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

[Skinsinparadise]

30 minutes ago, RWJ said:

 

SIP, the dude's going on 46 years old.  We don't need a has been or Y.A Tittle or George Blanda on this team.  With all due respect let's hope a new owner doesn't go that direction but goes for youth and someone up a coming.  Who that would be I don't know. 

 

46, you don't say?  If I only I would have known.  

 

I kid .   We differ on this.    I explained in detail in the past why i think it would be a good move including for Howell.  The team being closer to winning than some IMO think.  And what a name like that would do for a franchise desperate for relevance.  

 

But I don't care enough to argue because of the lack of realism on this. 

 

Feels like we are the class nerd who can't get a date to save our lives (supposedly even Wentz didn't want to come here) yet arguing about whether we'd tell Christine Brinkley to take a hike or not on the wild off chance she'd consider dating us because she's past her prime. 

 

6 minutes ago, mistertim said:

So we're supposed to believe that either a new owner (and potential coaching staff) will be fully in place by March 15th in time to woo Sean Payton and Tom Brady or that both of those guys will come here without having any idea who the owner will be or if they'll keep the current coaching staff?

 

Come on, guys.

 

lol, I don't believe it. 

 

But on the wild off chance it did happen even if I were in the hate the idea of Brady group, I'd still love it if somehow it went down - because what a tour de force it would be for an owner to organize all of that before even being in place.  It would get me fired up for that reason alone. 

 

On that same token, I am not with the idea of trade a draft pick for Payton but if that's what happens behind the scenes with a new owner -- I'd dig it for two reasons.  1.  Dan is definitely out.  2,  The new owner is a real mover and shaker.  

Edited January 29, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[mistertim]

17 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

46, you don't say?  If I only I would have known.  

 

I kid .   We differ on this.    I explained in detail in the past why i think it would be a good move including for Howell.  The team being closer to winning than some IMO think.  And what a name like that would do for a franchise desperate for relevance.  

 

But I don't care enough to argue because of the lack of realism on this. 

 

Feels like we are the class nerd who can't get a date to save our lives (supposedly even Wentz didn't want to come here) yet arguing about whether we'd tell Christine Brinkley to take a hike or not on the wild off chance she'd consider dating us because she's past her prime. 

 

 

lol, I don't believe it. 

 

But on the wild off chance it did happen even if I were in the hate the idea of Brady group, I'd still love it if somehow it went down - because what a tour de force it would be for an owner to organize all of that before even being in place.  It would get me fired up for that reason alone. 

 

On that same token, I am not with the idea of trade a draft pick for Payton but if that's what happens behind the scenes with a new owner -- I'd dig it for two reasons.  1.  Dan is definitely out.  2,  The new owner is a real mover and shaker.  

 

Yeah the whole idea is just not realistic to me. Like debating about whether or not Ferrari is overhyped so we're not sure if we want to buy one, when we currently have the resources to buy a Honda and have no idea if or when that might drastically change.

 

As far as Brady himself, I'm kind of on the fence with it. On one hand Brady is the GOAT, would be a huge PR/marketing win, could potentially put us in SB contention. On the other hand, he will be 46 and there are some signs that his age is finally catching up to him, and if that's the case and he's not that same guy, we would waste a year on a hope and prayer instead of trying to get better in other areas and/or developing a younger guy.

 

So I wouldn't reflexively love it or hate it, but I'd be skeptical as to how truly effective it would be. 

[RWJ]

37 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

46, you don't say?  If I only I would have known.  

 

I kid .   We differ on this.    I explained in detail in the past why i think it would be a good move including for Howell.  The team being closer to winning than some IMO think.  And what a name like that would do for a franchise desperate for relevance.  

 

But I don't care enough to argue because of the lack of realism on this. 

 

Feels like we are the class nerd who can't get a date to save our lives (supposedly even Wentz didn't want to come here) yet arguing about whether we'd tell Christine Brinkley to take a hike or not on the wild off chance she'd consider dating us because she's past her prime. 

Thanks, SIP.  At least we respect each other and can agree to disagree at times.   

 

[kingdaddy]

Eagles sucked 2 years ago, rid themselves of Wentz contract and went on the cheap with Hurts. They then built the roster and PAID guys like Slay, Brown, Reddick, Bradbury, etc while drafting Devonta Smith and others. You can be good quickly with this formula, building the roster with free agent studs and drafting well. Sure you need good QB play but, as the Niners showed too, you can add so many great players with cap space that you need to be aggressive and do it. Hassan Reddick and AJ Brown took the Eagles to a Super Bowl level as compliments to what they already had. 

I don't know if we can do it this year (ownership change) but we need to start making big splashes in free agency to add on to the great drafts we've had recently. Whatever offensive linemen are available we need to be in on. Any defensive playmakers that can help us we need to be in on. It's time to go all in and add where we need to so this defensive line can be even better. Show the guys we have that we'll give them additional firepower to become an elite team. Roll with Howell, sign a solid vet at a reasonable deal and start kicking ass. I'm optimistic that by declaring Howell the starter that RR and company realize this is how they can do it. 

[redskinss]

4 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

personally wouldn't trade a pick for Payton albeit I do like him as a coach.  Reading articles on this the story seems to be the Saints are playing hardball on the draft compensation.   Wonder if they end up relenting and deducing its better to get something versus nothing for Payton.  Payton's contract expires after the 2024 season so he's locked in for 2 more seasons if they pay hardball.

How much longer do the saints hold his rights for?

 

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, redskinss said:

How much longer do the saints hold his rights for?

 

Forever.

[redskinss]

2 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Forever.

Really?

Is that how it works, you retire and the contract just continues to toll perpetually?

 

[KDawg]

5 minutes ago, redskinss said:

Really?

Is that how it works, you retire and the contract just continues to toll perpetually?

 

 

I was joking. Pretty sure they only have it through next season.

[Jericho]

7 hours ago, KDawg said:

I think I’m one of the few who would understand a Brady move but not like it.

 

I agree. For a franchise that basically killed the starting careers of McNabb, Burnell, Alex Smith, Fitzpatrick, Rex Grossman, and probably Wentz in the last 20 years, it makes sense to put the final nail in Brady. It won't be pretty, but it's basically what this team does and would be very on brand

Edited January 30, 2023 by Jericho

[HigSkin]

This is hilarious and straight up speculation by DCSports80 but still....

 

 

 

[mistertim]

One other thing to consider regarding Brady: how likely would he be to go to a team that has a brand new OC who is installing a brand new system? I

 

I'm sure picking it up would be zero issue for Brady himself, but every other player on the offense would also be adjusting to a new system, which takes time. That makes it much less likely that, despite having some good talent, a team is truly ready to go to the SB that year, which is what Brady is looking for.

 

Brady will be quite aware of this so I'd be skeptical that he'd choose to go to a team that is in the midst of not only a turnover of ownership, but a turnover of offensive system.

Edited January 30, 2023 by mistertim

[tmandoug1]

Pretty sure Brady would be the pseudo OC......smart dude that is most likely better than most OC's available if that makes sense. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

1 hour ago, mistertim said:

One other thing to consider regarding Brady: how likely would he be to go to a team that has a brand new OC who is installing a brand new system? I

 

I'm sure picking it up would be zero issue for Brady himself, but every other player on the offense would also be adjusting to a new system, which takes time. That makes it much less likely that, despite having some good talent, a team is truly ready to go to the SB that year, which is what Brady is looking for.

 

Brady will be quite aware of this so I'd be skeptical that he'd choose to go to a team that is in the midst of not only a turnover of ownership, but a turnover of offensive system.

I’m pretty sure Brady would get to have a HUGE say in the offense, terminology, etc.  

 

If he comes in with Peyton, it’s Peyton’s offense.  It wouldn’t matter who the OC was.  And for most of the position players, it won’t be that big a deal.  
 

It’s the QB that it’s a big deal for because he needs to know the entire offense.  Each other group needs to just kidof know their piece of it.  
 

If Brady has already had conversions with Peyton, I’m pretty sure they’ll be on the same page from the get go. 
 

In the extremely unlikely event the deal closes before March 1, Peyton is hired and we sign Brady, learning a new system will not be a concern.  

[Voice_of_Reason]

4 hours ago, kingdaddy said:

Eagles sucked 2 years ago, rid themselves of Wentz contract and went on the cheap with Hurts. 
…

You forgot the most important part of this though:

 

Hurts developed into an NFL MVP candidate caliber QB.  That’s a combination of good planning and good luck.  
 

If he has stunk, none of the other roster building would have mattered. 

 

Mahomes will get the MVP honors.  But Hurts might be second or third in voting.

 

It’s not just cheap that’s important.  It’s cheap AND great.

 

Also FWIW, Mahomes is NOT cheap and they are in the SB.

 

The key is getting great QB play.  If you have to pay for it, pay for it.  If you can get it cheap, get it cheap.

 

But the key is not the price.  It’s the quality of play.  
 

Of the 4 Conference Championship teams, 3 had legitimate top 10 QBs. I’d argue you could say top 5 QBs.  Clearly Mahomes and Burrow are top 5.  If Hurts isn’t, he’s definitely JUST outside it.  Herbert, Rodgers, Allen, Hurts, Brady would probably be in the mix for 3-7 if you say Burrow and Mahomes are 1/2. 
 

