This is right after the Raiders signed him last offseason. I'd have to imagine Garoppolo will be cut after the season to prevent any more guaranteed money to kick in, but they'll absorb nearly a $29M dead cap hit in 2024.
I'm really starting to think it is never worth it to give out 2nd tier QB contracts. It's too hard to build a perfect roster around a QB that can't elevate players around him. Either you can (and earn big money) or you can't and you are better being lean financially at the position. If you are in between, that feels like QB hell in 2023.
Link - (
New Window )
Our defense is getting better.
Jones looks to be back.
OL is getting healthy.
If we rattle 4-5 wins to end the season, our QB dilemma gets even more murky.
I am positive that we are not the only two who have had this thought go through our minds this morning, lol
liter of cola.
lol thats awesome. Good on him.
Interesting point. I didn't consider that.
If true, however, it makes you wonder why they didn't sell Adams yesterday.
Back to JimG. He's hit the wall. And he's done.
Nah, this is a time where an L is beneficial, so Jones will play well enough and Wink's defense will feast
I hope the Giants beat on him as if he said "Shenanigans".
Our defense is getting better.
Don't worry, thats why we traded Williams.
On a different note, good luck to the "promising" O'Connell, not only is his HC gone, they also canned the OC.
Quote:
the whole firing was over whether to bench Jimmy G. The Raiders are tanking.
Interesting point. I didn't consider that.
If true, however, it makes you wonder why they didn't sell Adams yesterday.
Back to JimG. He's hit the wall. And he's done.
Either Mark Davis was livid that Zeigler and McDaniels made him get rid of Carr for Garapollo and just fired these guys for that error, or he wanted to bench Garapollo and tank and those guys were not on board. Either one I think is plausible, but I am sure we will learn soon enough. A 10pm firing has the signs of an all day power struggle after the loss the night before.
Back to JimG. He's hit the wall. And he's done.
Not that he was as impactful, but his career reminds me of Victor Cruz. Once you get one of them - they just halt your career.
Our defense is getting better.
Jones looks to be back.
OL is getting healthy.
If we rattle 4-5 wins to end the season, our QB dilemma gets even more murky.
I don't root for losses. Can't do it. Let the chips fall where they may. Draft is a crapshoot anyways.
Quote:
isnt good for the Giants.
Our defense is getting better.
Jones looks to be back.
OL is getting healthy.
If we rattle 4-5 wins to end the season, our QB dilemma gets even more murky.
I don't root for losses. Can't do it. Let the chips fall where they may. Draft is a crapshoot anyways.
+ Eleventy Billion.
Players only really contribute to the tank when they start making business decisions and not wanting to risk injury.
A team has to be really bad to not win by mistake.
So, I wear my Pierce jersey and my Purdue had.
Got it.
Link - ( New Window )
Quote:
isnt good for the Giants.
Our defense is getting better.
Jones looks to be back.
OL is getting healthy.
If we rattle 4-5 wins to end the season, our QB dilemma gets even more murky.
I don't root for losses. Can't do it. Let the chips fall where they may. Draft is a crapshoot anyways.
Well stated. That’s my stance, as well.
Quote:
isnt good for the Giants.
Our defense is getting better.
Jones looks to be back.
OL is getting healthy.
If we rattle 4-5 wins to end the season, our QB dilemma gets even more murky.
I don't root for losses. Can't do it. Let the chips fall where they may. Draft is a crapshoot anyways.
I don't root for losses either, it is just hard to get jazzed up about a win at 2-6 against a fourth round rookie QB
100%
Quote:
isnt good for the Giants.
Our defense is getting better.
Jones looks to be back.
OL is getting healthy.
If we rattle 4-5 wins to end the season, our QB dilemma gets even more murky.
I don't root for losses. Can't do it. Let the chips fall where they may. Draft is a crapshoot anyways.
Yup. We're 2 games out of the last wild card spot with nine games to go! Win.
"I'm really starting to think it is never worth it to give out 2nd tier QB contracts"
Just starting?
I consider it obvious. You need enormous luck to hit on all the picks you need to get all those systems (OL, DL, CB, Skill) near elite. The 49ers did it and they still haven't won a title.
You have a much greater chance on hitting on an elite QB, than you do hitting on a supreme roster. Throwing big money at a mid tier QB is a moronic move with low probability at real success.
If the Giants have a game I am rooting desperately for them to win in and am pissed if they lose (The Jets loss was brutal this weekend). But by Tuesday, I have convinced myself that a loss was better for the team long term anyways.
It may be a coping mechanism built over the last 10 years of largely meaningless games, but it helps.
