The Official QB Thread- JD5 taken #2. Randall 2.0 or Bayou Bob? Mariotta and Hartman forever. Fromm cut

[CapsSkins]

Howell is QB1, as many of us hoped.

 

QB2 will depend on who the OC is. But I suspect it will be someone cheap (duh). Dalton fits the bill as an experienced guy who only cost the Saints $3M last year. You know who fits the bill as well.

 

I reckon guys in the Mariota/Mayfield/Brissett tier will be too rich for our blood.

[HigSkin]

Howell was the eighth different quarterback to start in Rivera's first three seasons. With a talented group of playmakers at receiver in Terry McLaurin, Curtis Samuel and Jahan Dotson, Washington wants to shore up its offensive line to help Howell.

 

"Sometimes it's about putting all those other pieces into place first and then getting the guy," Rivera said. "I thought we showed we're more than a serviceable team if we can get consistent play from that position. I don't know if we need very, very, very dynamic play as much as we need dynamic play."

[mh86]

2 hours ago, KDawg said:

I’d give our first for Buech. You don’t say no to talent.

A first probably won’t get it done. Likely 2 firsts and a second 

[mistertim]

4 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I think they are chasing veterans who are ok with being backups but can start if something falls apart for Howell.  I don't get the impression that Rivera wants Howell on the bench but wants him to start but wants a backup who can step in in case of injury or it falls apart.

 

@KDawg's seceret agenda for pushing Bieniemy.  Shane might be coming.

 

 

https://chiefswire.usatoday.com/2021/05/18/kansas-city-chiefs-udfa-qb-shane-buechele-explains-decision-to-sign/

Shane Buechele joined Chiefs to learn from Patrick Mahomes, Andy Reid and others

 

Buechele actually worked out a bit with Mahomes in Fort Worth this offseason, so the two are already familiar with each other. He also gets a chance to learn from Chad Henne, who has stuck around in the NFL for 12 seasons. That’s not a bad person to learn from if you’re looking to stick in the NFL for a long time.

Then he’ll also have a former NFL quarterback as his quarterback coach in Mike Kafka. He’ll get to work with one of the most revered offensive coordinators in the league in Eric Bieniemy. There’s also a future Hall of Fame head coach in Andy Reid, who is known for his work getting the most out of his quarterbacks.

“Yeah, Coach Kafka is a great guy and he’s a great coach,” Buechele said. “Just in these three days of camp, I’ve learned a ton in meetings and super great for me to be able to do that. He’s a really good teacher, and it’s been helpful for me to learn from him as well as Coach EB (Eric Bieniemy and Coach (Andy) Reid as well.”

 

Article is very misleading IMO. We all know that Buechele actually went to KC to teach Mahomes, not learn from him.

[FootballZombie]

I never knew Buechy was real b4 today. I just assumed he was some imaginary dude from an inside joke.

 

Color me surprised.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

23 hours ago, wit33 said:

It’s seeing things for what they are and not placing pre conceived theories on how things are done. 

No, it’s seeing things how you want to see them - with absolutely zero evidence or proof to support your theories.

 

Beyond that, you completely dismiss events even when non-agents/media that are directly involved give their side of the story. 

23 hours ago, wit33 said:

The agent stuff lacks truth and any real substance in many cases. Washington will sign plenty of free agents, in most cases it will be because of money and opportunity to perform and earn more money. No, they are not going to acquire the veterans looking to win at this stage, but it has more to do with on field production versus all the other stuff that gets spewed around here. 

Again, all of this is just you painting with a really broad brush with zero evidence to support the blanket conclusions you come to.

 

These are just opinions you hold based on whatever theories you’ve conjured up in your head, completely dismissing information from those directly related and closely involved.  
 

For sake of not taking this to the tailgate, I’ll leave it at that.  It’s just odd to be so absolute in your way of thinking without anything to support it.

 

 

Edited February 9, 2023 by BatteredFanSyndrome

[wit33]

20 hours ago, mistertim said:

 

Hurts has little to no bearing on the current Richardson/Allen discussion/comparison because he was a prolific and extremely accurate passer in college.

I thought a big part of why he was second round pick with due to lack of accuracy and ability to operate from within the pocket. 
 

When playing versus Washington I'm hoping he has to make outside the hash mark throws due to inconsistency with accuracy.

 

19 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

No, it’s seeing things how you want to see them - with absolutely zero evidence or proof to support your theories.

