Dome Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 Just now, ET80 said: That's the really sad part - HE IS! We'd be losing 80-6 if Watson isn't there! I’m gonna need to see Watson literally put all of NRG on his back before I admit I was wrong about something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iknowcool Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 (edited) 13 hours ago, 11sanchez11 said: Rosen is the starting QB of the Arizona Cardinals. Not saying this isn’t a good choice (it is), but what is the reason teams do this every year? They start some average at best placeholder QB on a bad team instead of the rookie, then yank them after they predictably look bad in the first 2-4 games. Why not just start the rookie? What else did they expect? I could at least see it from the Texans side last year—you didn’t know for sure what you had in Savage. But we’ve seen Bradford. He’s not the kinda guy who is gonna make a bad team good, not to mention the injuries. In a 16 game season, you’ve already eliminated 18% worth of games for Rosen to learn and improve on the field. And for no reason. Just doesn’t make much sense to me. Edited September 25, 2018 by iknowcool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 8 minutes ago, Dome said: I’m gonna need to see Watson literally put all of NRG on his back before I admit I was wrong about something. Might come down to that, sadly enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dome Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 2 minutes ago, iknowcool said: Not saying this isn’t a good choice (it is), but what is the reason teams do this every year? They start some average at best placeholder QB on a bad team instead of the rookie, then yank them are they predictably look bad in the first 2-4 games. Why not just start the rookie? What else did they expect? In a 16 game season, you’ve already eliminated 18% worth of games for Rosen to learn and improve on the field. And for no reason. Just doesn’t make much sense to me. If the rookie looks bad you can say “but the vet was bad too, we gotta get them some help” and hide them behind that. If your rookie goes out and stinks it up and ends up getting benched for a vet, that looks a lot worse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iknowcool Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Dome said: If the rookie looks bad you can say “but the vet was bad too, we gotta get them some help” and hide them behind that. If your rookie goes out and stinks it up and ends up getting benched for a vet, that looks a lot worse Yea but that seems like stuff only fans would care about. A head coach shouldn’t care about what might look bad. And if your rookie QB sucks so bad you have to bench him, well you’ve got a bigger problem on your plate. Even Clausen and Gabbert didn’t get benched, and they were both as bad as it got as a rookie QB that I can remember. Rarely does a team bench a rookie QB (and I can’t remember a first rounder being benched), and I don’t think any fan is gonna advocate a rookie being benched unless they look THAT bad. And LIS, if it gets to that point, you have a bigger problem. I don’t have a problem with starting the vet. It’s just giving up on said vet after 2-3 games that bothers me. What was the point? Edited September 25, 2018 by iknowcool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmittyBacall Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 20 minutes ago, iknowcool said: Not saying this isn’t a good choice (it is), but what is the reason teams do this every year? They start some average at best placeholder QB on a bad team instead of the rookie, then yank them after they predictably look bad in the first 2-4 games. Why not just start the rookie? What else did they expect? I could at least see it from the Texans side last year—you didn’t know for sure what you had in Savage. But we’ve seen Bradford. He’s not the kinda guy who is gonna make a bad team good, not to mention the injuries. In a 16 game season, you’ve already eliminated 18% worth of games for Rosen to learn and improve on the field. And for no reason. Just doesn’t make much sense to me. In a perfect world Bradford remains competent for 16 games and Rosen can take the season to digest the playbook and adapt to the NFL before being thrusted into the fire. I’m sure Wilks was hoping Bradford would of lasted longer than 3 weeks. The more time you can buy for your rookie QB the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iknowcool Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 4 minutes ago, SmittyBacall said: In a perfect world Bradford remains competent for 16 games and Rosen can take the season to digest the playbook and adapt to the NFL before being thrusted into the fire. I’m sure Wilks was hoping Bradford would of lasted longer than 3 weeks. The more time you can buy for your rookie QB the better. Eh, the thing is I'm questioning if Wilks' thought process was that well laid out. I mean, he threw Rosen into just about the worst situation for a rookie QB to start his career. Already down a score with little time remaining against a Mack-led pass rush on a bad offense. Not only did he start a QB that he was gonna pull in a small time frame anyway, he did it in a way that was the most detrimental to the rookie QB coming in. I get what ya'll are saying though and I can see it both