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, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I see almost zero parallels.  Kirk was three years younger for starters.

 

Really, zero? 
 

Same caliber of player, could argue Carr has the higher ceiling due to physical abilities being better than Kirk. 
 

They truly are the same dude to me, but I suppose season to season you could put one at 14 the other 15 (or wherever you decide to rank them) depending on the team and situation around them. 
 

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Carr's last season was a career down year. I know you don't see it that way and expressed that its the same or close enough than the season before when he got the contract.   It's not a debate though.  It's simply not true. 

 

Carr has been hovering close to 70% completion rate for the previous 4 seasons -- the season before last he did that with throwing for almost 5000 yards.  He didn't come close to approaching that this past season, barely completed over 60% of his passes (heck that's worse than Heinicke) and his only worse season completion rate wise was his rookie season. 
 

 

What are you attributing his “bad season” to? He still had comeback games and were in contention for playoffs when 6-8 and barely lost to the Steelers to be in thick of it to close the season out. Last year they won a few to sneak at the end this year they didn’t. Going purely off of yards and points scored this year was better for the offense. 
 

For me, this caliber of QB is going to deviate to the edges and middle of the 70% reserved for the average. 
 

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

So in short except for you everyone agrees that it was a down year for Carr and now he's coming at a rebound season at 32.  It's not like Kirk at 29 coming off a good year.

 

I like Carr.  But Kirk is the better QB IMO.  Carr though more clutch.  But what Carr gets right now, its not apples to apples to where Kirk was. 

We both know where we stand, you rank this tier of QB, I put them all in one soup together in most cases. Carr and Cousins are the same dude to me. 
 

Admittedly, I’m locked in on this tier of QB because of my personal speculative views dating back to Kirk and wanting to be right. I do believe the jig is just about up for this tier of QB and their recent run of holding their franchises hostage as much as they did before.
 

My guess if lucky, Carr get 1.5 years guaranteed from an organization, we’ll see. Wasn’t long ago the thinking was you must pay what the market dictates and fall victim to this tier of QB. Owners appear done with coaches and GMs saying we need this guy, too many rookie deals and cheaper veterans providing similar results to the average highly paid guys. Logic also used to be you needed a face franchise, nope fans don’t care. 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, wit33 said:

 

Really, zero? 
 

Same caliber of player, could argue Carr has the higher ceiling due to physical abilities being better than Kirk. 

 

Circumstances as to when Kirk left here at arguably the peak of his powers and was still in his 20s versus Carr who will be 32 coming off his worst season since 2014 -- totally different scenes.

 

 

1 hour ago, wit33 said:

 

 

What are you attributing his “bad season” to? He still had comeback games and were in contention for playoffs when 6-8 and barely lost to the Steelers to be in thick of it to close the season out. Last year they won a few to sneak at the end this year they didn’t. Going purely off of yards and points scored this year was better for the offense. 

 

I told you what I attributed it to -- his stats this season versus the season before are far from identical, he wasn't playing that hot it was part of the narrative about him.  This season teams would come back against the Raiders -- that was part of the joke about their season, there seem to be no lead they couldn't blow. The season before they were comeback kings.

 

Again,  He barely threw for over a 60% completion rate.  3500 or so yards, granted he didn't pay at the end but he wasn't playing well.  The season before he had an impressive 68.4% completion rate and threw for almost 5000 yards,

 

I just looked at his PFF adjusted accuracy numbers.  The first graph before is this season.  The one before that is the season before.

 

I like Carr but to pretend this season was same old same old for him which whiie granted you are saying that as a shot at him is still not true.  You are the only one who thinks that.  We goofed on Heinicke's accuracy all season, Carr's was worse.  And that's not how he typically rolls.

 

This year PFF adjusted accuracy 

 

 

 

 

the year before in PFF adjusted accuracy.  

Edited February 11, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[HigSkin]

 

[KDawg]

3 minutes ago, HigSkin said:

 

No one can say a single word about his physical skills. He is among the elite as far as those things go. 
 

Question on him is: Can he tie that to the mental? 
 

To me, without knowing him, I think that can only occur if where he goes embraces him as the future on draft day. If not? He’s cooked.

[Jericho]

22 hours ago, Warhead36 said:

Wilson was legitimately terrible, but you drafted him #2 overall. You have to commit to him. 

