Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner
 

Archived Thread

Teams who will need QBs after this year

dep026 : 10/10/2018 10:32 am
I know there have been a few posts about teams who do/do not QBs, but I think as the season goes on - the numbers of teams looking for QBs will expand. I think the defenses in the NFL will start to catch up on the offenses and at least slow them down. Here are the teams to watch who might be looking for a QB.

1. Oakland Raiders - If Carr continues to struggle, Gruden will not hesitate to cut bait with them, and as I understand, they can get out of his god awful contract after this year. Gruden already parted away with their best player. He wont hesitate to get rid of Carr so he could groom his new QB. Will Grier seems like a typical Chucky QB.

2. Tennessee Titans - It looks like Marcus Mariota is the ultimate test for a GM. do you give him a 5th year and hope he can find it, or do you just cut bait now and look to start over. They should cut bait. He is oft injured and hasnt produced in over two years.

3. Tampa Bay Buccaneers - Fitzmagic is over. Winston is a walking time bomb who has been sporadic for years. Agasin, does TB give him hsi 5th year and hope for a turnaround? Very risky, one they probably shouldnt do, but probably will.

4. Denver Broncos - Case Keenum is not, nor will he ever be the long term guy. Elway passed on franchise guys this draft. He wont do it again. I expect him to make a MAJOR push for Hebert.

5. Miami Dolphins - Tannehill is coming back to the norm. Just a guy who flashes at times but is not consistent. He may get one more year, but a successor has to be in the plans shortly.

6. Washington Redskins - Alex Smith looks close to being done. Not legitimate backup. Another situation where you may see a QB drafted and look to surplant Smith midway through next year.

7. San Diego Chargers - they have to find a successor sooner or later, right? Rivers is still playing at high level, but he is getting older and no young back up worth noting on the roster.

8. Jacksonville Jaguars - I hate to be them right now. Bortles flashes, but then become the biggest liability in the league. A team with SB aspiration needs better. I am not sure if their route is QB in the draft - but they need to do something before their window closes.

9. Dallas Cowboys - Listen, the truth is Dak is not good. HE is not going to turn that offense around anytime soon. He is going to look to get paid, and I hope Dallas does it. But if common sense reigns, they would just let him go somewhere else.

10. New York Giants - been talked about enough here. Eli is old. Lauletta is unproven. They will be in the mix.
Pages: 1 2 <<Prev | Show All |
RE: We all know Dak sucks,  
giants#1 : 10/10/2018 10:51 am : link
In comment 14117451 Keith said:
Quote:
but I don't think Dallas would admit that. I don't see them looking for a QB. Lotta pride in that FO too.


Unfortunately their fans are starting to realize he sucks too, which will put more pressure on the FO to let him go.
Would any current QB entice anyone if shaken loose?  
Sean : 10/10/2018 10:52 am : link
Derek Carr comes to mind.
RE: Would any current QB entice anyone if shaken loose?  
giants#1 : 10/10/2018 10:56 am : link
In comment 14117457 Sean said:
Quote:
Derek Carr comes to mind.


Carr probably gets starters money >$20M+ (maybe even $25M+) from someone if he hits the open market.

Keenum, Bortles, Bridgewater all probably get deals in the $10-15M+ range as stop gaps.
Elway doesn't seem like the type to cut bait that quickly  
jcn56 : 10/10/2018 10:56 am : link
on Keenum. The rest, Carr in particular, make sense.
Carr and Mariota have been hurt.  
Big Blue '56 : 10/10/2018 10:57 am : link
Sometimes it takes awhile to reclaim the sealegs. Now if there are mental issues involved, thatís another story entirely. If not, I would not be depressed if either were on our roster
RE: Carr and Mariota have been hurt.  
dep026 : 10/10/2018 10:58 am : link
In comment 14117468 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
Sometimes it takes awhile to reclaim the sealegs. Now if there are mental issues involved, thatís another story entirely. If not, I would not be depressed if either were on our roster


I want no part of Mariota.
RE: Fix the OL and Eli will play effectively  
JCin332 : 10/10/2018 10:58 am : link
In comment 14117442 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
into his 40s, at least another 3-4 years if he cares to, imo. Thereís nothing wrong with him physically and heís got great tools to work with. Then thereís Lauletta whom Shurmur might be quite high on..

