The Official QB Thread- JD5 taken #2. Randal 2.0 or Bayou Bob? Mariota and Fromm battle for QB2 and so begins the Handsome Harem for Hartman

[wit33]

1 hour ago, skinny21 said:

@wit33I could be way wrong, but what I think(?) you might be missing - setting aside the culture, facilities, lack of a qb, etc - just honing in on the financials…

The (potential/likely) cash flow issues mean a hesitancy or even resistance to setting aside guaranteed money in an escrow account when that money could instead be earning interest.  So trading for Wentz, for example, becomes a lot more attractive because no money had to be set aside.  Whereas if Wentz had come with guaranteed 15mil each year (over 3 years), that’s 45 million that would not have been accruing interest (and worth bearing in mind the last 15mil would have been accruing interest for more than 2+ years).  

 

Now, obviously that’s a bad example, because surely part of the attractiveness of the trade was the ability to cut him whenever due to the lack of guaranteed money.

And to be fair, pretty significant guaranteed money had to be set aside for the deals for Terry/Allen.  But it’s easy to see how signing bigger names - for example, higher priced guards than Norwell/Turner - would have likely meant longer term deals with fairly substantial guaranteed money, and therefore however many millions not accruing interest for Dan.  
 

Anyway, the point is (I think) - sure, Dan is still paying up to the cap, but he’s doing it on a year-to-year basis with league money, not having to set aside many millions ahead of time (on top of what’s already set aside for current guaranteed money).  Essentially penny pinching on a macro level.

 

Or that’s how I understand it anyway.  And of course, that’s assuming the talk/reporting/rumors are correct.  One last point - this suggests that Ron being given a budget isn’t about how much cap money he can spend, but rather how much guaranteed money he can spend.

Is any of this different than the status quo of the NFL? 
 

It seems media and fans are jumping on the wagon of how the Saints, Buccaneers and Rams etc., have chosen to manage the cap as “the way”. 
 

22 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

To defend your points as to this being a destintation spot, Jay-Mike Jones are foggy or lying about Kirk, etc. -- its not about pre-conceived theories.  It's downright conspiracy theory turf to run with your thoughts with multiple people lying about a lot of stuff, and the conspiracy runs deep -- national reporters, local reporters, agents, insiders who actually work for the team are all lying.   It reminds me of some of the thoughts by some on the FO thread back in the day with some thinking the Bruce-Dan stories were made up or embellished and multiple media efforts and sources were in on the cabal.  It's cool to each their own but we are wasting each other time to keep beating on this track.

 

Free agents can careless about who or what is “destination spot”. Secure the most money, continue have opportunity to perform to earn more money and if by chance there’s a chance to win… awesome. 
 

It’s league stocked full of average, who knows what’s going to happen one season to the next. Control what you can control—money earned, and keep it moving. 

 

22 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Also don't want to derail the thread.  So bringing this back on point as to Carr.  Yeah at 32 coming off the worst season of his career since his rookie season -- his leverage is at an all time low -- especially with Jimmy G entering FA and Rodgers on the market.  He's not the only game in town and is being traded or released at the low point of his powers versus the peak of his powers.  So it should be interesting.  

 

Worst season by fans looking at stats. The dude was no different this season than the previous. He is who he is. Was shocked Raiders gave an extension of that size, then not surprised to learn later how the contract was structured and them having an out after one season. 
 

I don’t dislike Carr, just know he’s in the soup of about 70-75% of other QBs. You can win a SB with Carr just as you can with Foles. This level of QB must get humbled by the NFL and begin to work with their organizations from a contract standpoint.
 

They’ve become entitled and hold franchises hostage—you deserve nothing. Will gratitude return, who knows, not by his sly comment at the skills challenge—still seems to be employing an entitled mindset. Yuck! 

[Skinsinparadise]

14 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

 

Free agents can careless about who or what is “destination spot”. Secure the most money, continue have opportunity to perform to earn more money and if by chance there’s a chance to win… awesome. 
 

It’s league stocked full of average, who knows what’s going to happen one season to the next. Control what you can control—money earned, and keep it moving. 

