Rookie QB or Veteran QB for "Next Season"??? (I didn't bump this, but I ended up being wrong anyway....)

[PartyPosse]

I honestly don't expect any team to pick up his fifth year option. It's really not a big difference between a Franchise Tag a the fifth year option.

[Skinsinparadise]

As for Darnold starring at targets.  I could post clip after clip of this, play after play.  You can see here blow by blow, he's already starting to stare at his target even half a second before he's got the ball.  His eyes never look away from his target.  The Patriots secondary players notices it and gets in front of the receiver when the time is right and picks off the pass.

 

Darnold isn't a turnover machine because he's a gunslinger.  He's a turnover machine because he has accuracy issues, is careless with the ball hence the fumbles and from what I can see stares at his targets.  This isn't Winston or Fitzpatrick who are putting up big numbers but in their quest of being aggressive have turnovers.  This dude is turnover prone regardless of him not being aggressive. 

 

 

 

Edited February 7, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Conn]

42 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

The key is to always have a bonafide HOF at QB to elevate your team around you so you never have to actually improve the talent and thus can waste first rounders.

This is kind of dismissive of the organizational stability and clarity that you need to grow those HOF-level players. The Packers got Favre off the scrap heap from the Falcons for a 2nd when he didn’t even know what a nickel defense was after his rookie season. Rodgers was a late 1st round pick that almost everyone else passed on that the Packers didn’t “need” when they took him. They proceeded to spend more than a decade taking a 2nd round WR prospect almost every year to help him progress into the stud he is today, as one example. 
 

Love probably won’t continue the trend and imo with how long QB’s can play and stay healthy they should have used that 1st to help Rodgers—but it’s no lucky accident that the Packers have had stud QB play in all the years since we last won a SB. That organization, even when they mess up the micro decisions (not spending enough in FA during their QB’s prime when they could have, etc.), gets the macro decisions right on a structural level. They just get it. 

Edited February 7, 2021 by ConnSKINS26

[Malapropismic Depository]

1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

As for Darnold starring at targets.  I could post clip after clip of this, play after play.  You can see here blow by blow, he's already starting to stare at his target even half a second before he's got the ball.  His eyes never look away from his target.  The Patriots secondary players notices it and gets in front of the receiver when the time is right and picks off the pass.

 

Darnold isn't a turnover machine because he's a gunslinger.  He's a turnover machine because he has accuracy issues, is careless with the ball hence the fumbles and from what I can see stares at his targets.  This isn't Winston or Fitzpatrick who are putting up big numbers but in their quest of being aggressive have turnovers.  This dude is turnover prone regardless of him not being aggressive. 

 

 

 

And that is why teams are calling Seattle about Wilson, despite the fact they're not shopping him, and almost zero chance they do. Other teams needing QB's are getting desperate, when they see the quality of QB's on the market.

 

[Blanka]

I’m the furthest thing from an insider. But from following USC football for years you get nuggets off the record from people who hear things.
 

During the season a guy who’s plugged in with former players there said he learned from a USC source that supposedly SD had some people who are currently at WFT now that thought highly of him coming out + now. The timeframe of this statement was before the Jets beat the Rams. When the Jets were looked at as locks to be picking #1. This came up when asking where would Sam’s next stop could be and the potential interested teams.
 

I didn’t bring the info here then because while I know that the source is legit all things USC directly. It wasn’t directly from WFT’s side but from SC’s.  Fast forward to now when guys like Keim, Russell and JP allude to it maybe being actual interest and since they have actual WFT sources it holds more weight now. 
 

If I had to guess, and this is a total guess I’d assume Scott T and Ken Z are the fans. Just going off of last season where coordinators and position coaches went to bat for guys and they were brought in (LThomas, McKissic, AG in the draft). As well as this info was pre Mayhew and Hurney being hired so it wasn’t them at the time. However, after hearing JLC say that Kyle Shanahan is interested I wonder if Mayhew was too since he was there prior as the pro scout?  Now where he ranks as option a, b, c, d, e etc. here I don’t know. Just that the initial info seems to have legs. 

[Skinsinparadise]

7 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

I honestly don't expect any team to pick up his fifth year option. It's really not a big difference between a Franchise Tag a the fifth year option.

 

What would be the franchise tag?  Even the NY papers framed thing about the Jets if keeping him picking up the 5th year option versus the tag.  Not that the tag makes me feel that much better aside from you can set up the contract dance with him similar to Kirk with a prove year like they did in 2016.

Edited February 7, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Voice_of_Reason]

Just now, RWJ said:

If we trade for Darnold even a 7th round pick, RR/Mayhew/Hurnery at more stupid than the Bears GM.  My take.  

