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

[Koolblue13]

I think Fields is going to suck his way out of the league. Hurts on the other hand.........  we might be in trouble.

 

[KDawg]

11 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

As I mentioned, I was watching the game on a TV over a crowd of people, and couldn't entirely focus on everything, but this play really stood out as "bad footwork." 

 

I still think he's got a ways to go before he's a Top 15-type guy.  We'll see.  I wasn't as high on Fields as you were, but I think he was in a terrible situation last year, and we'll see how he does.

 

It's also a new coach and scheme, and probably some new techniques. 

 

For about 3 days, there was a chance Wilson was interested in Chicago.  If he went to Chicago, I wanted to see if we could get Fields here.  

 

Clearly none of that happened.  I do think Wentz this year is ahead of Fields this year, but how that plays out over time, who knows.  

Again, Wentz had 8 fumbles last year, good for the 17th ranking (1 being the worst)

 

And Gibson isn't going to be our starting running back.  At least, he is not going to be the RB with the most carries.  

Agreed. Wentz is much further ahead than Fields. It’s not even close, tbh. Fields is a guy who needed to get rid of the ball and refine footwork a bit (rest of his mechanics are fine). But those two things are not easy to fix. 
 

Going to Chicago was not a great spot for him. He is similar to Haskins in that way (I’m not comparing the two. I think Fields is far better as a prospect… but being drafted the lame duck regimes and regimes that were literally bottoming out and not rebounding yet is a common trait). 
 

Fields by all accounts works his ass off. But I’m not sure if he’s going to fix it and the longer he goes the more the bad habits get ingrained (that part IS a him problem).

 

I have zero issues admitting when I’m wrong about a prospect. Fields has work to do to get to where I thought he would. But to others (not you): his OL might be the worst in the league. You have to take that into account.

[Koolblue13]

Bears Oline isn't good enough to be considered trash. Glad we don't play them week one, because we'd probably think we're gods going into Detroit.

[CobraCommander]

13 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

I think Fields is going to suck his way out of the league. Hurts on the other hand.........  we might be in trouble.

 

Brewing some strong Kool-Aid up in Philly these days. 

[Warhead36]

Hurts will be the reason the Eagles don't win double digit games. Fortunately for them they still have a ton of draft capital to make a move for a QB next year.

 

I too think they'll disappoint this year. They feasted on weak competition all of 2021. Not a single win against a playoff team(even we had two).

[mistertim]

1 hour ago, Koolblue13 said:

I think Fields is going to suck his way out of the league. Hurts on the other hand.........  we might be in trouble.

 

 

My co-founder is an Eagles fan and he's really worried about the Hurts situation because he thinks Hurts will probably end up being good enough to be an ok starter but never good enough to be a top tier QB and take them anywhere. So then after this season the Eagles will either have to overpay big time for a mediocre QB or they'll just have to cut bait and try again.

 

I think he's probably right. 

Edited August 19, 2022 by mistertim

[Koolblue13]

9 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

My co-founder is an Eagles fan and he's really worried about the Hurts situation because he thinks Hurts will probably end up being good enough to be an ok starter but never good enough to be a top tier QB and take them anywhere. So then after this season the Eagles will either have to overpay big time for a mediocre QB or they'll just have to cut bait and try again.

 

I think he's probably right. 

They definitely have the team around him to succeed and the ammo to make a move if it doesn't, but I think the Eagles are going to be a 12+ win team and first in the East.

[HigSkin]

Finally, something positive from a national sports media smuck.

 

Cowherd points to things we've been discussing-

 

Wentz 9th rated QBR last season

Not enough talent on the team at needed positions

Ryan gonna find out quickly Wentz had to play more recklessly due to lack of talent at key positions

Ryan may protect the ball better but he isn't gonna escape rushes

For whatever reason Colts have had meltdowns with Jags over the years

 

 

 

Edited August 19, 2022 by HigSkin

[Koolblue13]

Looking forward, with the prices paid for rookie QBs last year and none of them, except Mac looking like starters vs this past draft and teams grabbing guys in rounds 3-6 and sitting them, could really be interesting.

