TL-TwoWinsAway Posted January 8, 2020 Author Share Posted January 8, 2020 34 minutes ago, detroitroar said: I dont believe that for one second. Driskel did pretty well till he got hurt. Blough showed some promise early for an undrafted rookie. And look what happened; his job security was put into question. I'm excited to have the chance to add a real blue chip player to a team that was competitive but I dont think there was any intention at all by anybody to do so. It was clear early into this year that Stafford was vitally important. They were fully aware of his back issue before the week 4 game. They did absolutely nothing to improve this roster. If winning this year was vital, they would've done something. To me, it's incredibly clear that they prioritized draft value over winning games, and continued to field a losing roster as a result. I don't believe that any reasonable fan thinks that either Quinn or Patricia felt that Driskel or Blough could push this team to compete for a playoff birth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detroitroar Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 18 hours ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said: It was clear early into this year that Stafford was vitally important. They were fully aware of his back issue before the week 4 game. They did absolutely nothing to improve this roster. If winning this year was vital, they would've done something. To me, it's incredibly clear that they prioritized draft value over winning games, and continued to field a losing roster as a result. I don't believe that any reasonable fan thinks that either Quinn or Patricia felt that Driskel or Blough could push this team to compete for a playoff birth. How can you say that? You act like we rolled out curtis painter. Our backup QB play was solid for a few weeks. And do qbs grow on trees?? We had a 2nd and 3rd stringer that came in and gave us a chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TL-TwoWinsAway Posted January 9, 2020 Author Share Posted January 9, 2020 (edited) 5 minutes ago, detroitroar said: How can you say that? You act like we rolled out curtis painter. Our backup QB play was solid for a few weeks. And do qbs grow on trees?? We had a 2nd and 3rd stringer that came in and gave us a chance. Out of my six sentences, I'm not sure which you're referring to. I stand by all of it. Yes, our backup QB play was solid for a few weeks. That is fantastic. That's exactly what I feel they were aiming for: be good enough to be competitive, but don't be good enough to win. That's why you start subpar players anyway. Do you feel that this team could've competed for a playoff spot without Stafford? If no, why wouldn't you want to play for the future? It's my opinion that we're only in this fantastic position because Quinn prioritized draft value over a few wins in 2019. I think that was an incredibly wise decision. Edited January 9, 2020 by TL-TwoWinsAway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detroitroar Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 56 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said: Out of my six sentences, I'm not sure which you're referring to. I stand by all of it. Yes, our backup QB play was solid for a few weeks. That is fantastic. That's exactly what I feel they were aiming for: be good enough to be competitive, but don't be good enough to win. That's why you start subpar players anyway. Do you feel that this team could've competed for a playoff spot without Stafford? If no, why wouldn't you want to play for the future? It's my opinion that we're only in this fantastic position because Quinn prioritized draft value over a few wins in 2019. I think that was an incredibly wise decision. They were aiming to be competitive but not quite to win?? That is soooooo ridiculous. Your mind has already been made up on this obviously but I havent seen anything at all of substance that actually points towards what your saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detroitroar Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 There are many reasons why subpar players may start but the number 1 reason is cause theres only so many effective players in an extremely competitive league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TL-TwoWinsAway Posted January 9, 2020 Author Share Posted January 9, 2020 1 hour ago, detroitroar said: There are many reasons why subpar players may start but the number 1 reason is cause theres only so many effective players in an extremely competitive league. And those players can be traded for. We had an entire stable of draft picks to make that happen, if we wanted to. We didn't. Stafford literally carried this team though the first eight weeks. When his lingering back issue flared up early in the season, the team knew that losing him would cost them a shot at competing. Mariota, for one example, was already starting his decline in TEN, and would have been a clear upgrade over Driskel or Blough. It's my opinion that they intentionally shifted their focus to the draft, and wisely so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detroitroar Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 Just because they didn't make a trade doesn't mean that. This isn't baseball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TL-TwoWinsAway Posted January 9, 2020 Author Share Posted January 9, 2020 (edited) 14 minutes ago, detroitroar said: Just because they didn't make a trade doesn't mean that. This isn't baseball. Of course. You're free to read it however you'd like. Question: when Stafford stopped starting due to a seemingly serious back injury, did you think we'd be in competition for a playoff spot? Edited January 9, 2020 by TL-TwoWinsAway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karnage84 Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 1 hour ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said: And those players can be traded for. We had an entire stable of draft picks to make that happen, if we wanted to. We didn't. Stafford literally carried this team though the first eight weeks. When his lingering back issue flared up early in the season, the team knew that losing him would cost them a shot at competing. Mariota, for one example, was already starting his decline in TEN, and would have been a clear upgrade over Driskel or Blough. It's my opinion that they intentionally shifted their focus to the draft, and wisely so. TL... you and I tend to agree on a lot of stuff but I can't go with you on this one. Stafford has not missed a game in like 8 or 9 years. Mariota had a $20M cap hit in 2019. You're not trading for him with that kind of cap hit