Funny. I went to college with Kevin Heffernan and the Broken Lizard crew. They are all good people. They made Super Troopers with money they borrowed from one of their GFs dads. Crazy how it worked out.
"I'm really starting to think it is never worth it to give out 2nd tier QB contracts"
Just starting?
I consider it obvious. You need enormous luck to hit on all the picks you need to get all those systems (OL, DL, CB, Skill) near elite. The 49ers did it and they still haven't won a title.
You have a much greater chance on hitting on an elite QB, than you do hitting on a supreme roster. Throwing big money at a mid tier QB is a moronic move with low probability at real success.
I think the more accurate way to phrase it is you have a greater chance of winning a super bowl with an elite QB than with a supreme roster, the latter of which is obtainable especially if the owner/gm/head coach structure is solid.
If elite QB is say top 5, then that's about 15% of the league's QB. If we go with those 5 right now being Mahomes, Burrow, Allen, Herbert, and let's say Lawrence (with Rodgers being a carry over), then of those, only one has won it, one came very close, the other is likely to do it if things align. I don't feel Lamar Jackson or Jalen Hurts are elite QBs, but likely good enough on the teams they play with.....maybe.
So what winds up happening is of the small group of elite QBs, only a handful of them win it all.
Now that the old guard of Peyton/Brady/Brees/Eli/Big Ben/Rodgers (?) is gone, we'll start to see how this all plays out, but my guess is it's about the same as it always was.
Stafford won the SB IMO on a hybrid team......a bit better built than the norm, but not your typical SF/PHI powerhouses of late. They had some elite stars in a few key positions, Staley coordinating the #1 defense somehow, and quite a bit of luck to beat SF and Cincy, if I may say so.
The amount of luck it takes to get an elite QB is crazy. KC got really lucky, bc no sure shot QB lasts to #10. Buffalo looked like Allen was a bust. Chargers got lucky Herbert was underrated. Bengals had great timing to be #1 overall pick. Jags also good timing.
It's all luck.
The next strategy is to be able to build a stacked team and win it all with say a top 10-12 QB, because those guys can be realistically obtained if you desire. But still it's an uphill battle.
For those who watched the old NFL and new, luck is so big a part of the modern game, it feels like predicting World Cup soccer winners than anything else.
Quote:
Given our history vs. backups, we’ll make O’Connell look Canton bound.
Nah, this is a time where an L is beneficial, so Jones will play well enough and Wink's defense will feast
Exactly. Bet the ranch on NYG this sunday. Bet big. 19-0 final.
"I'm really starting to think it is never worth it to give out 2nd tier QB contracts"
Just starting?
I consider it obvious. You need enormous luck to hit on all the picks you need to get all those systems (OL, DL, CB, Skill) near elite. The 49ers did it and they still haven't won a title.
You have a much greater chance on hitting on an elite QB, than you do hitting on a supreme roster. Throwing big money at a mid tier QB is a moronic move with low probability at real success.
There's no exact science. You win titles with great teams. You can compete consistently with a great QB as long as the team around him is capable enough. That said, great teams don't necessarily need great prolific QBs at the helm. Also, if you have a good team and you punt away the good QB just because "good QBs can't win super bowls," you're ignoring history and about to get fired.
You try and do both in my view. And you never let a good QB walk unless you have a young QB on the roster you believe in. It's easy for Joe blow on the couch to espouse these theories that good QBs aren't worth fuck all. Be a GM then get back to me.
Quote:
"I'm really starting to think it is never worth it to give out 2nd tier QB contracts"
Just starting?
I consider it obvious. You need enormous luck to hit on all the picks you need to get all those systems (OL, DL, CB, Skill) near elite. The 49ers did it and they still haven't won a title.
You have a much greater chance on hitting on an elite QB, than you do hitting on a supreme roster. Throwing big money at a mid tier QB is a moronic move with low probability at real success.
I think the more accurate way to phrase it is you have a greater chance of winning a super bowl with an elite QB than with a supreme roster, the latter of which is obtainable especially if the owner/gm/head coach structure is solid.
If elite QB is say top 5, then that's about 15% of the league's QB. If we go with those 5 right now being Mahomes, Burrow, Allen, Herbert, and let's say Lawrence (with Rodgers being a carry over), then of those, only one has won it, one came very close, the other is likely to do it if things align. I don't feel Lamar Jackson or Jalen Hurts are elite QBs, but likely good enough on the teams they play with.....maybe.
So what winds up happening is of the small group of elite QBs, only a handful of them win it all.
Now that the old guard of Peyton/Brady/Brees/Eli/Big Ben/Rodgers (?) is gone, we'll start to see how this all plays out, but my guess is it's about the same as it always was.