I disagree.  Darnold landed in absolutely the worst possible situation, even worse than Haskins, in the NFL.  The team lacked any degree of talent, and Gase was the definitive worst coach in the league.  

 

Darnold looks like he has some talent. He's definitely more physically gifted than either Allen or Heineke, with a much higher ceiling.  

 

@Skinsinparadise I get the comparison between Darnold and Rosen.  And it might be apt.  I think what's happening here, though, is a lot of folks are just looking at the situation Darnold has been in since the day he was drafted and thought, "God, even John Elway would have failed in that circumstance. There's zero chance for success for a young QB."  And they're writing off a lot of the on and off-field criticisms because of it.

 

That could be right, that could be wrong.  

 

Here's where I stand: I would not bring him in and think you've solved your QB problem.  I would offer a mid-round pick for him as a secondary option to come in and compete because he has more upside than Allen and Heineke.  And based on what I've read from the Kipers' of the world, there seems to be a derth of mid-round QBs in this year's draft that project as future starters.  I think Kiper (and I get that he's wrong as much as he is right) said that there are no 3rd or 4th round prospects that project the same way Cousins did when he was picked in the 4th round in 2012. If that's the case, and you want a developmental guy, then Darnold might be a good mid-round trade option.

 

However, it's NOT THE solution.  It's a POSSIBLE solution.  And you have to look at it that way. 

 

You do it because because you struck out on Stafford, you won't pony up a ridiculous price for Carr, the Packers' didn't lose their mind and trade Rodgers, and none of the other FA QBs are worth anything.  AND you didn't trade up to get one of the top 4 QBs in the draft.  If none of those things happen, and the Jets pick a QB at #2, or trade for Watson somehow, and you could get Darnold for a 3rd, I say "why not?"  That's better than going into 2021 with Allen, Heineke and (pick random crap FA QB, like "that Mitch guy," Tyrod Taylor, Andy Dalton, etc. 

 

It's a risk, Darnold might flame out and it might be a wasted pick.  But 3rd round picks are always risks, and if you happen to find a capable starter at QB, even for a couple of years, it's worth it.  

 

I get that my approach is a little more "fast and loose" with trading picks for players than the "BUILD THROUGH THE DRAFT.  IT'S THE ONLY WAY TO BUILD! DO NOT TRADE DRAFT PICKS! EVER!" crowd, who I believe are still suffering from Vinny/Dan induced PTSD stupid draft pick trades from the early 2000's.  

[CommDownMan]

1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Wnat would be the franchise tag?  Even the NY papers framed thing about the Jets if keeping him picking up the 5th year option versus the tag.  Not that the tag makes me feel that much better aside from you can set up the contract dance with him similar to Kirk with a prove year like they did in 2016.

 

This was 2020 values.  27 mill. 

 

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/nfl-franchise-tag-meaning-deadline-2020-values-rules/1nn0kl8x7hg5210kevqk2oim4w

[PartyPosse]

6 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

What would be the franchise tag?  Even the NY papers framed thing about the Jets if keeping him picking up the 5th year option versus the tag.  Not that the tag makes me feel that much better aside from you can set up the contract dance with him similar to Kirk with a prove year like they did in 2016.

It's 23.5 for 2021 so I can't see it being more than say 27-28 in 2022.

[RWJ]

12 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

As for Darnold starring at targets.  I could post clip after clip of this, play after play.  You can see here blow by blow, he's already starting to stare at his target even half a second before he's got the ball.  His eyes never look away from his target.  The Patriots secondary players notices it and gets in front of the receiver when the time is right and picks off the pass.

 

Darnold isn't a turnover machine because he's a gunslinger.  He's a turnover machine because he has accuracy issues, is careless with the ball hence the fumbles and from what I can see stares at his targets.  This isn't Winston or Fitzpatrick who are putting up big numbers but in their quest of being aggressive have turnovers.  This dude is turnover prone regardless of him not being aggressive. 

 

 

 

Don't want him.  Let the 9ers and Shanny take him, I hope.  Give me Carr or Minshew.

[COWBOY-KILLA-]

57 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Not sure wherre the moxie narrative comes from.  Who is Greeny?

Mike Greenberg. Big Jets fan ESPN radio host. The moxie narrative is my own. Just referring to some of his flash plays, scrambles. He’s shown a little of it. And to be clear, I am not an Darnold advocate. 

[Conn]

I would far prefer someone who turns the ball over between making big time plays like Winston than someone who turns the ball over because they are just plain awful like Darnold. I want neither really but at least one of those ways gets you a 4800 yard passer and some fun highlights. Darnold is just depressing to watch. 