 

What evidence do you need that I haven’t provided. 
 

High profile/successful coaches seek the weaker franchises with primary focus to establish power within the FO and maximize earning potential. All the other stuff is lip service. 
 

 

19 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

Beyond that, you completely dismiss events even when non-agents/media that are directly involved give their side of the story. 

Again, all of this is just you painting with a really broad brush with zero evidence to support the blanket conclusions you come to.

 

 

 

The 26 year old free agent fresh off a rookie deal will seek the most money, everything else is a distant second. 
 

The Jaguars won free agency last season. Bad teams and often times poorly ran organizations attract top free agents. Where is the lack of evidence. Washington did this for many years, what am I missing. The Bears a poorly ran organization will strike it big with multiple signings this off season. It’s how the NFL works. 
 

If the argument is middling older free agents will choose the better win now situation provided he will be given playing time opportunity to continue to excel and secure future money, then yes, I 100% agree.

 

All the young dudes seeking a second contract that are in demand can give zero cares about the FO, owner or past 30 years— this is for fans to bicker and obsess over. 

 

What am I missing? 
 

 

Edited February 9, 2023 by wit33

[Skinsinparadise]

11 hours ago, FootballZombie said:

I never knew Buechy was real b4 today. I just assumed he was some imaginary dude from an inside joke.

 

Color me surprised.

 

[CobraCommander]

11 hours ago, FootballZombie said:

I never knew Buechy was real b4 today. I just assumed he was some imaginary dude from an inside joke.

 

Color me surprised.

I thought everyone was talking about Shane Falco. 

[wit33]

20 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Do you think the perception of this organization today is the same as when Shanny or even Jay took the job?

 

I don’t think a 26 year old free agent gives a darn about the perception of the organization. That’s for us fans and media to stir up for us, but very little impact on the player. 

 

20 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

I posted it on the FO thread so plenty have seen it.  He flat out said he knows that that FO knows they are challenged to convince players to come here.  
 

 

I believe it comes down to opportunity and ability to be successful for the incoming free agent. For the majority. 

 

Washington will be high on list for a veteran CB due to potential opportunity to play and have a good season with an up and coming defense/ elite Dline. 
 

Washington will be low on the list for a veteran WR due to lack of projected play time and QB. 
 

Each situation the player can careless about the organization, it’s about their individual situation to maximize earnings. 

 

20 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

You seems to be focused on the winning part.  This isn't Siberia as far as winning.  It's been a mediocre team under Ron not a bad team, so so.  It's Siberia because this team is always in the news for sleaze, has a sleazy and incompetent owner, can't fill their stadium, has the worst facilities.   

 

This isn't a pet theory of mine.  Reporters have discussed it, agents have told that to Standig.  On and on.  The issues with this team are way way deeper than an 8-8-1 record or 7-9. 
 

 

Ron has communicated clearly they do t care to be active in free agency and want to build home grown talent. This has been his message from day 1. Washington has talent to pay in house, why look elsewhere. 
 

A player will choose Washington over Buffalo if money is the same but projected play time is more In Washington. 
 

20 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

For good players, they tend to get multiple competitive offers.  Everything being close to equal this isn't the team that they want to go to.  You said yesterday that everything being equal this is exactly where they'd want to go because they'd have more opportunity here.   
 

 

All things being equal: money and play time, the player will choose the better win now situation. The player can careless about the organization historically over last 30 years or if the owner is a good guy. 

 

20 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I wish I recall who said it, some posted it a few months ago, but there was one recently retired player who said when he talks to players in the league, they don't talk about wanting to come here. 
 

I’m sure those players talk about places lighter on taxes and places with good weather. 

 

20 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I don't mind talking about it.  But the conspiracy stuff is too wild for me.  Its much easier for me to engage without someone who engages on the actual narratives.  

What pick was offered, there top 5 or later one? Why isn’t this clear?

 

My argument with Bruce Allen was the on field results fell in line with the rest of the 70% middle class/mediocre/average franchises. 

I like Ron and I’m a big believer in culture, but on the field result he’s been no better than Bruce Allen. With that said, like you, I love the roster and believe there’s great potential. 

[Skinsinparadise]

@wit33

 

I think the hard thing about debating you on this stuff is you seem to take your opinions as facts.   That seems to be what @BatteredFanSyndrome I think was getting to.