Stafford won the SB IMO on a hybrid team......a bit better built than the norm, but not your typical SF/PHI powerhouses of late. They had some elite stars in a few key positions, Staley coordinating the #1 defense somehow, and quite a bit of luck to beat SF and Cincy, if I may say so.
The amount of luck it takes to get an elite QB is crazy. KC got really lucky, bc no sure shot QB lasts to #10. Buffalo looked like Allen was a bust. Chargers got lucky Herbert was underrated. Bengals had great timing to be #1 overall pick. Jags also good timing.
It's all luck.
The next strategy is to be able to build a stacked team and win it all with say a top 10-12 QB, because those guys can be realistically obtained if you desire. But still it's an uphill battle.
For those who watched the old NFL and new, luck is so big a part of the modern game, it feels like predicting World Cup soccer winners than anything else.
Fair post. I would add, however, that trying to build the supreme roster that can carry a pretty-good-not-great QB is also more difficult than the inverse because you have to keep it up for a much longer period of time to sustain a championship window. If you build a champion (or even a strong contender), you're going to lose players to FA, you're going to lose assistants to HC jobs, you're going to lose execs to GM jobs. You will face attrition all over the roster.
The same is also true with the supreme QB model, but it matters less, because you're never letting that QB out of your hands until you decide that it's time to punch the reset button. Getting the next Peyton Manning gives you a decade (or more) of championship opportunity. Building the roster that can carry Trent Dilfer (or Carson Wentz/Nick Foles) gives you a few years, and you have to be so much better at backfilling and executing mini-rebuilds along the way.
Said another way, you can win $1M on one lottery ticket, or you can win $1 on a million lottery tickets. By definition, both scenarios have the same ultimate outcome, and by design the single $1M ticket is exponentially less likely to occur than any individual $1 winning ticket. But the sheer volume of $1 winners that you'd need to hit on (and do it rapidly enough to have that roster come together around the same time) makes that path just as difficult as the singular $1M winner.
Quote:
"I'm really starting to think it is never worth it to give out 2nd tier QB contracts"
Just starting?
I consider it obvious. You need enormous luck to hit on all the picks you need to get all those systems (OL, DL, CB, Skill) near elite. The 49ers did it and they still haven't won a title.
You have a much greater chance on hitting on an elite QB, than you do hitting on a supreme roster. Throwing big money at a mid tier QB is a moronic move with low probability at real success.
I think the more accurate way to phrase it is you have a greater chance of winning a super bowl with an elite QB than with a supreme roster, the latter of which is obtainable especially if the owner/gm/head coach structure is solid.
If elite QB is say top 5, then that's about 15% of the league's QB. If we go with those 5 right now being Mahomes, Burrow, Allen, Herbert, and let's say Lawrence (with Rodgers being a carry over), then of those, only one has won it, one came very close, the other is likely to do it if things align. I don't feel Lamar Jackson or Jalen Hurts are elite QBs, but likely good enough on the teams they play with.....maybe.
So what winds up happening is of the small group of elite QBs, only a handful of them win it all.
Now that the old guard of Peyton/Brady/Brees/Eli/Big Ben/Rodgers (?) is gone, we'll start to see how this all plays out, but my guess is it's about the same as it always was.
Stafford won the SB IMO on a hybrid team......a bit better built than the norm, but not your typical SF/PHI powerhouses of late. They had some elite stars in a few key positions, Staley coordinating the #1 defense somehow, and quite a bit of luck to beat SF and Cincy, if I may say so.
The amount of luck it takes to get an elite QB is crazy. KC got really lucky, bc no sure shot QB lasts to #10. Buffalo looked like Allen was a bust. Chargers got lucky Herbert was underrated. Bengals had great timing to be #1 overall pick. Jags also good timing.
It's all luck.
The next strategy is to be able to build a stacked team and win it all with say a top 10-12 QB, because those guys can be realistically obtained if you desire. But still it's an uphill battle.
For those who watched the old NFL and new, luck is so big a part of the modern game, it feels like predicting World Cup soccer winners than anything else.
That's a solid post NINEster
I'm wondering if this is an active tank job now. Has to be.
Quote:
"I'm really starting to think it is never worth it to give out 2nd tier QB contracts"
Just starting?
I consider it obvious. You need enormous luck to hit on all the picks you need to get all those systems (OL, DL, CB, Skill) near elite. The 49ers did it and they still haven't won a title.
You have a much greater chance on hitting on an elite QB, than you do hitting on a supreme roster. Throwing big money at a mid tier QB is a moronic move with low probability at real success.