OL, OL, OL!


Yes spot on as usual Doc!
Drafting a QB, if we did, has zero to do with Eli next year  
PatersonPlank : 10/10/2018 11:02 am : link
Any QB drafted would be targeted to play in 2020 or 2021.

IMO it gets down to how we look when we finish the season. If the OL is improving then I think I would grab a QB in Rd 1 if the right guy was there when we draft. If not, then I'd likely grab a "cant miss type" OL player, or CB
RE: Drafting a QB, if we did, has zero to do with Eli next year  
Jay on the Island : 10/10/2018 11:10 am : link
In comment 14117476 PatersonPlank said:
Quote:
Any QB drafted would be targeted to play in 2020 or 2021.

IMO it gets down to how we look when we finish the season. If the OL is improving then I think I would grab a QB in Rd 1 if the right guy was there when we draft. If not, then I'd likely grab a "cant miss type" OL player, or CB

Agreed, Draft Justin Herbert, sign either Ja'Wuan James or Donovan Smith for RT, and draft a guard in rounds 2-3. That would move Wheeler back to the swing tackle role. Evan Brown, Greco, and Halapio could compete for the starting center role.
RE: Fix the OL and Eli will play effectively  
JFIB : 10/10/2018 11:14 am : link
In comment 14117442 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
into his 40s, at least another 3-4 years if he cares to, imo. Thereís nothing wrong with him physically and heís got great tools to work with. Then thereís Lauletta whom Shurmur might be quite high on..

OL, OL, OL!


While no one will argue that the OL needs some serious upgrades, If we are drafting in the top 10 I want to see this team draft the QB of the future even if it means a costly trade up. In my opinion Eli should not be this teams QB in his 40's.
RE: RE: Fix the OL and Eli will play effectively  
Big Blue '56 : 10/10/2018 11:18 am : link
In comment 14117498 JFIB said:
Quote:
In comment 14117442 Big Blue '56 said:


Quote:


into his 40s, at least another 3-4 years if he cares to, imo. Thereís nothing wrong with him physically and heís got great tools to work with. Then thereís Lauletta whom Shurmur might be quite high on..

OL, OL, OL!



While no one will argue that the OL needs some serious upgrades, If we are drafting in the top 10 I want to see this team draft the QB of the future even if it means a costly trade up. In my opinion Eli should not be this teams QB in his 40's.


If there is a franchiser available, sure
RE: Fix the OL and Eli will play effectively  
LawrenceTaylor56 : 10/10/2018 11:23 am : link
In comment 14117442 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
into his 40s, at least another 3-4 years if he cares to, imo. Thereís nothing wrong with him physically and heís got great tools to work with. Then thereís Lauletta whom Shurmur might be quite high on..

OL, OL, OL!


Yikes. Do you see some of throws Eli is missing where he does have time? And you're saying you want him around for 4 more years? I know you're pretty optimistic and even keeled around here, but oh man do we disagree. I do however, hope you're right. I just don't think that's the case.
Curious what Baltimore is thinking  
fanofthejets : 10/10/2018 11:40 am : link
You have average Joe and Lamar Jackson. Jackson I don't think will ever be an NFL starter. Flacco is kind of middling. I don't think their QB of the future is on that roster right now
RE: RE: Fix the OL and Eli will play effectively  
Big Blue '56 : 10/10/2018 11:50 am : link
In comment 14117507 LawrenceTaylor56 said:
Quote:
In comment 14117442 Big Blue '56 said:


Quote:


into his 40s, at least another 3-4 years if he cares to, imo. Thereís nothing wrong with him physically and heís got great tools to work with. Then thereís Lauletta whom Shurmur might be quite high on..

OL, OL, OL!