 

Lance got hurt for the 49ers. Who knows how he would have turned out. 

 

When was the last time a team had a QB competition and it actually ended up producing high quality QB play? Good franchises identify a guy they like and commit to him and allow him to develop properly.

 

I feel like the proverbial "QB competition" is just code meaning you have a bunch of bad QBs. So you can pick whichever one sucks the least. In that light, what you said is correct it pretty much never works out. Mainly because bad QBs don't magically become good because of "competition"

[MrJL]

1 minute ago, Jericho said:

 

I feel like the proverbial "QB competition" is just code meaning you have a bunch of bad QBs. So you can pick whichever one sucks the least. In that light, what you said is correct it pretty much never works out. Mainly because bad QBs don't magically become good because of "competition"

 

maybe your new guy just isn't ready yet

[Jericho]

1 minute ago, MrJL said:

 

maybe your new guy just isn't ready yet

 

If he isn't ready now, he probably never will be. The idea of having to sit for years before playing is 1980s thinking and earlier. Most QBs play as rookies, the few that don't usually are stuck behind someone pretty good. Looking around the league, the only two guys that are legit NFL starters that didn't start by year two I think are Aaron Rodgers and Kirk Cousins. Rodgers was behind Favre, so I can give him a pass. Cousins got stuck behind good RGIII (for his rookie season) and then the decaying corpse of RGIII that the team hoped could regain his magic. And that's basically it. If you're not being blocked by at least a Pro Bowl guy, you should be playing.

[FootballZombie]

I don't think Geno got anointed for the job until during the preseason, and he had a good year.

 

Sometimes you just need to see your guys work thru it b4 you can have more confidence in one guy. If coaches had the ability to instantly know which QB will operate the best we wouldn't have issues trying to determine which QB is the best each draft year.

 

Choosing a QB is not a hard science, there is some level of unknown. If you can take a little bit of that out by seeing your guys in game-likes situations first, you are afforded that luxury.

 

 

If you got that clear cut QB1 where it is more obvious, then sure roll w/ 'em. If you don't, then use a QB comp to make a more informed choice.

[Conn]

 

[wit33]

4 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Circumstances as to when Kirk left here at arguably the peak of his powers and was still in his 20s versus Carr who will be 32 coming off his worst season since 2014 -- totally different scenes.

 

 

 

I told you what I attributed it to -- his stats this season versus the season before are far from identical, he wasn't playing that hot it was part of the narrative about him.  This season teams would come back against the Raiders -- that was part of the joke about their season, there seem to be no lead they couldn't blow. The season before they were comeback kings.

 

Again,  He barely threw for over a 60% completion rate.  3500 or so yards, granted he didn't pay at the end but he wasn't playing well.  The season before he had an impressive 68.4% completion rate and threw for almost 5000 yards,

 

I just looked at his PFF adjusted accuracy numbers.  The first graph before is this season.  The one before that is the season before.

 

I like Carr but to pretend this season was same old same old for him which whiie granted you are saying that as a shot at him is still not true.  You are the only one who thinks that.  We goofed on Heinicke's accuracy all season, Carr's was worse.  And that's not how he typically rolls.

 

This year PFF adjusted accuracy 

 

 

 

 

the year before in PFF adjusted accuracy.  

I get the statistical logic, but I imagine if some one liked Care before the season you’d still like him now.

What has changed within the dude over an 8 month time frame?

 

I’d really have to dive in to compare last season to this season, but on the surface I can see the Raiders were more run centric with McDaniels as the head coach. The offense as a whole scored more than the previous season, so it appears they were on par with what he did last season even though his personal numbers were down. 
 

Look at that, you are the side of Carr not being all that good 😉 

Edited February 11, 2023 by wit33

[bird_1972]

1 hour ago, Conn said:

 

 

Damning

[Skinsinparadise]

7 hours ago, wit33 said:

I get the statistical logic, but I imagine if some one liked Care before the season you’d still like him now.

What has changed within the dude over an 8 month time frame?

 

I’d really have to dive in to compare last season to this season, but on the surface I can see the Raiders were more run centric with McDaniels as the head coach. The offense as a whole scored more than the previous season, so it appears they were on par with what he did last season even though his personal numbers were down. 
 