I think the more accurate way to phrase it is you have a greater chance of winning a super bowl with an elite QB than with a supreme roster, the latter of which is obtainable especially if the owner/gm/head coach structure is solid.
If elite QB is say top 5, then that's about 15% of the league's QB. If we go with those 5 right now being Mahomes, Burrow, Allen, Herbert, and let's say Lawrence (with Rodgers being a carry over), then of those, only one has won it, one came very close, the other is likely to do it if things align. I don't feel Lamar Jackson or Jalen Hurts are elite QBs, but likely good enough on the teams they play with.....maybe.
So what winds up happening is of the small group of elite QBs, only a handful of them win it all.
Now that the old guard of Peyton/Brady/Brees/Eli/Big Ben/Rodgers (?) is gone, we'll start to see how this all plays out, but my guess is it's about the same as it always was.
Stafford won the SB IMO on a hybrid team......a bit better built than the norm, but not your typical SF/PHI powerhouses of late. They had some elite stars in a few key positions, Staley coordinating the #1 defense somehow, and quite a bit of luck to beat SF and Cincy, if I may say so.
The amount of luck it takes to get an elite QB is crazy. KC got really lucky, bc no sure shot QB lasts to #10. Buffalo looked like Allen was a bust. Chargers got lucky Herbert was underrated. Bengals had great timing to be #1 overall pick. Jags also good timing.
It's all luck.
The next strategy is to be able to build a stacked team and win it all with say a top 10-12 QB, because those guys can be realistically obtained if you desire. But still it's an uphill battle.
For those who watched the old NFL and new, luck is so big a part of the modern game, it feels like predicting World Cup soccer winners than anything else.
Easy for someone to say draft a QB when you are not the one being help accountable.
Timing and having the right QB's available in that draft is often how it happens.
Build you team (focus on the fronts), win games and sometimes things just fall your way. 2003 was terrible year leading to Eli.
If have GM/HC thinks he can only win with a elite Qb then get another GM/HC imv.
I am saying: In pursuit of a championship team you are more likely to get there by chasing and obtaining an elite QB (via draft/trade/FA) as opposed to planning a supreme roster around a middling QB.
You are saying: once you have an elite QB you stand a better chance of winning a Super Bowl as opposed to the team who has already achieved a supreme roster.
These are very different points. My point is about strategy and how to pursue roster construction. Your point may be true too, but it is more of an academic debate.
I also disagree about there being only 5 QBs who we might consider elite. Maybe "elite" is a poor word. I think that at any time there are more than 5 and less than 10 Super Bowl quality QBs, so I usually settle on 8. And yes I would include Hurts and Lamar in that class.
I also strongly disagree that there is any more luck today than in past eras. The great teams and great QBs are always in the hunt, that's not luck. And I've been watching football for a long time.
Many thanks for the thoughtful reply.
Um, yeah, no shit.
Quote:
In comment 16270385 JT039 said:
Quote:
isnt good for the Giants.
Our defense is getting better.
Jones looks to be back.
OL is getting healthy.
If we rattle 4-5 wins to end the season, our QB dilemma gets even more murky.
I don't root for losses. Can't do it. Let the chips fall where they may. Draft is a crapshoot anyways.
Well stated. That’s my stance, as well.
The Commanders tanked a few years back for Chase Young. How did that work out for them?
"I'm really starting to think it is never worth it to give out 2nd tier QB contracts"
Just starting?
I consider it obvious. You need enormous luck to hit on all the picks you need to get all those systems (OL, DL, CB, Skill) near elite. The 49ers did it and they still haven't won a title.
You have a much greater chance on hitting on an elite QB, than you do hitting on a supreme roster. Throwing big money at a mid tier QB is a moronic move with low probability at real success.
If there are 6 elite QBs in the league and you don't give contracts to players below them, what are the other 26 teams supposed to do?
I am saying: In pursuit of a championship team you are more likely to get there by chasing and obtaining an elite QB (via draft/trade/FA) as opposed to planning a supreme roster around a middling QB.
You are saying: once you have an elite QB you stand a better chance of winning a Super Bowl as opposed to the team who has already achieved a supreme roster.
These are very different points. My point is about strategy and how to pursue roster construction. Your point may be true too, but it is more of an academic debate.
I also disagree about there being only 5 QBs who we might consider elite. Maybe "elite" is a poor word. I think that at any time there are more than 5 and less than 10 Super Bowl quality QBs, so I usually settle on 8. And yes I would include Hurts and Lamar in that class.
I also strongly disagree that there is any more luck today than in past eras. The great teams and great QBs are always in the hunt, that's not luck. And I've been watching football for a long time.