[HigSkin]

 

[philibusters]

50 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

My co-founder is an Eagles fan and he's really worried about the Hurts situation because he thinks Hurts will probably end up being good enough to be an ok starter but never good enough to be a top tier QB and take them anywhere. So then after this season the Eagles will either have to overpay big time for a mediocre QB or they'll just have to cut bait and try again.

 

I think he's probably right. 

 

You can absolutely build a good team with Hurts at QB if he is making 2 million a season.   He is a good runner and serviceable passer and if you surround him with talent on offense and have a solid defense, they can make the playoffs most years, and maybe have one or two contender teams (roughly a top 6 or 7 team in the NFL as that is how many teams typically have a realistic shot at a super bowl each year)  in a 7 or 8 year period.  But you may not be able to do that if he is making 40 million.  And that will be the issue when Hurts rookie contract is up---can you build a good enough team around him for him to succeed if he is making 40 million.

 

For example Wentz is making 28 million--Hurts 2 million.  If our starting QB was set to make 2 million for say the next three years, we could resign all the D-Line and trade for a Bates or Roquan Smith and upgrade our D.  Having an extra 26 million just makes things easier.

[Chris 44]

27 minutes ago, HigSkin said:

Finally, something positive from a national sports media smuck.

 

Cowherd points to things we've been discussing-

 

Wentz 9th rated QBR last season

Not enough talent on the team at needed positions

Ryan gonna find out quickly Wentz had to play more recklessly due to lack of talent at key positions

Ryan may protect the ball better but he isn't gonna escape rushes

For whatever reason Colts have had meltdowns with Jags over the years

 

 

 

I recall Coward being one of the very few national media to have been somewhat positive about Wentz since he was first acquired.

[NewCliche21]

44 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

They definitely have the team around him to succeed and the ammo to make a move if it doesn't, but I think the Eagles are going to be a 12+ win team and first in the East.

 

Effing crazy that they blew their load in 2015 on Wentz, won the whole thing in 2017 without him, and are surging in 2022 with multiple first-round picks for 2023.

We won it all in 1991.  End of story.  FML

[mistertim]

5 minutes ago, philibusters said:

 

You can absolutely build a good team with Hurts at QB if he is making 2 million a season.   He is a good runner and serviceable passer and if you surround him with talent on offense and have a solid defense, they can make the playoffs most years, and maybe have one or two contender teams (roughly a top 6 or 7 team in the NFL as that is how many teams typically have a realistic shot at a super bowl each year)  in a 7 or 8 year period.  But you may not be able to do that if he is making 40 million.  And that will be the issue when Hurts rookie contract is up---can you build a good enough team around him for him to succeed if he is making 40 million.

 

For example Wentz is making 28 million--Hurts 2 million.  If our starting QB was set to make 2 million for say the next three years, we could resign all the D-Line and trade for a Bates or Roquan Smith and upgrade our D.  Having an extra 26 million just makes things easier.

 

That doesn't work in reality. The only way you win a SB on a rookie QB contract is by extreme luck, nothing else. You don't really have to time to "build around" a rookie QB to the point of being a contender. Rookie QBs usually will take at least a year or two until they're even decent, so then by the time you can manage to build a stacked team around them, their rookie contract will be up.

 

This cap analytics and wonkiness way of deciding on QBs is silly to me. Yes, having to pay your QB $40+ million per year is going to make it more difficult to pay lots of other top tier talent, but the whole point of having an elite QB is that he elevates the other players and doesn't necessarily need to have tons of mega stars all around him. So THOSE are the guys you cycle in and out...receivers, TEs, etc, not your QB.

 

Of course, the biggest problem is not having to pay $40+ million for a top 5 elite QB. Any team would gladly do that in a heartbeat. The problem is having to pay 40+ million for a "good" QB who can win if all the parts are around him, but will never be good enough to elevate the team.

[DJHJR86]

 

 

In no reality is Tyrod Taylor better than Wentz.  JP's ranking is the most accurate.  

[Koolblue13]

4 minutes ago, NewCliche21 said:

 

Effing crazy that they blew their load in 2015 on Wentz, won the whole thing in 2017 without him, and are surging in 2022 with multiple first-round picks for 2023.

We won it all in 1991.  End of story.  FML

Howie takes a serious beating in Philly, but Eagles fans have no idea how lucky they are right now. They are competitive and trending up, can do anything they want in the offseason and in a weak division that has Dallas trending down.