and he's also the starter on a team that just won 9 games. He was on shaky ground but Mariota would've been costly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TL-TwoWinsAway Posted January 9, 2020 Author Share Posted January 9, 2020 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Karnage84 said: TL... you and I tend to agree on a lot of stuff but I can't go with you on this one. Stafford has not missed a game in like 8 or 9 years. Mariota had a $20M cap hit in 2019. You're not trading for him with that kind of cap hit and he's also the starter on a team that just won 9 games. He was on shaky ground but Mariota would've been costly. I agree completely! Mariota, just one example, was benched before the trade deadline and was definitely available. Despite being an undeniable and significant upgrade over Driskel or Blough, trading for him wouldn't have been worth it, although it would have significantly improved our QB position for 2019. It would have been a short term improvement, but a poor long term decision. That's my entire point in this whole thing: instead of giving up valuable pieces to improve this roster short term, they intentionally avoided improving the roster and looked to the future. (As they should have.) This team wasn't going to win as-is without Stafford. Instead of making improvements once his back issues were known to be serious (prior to week 4), they fielded a roster that they knew wouldn't be successful, which is far better for this franchise moving forward. Edited January 9, 2020 by TL-TwoWinsAway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detroitroar Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 32 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said: Of course. You're free to read it however you'd like. Question: when Stafford stopped starting due to a seemingly serious back injury, did you think we'd be in competition for a playoff spot? Unless you have evidence that they didn't even consider bringing someone in, I find your stance useless to be honest. I respect your opinion but dont see anything to suggest Quinn wanted to thank in any way, shape or form. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karnage84 Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 5 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said: I agree completely! Mariota, just one example, was benched before the trade deadline and was definitely available. Despite being an undeniable and significant upgrade over Driskel or Blough, trading for him wouldn't have been worth it, despite significantly improving our QB position for 2019. It would have been a short term improvement, but a poor long term decision. That's my entire point in this whole thing: instead of giving up valuable pieces to improve this roster short term, they intentionally avoided improving the roster and looked to the future. (As they should have.) I think I see your point and where you are going with this. Quinn wants to build this team through the draft and then supplement needs in FA. They value draft picks and it's why they tend to trade away guys like Tate and Diggs. They entered the season with high expectations, had the injury issues on the defense, struggled to get the run going and wound up on the wrong side of 0.500 when Stafford went down. They obviously liked Driskell enough to not make a move for a guy. There probably wasn't anyone that they considered to be an upgrade available at a reasonable cost in draft capital. The Titans already had Tannehill on the roster before the season started as they had question marks about Mariota. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karnage84 Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 3 minutes ago, detroitroar said: Unless you have evidence that they didn't even consider bringing someone in, I find your stance useless to be honest. I respect your opinion but dont see anything to suggest Quinn wanted to thank in any way, shape or form. I don't think it's about tanking as much as not wanting to give up assets (draft picks) for guys that they don't consider upgrades over Driskell and/or Blough at a cost they are willing to accept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TL-TwoWinsAway Posted January 9, 2020 Author Share Posted January 9, 2020 1 minute ago, Karnage84 said: I think I see your point and where you are going with this. Quinn wants to build this team through the draft and then supplement needs in FA. They value draft picks and it's why they tend to trade away guys like Tate and Diggs. They entered the season with high expectations, had the injury issues on the defense, struggled to get the run going and wound up on the wrong side of 0.500 when Stafford went down. They obviously liked Driskell enough to not make a move for a guy. There probably wasn't anyone that they considered to be an upgrade available at a reasonable cost in draft capital. The Titans already had Tannehill on the roster before the season started as they had question marks about Mariota. Exactly. And, based on that, I draw the conclusion that, by knowing our roster was insufficient without Stafford, and by not bringing in an upgrade to Driskel or Blough, they were satisfied with fielding an insufficient roster and playing for draft capital. That's exactly what happened. Midway through the second year of what's clearly a rebuild, trading valuable draft capital just to fall short of the playoffs would be a huge mistake. Instead, they positioned us with the 3rd overall pick, which has tons of value this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TL-TwoWinsAway Posted January 9, 2020 Author Share Posted January 9, 2020 Here's something interesting: I've created two mocks so far this off-season. Each one has what's arguably an improved roster, Stafford is healthy in each one, yet many have argued that those teams wouldn't compete for playoff spots. And that's perfectly fine. But, if those 'improved' rosters (with Stafford) would struggle to make the playoffs, how does an injured roster with an injured Stafford rate? I'd argue significantly worse. I believe that Quinn viewed 2019 the exact same way... that he makes similar assessments. I believe that he looks at the state of our roster, our performance on the field, weaknesses and injuries, and determines whether to have a short or long term approach. It's my opinion that, once Stafford started to struggle with what was known to be a serious back injury prior to week 4, Quinn - knowing how crucial QB play was to our success - took a long term approach. Once I heard that Stafford was struggling with his back, I wanted the exact same thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.