we have an offensive line worth a damn.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Signing Sam to a cheap backup QB contract while drafting a QB in the draft to be our future is perfectly acceptable.  Signing Sam for more money and rolling with him and Corral next year is one hell of a gamble at the most important positions in sports.  It's also one gamble that has already burned us pretty badly in very recent history....

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

Teddy is making 6.5 (average annual salary) as a backup, Keenum is making 6 (3 year 18 million), Taylor and Rudolph are just over 5.  So you basically want to pay him higher end backup money.  I am ok with that if he is the vet QB we are wanting to roll with.  I'm not sure he takes that contract if he "takes us to the playoffs."  That also doesn't stop us from drafting a QB to compete with Corral for our future.  

Yeah, I think we could wind up with three QBs on the roster next year.  Maybe Corral can't show enough to go past the practice squad, but I think we wind up with him, a vet, and a draft pick.  That's the price of handling the position the way we have to date.  It's not like we have an established #1 or #2 right now to put a lot of faith in.

 

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Davidson Deac II said:

10-13.9 million per year. That would be more than Marcus Mariota, but less than Jameis Winston.  

And I would throw in free Bojangles.  

We're not owned by the guy that owns Bojangles anymore.  Maybe Tepper would throw in a free partially built practice facility?

 

 

 

Too soon?

  • Pie 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

Signing Sam to a cheap backup QB contract while drafting a QB in the draft to be our future is perfectly acceptable.  Signing Sam for more money and rolling with him and Corral next year is one hell of a gamble at the most important positions in sports.  It's also one gamble that has already burned us pretty badly in very recent history....

I'm not against drafting a QB

I'm against completely abandoning Corral 

I'm against giving Sam a huge longterm deal.

I'm also against giving up on Sam if he takes us to the playoffs especially if he wins a game. If he does this he deserves a chance to keep growing despite what else we have in the QB room

 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Tetairoa McMillan.   The last 28 1st overall picks were either a QB, DE, or OT. Seeing as I don't think we'd take an OT in the 1st and give up on Ickey as an LT yet and there doesn't seem to be a clear overall #1 type of QB or DE pick this year, it very well could be a non conventional #1 overall this year, at least in regards from the last almost 3 decades of drafts. If we didn't have Horn, I'd be more open to Hunter as a CB at #1, but we have him so another CB wouldn't be how I'd use a #1 pick.  And as much as I love Legette, if we have SB contending aspirations, I don't think Legette is a #1 on a team like that, but he damn sure is an elite #2 on a team like that.  He's more of the Smith/Higgins/Waddle to Brown/Chase/Hill (in terms of role/impact, not style of play of course). T-Mac is going to be the top ranked WR on every team's board in the end.  He is going to be a true outside #1 WR who is viewed as a consensus Top 5 WR in the game by his second contract in the same way guys like Jefferson and Chase have done.  His height combined with his speed, athleticism, and hands are near impossible to find all in one player, there is a reason his generally used comp is Mike Evans (although as he's not as thick, I personally see him more as an AJ Green). Yes, as an Arizona alum I've admitted to having bias towards the player to begin with.  But he's also someone very widely being put into the Top 5 in mock drafts lately and most of them have him as the first non QB offensive player being taken, so it's not really THAT much of a homer pick on my part anyways. If a QB or DE truly separate themselves as being a can't miss prospect come draft day, I'm open to that discussion, but until then, or if it doesn't happen, T-Mac is my pick 100 times out of 100.
    • Logjam, indeed! Makes me nervous.
×
×
  • Create New...