The 49ers are the outlier of the group.  
 

I’m fine rolling the dice with Howell, seeing if he develops.  But after 19 passes in a meaningless game, I’m not sure I’m willing to say if the Commanders upgraded the rest of the roster they would be the Eagles.  
 

Now, if they upgraded the roster and Howell turns out to be Steve Young? (Mobile, shorter QB with tremendous ability) then yeah, we’re cooking with gas.  
 

If he turns out to be … a slightly better Taylor Hienicke?  Eh, we’ll win a bit more but nothing of note. 
 

Unless you’re the 49ers, you basically need top 10 QB play to win a game or two in the playoffs.  
 

How you get it might vary, but that’s what you need. 

Edited January 30, 2023 by Voice_of_Reason

[mistertim]

1 hour ago, tmandoug1 said:

Pretty sure Brady would be the pseudo OC......smart dude that is most likely better than most OC's available if that makes sense. 

 

Sure, but Brady is still working within a system. No coach or OC is just going to say "Draw up whatever plays you want and run them however you want."

 

You have to take the whole team into account, and that needs some sort of offensive system that everyone is working within and everyone is familiar with.

 

Guys like Brady and Peyton are the best ever at diagnosing plays, making adjustments at the line, and punishing defenses for making mistakes. But they still had to work within a system.

 

48 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

You forgot the most important part of this though:

 

Hurts developed into an NFL MVP candidate caliber QB.  That’s a combination of good planning and good luck.  
 

If he has stunk, none of the other roster building would have mattered. 

 

 

Yeah I don't get why he seemed to completely ignore that in his post. The Eagles jettisoning Wentz and building a roster would have been meaningless if Hurts hadn't developed into a star.

Edited January 30, 2023 by mistertim

[RWJ]

3 hours ago, HigSkin said:

This is hilarious and straight up speculation by DCSports80 but still....

 

 

 

Right there with you, HigSkin and totally agree. 

[88Comrade2000]

You can’t just fire Ron and go to Payton. You will have to inter 2 minorities before hiring Sean. Good luck getting any minorities to interview; knowing it’s a sham to just comply with Rooney rule.

[FootballZombie]

3 hours ago, 88Comrade2000 said:

You can’t just fire Ron and go to Payton. You will have to inter 2 minorities before hiring Sean. Good luck getting any minorities to interview; knowing it’s a sham to just comply with Rooney rule.

 

We would have to trade for Sean.

 

I don't know for sure but I'm not confident the rooney rule applies there.

[88Comrade2000]

1 hour ago, FootballZombie said:

 

We would have to trade for Sean.

 

I don't know for sure but I'm not confident the rooney rule applies there.

We can trade for him

but before that, we would have to comply.  When there’s a coaching opening, you must interview 2 minorities; even if that opening is in March.

 

[HigSkin]

Perspective and case for not spending the big bucks on QB's for those teams that haven't found their franchise guy.  He suggests if you're not able to be picking high first round to keep drafting lower round guys every year until you hit on one.

 

 

[Warhead36]

The point like someone else mentioned earlier is you need QUALITY at QB. Its fine to pay for a guy if you're paying for someone like Mahomes or Allen or prime Brady, Rodgers etc. etc. But if you're not paying for someone like that, then you're better off with a guy on a rookie contract who's got some talent and then stack the team around him.

 

The big mistake is paying elite money for a guy who might only be pretty good, like a Cousins or Dak. Now sometimes those types of guys can get red hot in the postseason and fuel a Super Bowl run(see Eli Manning or Flacco)but most of the time guys like that just keep you in purgatory.

[KDawg]

4 hours ago, 88Comrade2000 said:

We can trade for him

but before that, we would have to comply.  When there’s a coaching opening, you must interview 2 minorities; even if that opening is in March.

 

I don't think they'll struggle to comply. 

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[stoshuaj]

RE: Jalen Hurts, I thought around here the only way to get a potential SB quarterback is to tank and get one in the top of the 1st round?

[Warhead36]

1 minute ago, stoshuaj said:

RE: Jalen Hurts, I thought around here the only way to get a potential SB quarterback is to tank and get one in the top of the 1st round?

Hurts is an interesting case. He was a high 2nd round pick so its not like he was some late round flyer. But he was a very highly regarded talent in college who had to transfer because he lost his original starting job at Alabama. It was kind of a strange set of circumstances that caused him to drop. I think normally a talent like his would have probably been a 1st rounder(maybe not top of the 1st, but like middle or bottom of the 1st like a Lamar Jackson type).