 

If people in the actual know refute your opinion -- you say its unclear or imply they are lying.  And it doesn't seem to even matter how many sources it is, it could be multiple, 8-10 but it doesn't matter, its still all ignored. 

 

Heck I have opinons that have been refuted -- when I hear the same thing from multiple sources in the know, and its clear to me I am wrong, I admit it and move on.  You don't seem to do that.  So we butt heads on some topics because we come at information with different mindsets it seems. 

 

So its just a neverending circle.  Not on everything but certain topics that you will die on the hill for and seem impossible to budge. 

 

You were feisty defending Bruce in the previous FO thread.  Now you seem feisty in defending that this team is a destination spot.  In the process of defending your take that this is a destination spot you have to ignore a flood of information including from heck people even working for the team. 

 

But that seems to be how you roll on some subjects, so I don't get the point of why you even bother debating any of this when your mind is locked in.

 

 

Edited February 9, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[mistertim]

1 hour ago, wit33 said:

I thought a big part of why he was second round pick with due to lack of accuracy and ability to operate from within the pocket. 
 

When playing versus Washington I'm hoping he has to make outside the hash mark throws due to inconsistency with accuracy.

 

 

I think there were a few reasons that came together for Hurts to fall to the 2nd round. It was partially just circumstance since he was in a class with several other QBs who were considered to be better prospects (Burrow, Tua, Herbert, Love) which pushed him down the board and he became a bit of a 2nd or 3rd tier guy. I think in a weaker QB class he would have been a 1st round pick.

 

IIRC there were also some questions about his arm strength, whether Riley's offense at Oklahoma made QBs look better than they are, how good his decision making was from the pocket, and whether he bailed and went off script too quickly.

[wit33]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

@wit33

 

I think the hard thing about debating you on this stuff is you seem to take your opinions as facts.   That seems to be what @BatteredFanSyndrome I think was getting to.

 

If people in the actual know refute your opinion -- you say its unclear or imply they are lying.  And it doesn't seem to even matter how many sources it is, it could be multiple, 8-10 but it doesn't matter, its still all ignored. 

 

Heck I have opinons that have been refuted -- when I hear the same thing from multiple sources in the know, and its clear to me I am wrong, I admit it and move on.  You don't seem to do that.  So we butt heads on some topics because we come at information with different mindsets it seems. 

 

So its just a neverending circle.  Not on everything but certain topics that you will die on the hill for and seem impossible to budge. 

 

You were feisty defending Bruce in the previous FO thread.  Now you seem feisty in defending that this team is a destination spot.  In the process of defending your take that this is a destination spot you have to ignore a flood of information including from heck people even working for the team. 

 

But that seems to be how you roll on some subjects, so I don't get the point of why you even bother debating any of this when your mind is locked in.

 

 

I certainly operate with the premise what organizations share to the public and what really takes place is often times not the entire truth. I own this and can understand frustration if on the side of the debate. 
 

Destination spot was your skillful way to steer the conversation away from the fact coaches and players seek money and power wherever they can get it.  Destination spots are California (weather), Texas and Florida (taxes).
 

Washington or any franchise becomes a “destination spot” for the individual if they provide money and power for the coach and money and opportunity for the player. Yes, fundamentally this is how I think we are wired in a capitalistic paradigm, but I’m willing to debate those who disagree on some levels. 
 

Bruce was a part of the mediocre 70%, that’s all I ever argued. It’s damn hard to escape that without an elite QB. As I’ve always l said, I can careless about these guys as people, fan value in terms of wins and losses is what compare for the most part. 
 

If Washington wants Jessie Bates, Washington will get Jessie Bates. It doesn’t matter to him whether it’s his destination spot, money making time. 
 

Curious, why do you think Sheehan asked the question to Jay Gruden just a few short months ago about Kirk compensation if it was an established fact years ago by Mike Jones? 
 

9 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

I think there were a few reasons that came together for Hurts to fall to the 2nd round. It was partially just circumstance since he was in a class with several other QBs who were considered to be better prospects (Burrow, Tua, Herbert, Love) which pushed him down the board and he became a bit of a 2nd or 3rd tier guy. I think in a weaker QB class he would have been a 1st round pick.

 

IIRC there were also some questions about his arm strength, whether Riley's offense at Oklahoma made QBs look better than they are, how good his decision making was from the pocket, and whether he bailed and went off script too quickly.

Hurts falls into the dual threat QB soup you staunchly disagree can have success in the NFL, correct?