Look at that, you are the side of Carr not being all that good 😉 

 

I still like Carr.  But he certainly fell somewhat hard last year.    What changed?  The system changed and he didn't hit the ground running with it.  Going back to Jay Gruden for example, he said its not easy to change systems even for QBs. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

15 hours ago, Jericho said:

If you're not being blocked by at least a Pro Bowl guy, you should be playing

Put a slightly different way: if you can’t beat out a non-pro-bowl level QB by year 2, especially when a high draft pick is given every advantage and benefit of the doubt, Houston, we have a problem.

15 hours ago, KDawg said:

To me, without knowing him, I think that can only occur if where he goes embraces him as the future on draft day. If not? He’s cooked.

I don’t know if they would do this, but a perfect situation for him would be to be drafted by the ravens, who would franchise Lamar one year, let Richardson go through 2 full off-seasons then turn the team over to him.  Great organization with a track record of developing QBs.  No pressure year 1.  And the ravens wouldn’t have to pay Lamar the $50m/year he wants.

[Est.1974]

15 hours ago, Conn said:

 

Strong argument to draft a QB in 2023 IMO.

 

Roseman will never back down from drafting a talented quarterback.

“At the end of the day, it’s the most important position in sports. You see it through the course of this season,” Roseman said. “You need depth in this league. Why wouldn’t you consider building depth at the most important position of all sports?”

[bird_1972]

1 hour ago, Est.1974 said:

Strong argument to draft a QB in 2023 IMO.

 

Roseman will never back down from drafting a talented quarterback.

“At the end of the day, it’s the most important position in sports. You see it through the course of this season,” Roseman said. “You need depth in this league. Why wouldn’t you consider building depth at the most important position of all sports?”

 

Yeah, but who and in which round? 

 

We need OL/CB/LB in the worst way and I don't think we are like the Eagles where we've stockpiled picks and have the luxury of spending one on a QB

 

[Andre The Giant]

 

[KDawg]

27 minutes ago, bird_1972 said:

 

Yeah, but who and in which round? 

 

We need OL/CB/LB in the worst way and I don't think we are like the Eagles where we've stockpiled picks and have the luxury of spending one on a QB

 

If Hendon Hooker falls like some think... him. 100%. 

 

Jake Haener.

 

Tanner McKee.

 

Clayton Tune. 

 

Max Duggan.

 

 

[bird_1972]

9 minutes ago, KDawg said:

If Hendon Hooker falls like some think... him. 100%. 

 

Jake Haener.

 

Tanner McKee.

 

Clayton Tune. 

 

Max Duggan.

 

 

 

PFF has Tanner McKee rated very high. I know they aren't the end all, be all but if they are even remotely close that would mean we'd have to take him with potentially our 2nd round pick. I don't think that's a luxury we can afford right now.

 

I don't know as much about the other guys but have heard good things about Haener. Unfortunately, he may also require a pick in a round higher than I'd like.

[Est.1974]

1 hour ago, bird_1972 said:

 

Yeah, but who and in which round? 

 

We need OL/CB/LB in the worst way and I don't think we are like the Eagles where we've stockpiled picks and have the luxury of spending one on a QB

 

We have Howell then nothing. I’m open to us using any pick on a QB as long as the potential value is realistic at the selection being used. 

[wit33]

On 2/10/2023 at 11:46 AM, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Ron sort of did announce Howell as the starter.   But wants to add a veteran.  I think that's fine.

 

 

I didn't like the picks or the money part of the deal.  But the risk wasn't crazy considering it was basically a 1 year contract.

 

 

Getting one more year out of Kirk and that has value brings me back in time -- I recall Finlay would say then that's what they hear they are thinking -- its a year to year league, 2 years from now is forever in their mind, one year at a time.  
 

 

I think this is and will continue to be more common practice amongst franchises. The theory being the 70% pool QB being let go more often when money no longer makes sense. The idea being a year to year relationship with the QB when they gain perceived leverage. 
 

Fascinated to see how the Seahawks manage the Geno Smith situation. This is a situation organizations in the past would grossly overpay leading to an eventual split 2-3 years down the road. If Geno locks in 2.5 (even 2) fully guaranteed, it’s business as usual and punch in the face to my speculative position the QB market is beginning to change with this tier of QB. Previous conditioned thinking is Geno Smith is entitled to 35-40mil per year type deal. 
 