Yikes. Do you see some of throws Eli is missing where he does have time? And you're saying you want him around for 4 more years? I know you're pretty optimistic and even keeled around here, but oh man do we disagree. I do however, hope you're right. I just don't think that's the case.


Give him time to get on the same page with his receivers in this new O. This is is 3rd OC. Even Rodgers has had McCarthy his entire career.

Heís always missed makea le throws. In watching the coachís tape on Game Pass, he doesnít look all that different to me. His Ol is improving, but until he has full confidence in them, his timing could be affected.

Many will agree with you. I donít at this point in time. 😎
ma ele=makeable  
Big Blue '56 : 10/10/2018 11:51 am : link
.
RE: Fix the OL and Eli will play effectively  
Blue21 : 10/10/2018 12:03 pm : link
In comment 14117442 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
into his 40s, at least another 3-4 years if he cares to, imo. Thereís nothing wrong with him physically and heís got great tools to work with. Then thereís Lauletta whom Shurmur might be quite high on..

OL, OL, OL!


Gotta say I think this may be true although Eli drives me crazy with the pics and lack of mobility. Give him solid protection things could be different and Shurmur and Gettlemen will stick with him with Lauletta waiting in the wings. OL,OL,OL is where they'll concentrate as Doc said.
RE: RE: You can add the geriatric crowd  
eli4life : 10/10/2018 12:08 pm : link
In comment 14117421 dep026 said:
Quote:
In comment 14117416 Chip said:


Quote:


New Orleans Pittsburgh and New England



New Orleans didnt trade for Bridgewater to let him go after this year. And Payton is ENAMORED with Hill as well.


They wonít be able to keep him. They canít pay him starter money plus he WILL go where he has a legit chance to get the starting job in 19
Mariota's had some bad coaching and a poor supporting cast  
Go Terps : 10/10/2018 12:10 pm : link
I'm not an enormous fan of his, but I like his mobility and ability to extend plays. At a sub-franchise QB contract he could make sense in this offense. Put him in a backfield with Barkley and we have a lot of options that we don't currently have.
RE: Mariota's had some bad coaching and a poor supporting cast  
dep026 : 10/10/2018 12:13 pm : link
In comment 14117595 Go Terps said:
Quote:
I'm not an enormous fan of his, but I like his mobility and ability to extend plays. At a sub-franchise QB contract he could make sense in this offense. Put him in a backfield with Barkley and we have a lot of options that we don't currently have.


Underperforming is 1 thing.
Constantly hurt AND underperforming is another.
Yeah, I feel the same way about Mariota.  
bceagle05 : 10/10/2018 12:13 pm : link
Don't love him, but you could win with him. Change of scenery would probably do him good, especially if it comes with Beckham and Barkley.
if you think Eli  
larryinnewhaven : 10/10/2018 12:29 pm : link
makes bad throws and decisions Marriotta will not be your cup of tes.
RE: Mariota's had some bad coaching and a poor supporting cast  
giants#1 : 10/10/2018 12:36 pm : link
In comment 14117595 Go Terps said:
Quote:
I'm not an enormous fan of his, but I like his mobility and ability to extend plays. At a sub-franchise QB contract he could make sense in this offense. Put him in a backfield with Barkley and we have a lot of options that we don't currently have.


Well a "franchise QB contract" is now >$25M. So you would pay Mariota $20M per (e.g. Bortles)?
BB'56  
fkap : 10/10/2018 12:37 pm : link
I'm sorta with you on Eli. If we can provide him with protection (which we'll need to do for any QB we field), and IF he can regain his confidence, he is a QB we can win with for a couple of years. Not the greatest, but we would NOT have to be desperate for a QB.
RE: RE: Mariota's had some bad coaching and a poor supporting cast  
Go Terps : 10/10/2018 12:40 pm : link
In comment 14117628 giants#1 said:
Quote:
In comment 14117595 Go Terps said:


Quote:


I'm not an enormous fan of his, but I like his mobility and ability to extend plays. At a sub-franchise QB contract he could make sense in this offense. Put him in a backfield with Barkley and we have a lot of options that we don't currently have.



