Quarterbacks win championships

[45catfan]

3 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

You won't know that until next season is played out.  Just as this year's class was supposed to be deep before this past season was played.  Now look at it. 

But there's still good prospects in the draft if you have the scouts that can identify the kind of qb you should take a chance on. That's the real question. 

We are taking a qb. Odds are it will not be who the huddle majority want. Which will automatically make him a bust the first incomplete pass he throws.

The portal is a big factor now, agreed, but a lot of those guys from this year are out of eligibliy after this season.  It's the underclassmen that are the wildcards.  I'm not sure that Williams has anything more to prove.  Injury would be his only reason for staying.  I could see Maye returning, but the next tier or two is deep and many can't stay in college any longer.

[MHS831]

13 hours ago, amcoolio said:

Tell that to the posters who still vouch for Darnold and want to bring him back

Actually, I have been accused of this when what I said was-- they may bring him back because there are many 2021 busts who, under a new coach and new system, prospered in 2022.  The reality of the Panther situation may very well necessitate bringing back a veteran. 

I said Darnold has all the physical tools.  His issues are cerebral. 

But there are some people who must make everything about the person making an observation or statement so they can attack the person and not the actual message. It is easy that way--happens in sandboxes every day. Considering  possibilities that any intelligent person would analyze if they were mature enough to table their bias and analyze multiple possibilities and perspectives is the basis for intelligent discourse.  If analyzing what the could do with Darnold and discussing the potential positives (based on what has happened around the league with QBs with new coaches and systems--Goff, Jones, Tua, etc for example) because we all know what he looked like in the Jets/Rhule systems--why would a smart person attack the person bringing up these very realistic points and potential outcomes? 

So yeah, I get your point--Darnold bad, not Darnold good. 

[SmokinwithWilly]

15 minutes ago, Samppson said:

That's not true, the reason teams rarely trade for franchise QBs is they become available for trade very rarely. Especially one that isn't past their prime, and is still on the younger side. Any time that has happened, there has been many suitors willing to trade multiple first rounders. If you have a true guy like that, they can cover up so many holes on your roster. Is it ideal to draft one and only spend a single first rounder? Sure, and I'm on board with that approach, but let's not act like if Burrow/Herbert/Allen became available, you would have more than half the league willing to give up any draft picks for them.

 

It just happened with Russell Wilson. That didn't turn out well so far. Could that change under Payton? Sure. But RW looked like ass. Denver gave up a ton of picks and salary cap for him and got basically nothing. 

It's not just the picks. It's the salary cap implications as well. If Lamar is looking in the range of 50m a year guaranteed or more long term, which is what it's sounding like, who are you going to let walk? Burns. Chinn. Icky when it's time. Moton. DJ. Horn. Burns contract could be in the neighborhood of 25-30m per season. How do you fill in the rest of your team paying so much in salary? You need picks to replenish talent that is inevitably going to walk for a bigger paycheck that the team can't provide. And those picks will be sitting in Baltimore. Plus you have to hope he can play the entire season, because the past 2 he has missed several games to injury. 

Half the league may be willing to give up the picks to get the others, but would they be running to the mat if it was 50-60m per year fully guaranteed? I'm not against bringing in LJ, though I really think we should build through the draft. I'd be saying the same thing if it was Herbert, Burrow or Allen, especially Allen. His playing style and that elbow injury is very concerning if a fully guaranteed contract were in play. I'm against the combination of salary cap implications and traded picks that could very well leave the team hamstrung.

The whole thing really depends on what LJ contract price would be and what Baltimore would want in trade. 

[weyco2000]

13 hours ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

That's true but not on this forum.

 

You got people suggesting Derek Carr over a franchise MVP QB Lamar Jackson.lmao

 

Some people just don't know football.

 

Don't believe go check out the Derek Carr thread. People really want that to lead us to a SB. Like dude has 1 playoff appearance in his entire career and he's 32 wtf!

 

I love you guys but some of you are funny as sh!t!