 

6 hours ago, Est.1974 said:

Strong argument to draft a QB in 2023 IMO.

 

Roseman will never back down from drafting a talented quarterback.

“At the end of the day, it’s the most important position in sports. You see it through the course of this season,” Roseman said. “You need depth in this league. Why wouldn’t you consider building depth at the most important position of all sports?”

 

This right here, this should be the new wave of how to manage the QB position. Too many dudes have become entitled. Make them earn it like the other dudes in the locker room, especially the middle class QBs. 

 

On 2/10/2023 at 11:46 AM, Skinsinparadise said:

 

That mindset IMO is one of the reasons why this team is stuck in the mud.  it's all about now.  Ron referred to Dan's lack of patience in his own introductory press conference.  If Dan Snyder had a bumper sticker, he should put that on it -- the future is now. 
 

 

 

Imagine a coach or GM telling you the owner to be patient for 5 years lol This really used to be spewed by smart football people 10 years ago or whatever, it seems now we are down to 3. For me it should be year 2 and competing, if not it’s likely not going to be an elite situation forming. 
 

On 2/10/2023 at 11:46 AM, Skinsinparadise said:

 

As far as the rest of your point, I agree with some of it, disagree with most of it mainly because Bruce was polarizing in the actual negotiation where it wouldn't warrant some warm and fuzzy we are in this together vibe but even if I agreed with all of it -- so what IMO -- don't make decisions based on base emotions, get value for your assets.

 

Man, it would be tough as an owner when perceived smart football people are so mediocre at their job and follow the herd. 
 

I can always relate to the owner who involves self in day to day stuff, but understand it can be a detriment. Wonder how much owners really do involve selves even in the perceived well run organizations. 
 

Not at all saying Dan isn’t a horrible owner. 

 

On 2/10/2023 at 11:46 AM, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

The ones who covered the story competed with two narratives -- some said they heard a first rounder, others said a 2nd and third rounder.  That's not big enough value than the third rounder they got?

Certainly should have gotten more compensation. I think Trent is the greatest Olineman of all time arguably— not many believed in his value then or now than me. I was pointing that many on this board were openly questioning his value and ranking as an elite Olineman. Bad situation all around.
 

Yes, they should’ve gotten more. 

 

8 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I still like Carr.  But he certainly fell somewhat hard last year.    What changed?  The system changed and he didn't hit the ground running with it.  Going back to Jay Gruden for example, he said its not easy to change systems even for QBs. 

Right, the system not the QB. Why would your view on him change if it was an external factor that you believe was the cause of his average campaign?

[Andre The Giant]

 

[method man]

On 2/11/2023 at 4:32 PM, bird_1972 said:

 

PFF has Tanner McKee rated very high. I know they aren't the end all, be all but if they are even remotely close that would mean we'd have to take him with potentially our 2nd round pick. I don't think that's a luxury we can afford right now.

 

I don't know as much about the other guys but have heard good things about Haener. Unfortunately, he may also require a pick in a round higher than I'd like.

No to non mobile QBs like McKee

[Jericho]

7 hours ago, Andre The Giant said:

 

 

And this is why I was against trading for Carr, although certainly some here wanted to trade a bevy of picks for this guy. He's an okay player, but his own team is likely releasing him. That says a lot. Of course, Washington vastly overpaid for Wentz too, so it's not like Washington was making smart moves either. But guys like this shouldn't require significant compensation, if any, in a trade.

[Conn]

1 hour ago, Jericho said:

 

And this is why I was against trading for Carr, although certainly some here wanted to trade a bevy of picks for this guy. He's an okay player, but his own team is likely releasing him. That says a lot. Of course, Washington vastly overpaid for Wentz too, so it's not like Washington was making smart moves either. But guys like this shouldn't require significant compensation, if any, in a trade.

 

There’s so much wrong with this post. Almost nobody here this offseason wanted to trade anything for Carr. You’re pounding your chest over by far the majority opinion here. And the reason they’re releasing him is because his contract becomes largely guaranteed on a certain date if they don’t, and he has a no-trade clause to restrict their options. Not because nobody on earth would trade for him in a vacuum—he’ll probably end up with more guaranteed money as a FA than he would have staying on his current contract, so it’ll work out for him just fine. 

[FrFan]