Well a "franchise QB contract" is now >$25M. So you would pay Mariota $20M per (e.g. Bortles)?


I would not. If he wants a "trying to resurrect my career" $10M per, I'd be fine with that. But before giving him a big contract I'd just draft a mobile rookie.
Figure out who the QB Whisperer thinks he can rebuild. He will be the  
Ivan15 : 10/10/2018 12:43 pm : link
next starting QB, if they donít take a shot at the 2019 draft, or maybe even if they do.
so basically you would only sign him  
giants#1 : 10/10/2018 12:48 pm : link
for a well below market value deal. Brilliant!

Recent QB deals:
Bradford: $20M per (still swindling teams!)
Keenum: $18M per for 2 years
Bortles: $18M per for 3 years (up to $66M with incentives)
Foles: >$15M per for 2 years
Josh KcCown: $10M
Tyrod Taylor: $16M
Bridgewater: $6M after playing 1 game in 2 years

And you somehow think you could get Mariota for only $10M?
RE: so basically you would only sign him  
Go Terps : 10/10/2018 1:09 pm : link
In comment 14117649 giants#1 said:
Quote:
for a well below market value deal. Brilliant!

Recent QB deals:
Bradford: $20M per (still swindling teams!)
Keenum: $18M per for 2 years
Bortles: $18M per for 3 years (up to $66M with incentives)
Foles: >$15M per for 2 years
Josh KcCown: $10M
Tyrod Taylor: $16M
Bridgewater: $6M after playing 1 game in 2 years

And you somehow think you could get Mariota for only $10M?


Yeah, I would. With the exception of the Bridgewater deal those are all bad contracts. Why would we repeat those mistakes?
not sure I follow  
giants#1 : 10/10/2018 1:17 pm : link
Every team would take Mariota for $10M. That's the flaw in your plan...you're not going to get him for anything close to that.

And I agree that all those QBs are (massively) overpaid.

Especially Bortles. Jags would've been better off gambling on Bridgewater while either beefing up their D (e.g. Butler, Sherman, Poe, Johnson, etc) or adding more talent to the OL or skill areas.

That and the Bradford deal (WTF do teams keep paying him?)
Then I wouldn't be interested in signing him  
Go Terps : 10/10/2018 1:20 pm : link
Part of our problem is this feeling that we have to overpay free agents. A good manager is going to be willing to say, "no thanks" and explore other options.

Overpaying to keep up with the market is how we ended up paying guys like Vernon much more than they actually are worth.
if you're 'keeping up with the market'  
giants#1 : 10/10/2018 1:26 pm : link
then you're not 'overpaying'.

So your plan is basically to have only players on rookie deals or those willing to take below market deals (i.e. typically players on the decline)?
RE: if you're 'keeping up with the market'  
Go Terps : 10/10/2018 1:35 pm : link
In comment 14117695 giants#1 said:
Quote:
then you're not 'overpaying'.

So your plan is basically to have only players on rookie deals or those willing to take below market deals (i.e. typically players on the decline)?


And pay those guys that come available AND are top players. For example, I would have strongly considered pursuing a trade for Mack (and paying him with what was essentially the money we gave Beckham). And I really advocated for acquiring Bridgewater in the offseason. Great, great value.

The market is out of whack, and many of the guys getting paid what they are in FA aren't worth it. A+ money for B players.
players of Mack's ability don't become available  
giants#1 : 10/10/2018 1:42 pm : link
Unless you mean trading 2 first round picks and $23M for him. Where are you going to get all this young, cost-controlled talent from, which is central to your plan, if you trade multiple first round picks away?

Btw, that's ~30% more per season than Beckham is earning.
It s hard to agree with a POV  
joeinpa : 10/10/2018 1:47 pm : link
Stating Giants should go forward with Eli for 3 or 4 more years.

I get he deserves this season and probably next. But chasing past glory is no way to build a franchise.