Edited February 9, 2023 by wit33

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, wit33 said:

 

Destination spot was your skillful way to steer the conversation away from the fact coaches and players seek money and power wherever they can get it.  Destination spots are California (weather), Texas and Florida (taxes).

 

You are the one steering it away, not me.  It's a strawman misdirect of the conversation.  

 

I'll use a hypothetical -- not a real debate to bring my point home.  Lets say it would be like me saying Dan is a douche to work for and here's pile of evidence about it including people who have talked about it on the record and off the record to reporters and more. On and on and on.  Here's that mountain of information.

 

Your response to all of that is to ignore it.   And say do you agree Dan gives a lot to charity?  Does a douche give a lot to charity?   I respond by saying we are talking about he's a douche to work for and there is a ton of evidence for it, his charity work is a seperate point.   Your response to that is lets not get this off track, answer my question about charity. 

 

You said the other day you just want to be educated about Dan's cash flow, that's all you are doing.  But I suspect you aren't looking to be educated on it based on your responses considering all you did is counter punch everyone's argument.   But the kicker was this you ignored the macro arguments on the point, you lasered in on a single micro point that was more ambiguous and that can be challenged to try to take the full argument down.  That's a classic tactic for someone trying to win an argument versus as you said trying to get educated.   

 

Another one was you claim Jay was fuzzy talking about compensation yet at the same time you remembered his off hand gravy comment about how the compensation could have even been more.  That's an impressive thing to recall.  I tend to recall tidbit stuff like that only because I am a weirdo who often listens to the same podcasts twice.

 

For you to recall that obscure item of info, which is something that Jay only mentioned once -- shows you listened intently so part of me doubts you really missed the larger point which he was crystal clear about from that same podcast let alone he repeated that same story in mulitple other podcasts.  

 

My point is I have some doubts that you believe some of the stuff your purport because it doesn't always add up and you are doing it because you like to play contrarian.  But for me there is so long I can hang in there with that approach without being exhausted.  

 

And if you truly do believe this stuff.  And feel so much conviction in all of your beliefs, why waste your time debating it?  In my mind at least it feels like it wouldn't matter to you if the source at hand walked the info right to your house, sat down with you for an hour and swore by it in blood that you will change your mind.

 

For me, I think I am easier to budge.  I'll give a current example.  I've said a lot about Chase Young in other threads.  I've been listening over time to different narratives about him, including a reporter on the radio today and its making me reevaluate my previous takes.   

 

I am in the business where I deal directly with the media at times and I can be a source myself.  On occasion I share what I know with the media, often on background.   Do I personally know more than Joe public on what certain public figures know and think? Hell yeah, i am talking to them directly.  I am not speculating. 

 

I know exactly at times what they think about so and so.  I can tell stories about them that other people don't know.  On the same token, if lets say 5 people that are in the know say something -- i don't care if what they say doesn't fit my predispositons, they will change my mind. 

Edited February 9, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[mistertim]

34 minutes ago, wit33 said:

Hurts falls into the dual threat QB soup you staunchly disagree can have success in the NFL, correct?

 

No. I really don't know how many times I have to rehash my belief on this exact same topic. I have no clue if I'm just not getting it through or if you're intentionally misstating it repeatedly in order to prove some unknown point or get a rise out of me.

 

To me there's a big difference between a dual threat QB and a running QB. A dual threat QB is a guy who is a top tier passer first and can also use his legs really well second. That would be guys like Allen, Mahomes, Wilson (pre-sucking Wilson), Watson (though he's TBD nowadays) and now Hurts. A running QB is a guy who is mainly a runner first and a mediocre passer second. That's guys like Cam and Lamar.

 

I believe running QBs can have success, but not long term, because a dual threat QB will still be a great passer so when he loses a step or two over time (or has an injury that hampers his running ability) he won't skip too much of a beat, whereas when a running QB loses a couple of steps (or has an injury) he's probably done for since his ability to pass from the pocket doesn't really scare anyone.

 

A franchise dual threat QB can probably last you a good 10-15 years. I think a running QB has a shelf life of maybe half that at most. That's why I wouldn't want to pay Lamar whatever ungodly guaranteed amount he wants. Not only has his play leveled off big time since his one great year, but he's also now coming back from what seems to be a nagging knee injury.

[justice98]

Rivera feels like he's rigging the game for Howell.  Which I dont love.  Like they dont want anybody who might be good enough to best him out.  I would like this backup to be able to win a game if they're called upon.  But Ron made it seem like this guy's #1 job is to be a QB coach.