 

 

The goal posts keep changing.  Before it was if anything this is a preferred destination spot because of the losing at least in terms of attracting marquee players -- because you said they want the extra power and money that affords them by coming to a more desperate team.  Is that still a point? 

 

Or is it just FAs care about money so every team has an equal shot but you admit that losing is a problem.  Which point am I debating? 

 

If record is everything, they are plenty worst teams than this team.  Why did Russell Wilson supposedly really really want to go to Denver and some say not to here?  as you expressed Denver isn't a good organization so how can that be?

Edited February 8, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[wit33]

12 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

The goal posts keep changing.  Before it was if anything this is a preferred destination spot because of the losing at least in terms of attracting marquee players -- because you said they want the extra power and money that affords them by coming to a more desperate team.  Is that still a point? 
 

 

Nope, goal posts have not changed in the least bit. Players seek money and financial leverage with number of guaranteed years, there form of power within the NFL business paradigm. High profile Coaches seek money and FO power— this isn’t debate, it’s truth. Do you disagree with these factors? 
 

If Washington wants let’s say  a high profile free agent like Jessie Bates this off-season and willing to outbid everyone, they will get him. Jessie Bates is seeking his second contract with nothing else on his mind other than securing the most money possible.

 

Sure, on his 4th contract priorities change and his overall market will evolve and mature, then more factors can play into it all. He won’t be as highly sought after as he ages and his market price is more likely to fall in range where a competitive team with some available cap can have a chance to snag him. 

 

Fully admit, the free agent market landscape has changed and contending team are more likely to compete with this type of player more these days. With that said, if applying probabilities, the Bears are most likely to get him or a similar caliber of team. 
 

The QB , especially perceived elites operate outside of the normal business paradigm that is the NFL. Brady his entire career chose to operate within this paradigm and chose the spot he felt was best out of options he had. Wilson did some of the same, but wanted money and an awkward amount of power within the doors of the organization. Two different types of cats, Wilson more like your boy Cousins  jk… but a little serious 🧐 
 

These discussions have legs due to nuance, not in my view moving goal posts. I expect Houston, Carolina, Bears and Atlanta to win in free agency and attract top players. 
 

 

 

12 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Or is it just FAs care about money so every team has an equal shot but you admit that losing is a problem.  Which point am I debating?

 

 

The free agents seeking his first contract outside of his rookie deal cares muuuuch less about the chances to win and in some cases this is true for veterans, especially in a league that’s make or break for 80% of the teams. 
 

12 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

 

If record is everything, they are plenty worst teams than this team.  Why did Russell Wilson supposedly really really want to go to Denver and some say not to here?  as you expressed Denver isn't a good organization so how can that be?

Denver was willing to meet all demands and had a defense who performed well in previous years. Not sure Ron Rivera could sleep at night if he met all demands of Wilson and company—would’ve been absolutely shocked if Ricera conceded to Wilson’s request and immediately been out on him as a dude and coach. 
 

No surprise Payton checking Wilson and I’m sure working to establish a relationship filled with more gratitude and togetherness. The Denver organization lacked leadership and anyone with the cache to challenge any of this. 

[mistertim]

3 hours ago, KDawg said:

 

 

 

 

 

Numbers going across are: Class, Position, Games, Completions, Attempts, Comp %, Yards, Yards/Attempt, Adjusted Passing Yards/Attempt, TD, INT, Rating.

 

Can you guess who each belongs to?

 

 

 

The Josh Allen comparison is a bit like saying that an electron has a chance of tunneling from its current orbital shell to one that 5 miles away from the nucleus of its atom. Sure, it could happen, but it doesn't really happen.

 

Allen is a complete and utter one-off. I can't think of a single other QB who put up the kinds of numbers he did in college and who had such a below average completion percentage and then suddenly went on to be an elite NFL passer. It's unprecedented and will probably never happen again.

 

I actually really liked Allen coming out, but I figured he'd be one of those guys who relied mostly on his size and physical ability to overcome his mediocre accuracy, etc. What happened to him between 2019 and 2020 will forever be a mystery, though I suspect some sort of ritual sacrifices took place.