When you see athletic plays being made all around be the league from young mobile quarterbacks, how can anyone believe that Giants are best served with Eli into his 40 s?
RE: players of Mack's ability don't become available  
Go Terps : 10/10/2018 1:49 pm : link
In comment 14117719 giants#1 said:
Quote:
Unless you mean trading 2 first round picks and $23M for him. Where are you going to get all this young, cost-controlled talent from, which is central to your plan, if you trade multiple first round picks away?

Btw, that's ~30% more per season than Beckham is earning.


Mack is a better player than Beckham at a more important position - worth the 30%. The cost of acquiring Mack could have been offset by trading Beckham.

The critical part of my plan would be not paying the inflated franchise QB price. Mack is enormously paid because he's one of the best players in the league. He's still paid less than non-elite players that get the inflated QB premium: Garoppolo, Stafford, Carr, Flacco, Cousins all make more than Mack.

Paying Mack $23M is good. Paying Stafford $26M is not.
RE: RE: if you're 'keeping up with the market'  
chopperhatch : 10/10/2018 2:15 pm : link
In comment 14117710 Go Terps said:
Quote:
In comment 14117695 giants#1 said:


Quote:


then you're not 'overpaying'.

So your plan is basically to have only players on rookie deals or those willing to take below market deals (i.e. typically players on the decline)?



And pay those guys that come available AND are top players. For example, I would have strongly considered pursuing a trade for Mack (and paying him with what was essentially the money we gave Beckham). And I really advocated for acquiring Bridgewater in the offseason. Great, great value.

The market is out of whack, and many of the guys getting paid what they are in FA aren't worth it. A+ money for B players.


The Bridgewater thing I would have totally been on board with. But I also think if you do that, you have to pay Odell. Odell is "quietly" having a pretty damn good season and we don't know what Bridgewater is yet since the injury.
RE: Fix the OL and Eli will play effectively  
family progtitioner : 10/10/2018 2:24 pm : link
In comment 14117442 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
into his 40s, at least another 3-4 years if he cares to, imo. Thereís nothing wrong with him physically and heís got great tools to work with. Then thereís Lauletta whom Shurmur might be quite high on..



Oh please no.
problem with the Bridgewater deal  
giants#1 : 10/10/2018 2:25 pm : link
is that its a 1 year deal. Even assuming we didn't have Eli, best case scenario has him immediately returning to his 2015 level which was good, but not elite. So unless everything else went right and you managed to win it all, you'd be back looking for another QB or faced with paying Bridgewater >$20M.
RE: It s hard to agree with a POV  
Big Blue '56 : 10/10/2018 2:46 pm : link
In comment 14117728 joeinpa said:
Quote:
Stating Giants should go forward with Eli for 3 or 4 more years.

I get he deserves this season and probably next. But chasing past glory is no way to build a franchise.

When you see athletic plays being made all around be the league from young mobile quarterbacks, how can anyone believe that Giants are best served with Eli into his 40 s?


Joe, if he falls off a cliff after next season, then sure, he would need to retire. I donít bother with the age of athletes like I used to, as they are, generally speaking, in much better shape. I see Eli as being physically sound, with a still quite viable arm to go with his smarts. I donít concern myself with his age per se
RE: RE: players of Mack's ability don't become available  
RobCarpenter : 10/10/2018 2:52 pm : link
In comment 14117733 Go Terps said:
Quote:
In comment 14117719 giants#1 said:


Quote:


Unless you mean trading 2 first round picks and $23M for him. Where are you going to get all this young, cost-controlled talent from, which is central to your plan, if you trade multiple first round picks away?

Btw, that's ~30% more per season than Beckham is earning.

Mack is a better player than Beckham at a more important position - worth the 30%. The cost of acquiring Mack could have been offset by trading Beckham.

The critical part of my plan would be not paying the inflated franchise QB price. Mack is enormously paid because he's one of the best players in the league. He's still paid less than non-elite players that get the inflated QB premium: Garoppolo, Stafford, Carr, Flacco, Cousins all make more than Mack.