[Riggo#44]

More like SportCRACK, amirite?

 

[wit33]

1 hour ago, mistertim said:

 

No. I really don't know how many times I have to rehash my belief on this exact same topic. I have no clue if I'm just not getting it through or if you're intentionally misstating it repeatedly in order to prove some unknown point or get a rise out of me.

 

To me there's a big difference between a dual threat QB and a running QB. A dual threat QB is a guy who is a top tier passer first and can also use his legs really well second. That would be guys like Allen, Mahomes, Wilson (pre-sucking Wilson), Watson (though he's TBD nowadays) and now Hurts. A running QB is a guy who is mainly a runner first and a mediocre passer second. That's guys like Cam and Lamar.

 

I believe running QBs can have success, but not long term, because a dual threat QB will still be a great passer so when he loses a step or two over time (or has an injury that hampers his running ability) he won't skip too much of a beat, whereas when a running QB loses a couple of steps (or has an injury) he's probably done for since his ability to pass from the pocket doesn't really scare anyone.

 

A franchise dual threat QB can probably last you a good 10-15 years. I think a running QB has a shelf life of maybe half that at most. That's why I wouldn't want to pay Lamar whatever ungodly guaranteed amount he wants. Not only has his play leveled off big time since his one great year, but he's also now coming back from what seems to be a nagging knee injury.

Well, isn’t that convenient, pick and choose which ones you like. 
 

 

 

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

You are the one steering it away, not me.  It's a strawman misdirect of the conversation.  

 

I'll use a hypothetical -- not a real debate to bring my point home.  Lets say it would be like me saying Dan is a douche to work for and here's pile of evidence about it including people who have talked about it on the record and off the record to reporters and more. On and on and on.  Here's that mountain of information.

 

Your response to all of that is to ignore it.   And say do you agree Dan gives a lot to charity?  Does a douche give a lot to charity?   I respond by saying we are talking about he's a douche to work for and there is a ton of evidence for it, his charity work is a seperate point.   Your response to that is lets not get this off track, answer my question about charity. 
 

 

Yes, money makes most people overlook the character of a man. 
 

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

You said the other day you just want to be educated about Dan's cash flow, that's all you are doing.  But I suspect you aren't looking to be educated on it based on your responses considering all you did is counter punch everyone's argument.   But the kicker was this you ignored the macro arguments on the point, you lasered in on a single micro point that was more ambiguous and that can be challenged to try to take the full argument down.  That's a classic tactic for someone trying to win an argument versus as you said trying to get educated.   
 

 

I was curious if others knew something beyond my comprehension and previous exposure from an on field competitive disadvantage standpoint, I have yet see any proof of this. Washington will be at the top of the cap for this season once again. Nothing to see here. 

 

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Another one was you claim Jay was fuzzy talking about compensation yet at the same time you remembered his off hand gravy comment about how the compensation could have even been more.  That's an impressive thing to recall.  I tend to recall tidbit stuff like that only because I am a weirdo who often listens to the same podcasts twice.

 

For you to recall that obscure item of info, which is something that Jay only mentioned once -- shows you listened intently so part of me doubts you really missed the larger point which he was crystal clear about from that same podcast let alone he repeated that same story in mulitple other podcasts.  
 

 

Locked into Sheehans show, he represents 90% of my listening time. Love Gruden on shows, so seek him out. Believe he has a chance to be a real talent in tv when he finally gives up the pipe dream of being an OC again. 
 

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

My point is I have some doubts that you believe some of the stuff your purport because it doesn't always add up and you are doing it because you like to play contrarian.  But for me there is so long I can hang in there with that approach without being exhausted.  

 

And if you truly do believe this stuff.  And feel so much conviction in all of your beliefs, why waste your time debating it?  In my mind at least it feels like it wouldn't matter to you if the source at hand walked the info right to your house, sat down with you for an hour and swore by it in blood that you will change your mind.

 

I like to engage and share opinions and at times understand others perspectives. Rarely is it ever a right or wrong type deal. 
 

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

For me, I think I am easier to budge.  I'll give a current example.  I've said a lot about Chase Young in other threads.  I've been listening over time to different narratives about him, including a reporter on the radio today and its making me reevaluate my previous takes.

 

 

For sure, I’ve been wrong and right about players. I’m with you. 