1 minute ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

 

In no reality is Tyrod Taylor better than Wentz.  JP's ranking is the most accurate.  

I thought about posting that. The first two are trash, the two on the right are fair. The top 3 are a lock in whatever order you put them.

[philibusters]

7 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

That doesn't work in reality. The only way you win a SB on a rookie QB contract is by extreme luck, nothing else. You don't really have to time to "build around" a rookie QB to the point of being a contender. Rookie QBs usually will take at least a year or two until they're even decent, so then by the time you can manage to build a stacked team around them, their rookie contract will be up.

 

This cap analytics and wonkiness way of deciding on QBs is silly to me. Yes, having to pay your QB $40+ million per year is going to make it more difficult to pay lots of other top tier talent, but the whole point of having an elite QB is that he elevates the other players and doesn't necessarily need to have tons of mega stars all around him. So THOSE are the guys you cycle in and out...receivers, TEs, etc, not your QB.

 

Of course, the biggest problem is not having to pay $40+ million for a top 5 elite QB. Any team would gladly do that in a heartbeat. The problem is having to pay 40+ million for a "good" QB who can win if all the parts are around him, but will never be good enough to elevate the team.

 

I was talking about Jalen Hurts in particular.  My point was if you put a good team around him, he is good enough at QB for the Eagles to be a good team.  But if he is making 40 million I don't think  you can build a team that you would expect to make the playoff most years around him.

In terms of rookie contracts, it definitely helps.  The Eagles made the Super Bowl in Wentz's second year (2017), Rams in Goffs third year (2018), Chiefs won it in Mahomes third year (2019) and lost it in his fourth year (2020), and the Bengals made it to the Super Bowl in Burrows second year (2021), so each of the last 5 Superbowls has had at least one QB on a rookie deal (with the caveat Wentz was injured for the Super Bowl in 2017).

Edited August 19, 2022 by philibusters

[DJHJR86]

 

 

 

 

Really, really bizarre at how different the signing of Fitzpatrick compared to the trading for Wentz.  I mean, Fitzpatrick was a terrible quarterback who had flashes of greatness and became a meme, but he too was on 3 teams in 3 different years and there was never any discussions about him being some terrible person or locker room cancer.  

[Thinking Skins]

8 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I am not a coordinator-play calling > leadership-personality kind of guy for HC.  I used to be but I am not anymore.  So many of the playcallers but not leader of men types flame out as head coaches.

 

Our best coaches during Dan's reign were Marty and Gibbs both were leaders of men types, no longer hot shot X and O's types.  As much as i like (but far from love) Scott as an offensive coordinator, I think he'd be almost Zorn level ridiculous pick as a head coach.  He's not as zany as Zorn but he strikes me almost as odd as a choice to lead a locker room.  To me Scott, is just way too low key, comes off a bit shy and akward, not much charisma, has no presence IMO that I can tell.  He'd be my last choice among the coordinators who work here as HC at least among the coordinators that I've seen interviewed.  

 

I know its an odd thing to say for me, as a dude who probably defended Scott as much as anyone here.  But IMHO he would be a cringe worthy choice as HC.  I like him as a coordinator but as a CEO type running the team I'd borderline gag. 

 

 

 

 

I could understand that and I'm probably in agreement with you. Normally I want a DC as head coach (Williams and Zimmer before calling for JDR before Ron) but none of those guys have lit it up either. And honestly I fear that some are just as bad to lead men as you say about Scott. I'm not even the offensive genius thing, we saw how Norv did with that. I think it's all about the QB, and the QB HC relationship. That's why I'm thinking about this because we lose Scott and we lose that relationship. But I get your point and I'm not going to slam on the table for Scott. Right now he's like a KOC type. I'm really meh and if Ron is doing well on everything else, let him keep the ship going. 

[FootballZombie]

21 minutes ago, DJHJR86 said:

Really, really bizarre at how different the signing of Fitzpatrick compared to the trading for Wentz.  I mean, Fitzpatrick was a terrible quarterback who had flashes of greatness and became a meme, but he too was on 3 teams in 3 different years and there was never any discussions about him being some terrible person or locker room cancer.  

 

Due to his age FitzMagic was never seen as a long term answer. He was a stop-gap or a bridge. His measurement bar for success with the media was to simply improve the QB room and provide better play then they guys who proceeded him. Not an amazingly hard lift if we are being honest. 