ways. I guess it really depends on how much you think not playing helps a QB. In this day and age of the NFL, I'm not sure sitting on the bench helps them that much. I mean, it definitely isn't a negative - Mahomes probably appreciates the time to sit and learn from Reid and Smith and whoever else. But how much does it help? I'm not sure. Cam Newton was a raw QB who had even less time in the offseason to learn because of the NFL Lockout and his rookie season was electric. Matt Stafford started immediately on an awful team and turned out just fine. Jared Goff struggled, but not only has he turned out more than fine, it's pretty obvious he would have done a lot better if McVay was his HC as a rookie. Obviously those guys are #1 overall picks for a reason, so in a way I could see where I'm looking at it the wrong way, but even Flacco came in and did reasonably well. Ultimately even if I did 100% agree it was better for rookies to ride the pine, it isn't like 2-3 games doing so (Savage was benched after one half for example) is going to make the difference between a good and bad rookie season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rivers Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 It's interesting if Rosen, Darnold and Baker all get to start this early. Who will have the better season? Mayfield is really accurate and as long as he has time, I expect him to pick people apart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmittyBacall Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 Just now, iknowcool said: Eh, the thing is I'm questioning if Wilks' thought process was that well laid out. I mean, he threw Rosen into just about the worst situation for a rookie QB to start his career. Already down a score with little time remaining against a Mack-led pass rush on a bad offense. Not only did he start a QB that he was gonna pull in a small time frame anyway, he did it in a way that was the most detrimental to the rookie QB coming in. I get what ya'll are saying though and I can see it both ways. I guess it really depends on how much you think not playing helps a QB. In this day and age of the NFL, I'm not sure sitting on the bench helps them that much. I mean, it definitely isn't a negative - Mahomes probably appreciates the time to sit and learn from Reid and Smith and whoever else. But how much does it help? I'm not sure. Cam Newton was a raw QB who had even less time in the offseason to learn because of the NFL Lockout and his rookie season was electric. Matt Stafford started immediately on an awful team and turned out just fine. Jared Goff struggled, but not only has he turned out more than fine, it's pretty obvious he would have done a lot better if McVay was his HC as a rookie. Obviously those guys are #1 overall picks for a reason, so in a way I could see where I'm looking at it the wrong way, but even Flacco came in and did reasonably well. Ultimately even if I did 100% agree it was better for rookies to ride the pine, it isn't like 2-3 games doing so (Savage was benched after one half for example) is going to make the difference between a good and bad rookie season. The more the experience the better, and obviously if you gain that experience from the jump you'll get better faster. But if that experience comes at the cost of giving the team a better chance to win, I think that's when they sit. Rookie QBs are traditionally pretty rocky. They have their ups and downs and take their lumps. So theoretically starting a vet like Bradford makes sense. I'd be a lot more comfortable taming a lion if I could watch it from safety for a year and learn it's tendencies etc., rather than get in the pit on my first day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanSlim Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 I don't know how good it's going to be but I'm completely intrigued with the new AAF spring league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaidersAreOne Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 Our O can move the ball, but not score. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Ramster Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 15 minutes ago, RaidersAreOne said: Our O can move the ball, but not score. You guys should Cooper while he has some value. I'll hate to be the team that pays him 18+ Mil.. Like for real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 1 hour ago, RaidersAreOne said: Our O can move the ball, but not score. Same in Houston - 8th in total yards, tied for 22nd in points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFlaccoSeagulls Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 1 hour ago, El ramster said: You guys should Cooper while he has some value. I'll hate to be the team that pays him 18+ Mil.. Like for real. Why wouldn't they just hold onto him and let him walk in FA and recoup the 3rd/4th round pick they'll eventually get from the comp system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuskieTitan Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 20 hours ago, sdrawkcab321 said: I knew Malcom butler was severely overrated but damn he’s rated as the worst CB in the league. Based off what rating system? Weeks 1 and 2 he got beat deep a few times, which I believe probably is playing a big impact. But for the most part he's been with his man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts