Marcus Mariota: Is it Time ??

[KingTitan]

1 hour ago, TitanSS said:

Since you have it figured out.. cut Mariota after the next two preseason games... Then what?

How do we get better? When do we get our next QB who is clearly better? Who is this magical person?

Tannehill. 
Who all the sudden is worth starting....even though Miami said they like their chances better with Fitzmagic and Josh Rosen. But Tannehill is the guy for us.

I just find it comical. Taking Marcus out the conversation and say we had Teddy Bridgewater as starter, who for the sake of the argument is not a 100% surefire starter in the league. But you bring in Tannehill and all the sudden he is worth starting? When all these media personalities and fans said he shouldn't be playing in Miami.

What changed besides his zip code? lol
If someone doesn't like Marcus because they don't know what he is or thinks they have him figured out after 5 years. What makes Tannehill the answer? We've seen 7 years of what he has to offer and he ain't changing. 7 years one playoff appearance that was a 30-12 lost to the Steelers.  

SIGN ME UP!

If we are replacing Marcus, the answer will have to be to gamble in the draft or gamble by trading for an unproven backup. 

 

[FutureIsWhite]

1 hour ago, TitanSS said:

You're delusional if you think even half of the first round QBs drafted over the last 10 years are better than Mariota. Most of them end up like Matt Leinart, Blake Gabbert, Jake Locker, etc.. The list goes on and on.

Very few QBs succeed long term. Some do. The car analogy is horrible because very few brand new cars are lemons. That is not the same with new NFL QBs. It's the exact opposite, most of them are lemons.

In 4 years when half of these "young star" QBs have been tossed aside maybe you'll see what I mean. But you won't, because there will be a new crop of young studs that everyone is clamoring over and saying "we should go get someone like them!".

You don't think the exact same things that are being said about Watson, Mahommes, Mayfield, Darnold, and whoever else wasn't said about the young guys 5vyears ago? Well it was and Andrew Luck is the only one who still is considered good. It's a cycle and you just dont see it because it hasn't happened yet. The truth is no one knows which one of these young guys is the real deal and which ones are duds, but if I had to bet money on it I would say that Mahommes is a star, Mayfield is an average starter, and Houston is wondering if Watson really deserves that second contract.

The problem isn't that I don't see Mariota's issues. The problem is that you don't see how unlikely you are to even find an average starting QB in the NFL draft.

What’s delusional is the fact you think Watson isn’t deserving of a new contract , and that you think Mayfield is average . Also I think your forgetting that Mariota was drafted number 2 overall, not pick 8,10,15 or a later first rounder . Getting picked 2 overall holds you too a higher standard , he’s also getting paid like it as well but yet you can find the same level of production if not more later in the draft or even undrafted like Mullins . 

As far as your Lemon theory is concerned , let’s look at the QBs drafted top 15 overall the last 4 years too see how many were lemons . 

2015- Winston , Mariota , (both look about fizzled out or average  ) 2 lemons 

2016-wentz, Goff, (Both look like franchise guys)

2017- Trubisky, mahomes, Watson (all have been to the playoffs, all look good to great) 

2018- Mayfield , darnold , Allen, Rosen, (2 out of the 4 look good but still too early ) 2 lemons 

So the last 4 years there has been 11 QBs drafted in the top 15 and 7 look good to great . So your theory is wrong because there is more good QBs then lemons . 

Finally  to answer your question on what I would do in regards to our QB situation I would play who ever deserves it . I wouldn’t go into the season giving the Job to Mariota , he hasn’t deserved it and I think it’s foolish to add a guy like Tannehill and not have a competition. Our QB has 23 tds over the course of two seasons, we can’t score and If it wasn’t for our defense we would a be 3-13  football team. Am I saying that I wouldn’t label Mariota the starter ? No , I actually would . However I wouldn’t be hesitant for a second to make a switch if my backup QB outplayed my started by a huge margin during the preseason  . So to answer your question id play whoever deserves it and the other is the backup, I wouldn’t cut Mariota lol. After the season I would but this team does need a backup going forward . 

 

 

[Daniel]

3 hours ago, FutureIsWhite said:

What’s delusional is the fact you think Watson isn’t deserving of a new contract , and that you think Mayfield is average . Also I think your forgetting that Mariota was drafted number 2 overall, not pick 8,10,15 or a later first rounder . Getting picked 2 overall holds you too a higher standard , he’s also getting paid like it as well but yet you can find the same level of production if not more later in the draft or even undrafted like Mullins . 

As far as your Lemon theory is concerned , let’s look at the QBs drafted top 15 overall the last 4 years too see how many were lemons . 

2015- Winston , Mariota , (both look about fizzled out or average  ) 2 lemons 

2016-wentz, Goff, (Both look like franchise guys)

2017- Trubisky, mahomes, Watson (all have been to the playoffs, all look good to great) 

2018- Mayfield , darnold , Allen, Rosen, (2 out of the 4 look good but still too early ) 2 lemons 

So the last 4 years there has been 11 QBs drafted in the top 15 and 7 look good to great . So your theory is wrong because there is more good QBs then lemons . 

Finally  to answer your question on what I would do in regards to our QB situation I would play who ever deserves it . I wouldn’t go into the season giving the Job to Mariota , he hasn’t deserved it and I think it’s foolish to add a guy like Tannehill and not have a competition. Our QB has 23 tds over the course of two seasons, we can’t score and If it wasn’t for our defense we would a be 3-13  football team. Am I saying that I wouldn’t label Mariota the starter ? No , I actually would . However I wouldn’t be hesitant for a second to make a switch if my backup QB outplayed my started by a huge margin during the preseason  . So to answer your question id play whoever deserves it and the other is the backup, I wouldn’t cut Mariota lol. After the season I would but this team does need a backup going forward . 

Your argument kinda fails when two of those QBs you're using to come up with "good to great" are rookies, where it's way too early to tell.  I'd argue it's too early to tell until at least year three most of the time, because as many have pointed out, Mariota looked like a future superstar after his second year in the league, as did Winston.

But let's let you keep 2017, and not challenge whether Trubisky qualifies as actually "good to great."  Let's eliminate 2018, because it's too early, and go back a year.

2014 just gives you Bortles.  Huge flop, obviously.  So now, we're down to 5 out of 8, and being generous.  And you limited to top 15.  Well, let's expand it to the first round completely, assuming Mariota is the problem, at the Titans again finish around 9-7, outside the top 15, because the rest of the team must be really good then.

In 2014, that adds Manziel and Bridgewater.  In 2016, that adds Paxton Lynch.  All three lemons.  So now, we're 5 out of 11, and being generous with whether one of those five is even really good to great.  In fact, we're being super generous that none of the 2017 players fall off enormously in their perceived stock, like Winston and Mariota both did.

Now if you want to really make it look worse, let's go back and get a fifth year in 2012, since 2013 didn't produce any first round QBs (which is a whole nother possibility): Andrew Luck is a stud, but RG3 was a bust, Tannehill is Mariota's backup, and Brandon Weeden is our other option, and he's not even with a team.  So that knocks us down to 6 out of 14, with a year between that produced zero top talents.

Odds don't look so great if you don't cherry-pick it.

Edited August 13, 2019 by Daniel

[TitanSS]

7 hours ago, FutureIsWhite said:

What’s delusional is the fact you think Watson isn’t deserving of a new contract , and that you think Mayfield is average . Also I think your forgetting that Mariota was drafted number 2 overall, not pick 8,10,15 or a later first rounder . Getting picked 2 overall holds you too a higher standard , he’s also getting paid like it as well but yet you can find the same level of production if not more later in the draft or even undrafted like Mullins . 

As far as your Lemon theory is concerned , let’s look at the QBs drafted top 15 overall the last 4 years too see how many were lemons . 

2015- Winston , Mariota , (both look about fizzled out or average  ) 2 lemons 

2016-wentz, Goff, (Both look like franchise guys)

2017- Trubisky, mahomes, Watson (all have been to the playoffs, all look good to great) 

2018- Mayfield , darnold , Allen, Rosen, (2 out of the 4 look good but still too early ) 2 lemons 

So the last 4 years there has been 11 QBs drafted in the top 15 and 7 look good to great . So your theory is wrong because there is more good QBs then lemons . 