Many thanks for the thoughtful reply.
Sure no problem, and thanks guys.
The luck part I still contend for actually winning the Super Bowl, not so much being a top team.
Injuries, penalties, can definitely play a role in who wins what these days.
There wasn't a penalty or injury that would've derailed the '86 Giants. Losing Simms didn't derail the '90 Giants.
You always got the sense in the old days, when you got beat, the other team was just better. Usually better on OL/DL, more physical, better defense, etc. And sometimes your team could be "better" but lose to an insane defense.
Now it's almost like at best you know who had the better QB, maybe better head coach. KC/Buffalo/Cincinnati playing each other could be seen as battle of actual teams, but versus anyone else, it's a battle of QBs. I think this year's Ravens' team could be the best "team" in the AFC, but if they don't play in the AFCC, what would be the reason?
It's a different game for sure for determining Super Bowl champion.
Quote:
In comment 16270470 jinkies said:
Quote:
"I'm really starting to think it is never worth it to give out 2nd tier QB contracts"
Just starting?
I consider it obvious. You need enormous luck to hit on all the picks you need to get all those systems (OL, DL, CB, Skill) near elite. The 49ers did it and they still haven't won a title.
You have a much greater chance on hitting on an elite QB, than you do hitting on a supreme roster. Throwing big money at a mid tier QB is a moronic move with low probability at real success.
I think the more accurate way to phrase it is you have a greater chance of winning a super bowl with an elite QB than with a supreme roster, the latter of which is obtainable especially if the owner/gm/head coach structure is solid.
If elite QB is say top 5, then that's about 15% of the league's QB. If we go with those 5 right now being Mahomes, Burrow, Allen, Herbert, and let's say Lawrence (with Rodgers being a carry over), then of those, only one has won it, one came very close, the other is likely to do it if things align. I don't feel Lamar Jackson or Jalen Hurts are elite QBs, but likely good enough on the teams they play with.....maybe.
So what winds up happening is of the small group of elite QBs, only a handful of them win it all.
Now that the old guard of Peyton/Brady/Brees/Eli/Big Ben/Rodgers (?) is gone, we'll start to see how this all plays out, but my guess is it's about the same as it always was.
Stafford won the SB IMO on a hybrid team......a bit better built than the norm, but not your typical SF/PHI powerhouses of late. They had some elite stars in a few key positions, Staley coordinating the #1 defense somehow, and quite a bit of luck to beat SF and Cincy, if I may say so.
The amount of luck it takes to get an elite QB is crazy. KC got really lucky, bc no sure shot QB lasts to #10. Buffalo looked like Allen was a bust. Chargers got lucky Herbert was underrated. Bengals had great timing to be #1 overall pick. Jags also good timing.
It's all luck.
The next strategy is to be able to build a stacked team and win it all with say a top 10-12 QB, because those guys can be realistically obtained if you desire. But still it's an uphill battle.
For those who watched the old NFL and new, luck is so big a part of the modern game, it feels like predicting World Cup soccer winners than anything else.
Fair post. I would add, however, that trying to build the supreme roster that can carry a pretty-good-not-great QB is also more difficult than the inverse because you have to keep it up for a much longer period of time to sustain a championship window. If you build a champion (or even a strong contender), you're going to lose players to FA, you're going to lose assistants to HC jobs, you're going to lose execs to GM jobs. You will face attrition all over the roster.
The same is also true with the supreme QB model, but it matters less, because you're never letting that QB out of your hands until you decide that it's time to punch the reset button. Getting the next Peyton Manning gives you a decade (or more) of championship opportunity. Building the roster that can carry Trent Dilfer (or Carson Wentz/Nick Foles) gives you a few years, and you have to be so much better at backfilling and executing mini-rebuilds along the way.
Said another way, you can win $1M on one lottery ticket, or you can win $1 on a million lottery tickets. By definition, both scenarios have the same ultimate outcome, and by design the single $1M ticket is exponentially less likely to occur than any individual $1 winning ticket. But the sheer volume of $1 winners that you'd need to hit on (and do it rapidly enough to have that roster come together around the same time) makes that path just as difficult as the singular $1M winner.
Very good post.
You described the Seattle Seahawk run with Wilson to a tee.
He sounds pretty impressive. I think the Raiders are going to play hard Sunday.
The key to everything is superior drafting. But 31 other groups of experts are choosing from the same pool of talent.
Haha. So we are already giving the $40M QB a pass for being unproductive before the game even starts? They score 6 points against a terrible team and your preemptive strike is that it’s not the QBs fault?
Holy shitballs.