 

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

I know exactly at times what they think about so and so.  I can tell stories about them that other people don't know.  On the same token, if lets say 5 people that are in the know say something -- i don't care if what they say doesn't fit my predispositons, they will change my mind. 

I’m with you for the most part. There’s often times inconsistencies in reporting and requires some outside the box thinking, in my opinion. Obviously that’s a personal choice. 
 

For example, Jay Gruden once said the Niners were willing to give up two 1st round picks, two 2nd round picks and more on top of it to acquire Kirk Cousins. Nooo, I don’t believe this just because he said it. He’s been all over the map with this, which leads me to speculate he’s not the best source. 

Edited February 9, 2023 by wit33

[KDawg]

6 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

More like SportCRACK, amirite?

 

$20…MILLION?

 

Alright [REDACTED] go get your bag. Just not here. And if he signs for that Danny Dimes is certainly worth 30-35

[FootballZombie]

Never in his life will he see a numby like that.

Dude would be lucky to get 5.

 

I don't think any other Org would even want him.

[actorguy1]

 

 

 

 

[Riggo#44]

29 minutes ago, KDawg said:

$20…MILLION?

 

Alright [REDACTED] go get your bag. Just not here. And if he signs for that Danny Dimes is certainly worth 30-35

If someone went full TBI-Vinny-Cerrato, and gave him that, it would mean we get a 3rd round comp pick, correct?

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, wit33 said:

 

For example, Jay Gruden once said the Niners were willing to give up two 1st round picks, two 2nd round picks and more on top of it to acquire Kirk Cousins. Nooo, I don’t believe this just because he said it. He’s been all over the map with this, which leads me to speculate he’s not the best source. 

 

The fact though that this is even a debate and you are still arguing this shows it a waste of my time to debate you on certain subjects (not all) because you are going to believe what you want to believe it seems. 

 

There isn't a single other person except for you debating the validity of the story, not here, not on twitter, not on call radio, all venues where the topic has been discussed and vetted.

 

It was super simple and straightforward.  Jay talked about one first round pick, which was 2nd pick of the draft, in one of the podcasts he took it a step further but the step further stuff came off as speculation.  

 

Jay actually repeated that story in at least 3 different podcasts.  It was clear enough that other reporters talked about it on their own shows. 

 

If that wasn't enough and you wonder about Jay, its  a little weird you don't trust it in my book but what really makes it uber weird is that Mike Jones talked to the actual horses mouth about it and was super direct -- Kyle Shanahan and he confirmed the exact same story that a first was offered (and did so in real time not in retrospect) and you choose to flat out ignore that like it means nothing.   Jones didn't say though more than a first.

 

That part of this has been talked about on this thread and I've mentioned it to you plenty of times in the past.  But apparently its inconvenient for someone else on the other side of the story to back Jay's story and was clear as a bell about it.  So lets just ignore it like Jones never kicked in on the same story? 

 

Your thesis is referencing one of those podcasts where Jay speculated beyond the first round draft pick that if they negotiated that he thinks they could have gotten even more including one more number 1 and change.  You take that part of his conversation that they could have gotten even more to twist it to somehow that means they actually got offered nothing.  That's beyond pretzel logic to me. 

 

Since Jones said just the first, I'll stick to Jay thinking it could have been more as mere speculation.  But the first rounder is clear. So I am sticking to just the facts that's consistent from one story to the next.  

 

The same point applies to the arguments on Dan including your point that this is a destination spot.  You seem determined to not let up and "win" this as if we are in court and you got to stick to your side of the argument no matter what is presented. 

Edited February 9, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, Riggo#44 said:

More like SportCRACK, amirite?

 

 

I'd be surprised if he gets over 6 million.   I am so sick of the narrative that i am rooting he ends up elsewhere

[mistertim]

1 hour ago, wit33 said:

Well, isn’t that convenient, pick and choose which ones you like. 

 

Are you telling me you seriously don't see the enormous and glaring difference between QBs like Cam or Lamar and QBs like Mahomes or Allen? 

 

Who do you think will more likely be playing at an All-Pro level 5 years from now: Mahomes or Lamar? I think anyone who says Lamar is delusional, and that's the biggest difference. Running QBs are a flash in the pan. Dual threat QBs can last.

 

But debating this with you is probably about as fruitful as debating the cap or rookie QB contracts. You've staked out your position and you're anchored to it with high tensile steel and it will never change. So I guess we can just agree to disagree.