Franchise QB’s don’t hit free agency when their rookie deal expires. Both guys are out of our pay range and neither are worth the asking price (salary/draft picks). 

[45catfan]

10 minutes ago, weyco2000 said:

Franchise QB’s don’t hit free agency when their rookie deal expires. Both guys are out of our pay range and neither are worth the asking price (salary/draft picks). 

Desperation makes people do and say weird things.  The QB desperation here has hit an all-time high.  I read a post from someone earlier saying they didn't care WHAT the cost was as long as we drafted a QB this year.

Edited February 13, 2023 by 45catfan

[Wundrbread33]

Teams win championships. 
 

It certainly helps if you draft a QB who ends up being the Michael Jordan of football though. 

[amcoolio]

16 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

Actually, I have been accused of this when what I said was-- they may bring him back because there are many 2021 busts who, under a new coach and new system, prospered in 2022.  The reality of the Panther situation may very well necessitate bringing back a veteran. 

I said Darnold has all the physical tools.  His issues are cerebral. 

But there are some people who must make everything about the person making an observation or statement so they can attack the person and not the actual message. It is easy that way--happens in sandboxes every day. Considering  possibilities that any intelligent person would analyze if they were mature enough to table their bias and analyze multiple possibilities and perspectives is the basis for intelligent discourse.  If analyzing what the could do with Darnold and discussing the potential positives (based on what has happened around the league with QBs with new coaches and systems--Goff, Jones, Tua, etc for example) because we all know what he looked like in the Jets/Rhule systems--why would a smart person attack the person bringing up these very realistic points and potential outcomes? 

So yeah, I get your point--Darnold bad, not Darnold good. 

I love that people like to attack posters intelligence on here for having a different opinion. Totally not like anyone to be completely wrong on here before but ignore it and pretend like it never happened....

Everyone knows Darnold has all the physical tools. Darnold's mental deficiencies aren't fixable. He panics. He holds on to the ball a half second more than he needs to. He doesn't trust himself. There is no possible way you can tell me that Darnold could play in that game last night. He couldn't even play in week 18 in a meaningless game....he panicked all over himself to the tune of 5 completed passes...in a dome! 

Look, Sam is a nice guy. I get that you want to see him succeed. But even if he had a super staff of the Eagles and Chiefs offensive gurus combined, it is very unlikely he could be fixed. The Eagles and Chiefs dropped their dead weight quarterbacks before Mahomes and Hurts, so they see stuff like this too.

THE #1 TRAIT you need in a quarterback, beyond all else, is composure. 2nd is will to win. Darnold has neither. We don't need to subject ourselves to settle for subpar quarterbacking. Enough with the excuses for Sam, and enough with the putting down posters on here who want to be rid of Sam.

[CamWhoaaCam]

14 minutes ago, weyco2000 said:

Franchise QB’s don’t hit free agency when their rookie deal expires. Both guys are out of our pay range and neither are worth the asking price (salary/draft picks). 

Then hopefully we draft one.

 

Im gonna lose it if we settle for Derek Carr. 3 years is enough suffering. It's time we get our guy.

[CRA]

1 hour ago, 45catfan said:

Trivia question: Who was the last #1 draft pick QB to win a Super Bowl with their original draft team? (Name, SB year and draft year).

It's not the right answer I don't think because of the trade but Eli IMO should qualify.   He was the #1 overall pick and won it for the Giants. 

[CRA]

17 minutes ago, Wundrbread33 said:

Teams win championships. 
 

It certainly helps if you draft a QB who ends up being the Michael Jordan of football though. 

32 teams.  In the last two decades......only 11 QBs have won the Super Bowl.  

[45catfan]

Just now, CRA said:

It's not the right answer I don't think because of the trade but Eli IMO should qualify.   He was the #1 overall pick and won it for the Giants. 

*It was a draft day trade for Eli, but it was his brother Peyton.  2006 SB, drafted #1 overall by the Colts and in 1998.  My point, if having the #1 pick for a QB hit more often than not, I wouldn't be opposed to moving all the way up.  Considering the ramifications of the move up and spotty prospects of it actually panning out, it's a hard pass for me.

