skinsfan66

1 hour ago, Chris 44 said:

The problem with building a team first and getting your QB later is you will probably end up with a middish round pick and not have the chance to select the very best QBs available. Sure  you may find a QB in the draft in later rounds that will work out or you may sign a good vet. But that rookie contract for QB's is huge. if you sign a good vet QB your really going to pay out the nose which trickles down to signing other players that may have helped. Having a chance to draft a really top level QB does not happen often.

1 hour ago, MartinC said:

We’ve largely been the Jets for the last 30 years or so. 
 

Huge opportunity in front of us to take a swing at changing that.

Jet's took there swing and struck out with Wilson, just saying. Hope we have better luck.

1 minute ago, dunfer said:

Id rather throw sam or jacoby out there until i saw it was safe. we arent going to win a superbowl next year so why throw caution to the wind

Of course if he cannot beat out either you have no choice. But Brissett is not cheap and may move on still do not want another castoff coming in.

14 minutes ago, dunfer said:

this is just fan created housewives of dc ****. If another qb in the room is too much competition and makes your golden child uncomfortable, then wtf..if thats a situation youre ****ed

for the next decade instead of ruining him his rookie year by getting beat up behind a terrible line

 

Seems like everybody wants a backup option for the Blue Chipper. You pull the trigger, you got to go for it, no second thoughts. Why bring a vet in to hold your Blue Chipper's hand? All 3 Blue Chippers started last year.  I can see letting a 2nd tier QB maybe sit for a year.  

1 hour ago, ThatNFLChick said:

 

Thats my thought, his value will only go down from here and getting a 4th for a 5th round pick would be ideal. It is HIGHLY unlikely his value will increase and if we're not starting him we should get something for him. He only has 2 years left on his rookie contract so we're not saving that much. 

 

Also some Kirk stuff that may effect FA for everyone:

 

 

To the highest bidder like always. (Kirk)

1 hour ago, dunfer said:

yeah sitting a guy when your team and oline is **** isnt a bad thing

Why draft a blue chipper then? 

1 hour ago, DogofWar1 said:

 

I mean, in fairness, the teams picking 1-3 tend to not be very good and are drafting a QB out of desperate need.  It being the norm that QBs start year 1 doesn't make it the optimal choice.

 

Mahomes sat pretty much the first whole season, Jackson sat roughly half of one, Allen sat for like 5 games, Goff sat for half a season, Tua came in week 6.

 

Ultimately, you want them to come in ready, and not push them out the gate too early.  If Maye/Daniels are looking ready for prime time immediately, run em, but the CJ Stroud's of the world are pretty few and far between.

Mahomes and Jackson were not top 3, Second tier QB's. They were not blue chippers.  All 3 blue chippers from last year started. 1Good, 1Bad, 1Hurt.

49 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

well hopefully our oline improves between now and opening day, haha.

 

There's some solid OL talent out there this draft, wouldn't be surprised if we went OL on both our 2nds and got solid dudes.

There was even more talent last year. We got zero solid dudes.

1 hour ago, Warhead36 said:

I'd happily trade Howell for a 4th. We don't need two young developmental QBs and I don't like the Maye/Howell friendship dynamic. Could make things awkward in the meeting rooms.

Kind of like Kirk looking over Bob's shoulder.

1 hour ago, ThatNFLChick said:

 

Yeah absolutely nobody will give us a 2nd. 

 

So are you assuming Howell will start 8 games this season and the rookie sit behind him for half the season?

 

Howell only has 2 years left on his rookie contract and if he doesn't play this season his value drops to basically nothing. 

 You bring a Vet in or Brissett 10mil a year for 2 years or more and trade Howell.  Or Howell and his rookie contract for 2 years.  What if he plays all 17? 

32 minutes ago, ThatNFLChick said:

Russell Wilson or Ryan Tannehill would be considerably cheaper than normal. Say we really like Maye but think he needs to sit a season or 2 so he can exclusively work on his mechanics and learning a pro style offense instead of putting him out there and him losing confidence.