 

My default assumption, because it's pretty much always been the case, is that an inaccurate QB in college will continue to have accuracy issues in the NFL.

[KDawg]

2 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

The Josh Allen comparison is a bit like saying that an electron has a chance of tunneling from its current orbital shell to one that 5 miles away from the nucleus of its atom. Sure, it could happen, but it doesn't really happen.

 

Allen is a complete and utter one-off. I can't think of a single other QB who put up the kinds of numbers he did in college and who had such a below average completion percentage and then suddenly went on to be an elite NFL passer. It's unprecedented and will probably never happen again.

 

I actually really liked Allen coming out, but I figured he'd be one of those guys who relied mostly on his size and physical ability to overcome his mediocre accuracy, etc. What happened to him between 2019 and 2020 will forever be a mystery, though I suspect some sort of ritual sacrifices took place.

 

My default assumption, because it's pretty much always been the case, is that an inaccurate QB in college will continue to have accuracy issues in the NFL.

I disagree with this entire take. 
 

Keep in mind, I’m not advocating for Richardson. So let’s not get it twisted.

 

I’m advocating against people dismissing him for his stats. Which is a crusade I am regularly on. So it’s not some island I just decided to stand on.

 

One thing you aren’t counting on is that the modern day QB is very different than the old school QB. Allen could be the start… not the end… of a trend. 
 

Also, Lamar Jackson had a sub 60% completion percentage and he’s turned out pretty good.

 

 

[wit33]

4 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

 

One thing you aren’t counting on is that the modern day QB is very different than the old school QB. Allen could be the start… not the end… of a trend. 
 

This right here—Takes a while to divorce romantic relationships with the past.

 

The dual threat QB is here to stay. Jalen Hurts might win one while on a rookie deal.

 

 

[mistertim]

3 minutes ago, KDawg said:

I disagree with this entire take. 
 

Keep in mind, I’m not advocating for Richardson. So let’s not get it twisted.

 

I’m advocating against people dismissing him for his stats. Which is a crusade I am regularly on. So it’s not some island I just decided to stand on.

 

One thing you aren’t counting on is that the modern day QB is very different than the old school QB. Allen could be the start… not the end… of a trend. 
 

Also, Lamar Jackson had a sub 60% completion percentage and he’s turned out pretty good.

 

 

 

I'm not saying he should be dismissed because of his stats. I'm saying that comparing him to what seems to be a once-in-a-lifetime freak occurrence in Josh Allen is not a great idea. Sure, Allen could be the start of inaccurate college QBs suddenly morphing to QBs with elite accuracy in the NFL, but since there isn't really any evidence to support that, I don't see any specific reason to think that's the case until it starts regularly happening.

 

And sure, Lamar went from 59% to 62% completion, but I don't think that's nearly as relevant since Lamar is a running QB and only a mediocre passer whereas Allen is an elite passer who is also excellent when using his legs. IMO they aren't even in the same category as QBs.

 

I wouldn't hate Richardson, but I certainly wouldn't take him in the 1st round.

[Skinsinparadise]

54 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

Nope, goal posts have not changed in the least bit. Players seek money and financial leverage with number of guaranteed years, there form of power within the NFL business paradigm. High profile Coaches seek money and FO power— this isn’t debate, it’s truth. Do you disagree with these factors? 

 

It's a strawman.  The argument isn't whether coaches seek money or power. 

 

The argument is as you presented the other day the Commanders would be one of the top destination spots for any player or coach -- this is where they want to go. 

 

So in turn when Logan Paulsen says the FO finds them struggiling to lure players here and agents say they are not sending their players with options to this team in part because of the scandals and Dan -- its all a lie?

 

 

54 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

 

If Washington wants let’s say  a high profile free agent like Jessie Bates this off-season and willing to outbid everyone, they will get him. Jessie Bates is seeking his second contract with nothing else on his mind other than securing the most money possible.

