Sam Darnold

[MasterAwesome]

7 minutes ago, CRA said:

He also added 132 rushing yards on the ground.  So when he sucks as a passer, he compensates in other ways. 

Justin Fields has shown legit elite and special ability.    Largely as a runner.  But there is something special about him.   And only 2 years under his belt.  And the team last year was prepped to be a Andy Dalton O.   The one year they went in with Fields as the starter, he did near historic stuff.  Sam has a half decade in the league and has been given legit opportunity.  And there is nothing special about him that has ever popped in those 5 years.   These two things are not the same.  There is a legit argument to continue the Fields experiment and buy into him developing.  There isn't for Sam. 

All that "compensation" at the end of the day resulted in 10 points.  And that has essentially summarized Fields' career to this point IMO...he's exciting, but largely ineffective thus far.  What you call "legit elite and special ability" (with his legs as you accurately pointed out) I think is just a fluffed up embellished way of saying he's an "exciting" player, which he definitely is.  Unfortunately so far it's been mostly all flash and little substance.  Fields can bust out an incredible 60-yard run on one play and then overthrow a wide open checkdown on the next.  Or throw an interception on a play where the opposing defense rushes zero.  Not every coach will take that trade-off of missing the easy stuff while pulling off miraculous plays that no other QB can.  I think most would, because they think it's easier to overcome those routine easy things, but it's still very much TBD right now.

The irony is that if Justin Fields doesn't fix his passing issues and start piling up wins soon, then he's gonna turn into the next Sam Darnold where years later people are still making excuses for his shortcomings.  "Poor Fields has been the victim of horrible coaches, a horrible o-line, and horrible receivers!  He has never had a real chance!" - sound familiar?  (Substitute Fields with Darnold).

And I left off his rushing stats because I was following your lead.  Are we including rushing stats or not?  Because just a minute ago you were talking about Darnold's 3 passing touchdowns in 4 games instead of his 5 total touchdowns.  Both are pretty awful don't get me wrong...but I'm guessing you know it sounds a bit more damning to be able to say he "averaged less than 1 TD per game".

[ForJimmy]

4 minutes ago, ECHornet said:

And tons of cap space. It seems to be setting up as a defining year for Fields as far as career trajectory. 

Hopefully they build a team around him and help him achieve his success.  If they don't and/or he struggles, yeah they will be in the market again.  Year 3 is usually a big year for QBs.

[KSpan]

1 hour ago, kungfoodude said:

It depends on how you want to lose, I guess. If you want to lose most of your games, Darnold is your guy. He is going to absolutely lead you to a sub-.500 record. Proven commodity in that regard. Shouldn't really matter how good or bad the team is around him, those will be the results.

If you want to be around .500 or possibly a little better, Teddy and Jacoby can get you there. They just need a team around them to support a 9+ win season.

FWIW, while football is not an individual sport Sam's career win percentage is .381 in 51 starts and Brissett's is .375 in 48 starts while on at least 1 or 2 arguably better teams. They are, at worst, equivalent ways to get to the same spot, as you touched on in your first sentence. I'll take Sam and some, any, actual potential for downfield explosive football.

Bridgewater's win pct would be right there with them if not padded by AP carrying the Vikings in 2015 and Sean Payton in 2019.

Edited February 9, 2023 by KSpan

[MasterAwesome]

38 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

I think it’s crystal clear at this point that we were indeed idiots for not drafted him.  I mean for fugs sake it’s 3 years later and we are still looking for a qb.  

It's really not crystal clear at all until Fields takes that next step in his passing game and more importantly starts winning games.  At the end of the day he's 5-20 as a starting QB in the NFL...his development has been more encouraging than discouraging, but he's still got a long way to go.

If Fields was a slam dunk, I can promise you there wouldn't be reporters asking the GM at the podium if Fields is the starting QB next year and it wouldn't have been such a newsworthy moment that spurned countless articles.  Imagine Pederson being asked if Trevor Lawrence is the starting QB next year.  Lol.  The only articles that would be written about that moment would be how stupid of a question that was.

[ECHornet]

14 minutes ago, CRA said:

highly paid NFL folks seem to struggle with the most basic stuff sometimes though.   Especially certain orgs. We have seen that here.  It's not a given Chicago will be smart. 

True but year 3 with $100 mil to spend in free agency should translate to some wins or that QB and/or coach probably aren’t the answer. 

Edited February 9, 2023 by ECHornet

[Krovvy]

It's interesting how the Ryan Tannehill comparison with Sam Darnold has morphed into Geno Smith.

Meanwhile, it's being reported that Tennessee have already made Chicago an offer for the first overall pick.

Edited February 9, 2023 by Krovvy

[CRA]

24 minutes ago, MasterAwesome said:

All that "compensation" at the end of the day resulted in 10 points.  And that has essentially summarized Fields' career to this point IMO...he's exciting, but largely ineffective thus far.  What you call "legit elite and special ability" (with his legs as you accurately pointed out) I think is just a fluffed up embellished way of saying he's an "exciting" player, which he definitely is.  Unfortunately so far it's been mostly all flash and little substance.  Fields can bust out an incredible 60-yard run on one play and then overthrow a wide open checkdown on the next.  Or throw an interception on a play where the opposing defense rushes zero.  Not every coach will take that trade-off of missing the easy stuff while pulling off miraculous plays that no other QB can.  I think most would, because they think it's easier to overcome those routine easy things, but it's still very much TBD right now.

The irony is that if Justin Fields doesn't fix his passing issues and start piling up wins soon, then he's gonna turn into the next Sam Darnold where years later people are still making excuses for his shortcomings.  "Poor Fields has been the victim of horrible coaches, a horrible o-line, and horrible receivers!  He has never had a real chance!" - sound familiar?  (Substitute Fields with Darnold).

And I left off his rushing stats because I was following your lead.  Are we including rushing stats or not?  Because just a minute ago you were talking about Darnold's 3 passing touchdowns in 4 games instead of his 5 total touchdowns.  Both are pretty awful don't get me wrong...but I'm guessing you know it sounds a bit more damning to be able to say he "averaged less than 1 TD per game".

Fields won't be the next Sam.  Fields won't continue to get opportunities like Sam. Sam is sort of an anomaly. 

also, Sam Darnold was put into a much better position to find success year 2 than Justin Fields.  So, that part doesn't sound familiar.   Jets tanked their roster after Sam was so horrific in year 2 despite being put in a spot not to be so bad at quarterbacking.  Because the load and ask wasn't going to be that massive.  That wasn't the case for Fields.  One man show with no defense. 

Bears have a long way to get to what the Jets had around Sam Darnold in his 2nd year.  Jets had a top 10 D.  #7 vs #29 for the Bears.  That's a talented QBs real best friend.  Also do it all RB in Bell.  Been around the league and diverse/solid but not spectacular WRs.  Jets tanked the roster after that year.  Sam Darnold was already clearly fools gold.   And they secured a top pick to replace him. 

[frankw]

1 hour ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

I'm ready to see him go so we can stop talking about him.

All back and forth aside I agree with this completely. Just talking the truth about Darnold in this thread results in no less than half a dozen poo'd posts lmao. You'd think we had actually won something of significance or been to the playoffs with this guy. People are crazy lol. I cannot wait until the draft and free agency has begun.

[heel31ok]

17 minutes ago, ECHornet said:

True but year 3 with $100 mil to spend in free agency should translate to some wins or that QB and/or coach probably aren’t the answer. 

My fear in our own projected path, but minus 100 mil.

Could be very prophetic.

[CRA]

saying Sam Darnold should stay is just this season's version of Matt Rhule deserves another chance after 2021. 

 

[PNW_PantherMan]

5 minutes ago, frankw said:

All back and forth aside I agree with this completely. Just talking the truth about Darnold in this thread results in no less than half a dozen poo'd posts lmao. You'd think we had actually won something of significance or been to the playoffs with this guy. People are crazy lol. I cannot wait until the draft and free agency has begun.

I cannot think of a less significant player in Panthers history that has caused so much debate.

[MasterAwesome]

10 minutes ago, CRA said:

also, Sam Darnold was put into a much better position to find success year 2 than Justin Fields.  So, that part doesn't sound familiar.   Jets tanked their roster after Sam was so horrific in year 2 despite being put in a spot not to be so bad at quarterbacking. 

How so?  That's quite debatable lol.  Darnold definitely had a better defense, that's about the only thing I'd give him.  I would argue Fields had a slightly less awful receiving corps, a better o-line, and better RBs.  Coaching is TBD cause Adam Gase is mediocre at best and Eberflus just finished his first season.

Speaking of o-line...I constantly hear talk about Fields' awful o-line but they were ranked top 10 by two independent fairly reputable establishments: PFF and ESPN (at least with regards to their "pass blocking win rate" metric).  Fields takes a lot of sacks but a lot of those are undeniably his fault.  For comparison's sake since you want to compare both of their 2nd years in the league: Fields had less pressures (119) compared to Darnold (135), and somehow incredibly turned that into 67% more sacks (55 vs. 33).  That's pretty damn staggering.  There was a graphic posted in here maybe a month or two ago that showed a QB's tendency to turn pressures into sacks in college vs. the NFL.  Fields was tops in both categories, meaning he succumbs to sacks when pressured at a much higher than average rate.  Did OSU have a horrible o-line too?  Pocket awareness/navigating the pocket, stepping up in the pocket to evade edge rushers, etc. those are damn important traits for a QB and it's another flaw for Fields that I don't see talked about.  Not only is it not talked about, but it's flipped on its head and used as a point in Fields' favor, as that blame is redirected from Fields and onto his o-line.

[mrcompletely11]

So fuging weird.  

[ForJimmy]

7 minutes ago, MasterAwesome said:

How so?  That's quite debatable lol.  Darnold definitely had a better defense, that's about the only thing I'd give him.  I would argue Fields had a slightly less awful receiving corps, a better o-line, and better RBs.  Coaching is TBD cause Adam Gase is mediocre at best and Eberflus just finished his first season.

Speaking of o-line...I constantly hear talk about Fields' awful o-line but they were ranked top 10 by two independent fairly reputable establishments: PFF and ESPN (at least with regards to their "pass blocking win rate" metric).  Fields takes a lot of sacks but a lot of those are undeniably his fault.  For comparison's sake since you want to compare both of their 2nd years in the league: Fields had less pressures (119) compared to Darnold (135), and somehow incredibly turned that into 67% more sacks (55 vs. 33).  That's pretty damn staggering.  There was a graphic posted in here maybe a month or two ago that showed a QB's tendency to turn pressures into sacks in college vs. the NFL.  Fields was tops in both categories, meaning he succumbs to sacks when pressured at a much higher than average rate.  Did OSU have a horrible o-line too?  Pocket awareness/navigating the pocket, stepping up in the pocket to evade edge rushers, etc. those are damn important traits for a QB and it's another flaw for Fields that I don't see talked about.  Not only is it not talked about, but it's flipped on its head and used as a point in Fields' favor, as that blame is redirected from Fields and onto his o-line.

Chicago's OL want ranked higher in PFF mainly due to run blocking.  They also battled injuries all year so it was constantly shuffled.

https://www.si.com/nfl/bears/news/grading-the-bears-on-2022-season

Their pass blocking was so bad it hid the fact they ran for more yards than any Bears team ever and the most in the league. More than 650 yards of Justin Fields' 1,143 came on scrambles, which weren't planned running plays and resulted from the line's inability to protect him. He suffered a league-high 55 sacks. The line did endure nine starting lineup changes due largely to injuries, but they suffered only one bonafide season-ending injury. Only two offensive linemen had as many as five penalties—Braxton Jones (10) and Sam Mustipher (5)—and those two accounted for seven of the line's 15 holding penalties. This unit was good enough to be ranked 14th best offensive line by Pro Football Focus. They're overrated. This was a ranking skewed greatly by their status as the top rushing team for the first time since 1986, and that rushing total was skewed greatly by Fields' scrambling.

Basically their OL pass protection was so bad and their WR's weren't getting open so Fields HAD to run to gain yardage.  However his elite scrambling gave his OL higher ratings in run blocking which is really because of their bad pass blocking?  I think they broke the PFF algorithm??