 

Are you ok with signing Wilson or Tannehill to a 2 year contract and having Maye sit (again the Broncos owe RW guaranteed money so he won't cost a ton)? 

No, cannot not see signing another castoff QB, we have had 8 new starters for 8 years in a row, they come here and end their careers. Maybe end that run. New offense for who ever is the pick of the top 3 and whoever is still here. I mean all they have to beat out is Howell or Brissett or...right? Why waist a year of the rookie contract look at Stroud.

1 hour ago, wit33 said:

Imagine supporting a family as a slide coach is fantastic and increasingly essential, especially with the growing trend of quarterbacks relying on backyard football skills, agility and running. 
 

Disappointed that Jayden Daniels lacks a baseball history for sliding and exploring unique arm angles. I appreciate the concept of having an elite dual-threat player who can both navigate the field effectively (being taller) and maintain a smooth delivery. Typically, elite dual-threat athletes are smaller and struggle with inconsistent throwing motions, hindering their ability to establish early rhythm in an offense with their arms.

Did not know he did not play B.B. but predicted it on here. Baseball helps your side vision while looking forward among other things.

6 hours ago, KDawg said:

 

You just said numbers without context have no meaning. Yet here you are with this post.

 

The seven games he threw for under 200 yards:

 

Bowling Green W 31-6 - This was a bad game for McCarthy. Three interceptions. However, he was throwing passes he shouldn't due to the opponent and Michigan had the game in hand. Hopefully lessons were learned because 3 INT games look really bad against anyone, especially teams like Bowling Green.

 

Nebraska - W 45-7 - McCarthy didn't even play the whole game. He was out with 5:36 left in the 3rd quarter. 12/16 for 156 2/0 in 2.5 quarters.

 

Penn State W 24-15 - This is one of the type of games I had questions about earlier. He went 7/8 passing for 60 yards. However, Michigan had 230 yards of rushing offense. Obviously they crushed Penn State on the ground, but there is absolutely a question mark there about why the coaches took the ball out of his hands.

 

Maryland W 31-24 - This was another actual bad game for him. This and Bowling Green really stand out. 12/23 for 141 0/1 is not a great stat line playing against a mid level ACC team. 

 

Ohio State W 30-24 - This was actually a really good game despite the passing yards. 16/20 for 148 1/0. He controlled the clock (Michigan's offensive style is clock control and take what's there to keep the clock running). 

 

Iowa - W 26-0 - Iowa's defense is a top defense in collegiate football. McCarthy didn't need to do much here. 22/30 for 147. Michigan only ran for 66 yards and 34 carries, though, so McCarthy had the team on his back offensively in this one. He also got sacked three times due to broken protections. 

 

Washington W 34-13 - He started off horrible. But made key plays in big moments to help seal the game for the Wolverines when it came down to it. 10/18 for 140. Michigan also rushed for 303 yards and Washington's defense had been a blundering mess all season against the run. 

 

When I look at that I see two games that stand out as not good... Bowling Green and Maryland. The rest stand out as gameplan oriented/he did all that he needed to/blow out wins. 

 

Also, Sam Howell ran for 900 yards his final college season. Do you honestly believe that if a team asked McCarthy to run he would have rushed for less yards than Sam Howell? C'mon. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maryland mid level ACC team?  Big 10 team that plays in the tough div.  Mich. Penn ST. Ohio ST. who lost to all 3 but still won 7 games and crushed Auburn in the Bowl game. 

2 hours ago, ThatNFLChick said:

 

I mean, the yardage for him compared to others is extremely low but he shows up well in most stats and metrics. Its just the volume is significantly lower than anyone else's

I'm not interested in Daniels to be honest. Metrics, numbers, yardage, are just a part of the whole process. J.J. numbers are fine with me thanks for posting them.

Just now, Est.1974 said:

Plenty to like about him in my opinion

Could be a good fit and a small trade down with extra pick. Would not be the worst pick. Young, let him sit a year and grow. We have coaches now to develop him.