Finally  to answer your question on what I would do in regards to our QB situation I would play who ever deserves it . I wouldn’t go into the season giving the Job to Mariota , he hasn’t deserved it and I think it’s foolish to add a guy like Tannehill and not have a competition. Our QB has 23 tds over the course of two seasons, we can’t score and If it wasn’t for our defense we would a be 3-13  football team. Am I saying that I wouldn’t label Mariota the starter ? No , I actually would . However I wouldn’t be hesitant for a second to make a switch if my backup QB outplayed my started by a huge margin during the preseason  . So to answer your question id play whoever deserves it and the other is the backup, I wouldn’t cut Mariota lol. After the season I would but this team does need a backup going forward . 

 

 

I've told you time and time again that half the "young studs" fizzle out once they're no longer new, and your example for how easy it easy to replace Mariota is by listing 4 QBs who have started 3 years, 2 of which have "fizzled out" and another one who most people think owes all of his success to his OC.

You basically proved my point about what's wrong with your line of thinking. It's short sighted.

As Daniel has shown above, time usually exposes the young guns. Let's take a look at the QBs who have been drafted in the first round in the last 10 years that have started at least 3 years in the NFL.

2016 - Wentz, Goff, Lynch

2015 - Winston, Mariota

2014 - Bortles, Manziel, Bridgewater

2013 - Manuel

2012 - Luck, RG3, Tannehill, Weeden, 

2011 - Newton, Locker, Gabbert, Ponder

2010 - Bradford, Tebow

2009 - Stafford, Sanchez, Freeman

We have 4 QBs that you can consider "hits" or franchise QBs: Wentz, Goff (maybe), Luck, Stafford

We have 17 QBs that you can consider a "miss": Lynch, Winston, Mariota, Bortles, Manziel, Bridgewater, Manuel, RG3, Tannehill, Weeden, Locker, Gabbert, Ponder, Bradford, Tebow, Sanchez, Freeman

Now do you see why your "all these young QBs are good" argument is flawed? If you don't think people were saying the same **** about young QBs in 2011 you're wrong. Time reveals all. Fans are just irrational and listen to the media far too often.

Even if you move Newton to the hits list, you're batting about .238 overall and all of the ones you could consider a "hit" were taken in the top 2 picks of the draft, 4 out of 5 were first overall. There are some outliars like Wilson or Prescott who are drafted in the mid rounds, but that's absolutely not something we can count on happening and having Mariota on the team isn't stopping that from happening.

So what's your plan to get into the top 2 picks? Or is your plan to get incredibly lucky and have Wilson fall to us in the 3rd round or Mahommes fall to us in the teens, both of which are strikes of luck that haven't been reproduced a single time in the last 10 years? 

We cut Mariota. Okay, I'm there with you. Now let's say we draft somewhere around 18th. Which one of these guys are you going to acquire with that 18th pick? The good ones went top 2 and you're giving up 3 entire drafts  minimum to get them and that's even if the team is willing to trade. Oh, and there's less than a 25% they are cemented as a starter in the NFL 5-10 years after they're drafted. 

Good luck.

Edited August 14, 2019 by TitanSS

[FutureIsWhite]

14 hours ago, Daniel said:

Odds don't look so great if you don't cherry-pick it.

Says the guy who had to go back more then half a decade to try and prove I’m wrong.  I’m going on the last 5 years since Mariota has been in the NFL. If you really want to go far back we can play this game all day. How about the year where rivers, manning and Big Ben were drafted ? Or the year Elway, kelly and Marino were drafted . 

 

No no need to try and go back 5 plus years to try and prove me wrong , going off the last years your theory is wrong . Even if all the rookies I named that were good last year don’t pan out that’s still about a .500 batting average . However 1 or 2 will more then  Likely  pan out . 

[dtait93]

55 minutes ago, FutureIsWhite said:

Says the guy who had to go back more then half a decade to try and prove I’m wrong.  I’m going on the last 5 years since Mariota has been in the NFL. If you really want to go far back we can play this game all day. How about the year where rivers, manning and Big Ben were drafted ? Or the year Elway, kelly and Marino were drafted . 

 

No no need to try and go back 5 plus years to try and prove me wrong , going off the last years your theory is wrong . Even if all the rookies I named that were good last year don’t pan out that’s still about a .500 batting average . However 1 or 2 will more then  Likely  pan out . 