 

 

As one article that discussed this said, they have to outbid probably by a nice margin.  So i am surprised for you of all people who seems obsessed with money and the cap -- talking about hey if we are the dude on the block that blows away the bid for the house and resets the market for the neighborhood, we can land name that player.  That's not a real way to run a team if you have to overpay for everyone.

 

54 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

Two different types of cats, Wilson more like your boy Cousins  jk… but a little serious 🧐 

 

Yeah I know you aren't joking.  You got very feisty on anything relating to Kirk and will die on any hill. .  Everytime you could on that QB thread you would shoot me or anyone else down that challenged how Bruce handled the compensation -- the third rounder was as good as it gets as far as you saw it, Bruce was a solid GM according to you then and Bruce nailed it on Kirk. 

 

No one agreed with you, not even the Kirk haters.  Mike Jones and Jay flat out multiple times have said they were offered a first or more.  Clear as bell.  So clear that other reporters picked up on it for their own podcasts and also talked about it.  But you being the one hold out saying its fake news is on point.  

 

My point here is who gives a rats behind that you were wrong.  Why not relent?   No one here is keeping score.  I've been wrong about things.  Everyone has.  It's the cost of doing business when you offer opinions.

 

Bringing this back on point, as some have said about Howie Roseman part of the reason why he's such a good GM is he can cut his losses and admit it when he's wrong so he can turn another page versus caring about justfying things, getting bogged down with ego, and doubling down on mistakes.

Edited February 8, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[mistertim]

3 minutes ago, wit33 said:

This right here—Takes a while to divorce romantic relationships with the past.

 

The dual threat QB is here to stay. Jalen Hurts might win one while on a rookie deal.

 

 

 

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

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, mistertim said:

 

I'm not saying he should be dismissed because of his stats. I'm saying that comparing him to what seems to be a once-in-a-lifetime freak occurrence in Josh Allen is not a great idea. Sure, Allen could be the start of inaccurate college QBs suddenly morphing to QBs with elite accuracy in the NFL, but since there isn't really any evidence to support that, I don't see any specific reason to think that's the case until it starts regularly happening.

 

And sure, Lamar went from 59% to 62% completion, but I don't think that's nearly as relevant since Lamar is a running QB and only a mediocre passer whereas Allen is an elite passer who is also excellent when using his legs. IMO they aren't even in the same category as QBs.

 

I wouldn't hate Richardson, but I certainly wouldn't take him in the 1st round.

But him evolving into an elite passer isn’t part of my argument. Again, you’re arguing against a take I didn’t make.

 

My point, and the entirety of my point, was not to dismiss Richardson. Not to hail him as a potential elite passer.

 

My use of Josh Allen was NOT to say he is Josh Allen… but to point out a guy with similar production issues who made it… a guy who some outwardly laughed away prior to the draft. 
 

Point: It’s folly to dismiss potential outright. 
 

 

[Zim489]

 

[mistertim]

13 minutes ago, KDawg said:

But him evolving into an elite passer isn’t part of my argument. Again, you’re arguing against a take I didn’t make.

 

My point, and the entirety of my point, was not to dismiss Richardson. Not to hail him as a potential elite passer.

 

My use of Josh Allen was NOT to say he is Josh Allen… but to point out a guy with similar production issues who made it… a guy who some outwardly laughed away prior to the draft. 
 

Point: It’s folly to dismiss potential outright. 
 

 

True, it's folly to dismiss potential outright, which is why I'm not dismissing Richardson. But I just feel like it's a bit of a loaded comparison when using Josh Allen because he's really a completely and utterly unique case. Usually guys who struggle with accuracy in college still struggle at least somewhat with it in the NFL.

[wit33]

10 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

It's a strawman.  The argument isn't whether coaches seek money or power. 

 

The argument is as you presented the other day the Commanders would be one of the top destination spots for any player or coach -- this is where they want to go. 
 

 

The point being the top destination spot is whichever organization is will cede most power and money to the coach and most money to the player. 
 

What’s the disconnect, to name a few examples off the top of my head of guys going to weak franchises willing to give most money and power:

 

Mike Shannahan

Jon Gruden

Urban Meyer

Sean Payton

Nick Saban

 

The Jaguars won free agency last year. The Bears, Texans, Falcons etc. will most likely win it this year. 

 

10 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

So in turn when Logan Paulsen says the FO finds them struggiling to lure players here and agents say they are not sending their players with options to this team in part because of the scandals and Dan -- its all a lie?

 

I’ll need more context and examples from Paulsen. My understanding with Ron is philosophically he disagrees with spending a lot in free agency and the team has a lot of home grown talent needing to be paid. Money lures free agents, but I concede tenured veterans will pursuit winning situations for a 1-2 year window and Washington would not be a desired option for this type of free agent. 
 

10 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

As one article that discussed this said, they have to outbid probably by a nice margin.  So i am surprised for you of all people who seems obsessed with money and the cap -- talking about hey if we are the dude on the block that blows away the bid for the house and resets the market for the neighborhood, we can land name that player.  That's not a real way to run a team if you have to overpay for everyone.

 

Outbidding is required in free agency. This isn’t a Washington issue. The Patriots made a major splash two seasons ago and had to pay a premium—the best organization in all of football. 
 

10 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

Yeah I know you aren't joking.  You got very feisty on anything relating to Kirk and will die on any hill. .  Everytime you could on that QB thread you would shoot me or anyone else down that challenged how Bruce handled the compensation -- the third rounder was as good as it gets as far as you saw it, Bruce was a solid GM according to you then and Bruce nailed it on Kirk. 
 

 

Oh ya, Kirk remains a fun topic to engage in here or there, especially in the off season  

 

10 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

No one agreed with you, not even the Kirk haters.  Mike Jones and Jay flat out multiple times have said they were offered a first or more.  Clear as bell.  So clear that other reporters picked up on it for their own podcasts and also talked about it.  But you being the one hold out saying its fake news is on point. 
 

 

Some reported Niners were willing to give both of their first round picks. Do you believe this as well? 

 

10 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Bringing this back on point, as some have said about Howie Roseman part of the reason why he's such a good GM is he can cut his losses and admit it when he's wrong so he can turn another page versus caring about justfying things, getting bogged down with ego, and doubling down on mistakes.

Yup, keep shooting shots at the QB position. I like idea of remaining lean while taking shots and a huge reason why the middling QB on a bloated contract can make it more difficult. 

[KDawg]

2 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

True, it's folly to dismiss potential outright, which is why I'm not dismissing Richardson. But I just feel like it's a bit of a loaded comparison when using Josh Allen because he's really a completely and utterly unique case. Usually guys who struggle with accuracy in college still struggle at least somewhat with it in the NFL.

You aren’t who I was originally replying to. You inserted yourself into the conversation and made an argument against a point I didn’t make. So I’m confused where the mix up is? 
 

you argued against a point I didn’t make, I’m letting you know you didn’t understand my original take, you continue to argue against a take I didn’t make. 
 

I’ve never said he wouldn’t stuggle with accuracy. His arm and his legs, though, give him fertile developmental ground. That is it. Not that he’s a superstar. Not that we should take him (we shouldn’t). Not that he’s going to be awesome. 
 

Just that dismissing him is a mistake. 

[Est.1974]

The key word in that Rivera segment was ‘competition’. Which cast off are we bring in?

[Skinsinparadise]

26 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

The point being the top destination spot is whichever organization is will cede most power and money to the coach and most money to the player. 
 

What’s the disconnect, to name a few examples off the top of my head of guys going to weak franchises willing to give most money and power:

 

Mike Shannahan

Jon Gruden

Urban Meyer

Sean Payton

Nick Saban

 

 

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

 

26 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

 

I’ll need more context and examples from Paulsen. My understanding with Ron is philosophically he disagrees with spending a lot in free agency and the team has a lot of home grown talent needing to be paid. Money lures free agents, but I concede tenured veterans will pursuit winning situations for a 1-2 year window and Washington would not be a desired option for this type of free agent. 

 

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.  

 

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. 