 

Wentz is not in that same boat. He was not brought in to be a temp. Wentz is being brought in for a chance to be the long term guy. The franchise QB. That is a much harder lift. His measurement bar for the media will be entrenching himself as the guy. Just being better than the guys before him wont be enough to accomplish that. Anything short of becoming the francise and he will be added to the long list of failed Washington QBs.

 

The two situations are not comparable as Fitz did not have half the expectation shoes to fill that Wentz does. Fitz did not have to do nearly as much when he signed to be deemed successful.

[Skinsinparadise]

37 minutes ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

 

 

 

Really, really bizarre at how different the signing of Fitzpatrick compared to the trading for Wentz.  I mean, Fitzpatrick was a terrible quarterback who had flashes of greatness and became a meme, but he too was on 3 teams in 3 different years and there was never any discussions about him being some terrible person or locker room cancer.  

 

Fitz's signing was better received.  And I agree its odd.  I disagree that he was a terrible QB.  He was a wildly inconsistent QB who had some of his better seasons later in his career.  

 

As a personality though he consistently just about was a 10 out of 10 by most accounts, so there shouldn't have been any discussion of him being a bad dude -- considering him being a leader and being beloved by the locker room is what he majored in.  I think he milked quite a career out of his magnetic personality.

 

Wentz i think by most accounts is a nice guy.  By some accounts he's a bit aloof and not the belle of the ball of the locker room type like a Fitzpatrick -- but the national media seems to twist this about Wentz where we got this odd narrative that he's a bad guy when he isn't.

 

Edited August 19, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Thinking Skins]

1 hour ago, Thinking Skins said:

I could understand that and I'm probably in agreement with you. Normally I want a DC as head coach (Williams and Zimmer before calling for JDR before Ron) but none of those guys have lit it up either. And honestly I fear that some are just as bad to lead men as you say about Scott. I'm not even the offensive genius thing, we saw how Norv did with that. I think it's all about the QB, and the QB HC relationship. That's why I'm thinking about this because we lose Scott and we lose that relationship. But I get your point and I'm not going to slam on the table for Scott. Right now he's like a KOC type. I'm really meh and if Ron is doing well on everything else, let him keep the ship going. 

I'm reading this and thinking about your much either my thoughts have evolved or I'm just willing to admit what I wasn't in the past which is the QB thing. I don't know percentage wise how much it depends on a QB because we saw Jimmy G almost do it and Goff and a number of mediocre guys but it shows you how much I'm in on Wentz that I'm talking like this instead of saying we need to get a low round pick to compete.

[mistertim]

2 hours ago, philibusters said:

 

I was talking about Jalen Hurts in particular.  My point was if you put a good team around him, he is good enough at QB for the Eagles to be a good team.  But if he is making 40 million I don't think  you can build a team that you would expect to make the playoff most years around him.

In terms of rookie contracts, it definitely helps.  The Eagles made the Super Bowl in Wentz's second year (2017), Rams in Goffs third year (2018), Chiefs won it in Mahomes third year (2019) and lost it in his fourth year (2020), and the Bengals made it to the Super Bowl in Burrows second year (2021), so each of the last 5 Superbowls has had at least one QB on a rookie deal (with the caveat Wentz was injured for the Super Bowl in 2017).

 

Sure, having a guy on a rookie contract helps, but trying desperately to reach a SB while your QB is still a rookie isn't much of a long term strategy. If you find an elite QB you're eventually going to pay him, and pay him a lot. Because the teams with elite QBs are the ones that are perennial contenders.

 

That's why I don't get some peoples' obsession with the cap percentage of a QB. Who cares? If he's an elite QB he's a force multiplier and will likely make you a contender for years to come. You just pay him and don't look back.

 

I guess the problem is if he's good but not great. Then you have to decide if you want to pay him a huge market rate and then just hope that you can build the kind of great supporting cast he'll need to go all the way or if you just want to cut your losses and try the draft again.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[mistertim]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

 

I still have yet to hear any decent explanation from sports media about how Wentz overall has such good TD:INT ratios (outside of 2020) when, according to them, he's easily one of the worst QBs in the entire NFL. They seem to mostly just ignore it.