9 hours ago, ThatNFLChick said:

 

I asked because of this stat. His passer rating when behind is lower than almost all the other QBs

 

2024 @NFLDraft Quarterback Prospects
Performance when behind 1-14 points
 

3. Jayden Daniels, LSU
132.52 Situational Passer Rating
67-of-97, 1075 yards, 12 TDs, three INT
 

8. Drake Maye, North Carolina
100.86 Situational Passer Rating
47-of-82, 804 yards, five TDs, two INTs

 

12. Caleb Williams, USC
89.38 Situational Passer Rating
78-of-126, 980 yards, five TDs, three INTs

 

 

 

 

J.J. no.1 in the clutch

44 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said:

 

He is the Vet QB/ Coach on the team we need, no need to run out and sign a Fields is what I feel from the hire.

22 minutes ago, Conn said:

huh? 

 Sorry, I like Howell over fields for the record too, We are taking a QB in the draft. Do not want Fields as a vet, keep Brissett as the vet?

12 minutes ago, klwilkins1977 said:

The most important comment came from Kingsbury on adapting to the players (strengths and weaknesses).  Football is like ordering uniforms: it's not one size fits all.  You have to take the nuances in the individuals to get it right. Glad no one is trying to ram-rod the players into packages or an ideal... It will take a few draft cycles to get what they want while working with what they have.  Common sense, but great to hear.

Agree, Also the draft If true to their word? Will be more like, is this player better than ours, can he do more to help the team. By knowing what you have on the team first. Instead of he is ranked whatever at the position in the draft. Draft rank will not matter, is he better, does he fit, if not move on to the next. 

22 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I'd rather run it back with Howell then trade for Fields. Good grief the obsession so many have with such a terrible QB is mind-boggling to me.

Howell and maybe Brissett with another rookie QB, better than Fields, that would be just another retread to come here and end his career.

10 hours ago, HoggLife said:

We can't build like Detroit. We can't build like SF. We can't build like KC. You have to build your way. No one way works every time or everyone would do it. You can learn certain thing that work but there is no exact blueprint. 

It's what I want not what they will do, it's a opinion, mine is use the draft and low budget F.A.'s this year. Detroit had 4 great hits in the draft this year. Chicago capitalized on a trade down. what's your opinion?  

J. Brissett do you resign? If you draft Daniels they may want to keep him around as the backup.

58 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Yeah its a bit much.    I saw a post from @UK Skins the other day saying the same.  I am trying hard not to let the over the top nonstop gushing PR campaign sour me on the dude.  Because removing all of that, i genuinely would be stoked if its Maye or Daniels albiet prefer Maye. 

 

If a dude is this level flawless and anyone who mentions any flaw really simply hasn't watched him or doesn't understand football apparently or just hates the dude for no reason -- then for those that love him to that extent, I'd be absolutely crushed if this FO doesn't take him.   I'd think this FO then are a bunch of no-nothing about football buffoons if they don't take this dude.  Peters should be out then from the jump.

 

Personally, I've watched more Maye and Daniels then any players in my lifetime I've watched draft prospects.  I've watched most of the games I've had available to watch give or take about 4 times each.   I am no QB expert to say the least.  But I can hang in here with average layperson in a discussion.  I read Arians book about QBs among other things.  I try to learn about that spot over the years.  It's not easy but I give it a shot. 

 

I've nailed some things about QBs here over the years.  I am nothing special on this front but again I am not a lost puppy in a average discussion with the typical fan on the topic.  Ditto plenty of other people here who I know watched these guys.  Doesn't make us right but we do put in the time.  Heck at this point of the draft season, I am typically much deeper talking about prospects but I've been stuck in quick sand in the QB discussion.  I need to pull out for my own sanity. 

 

As for Daniels, love him as a runner.   As @wit33 remembers like he does, I love myself mobile QBs.  I was on the Kyler Murray train at the time among others.  Love QBs with wheels.   I like his touch on the deep ball.  Decent though not perfect making throws in the flat.  I like what I've read about him as a dude.  All these guys though have some red flags.  I've said to death Drake Maye's red flags even though that's who I want at #2 -- Drake is far from flawless, too.  As to Daniels, my number one concern isn't just him getting hurt because of his slight frame, its that he likes to take off versus throw off platform.  And defenses in the NFL can clamp down on that.  You spy someone especially on the edges and keep him in the pocket and force him to throw.

 

When it comes to mobile QBs, I like them to master throwing off platform.  IMO throwing off platform should be your go to move when flushed in the pocket not taking off.   So when people talk about concerns about his durabilty its especially relevant with Daniels for three reasons.  1.  His frame.  2.  His tendency to take off versus throw off platform.  He also takes his fair share of sacks especially when you collapse the interior.  So when you combine them all, it's a real disclaimer not a BS one, but a real one.  It could work out fine but the concerns are certainly not BS and that people just haven't watched him. 

 

 

 

 

Mahomes had the edges taken away in the S.B. by Bosa and others, while flushing him out out of the pocket, they had a plan and it worked for most of the game.  Andy Reid saved and called the perfect play to win the S.B.   Daniels will see a lot of this most likely. Can Daniels make plays like this in crunch time like Mahomes? He adapted all game took what little they gave him? If they think he is the one they will draft him.

3 hours ago, mistertim said:

 

All three of the top QBs in this class could easily fit a Kingsbury offense. They can all make plays when the things break down and they can all scramble/run.

 

Though with this tweet about comments by KK I get the feeling he's not necessarily looking for a guy who's going to run for a thousand yards, but more a guy who can extend plays with their legs and either find open guys downfield in a scramble drill or pick up some yardage to move the sticks.

 

 

Also said he has to be a leader and how the other players react to him, Mahomes is a leader and great person, that's what a QB is. Not word for word put this. That's going to matter to the team, He better be a leader and be liked and trusted by team members. 

3 hours ago, Est.1974 said:

The Lions built by trading away their star QB, accumulated a stack of draft picks and then put all of those pieces around a retread vet QB. 
 

We are all assuming a different approach here by going with a rookie QB.

 

I think with the FO and coaching staff we have pulled together we have a great opportunity to purge free agency in a more constructive way to what we have previously.

 We traded our 2 top pick DE's and tanked to get the picks like they did the first year. 

4 minutes ago, Est.1974 said:

The Lions built by trading away their star QB, accumulated a stack of draft picks and then put all of those pieces around a retread vet QB. 
 

We are all assuming a different approach here by going with a rookie QB.

 

I think with the FO and coaching staff we have pulled together we have a great opportunity to purge free agency in a more constructive way to what we have previously.

We or Some are assuming? I like Detroit's or Chicago's approach, even with a New QB per no.2 or trade down and then take one with extra picks. What does it matter? The Big F.A. from other teams at big prices can just stay there, this year no purge for me. I like the draft and a few low budget FA's. And I would not trade up to the top spot for a QB, to much of a risk for me.   How is taking a QB and loading up on big FAs a new approach anyway we been there done that too? My opinion or yours will not matter anyway it's the teams and ours are just what they are just like the. We or Some thought our Coach would be from the Lions too? 

Detroit just built threw the draft top 4 picks were all hits. We have the picks, need to work the draft and stay away from the big ticket players.

15 minutes ago, NOLA2DC said:

I'm not sure about that. Obviously, the league has changed, and no one wants a statute back there. However, the dual-threat guys routinely get two suggestions: a one-read guy and not a pure passer. The unique thing comment I see with Daniels is the size comment, everything else is pretty standard.  

Daniels has got the passing thing down, he is not Lamar, Hurts, Watson type runners they run like RB's with mean stiff arms if they choose. He is more like Fields but a better Passer. There is a difference in size it's what you like. Just my opinion, which is not much around here anyway.