You decide: Do we move on from Carr this offseason?

[NYRaider]

42 minutes ago, SilverNBlackFan said:

But have Frankie tell it "He carried us to a near playoff birth "

 

He was almost MVP in 2016!!!

[Geezy]

1 hour ago, BayRaider said:

Also a scenario you guys aren’t considering is what if Gruden ends up really loving Eason or Herbert? He could trade down to 30-32 with one of our 1sts. Pick up a 2nd. And draft one of those guys with the fifth year option. If Jordan Love propels up, he could even take him at 30-32. 
 

While Carr may get another year, it basically seals his fate. He’d have a 1st Round Rookie waiting in the wings and also Nate Peterman who looked absolutely excellent in TC and Pre Season. Peterman has earned 2-3 full starts at some point. Not saying it’ll lead to anything but I’m quite curious. 

Carr sucks but Peterman looked absolutely excellent? You guys are too much 

[S&B Bleeder]

5 hours ago, NickButera said:

Wow Carr did all that by himself? Whilst being the best 3rd down QB in the league, 1 of only 4 QBs with over 100 qb rating, hitting 4000+ yards with a small amount of int's..... You know that any other QB is going to do a lot, a lot, less than Carr with his arm and how exactly does that translate to more wins?  Sorry but no other QB is going to out up that stats Carr can. And we can argue till we're blue in the face about stats and wins. But the fact is you can't get more wins with worse stats unless you're on a phenomenal team. 

 

In the long run I agree. But for next year? No way.

Right now a move at QB is not in the cards.  I've said it; this happens every year somewhere.  It's the QB's fault.  BS.

[BayRaider]

1 minute ago, Geezy said:

Carr sucks but Peterman looked absolutely excellent? You guys are too much 

Don’t make this a narrative. I said Peterman looked great in TV/PS and deserves a 2-3 game start. 

[Geezy]

3 minutes ago, BayRaider said:

Don’t make this a narrative. I said Peterman looked great in TV/PS and deserves a 2-3 game start. 

I’m not making it anything, just going off your posts. If Peterman is ever our starter, we’re a bottom 5 team 

[BayRaider]

Just now, Geezy said:

I’m not making it anything, just going off your posts. If Peterman is ever our starter, we’re a bottom 5 team 

I think Peterman would perform better than Carr. Stop going by his Bills history. Dude can extend plays 100x better than Carr and will make plays off script. Derek Carr is a robot. He will never have that trait which is absolutely necessary in todays NFL. 

[Geezy]

1 hour ago, NYRaider said:

I think it's two things:

1.) People still hold onto hope that he can regain form and produce/play at the same level he did in 2016. 

2.) He's our "all-time" leading passer so people don't want to give up on him, despite the fact he hasn't been very impressive during his career here overall.

It’s neither, it’s more that there isn’t a QB available this offseason that would be an actual upgrade. 
 

Carr haters just want a change for the sake of change, which is bad business 

[Geezy]

4 minutes ago, BayRaider said:

I think Peterman would perform better than Carr. Stop going by his Bills history. Dude can extend plays 100x better than Carr and will make plays off script. Derek Carr is a robot. He will never have that trait which is absolutely necessary in todays NFL. 

I’m not going by anything other than what I saw in preseason vs scrubs, he’ll be a decent back up but I would hate for him to be my starter

[BayRaider]

Just now, Geezy said:

I’m not going by anything other than what I saw in preseason vs scrubs, he’ll be a decent back up but I would hate for him to be my starter

Agree, it’s a long shot which is why I said two games. I would also hate for Carr to me my starter. 

[OG_C2X]

10 minutes ago, BayRaider said:

I think Peterman would perform better than Carr. Stop going by his Bills history. Dude can extend plays 100x better than Carr and will make plays off script. Derek Carr is a robot. He will never have that trait which is absolutely necessary in todays NFL. 

Lol Peterman would preform better then Carr is laughable. Peterman is.a back up QB.

 

BtW Peyton Manning was a robot. Being a Robot isn't a bad thing. 

I hate this new age idea that a great QB makes plays off script, etc. A Great QB is one that plays within the system and Carr does that perfectly. If the system is your problem then Gruden needs to be changed.

Edited December 31, 2019 by OG_C2X

[Steins Gate]

55 minutes ago, Rich7sena said:

I think his play was markedly improved from last year, as a whole. I really thought Carr struggled to start the year an improved as it went on despite having worse players at his disposal. For a few game stretch Brandon Lafell was the best wide receiver he had.

Because Carr is not in his "natural habitat", so to speak, I think he just doesn't see the field as quickly or easily if he were playing in a shotgun vertical offense. By the time he recognizes a window downfield, it has closed. I also think Gruden is in his ear about mitigating turnovers. I distinctly remember Gruden telling Andrew Luck during his QB camp, "you can't go broke making a profit." And, to me, that has been a lot of what Carr and the play-calling have looked like.

It's also important to note that in 2016 (or 2015, both Musgrave years), Carr was not making a whole lot of plays outside of structure and was getting rid of the ball extremely quickly--just like he has always been. I just think that's how he plays. He also was slow starter in most games, at least in 2016. I believe good coaches should tailor their schemes to their best or most important players, not the other way around.

I see what you are trying to say. Carr is essentially improving in areas of weakness due to being in a more traditional offense. He is learning to be a more traditional QB. Sadly, It's not getting us more wins.

I agree that Carr isn't processing the field as quickly as he should. And part of that is being comfortable with the offense. But once comfortable, processing should become 2nd nature. But if he can only play at a high level in a shotgun offense, then Gruden would have to adapt Carr's college offense for the pros. Can you see Gruden doing that?

[OG_C2X]

Just now, Steins Gate said:

I see what you are trying to say. Carr is essentially improving in areas of weakness due to being in a more traditional offense. He is learning to be a more traditional QB. Sadly, It's not getting us more wins.

I agree that Carr isn't processing the field as quickly as he should. And part of that is being comfortable with the offense. But once comfortable, processing should become 2nd nature. But if he can only play at a high level in a shotgun offense, then Gruden would have to adapt Carr's college offense for the pros. Can you see Gruden doing that?

Now sure your proficiency in math. But 7 is greater than 4. Meaning his improvement is getting us more wins. 

[Geezy]

Legit question, has a team ever moved on from a QB entering his prime coming off a season in which he had a 100+ passer rating, or is half of Raider Nation off their meds? 

[BayRaider]

15 minutes ago, OG_C2X said:

Lol Peterman would preform better then Carr is laughable. Peterman is.a back up QB.

 

BtW Peyton Manning was a robot. Being a Robot isn't a bad thing. 

I hate this new age idea that a great QB makes plays off script, etc. A Great QB is one that plays within the system and Carr does that perfectly. If the system is your problem then Gruden needs to be changed.

Carr has played this ultra conservative way across five coaching staffs dating back to college. Saying this is on Gruden is another long list of never ending Carr excuses.

[Steins Gate]

1 minute ago, OG_C2X said:

Now sure your proficiency in math. But 7 is greater than 4. Meaning his improvement is getting us more wins. 

Dude.... You can't be that dense....

The team was a hot mess last year. With the IMPROVED ROSTER, this year's team had a chance for the playoffs. Carr's numbers were almost identical from last year to this year. So his improvement didn't do squat.