They are going back over half a decade to show you that the hot commodity 1st round QB’s way more often than not don’t pan out. You don’t know which QB’s will fizzle out with the sample size you gave because not enough time has gone by yet - therefore you have to increase the sample size to get a clearer picture. Also they didn’t cherry pick, they went back consecutive years. If anyone cherry picked it was you by using the 2004 and 1983 draft classes while omitting all the years in between. Go through all the first round QB’s drafted from 1983-2015 if you want the reality of what you’re more than likely getting when you draft a QB in the first round. I think they already laid it out pretty clearly though.

Edited August 14, 2019 by dtait93

[Daniel]

11 hours ago, TitanSS said:

2013 - Manuel

I completely forgot that he was an actual first round pick.  Man, that was a bad year for the draft.

[FutureIsWhite]

11 hours ago, TitanSS said:

I've told you time and time again that half the "young studs" fizzle out once they're no longer new, and your example for how easy it easy to replace Mariota is by listing 4 QBs who have started 3 years, 2 of which have "fizzled out" and another one who most people think owes all of his success to his OC.

You basically proved my point about what's wrong with your line of thinking. It's short sighted.

As Daniel has shown above, time usually exposes the young guns. Let's take a look at the QBs who have been drafted in the first round in the last 10 years that have started at least 3 years in the NFL.

2016 - Wentz, Goff, Lynch

2015 - Winston, Mariota

2014 - Bortles, Manziel, Bridgewater

2013 - Manuel

2012 - Luck, RG3, Tannehill, Weeden, 

2011 - Newton, Locker, Gabbert, Ponder

2010 - Bradford, Tebow

2009 - Stafford, Sanchez, Freeman

We have 4 QBs that you can consider "hits" or franchise QBs: Wentz, Goff (maybe), Luck, Stafford

We have 17 QBs that you can consider a "miss": Lynch, Winston, Mariota, Bortles, Manziel, Bridgewater, Manuel, RG3, Tannehill, Weeden, Locker, Gabbert, Ponder, Bradford, Tebow, Sanchez, Freeman

Now do you see why your "all these young QBs are good" argument is flawed? If you don't think people were saying the same **** about young QBs in 2011 you're wrong. Time reveals all. Fans are just irrational and listen to the media far too often.

Even if you move Newton to the hits list, you're batting about .238 overall and all of the ones you could consider a "hit" were taken in the top 2 picks of the draft, 4 out of 5 were first overall. There are some outliars like Wilson or Prescott who are drafted in the mid rounds, but that's absolutely not something we can count on happening and having Mariota on the team isn't stopping that from happening.

So what's your plan to get into the top 2 picks? Or is your plan to get incredibly lucky and have Wilson fall to us in the 3rd round or Mahommes fall to us in the teens, both of which are strikes of luck that haven't been reproduced a single time in the last 10 years? 

We cut Mariota. Okay, I'm there with you. Now let's say we draft somewhere around 18th. Which one of these guys are you going to acquire with that 18th pick? The good ones went top 2 and you're giving up 3 entire drafts  minimum to get them and that's even if the team is willing to trade. Oh, and there's less than a 25% they are cemented as a starter in the NFL 5-10 years after they're drafted. 

Good luck.

At the end of the day we could argue back and forth about QBs who pan out and QBs who don’t pan out . However all that matters is we have a huge QB issue and something has to be done in the next few years. I just don’t understand your reasoning at all in regards to not wanting to move on to a different QB because you don’t think we can  find someone in the draft or elsewhere that can give us the same production.  

 

So because you think most QBs are lemons coming out of the draft that warrants the fact that we shouldn’t draft a QB or try to give another QB a chance ? I mean even if the percentage is incredibly low on finding a franchise QB or at least a QB is above average in the draft that doesn’t mean you hold onto a guy like Marcus because the chances of drafting an above average QB is low. You draft a QB until you hit on one , you don’t keep a guy because you think you have no other options , especially a guy who’s looked as bad as Mariota has . In reality it’s  actually going to be fairly easy finding a replacement for him that can give us the same if not more production, I get your thinking though but Mariota is not a good example.  He has done absolutely nothing to warrant keeping him, hence why we traded for Tannehiill and also why he hasn’t been given a new contract yet . Obviously the front office feels the same way as I do. Yea it sucks we missed on Locker, Young, Mariota but it doesn’t mean we stop trying , the QB position is the hardest to fill in sports for a reason. Browns picked how many QBs till they finally hit one, Bills as well except there still searching, hell Cardinals took two in the top 10 back to back years. Then you have teams who hit on a QB there first time like Colts with Manning and Luck, it’s just how the NFL works  . Having said all this it’s obvious that your dissection Of QBs is way different then mine , so we won’t agree on this . I think Watson and Mayfield are franchise guys , you don’t . I think We can find the same production as Mariota elsewhere and you think getting rid of him makes this team worse sooner rather then later . I guess we will just have to wait and see. 