[SCO96]

2 hours ago, Growl said:

it’s remarkable there’s still people trying to resist this

People really aren't resistant to the idea that you need strong QB play to win a championship. We're resistant to the idea that giving up a several of our #1, #2 and possibly #3 draft picks in the in the 2023-2025 drafts to move up to get Bryce Young and CJ Stroud (neither is a sure bet to excel in the NFL) in the draft. 

Contrary to popular opinion, our roster is not that strong. We have some nice pieces in place. But we are not a stacked team by any measure. 

Our defensive tackles combined for 2 sacks on the season. One player (Brian Burns) is responsible for 12.5 of our 35 team sacks, and a segment on this board actually wants to trade him. Our 2nd leading pass rusher was a LB (Luvu had 7 sacks) we acquired in free agency. One D-lineman had 5 sacks, another had 2.5. No one else had more 1. Several didn't have any.

Our Secondary had 10 INTs. Our Safeties didn't have any of them. A player who almost missed half the season was tied for 2nd on the team (2 INTS) with CJ Henderson who didn't miss a game. Our best corner had 3. The other 3 came from Luvu, Brown and Roy, the latter two are DT's.

Christian was the 2nd leading receiver in 2022, despite playing half the season with another team. Outside of DJ, no wideout eclipsed 30 catches this year. Our TE's are not passing threats. They combined for 3 TD's (all by Tremble) and would not start on any team in the NFL. 

Shaq and Luvu had over 100 tackles. No other LB eclipsed 50.

We could try to trade up and pick Stroud or Young, but we'd have to mortgage the future to do it. How do we fill the holes at DE, DT, OLB, S, WR, TE, and CB if we give away #1 ,#2 picks, #3 picks in 2023, 2024 and 2025?

We can sit still at #9, grab a QB, and find starters for half of those positions in this years draft with our #2 and # 3 draft choices alone. Or you can grab BPA at #9,  draft a rookie to groom later in the draft, and still fill multiple holes.

And, if you did hold off on a QB this year (not ideal, but it could happen), we would literally be able to move up to a higher spot and part with draft choices in 2024 to get our for two reasons:

1) We'd have most of our holes already filled.

2) Every drafted starter on our team would be on their rookie deal in 2024 with the exception of Moton and DJ who have already been resigned and Burns who would be FA at the end of 2023.

[Wundrbread33]

14 minutes ago, CRA said:

32 teams.  In the last two decades......only 11 QBs have won the Super Bowl.  

When a third of those were won by the Goat and a hall of fame coach, I’m not sure the point lands. 
 

Like 7 of the last 21 were Brady, which means 10 QB’s won the other 14. 
 

Now if we rephrase it as “The greatest QB of all time wins super bowls,” or “hall of fame talent QB’s win super bowls,” then sure.

 

Now we just have to do the easy thing and draft a hall of fame QB.

…or the plan could be to build the strongest roster in the most team sporty team sport, since even hall of fame QB’s lose in the playoffs every year because they don’t get the help they need from having weak teams around them. 

[CRA]

1 minute ago, Wundrbread33 said:

When a third of those were won by the Goat and a hall of fame coach, I’m not sure the point lands. 
 

Like 7 of the last 21 were Brady, which means 10 QB’s won the other 14. 
 

Now if we rephrase it as “The greatest QB of all time wins super bowls,” or “hall of fame talent QB’s win super bowls,” then sure.

 

Now we just have to do the easy thing and draft a hall of fame QB.

…or the plan could be to build the strongest roster in the most team sporty team sport, since even hall of fame QB’s lose in the playoffs every year because they don’t get the help they need from having weak teams around them. 

I don't think it lessens the point at all.  It reinforces how important the QB spot is from my vantage point.  

there were tons of better teams out there each year Brady was winning. 

and yeah, I think the point is to go find a HOF type player.  That's who can consistently compete for championships.  If you don't have that? Well, you are just praying for some obscure season playing out for you.