[heyholetsgogrant]

5 hours ago, skinsfan_1215 said:

Here you go... every pass he completed in 2020. Note: there are no incompletions, sacks, or INTs in this video. These are the highlights. But dude, first 5 minutes of this video there are probably a half dozen plays that were better than anything we’ve seen outside of Taylor Heinicke for years.
 

I think he’s still got potential and if it doesn’t cost a 1st I’m on board. Tannehill was picked up off the scrap heap from Miami and instantly looked 10x better when he got on a good team. 

 

 

I see a player with bad mechanics.

9 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

I would far prefer someone who turns the ball over between making big time plays like Winston than someone who turns the ball over because they are just plain awful like Darnold. I want neither really but at least one of those ways gets you a 4800 yard passer and some fun highlights. Darnold is just depressing to watch. 

Exactly, if you get Darnell you get INT’s and “seeing ghosts,” you might as we’ll get Winston.

Edited February 7, 2021 by heyholetsgogrant

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

5 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

I would far prefer someone who turns the ball over between making big time plays like Winston than someone who turns the ball over because they are just plain awful like Darnold. I want neither really but at least one of those ways gets you a 4800 yard passer and some fun highlights. Darnold is just depressing to watch. 

 

The Bucs were a good team, with weapons and a good defense the year with Winston as well.  They went 7-9.  With Tom Brady they're in the Super Bowl.  Winston isn't taking any team anywhere.

 

When Drew Brees went down, they didn't turn to Winston, they turned to a gadget QB.

 

The goal isn't to have a high yardage passer and miss the playoffs.  That's Kirk Cousins in a nutshell.

[Est.1974]

If you trade for Darnold you have to agree some form of short term 3 year deal with him, low-mid base amounts but heavily weighted with incentives to recognise performance.

 

That’s what I’d be thinking.

[Skinsinparadise]

40 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

@Skinsinparadise I get the comparison between Darnold and Rosen.  And it might be apt.  I think what's happening here, though, is a lot of folks are just looking at the situation Darnold has been in since the day he was drafted and thought, "God, even John Elway would have failed in that circumstance. There's zero chance for success for a young QB."  And they're writing off a lot of the on and off-field criticisms because of it.

 

That could be right, that could be wrong.  

 

 

For me there is a difference between players I read about and watch intently. I can't say I've watched Darnold intently yet but I am getting there.  Once I've watch someone enough I am tough to be swayed by just a narrative alone.   So as for Darnold, its hard for me to be pushed by an argument that isn't based on someone watching his games and selling me on him based on what they see.  I've been convinced before from others when I wasn't sold on a player based on what they saw.  But anyone regurgitating a narrative doesn't move me.  I know the pro Darnold and anti Darnold narratives well.

 

For example I know you like to listen to Sheehan/Cooley as do I.  I listened to their talk about Darnold and in that mix Cooley admitted he hasn't really watched him.  Then Sheehan basically repeats the same stuff, high pick, he was with the Jets, he doesn't say a single thing about any of his attributes.  Those arguments to me seem more about wishful thinking than having any substance.   I am not saying you or anyone else needed to be swayed by a different argument but for me personally the Tannehill, Jets, Gase arguments come off silly if they aren't accompanied with any substance beyond it. 

 

I'd be curious to hear what Cooley thinks about Darnold when he actually watches him. If he liked him I'd be reassured some.  For me to be sold on Darnold, it would have to be something like that. Most QBs I can think of who looked like busts playing for bad teams moved on and ended up also looking like busts elsewhere.  Tannehill wasn't a bust with Miami.  He just happened to get better with the Titans.  But lets pretend he was a bust, he'd be the exception not the norm.   I bet some wishful thinking Steeler fans are saying now, yeah Haskins failed but that was the WFT.  

 

I was on the record for liking Darnold before that draft.  But I didn't really start watching draft prospects intently until after that specific draft.  I watched some of Darnold's USC games at the time.  But my sell on him was somewhat generic and broad:  big dude and can move well for a big dude.  He wasn't fast but he could roll in the pocket well and dodge pressure.  His accuracy/completion percentage wasn't hot in the context of college stats and his issues were turnovers -- both fumbles and picks.   He goes to the NFL and his issues are exactly the same -- accuracy and turnovers.

 

I do believe some players can turn things around with better coaching.  I personally wouldn't bet on Darnold on that front.  But playing along you really got to be invested with Darnold more so than other turnaround projects like Winston, Trubisky.  Because you are likely giving up a high pick for Darnold versus getting him for nothing.

 

Only reason why I brought in Rosen to this is I recall the same narrative about him.   The national NFL media types love former first rounders on the trade market especially QBs.  It almost always feels like a bargain to them.  Especially because many of them lauded that same player in the draft so it doubles down on making them feel right as opposed to wrong.  The NFL media buzz in 2019 was go get yourself Josh Rosen and you won't regret it.   And while Rosen has diffferent strengths and weaknesses with Darnold -- they both suffers from what I think is a fatal flaw which is poor decision making in the heat of battle.  I don't think its easily fixed.  

Edited February 7, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Skinsinparadise]

26 minutes ago, COWBOY-KILLA- said:

Mike Greenberg. Big Jets fan ESPN radio host. The moxie narrative is my own. Just referring to some of his flash plays, scrambles. He’s shown a little of it. And to be clear, I am not an Darnold advocate. 

 

Ok cool for me when I think of moxie I think of a Favre gunslinger type, that's not him IMO.  But yeah escaping pressure in the pocket is his thing, roll outs. 

Edited February 7, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[PartyPosse]

16 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN 74 said:

If you trade for Darnold you have to agree some form of short term 3 year deal with him, low-mid base amounts but heavily weighted with incentives to recognise performance.

 

That’s what I’d be thinking.

I doubt he would take it. If the team declines the 5th year then his best interest would be to ball out and cash in. Accepting a low level bridge deal basically admits he's not gonna be any better than he has shown.

[Darth Tater]

At best, Darnold would need to be treated to a rehab season for PTSD (probably means riding the bench in year 1 or a mediocre year).  I don't think we have the staff, front office or fan base (only important because of our FO) that allows this to be a successful strategy (maybe if Alex was healthy). This means to me that we should only put him on the consider pile if he is cut after the draft and we don't have a long-term solution in place (and then, he is only on the consider pile).

[PartyPosse]

1 minute ago, Darth Tater said:

At best, Darnold would need to be treated to a rehab season for PTSD (probably means riding the bench in year 1 or a mediocre year).  I don't think we have the staff, front office or fan base (only important because of our FO) that allows this to be a successful strategy (maybe if Alex was healthy). This means to me that we should only put him on the consider pile if he is cut after the draft and we don't have a long-term solution in place (and then, he is only on the consider pile).

Why would NY cut him? He's costing them a shade under 10 mil either way plus they don't get a comp pick if someone else picks him up.

[wit33]

 

4 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

Why would NY cut him? He's costing them a shade under 10 mil either way plus they don't get a comp pick if someone else picks him up.

No way he gets cut and reports have already said multiple teams are interested if he becomes available. Coaches love a dude who can create off-schedule/when a play doesn’t work and will think they can create a system with necessary constraints to hone him in. He does have unique escape ability as I continue to watch more of his highlights. 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

You do it because because you struck out on Stafford, you won't pony up a ridiculous price for Carr, the Packers' didn't lose their mind and trade Rodgers, and none of the other FA QBs are worth anything. 

 

IMO you don't make a move just to make a move.  If they love Darnold then go for it.  But if they don't, then I wouldn't do something just to do something.  I also doubt you are getting him for a third.  Looks like inflation has hit the market hard.  Everything is more expensive it seems than expected.  So when Schefter says a late first for Darnold i believe it to an extent.

 

Having said that some of these rumors might not be true.  I recall the buzz was for example that SF was all over Stafford and then it came out later that it wasn't true.   Ditto NO.    So some of this could always be agents trying to make it look like their players are in hot demand. 

Edited February 7, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[heyholetsgogrant]

I was thinking about this more today. The only scenario I can think of is, Darnold is the cheapest option we have (Carr and Watson will be too much draft capital) and there are no decent QB’s worth taking in rounds 2-7. Basically, they want to get another QB in here, but there are not many options that won’t cost 2-3 first rounders. I much rather sign Fitzpatrick for a cheap option, at least you get some leadership and big plays.  Darnold you get neither.

 

Edited February 7, 2021 by heyholetsgogrant

[Est.1974]

Hey @Skinsinparadise I think you are starting to seriously worry now with this Darnold chatter. I worry for your sanity if this come to fruition.

[DWinzit]

17 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Ok cool for me when I think of moxie I think of a Favre gunslinger type, that's not him IMO.  But yeah escaping pressure in the pocket is his thing, roll outs. 

Totally agree.  What about Winston, would you refer to him as a gunslinger type? 

 

I am having such a hard time weeding through all these eh QB's, especially when giving picks away for eh QB's.

 

The only player realistically available that I could see leading WFT for a few years is Carr...and that means we would need to give up assets. I would not give a ton for him.

Winston has the talent and abilities but has not proven he is a winner in the pro's. Darnold...maybe deserves a second chance in a change of scenery but we both know he just isn't worth asset loss.