[ShupacTakur]

On 8/12/2019 at 10:29 PM, KingTitan said:

He'd have to fail on a grand scale. Titans are truly looking for any small reason to extend him in my opinion. 

If he gets hurt and Ryan plays well bye Marcus. 

If we go 0-5 and he is playing bad. Bye Marcus. 

What is likely to happen is we are 5-3 and he is doing ok. Lol and nobody has a true answer. 

If they were dead set on extending him, they already would have. I actually believe it's the inverse. I'm not sure anything short of the best season of his career will get him an extension. People seem to forget that Vrabel and Robinson have no ties to him, and while finding a good QB is not easy, the 2017 -2018 version of Marcus Mariota is not hard to replace. And if they do need a stop gap for a year or two until they can find "their guy", they could do a lot worse than Ryan Tannehill.   

[TitanSS]

3 hours ago, FutureIsWhite said:

At the end of the day we could argue back and forth about QBs who pan out and QBs who don’t pan out . However all that matters is we have a huge QB issue and something has to be done in the next few years. I just don’t understand your reasoning at all in regards to not wanting to move on to a different QB because you don’t think we can  find someone in the draft or elsewhere that can give us the same production.  

 

So because you think most QBs are lemons coming out of the draft that warrants the fact that we shouldn’t draft a QB or try to give another QB a chance ? I mean even if the percentage is incredibly low on finding a franchise QB or at least a QB is above average in the draft that doesn’t mean you hold onto a guy like Marcus because the chances of drafting an above average QB is low. [1]You draft a QB until you hit on one , you don’t keep a guy because you think you have no other options , especially a guy who’s looked as bad as Mariota has . In reality it’s  actually going to be fairly easy finding a replacement for him that can give us the same if not more production, I get your thinking though but Mariota is not a good example.  [2]He has done absolutely nothing to warrant keeping him, hence why we traded for Tannehiill and also why he hasn’t been given a new contract yet . Obviously the front office feels the same way as I do. Yea it sucks we missed on Locker, Young, Mariota but it doesn’t mean we stop trying , the QB position is the hardest to fill in sports for a reason. [3]Browns picked how many QBs till they finally hit one, Bills as well except there still searching, hell Cardinals took two in the top 10 back to back years. Then you have teams who hit on a QB there first time like Colts with Manning and Luck, it’s just how the NFL works  . Having said all this it’s obvious that your dissection Of QBs is way different then mine , so we won’t agree on this . I think Watson and Mayfield are franchise guys , you don’t . I think We can find the same production as Mariota elsewhere and you think getting rid of him makes this team worse sooner rather then later . I guess we will just have to wait and see. 

1. So we say to hell with going 9-7 each of the last 3 years with 1 playoff win, let's go 3-13 over an over again and draft a QB every 3 years until we have another starter?

2. Tannehill has done absolutely nothing to warrant replacing Mariota, hence why he was traded. The front office understands that Mariota being injured has cost us far too much, but there is no indication that they see Tannehill as a replacement, and I highly doubt there to be any truth in that speculation.

3. Great example. This basically goes with #1. The Browns were the laughing stock of the NFL for 20 years and now they might finally have a guy who can play. Let's forget the fact that the guy hasn't even played 16 games in the NFL yet and you're already crowning him and focus on my previous sentence. Do you really want to be the laughing stock of the NFL for the next 20 years? Picking in the top 5 every year instead of being a borderline playoff team as Mariota makes us?

I don't want to be absolute dog **** anymore. I acknowledge Mariota has issues, but I also acknowledge that he's probably somewhere around the 20th best QB in the NFL. Do you know what that means? He's a starting NFL QB on 12 teams.