 

26 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

Outbidding is required in free agency. This isn’t a Washington issue. The Patriots made a major splash two seasons ago and had to pay a premium—the best organization in all of football. 
 

 

 

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.   

 

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. 

 

26 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

 

Oh ya, Kirk remains a fun topic to engage in here or there, especially in the off season  

 

 

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.  

 

 

26 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

 

Some reported Niners were willing to give both of their first round picks. Do you believe this as well? 

 

 

As far as whether it was the first pick AND change.  The change part is the only fuzzy part of the discussion.  You are the sole person who said Jay was fuzzy on whether anything at all was offered for Kirk.  He wasn't fuzzy at all, he was clear as a bell.  And Mike Jones talking to Shanny was clear as a bell that a first rounder was offered.   Not only were both clear as a bell but they repeated the narratives multiple times. 

 

The only part that Jay was fuzzy about was whether he thought they could get more than the first rounder.  He suspected they could but he didn't know.  The first round pick was offered.  But he felt he could get even more -- perhaps two first rounders but he wasn't sure about getting a 2nd first rounder.  

Edited February 8, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[Jumbo]

😁😁

 

[zCommander]

1 hour ago, Zim489 said:

 

 

Just going to add the comments from Nick Shook on the article from NFL.com. For those who keep on saying he is just a 5th rounder pay attention to the bolded part:

 

Howell's career appeared destined for such an opportunity, at least prior to his final season at North Carolina. Howell was regarded among the 2022 draft's top signal-callers entering the 2021 collegiate season, but a difficult year for the Tar Heels saw him fall from Day 1 or 2 consideration into the fifth round, where Washington selected him 144th overall and sat him behind Wentz and Taylor Heinicke for all but one game in 2022.

 

Howell could have completed his entire rookie season without registering more than a blip on the NFL radar, but his showing in a 26-6 win over Dallas in Week 18 -- in which Howell completed 11 of 19 passes for 169 yards, one touchdown and one interception -- earned him enough attention to prompt Wednesday's question regarding his standing in Washington entering 2023.

 

It seems as if Rivera is willing to give the unproven Howell the first chance to earn a starting job in 2023. This doesn't mean Washington won't be active in seeking another option at the position, especially considering the veteran talent expected to become available in March. But for now, at least, Howell is likely starting the new year as Washington's top quarterback.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[CapsSkins]

It’s a funny situation. Rivera wanted to draft Howell in the 2nd and roll with him as starter, which would have been a great move, but instead traded for Wentz, which ended up being a horrible move, but was able to draft Howell anyway, which could very well save his job as he most likely enters a hot seat year under new ownership.

[Est.1974]

27 minutes ago, CapsSkins said:

It’s a funny situation. Rivera wanted to draft Howell in the 2nd and roll with him as starter, which would have been a great move, but instead traded for Wentz, which ended up being a horrible move, but was able to draft Howell anyway, which could very well save his job as he most likely enters a hot seat year under new ownership.

The danger here could be that Rivera let’s his ‘ego’ get in the way of making the correct call at QB.  

[CapsSkins]

6 minutes ago, Est.1974 said:

The danger here could be that Rivera let’s his ‘ego’ get in the way of making the correct call at QB.  

I don’t get this line of thinking. Ron’s foremost priority is to win games so he keeps his job. And Howell is a guy *he* drafted, anyway. There’s no incentive for him to kneecap Sam’s opportunity. Quite the opposite, in fact.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[NoCalMike]

I think Ron saying they won't spend big capital on QB this offseason probably more means they aren't trading for any QB, but free agency is different.  I think Ron is doing everything he can to coachspeak the situation to satisfy all sides of the issue. At this point Howell as the starter in 2023 wouldn't surprise me ( that is the route I hope they go outside of landing a Rodgers for a 1-2 season win right now run) but I equally wouldn't be surprised if a Carr or Carr-type ends up getting signed and ultimately starts.   Too early and too many more dominoes need to start falling first.

[FootballZombie]

I still think they bring in a vet.

 

We'll see what happens when QB bullets start flying for real.