Paying Mack $23M is good. Paying Stafford $26M is not.


I get that you don't like OBJ, but I don't get how you can assert that Mack is better than OBJ at his position. Both Mack and OBJ are among the top 5 in the NFL at their position.

The Giants had terrible drafts for years, and it will take time to rebuild through the draft. That includes OL and players that can rush the passer. Chase Winovich would be a nice addition at the OLB spot, though I'm not sure what his draft projection would be.

Im with Terps on those QBs - None  
AcesUp : 10/10/2018 3:11 pm : link
They don't bring much more to the table than the guys on the scrap heap...they just come at 5-10X the cost. Ryan Fitzpatrick is making 3.3M this year, do you see a whole lot separating him from the guys on that list? This new trend of paying journeymen starters/borderline backups 20M/yr is so dumb. Use the cap resources to help your talent-dependant QB perform because every QB on that list is extremely dependant on the talent around him.
Rob  
Go Terps : 10/10/2018 3:11 pm : link
I can make that assertion because I've watched them both play. Mack destroys games and has helped change the culture of the Bears almost immediately. That team is 3-1 (and an Aaron Rodgers miracle away from 4-0) despite some pretty poor QB play. He has changed that team into a playoff contender. Shifted the culture. He's a winning player.

We're 1-4 and Beckham's giving interviews knocking his QB and the weather in NY while sitting next to a shitty rapper that "still fucks with Eli".

Not in the same class.
Since Mack vs. Beckham has been brought up...  
Mr. Bungle : 10/10/2018 4:52 pm : link
...here were the Raiders' records with Mack on the roster:

3-13
7-9
12-4 (one-and-done in the playoffs)
6-10

Here were the Giants' records with Beckham on the roster:

6-10
6-10
11-5 (one-and-done in the playoffs)
3-13

For all intents and purposes, the same. But Mack is a winner (at a more important position), and Beckham is a loser. Got it.
How it works...  
Dan in the Springs : 10/10/2018 4:59 pm : link
it only takes one team to fall in love with a prospect, especially a QB, for him to go early. Teams will move up for a prospect they love.

For example, teams like Tampa or Tenn may be okay with giving a guy like Winston or Mariota even if they fall in love with someone like Herbert. However, if Herbert falls within their range they can easily still move up to grab him.

So to analyze who might be in the market you need to assess how far would a team be willing to move for their QB.

If the NYG love a QB enough, I could see them giving up several picks to get one, just like they did with Eli. They won't have to have the first overall, they just have to be close enough and in love enough to be willing to do it.

I don't think Herbert gets out of the top five, but it is early still. Who knows.

The NYG might still make the playoffs this year given the division. #1 is also not out of the question.

This conversation will be a lot more interesting after the draft order is established.
RE: Mariota's had some bad coaching and a poor supporting cast  
Dan in the Springs : 10/10/2018 5:03 pm : link
In comment 14117595 Go Terps said:
Quote:
I'm not an enormous fan of his, but I like his mobility and ability to extend plays. At a sub-franchise QB contract he could make sense in this offense. Put him in a backfield with Barkley and we have a lot of options that we don't currently have.


I agree with this take - if he ends up on the scrap heap he seems exactly like the type of player that Shurmur could do something with.

And as valuable as a #1 pick is, a cheap vet QB who is coached up properly can be more valuable than a #1 pick who needs a couple years of coaching to get to (hopefully) the level of a franchise QB.

Another way of saying that is that whoever we might be looking at could possibly be the next Mariota. Is it better to take him high, or to sign him in FA to a reasonable contract?
RE: Rob  
RobCarpenter : 10/10/2018 5:15 pm : link
In comment 14117875 Go Terps said:
Quote:
I can make that assertion because I've watched them both play. Mack destroys games and has helped change the culture of the Bears almost immediately. That team is 3-1 (and an Aaron Rodgers miracle away from 4-0) despite some pretty poor QB play. He has changed that team into a playoff contender. Shifted the culture. He's a winning player.