Right now our QB group is an injury prone Mariota and an injury prone Tannehill. If we let Mariota go simply for the hell of it we then are stuck with an injury prone Tannehill as our starter and some no-name guy as our backup. And oh, by the way, Tannehill is injured just as often as Mariota. So that means we are exactly where we started with some **** backup starting 4 games a year for us again.

Again, I don't think Mariota is our savior, but I think he's the best we're going to have access to for the time being. I absolutely do not want to be picking in the top 5-10 year after year again. I would rather try to take an approach similar to what the Chiefs did with Alex Smith, who I think was a similarly talented player. 

Bottom line: The next two playoff games mean as much for Mariota as they do for Vrabel. Nothing. Barring an injury (however likely) he is going to start the entirety of this season. It would take play far worse than he has ever demonstated over the course of a season for us to outright bench him without an injury. Provided that he performs well enough for us to be in contention for a playoff spot, he will most likely be extended as our starter. That doesn't mean we can't look for a QB. It just means we're not likely to find one better simply because we decided to let what we had go.

[TitanSS]

12 minutes ago, ShupacTakur said:

If they were dead set on extending him, they already would have. I actually believe it's the inverse. I'm not sure anything short of the best season of his career will get him an extension. People seem to forget that Vrabel and Robinson have no ties to him, and while finding a good QB is not easy, the 2017 -2018 version of Marcus Mariota is not hard to replace. And if they do need a stop gap for a year or two until they can find "their guy", they could do a lot worse than Ryan Tannehill.   

When it comes to an injury plagued player this simply isn't true. They want to see that he can stay healthy prior to giving him a contract. If he can't, there's a chance he's gone. If he does, I think he would have to fail tremendously not to get an extension.

The Tennessee Titans organization does way too much to promote a player you claim they are already set on releasing.

Edited August 14, 2019 by TitanSS

[KingTitan]

7 minutes ago, TitanSS said:

When it comes to an injury plagued player this simply isn't true. They want to see that he can stay healthy prior to giving him a contract. If he can't, there's a chance he's gone. If he does, I think he would have to fail tremendously not to get an extension.

The Tennessee Titans organization does way too much to promote a player you claim they are already set on releasing.

They LOOOOVE Marcus. They do. They love everything about him.
They are like, just give us a reason to back you. Stay Healthy.....play consistent (at whatever level that is) and we will pay you.

If they were the opposite, they would be looking for a reason to get rid of him. Looking for a reason to bench him. And I just don't think that is the case.

Example: Vince Young. I think the team was looking for a reason to bench him. Give me anything and I'm playing Kerry Collins. Young was the QB when we won some games, had fan support, and they were looking for excuses to get rid of him and Young gave it to them.

This is not the case. 

They are almost going out their way to promote Marcus and hope the fans stay with him, since we have a lot of them turning on Marcus, for various reasons. 

[TitanSS]

1 minute ago, KingTitan said:

They LOOOOVE Marcus. They do. They love everything about him.
They are like, just give us a reason to back you. Stay Healthy.....play consistent (at whatever level that is) and we will pay you.

If they were the opposite, they would be looking for a reason to get rid of him. Looking for a reason to bench him. And I just don't think that is the case.

Example: Vince Young. I think the team was looking for a reason to bench him. Give me anything and I'm playing Kerry Collins. Young was the QB when we won some games, had fan support, and they were looking for excuses to get rid of him and Young gave it to them.

This is not the case. 

They are almost going out their way to promote Marcus and hope the fans stay with him, since we have a lot of them turning on Marcus, for various reasons. 

I absolutely got that vibe with their 3 video series on Mariota a couple weeks ago. What other reason would they be doing that other than to try and get more fans to favor him?

[ShupacTakur]

12 minutes ago, TitanSS said:

When it comes to an injury plagued player this simply isn't true. They want to see that he can stay healthy prior to giving him a contract. If he can't, there's a chance he's gone. If he does, I think he would have to fail tremendously not to get an extension.

The Tennessee Titans organization does way too much to promote a player you claim they are already set on releasing.

What simply isn't true? 

 

[KingTitan]

2 minutes ago, ShupacTakur said:

What simply isn't true? 

 

I think saying they would have extended him already. They won't do it because of the injury history. I don't think it's based on his play. It's his availability