We're 1-4 and Beckham's giving interviews knocking his QB and the weather in NY while sitting next to a shitty rapper that "still fucks with Eli".

Not in the same class.


Mack was joining a team with a stacked defense. Yes he's great but that D was already stout.

OBJ is the fifth leading receiver in the NFL on a team that couldn't draft OL for years.

Not saying Mack isn't a great player but OBJ is a great player as well. And in my opinion trading two first round picks is too high a price for anyone. Especially for a team like the Giants that badly needs young talent on the OL.
It takes a lot of luck to get a top pick  
Jerry in DC : 10/10/2018 5:16 pm : link
Last year that luck broke out way. This year we might squeeze out a few wins a put us out of range of the QBs, who are rated far lower than the guys from last year.

Then maybe Donuts Dave will fall in love with a run stuffing middle linebacker who reminds him of Dick Butkus and tell us that running the ball and stopping the run are the most important parts of the game.

And the homers will tell us how you can't pass on that talent. And we will be slightly better at stopping the run. And our quarterback will continue to either check down or fall down on every snap. And despite our skill position talent, our offense will remain inept. And maybe we'll get lucky and get another high pick the following year. And maybe draft a qb who will take a year or two to develop. And our LT will be old and we'll have wasted more years of our skill players primes....
RE: RE: Fix the OL and Eli will play effectively  
Diver_Down : 10/10/2018 5:17 pm : link
In comment 14117498 JFIB said:
Quote:
In comment 14117442 Big Blue '56 said:


Quote:


into his 40s, at least another 3-4 years if he cares to, imo. Thereís nothing wrong with him physically and heís got great tools to work with. Then thereís Lauletta whom Shurmur might be quite high on..

OL, OL, OL!



While no one will argue that the OL needs some serious upgrades, If we are drafting in the top 10 I want to see this team draft the QB of the future even if it means a costly trade up. In my opinion Eli should not be this teams QB in his 40's.


If we are in the top 10, Jonas Williams. If we are top 5, Nick Bosa.
OL  
Foobarbaz : 10/10/2018 6:33 pm : link
Id hate to say it but looks like we're stuck with Eli another year or so, unless Geno is still available. Stack up on OL for rounds 1-3 we need Center guards and tackles.

This is going to mess up our draft pick though and make it harder in the future to get a QB
RE: RE: Mariota's had some bad coaching and a poor supporting cast  
FStubbs : 10/10/2018 7:51 pm : link
In comment 14118036 Dan in the Springs said:
Quote:
In comment 14117595 Go Terps said:


Quote:


I'm not an enormous fan of his, but I like his mobility and ability to extend plays. At a sub-franchise QB contract he could make sense in this offense. Put him in a backfield with Barkley and we have a lot of options that we don't currently have.



I agree with this take - if he ends up on the scrap heap he seems exactly like the type of player that Shurmur could do something with.

And as valuable as a #1 pick is, a cheap vet QB who is coached up properly can be more valuable than a #1 pick who needs a couple years of coaching to get to (hopefully) the level of a franchise QB.

Another way of saying that is that whoever we might be looking at could possibly be the next Mariota. Is it better to take him high, or to sign him in FA to a reasonable contract?


This - we could easily end up with a Mariota at QB and save cash. Mariota isn't a bad QB. He isn't great either though.
RE: Mariota's had some bad coaching and a poor supporting cast  
djm : 10/10/2018 10:18 pm : link
In comment 14117595 Go Terps said:
Quote:
I'm not an enormous fan of his, but I like his mobility and ability to extend plays. At a sub-franchise QB contract he could make sense in this offense. Put him in a backfield with Barkley and we have a lot of options that we don't currently have.


I like Mariota and itís not true that heís done nothing for two years. Guy won a playoff game in KC last season. He hasnít been proflifc but heís been a professional and heís got upside.

But wherever he goes he will get paid a massive contract. Heís an nfl starting Qb.
Pages: 1 2 <<Prev | Show All |
Back to the Corner