BayRaider Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 Just now, JustAnotherFan said: They did not always need the money and were not only strapped for cash because they had to pay Rodgers. We are not discussing the past though. We are discussing how paying your QB a ridiculous amount of money stumps your roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyers0909 Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 Even if this is the right move, I don't think we'll ever see it done. It could be the right move more times than not, but if you miss on that rookie QB it costs the GM their job. There's just not stability in the GM position where you can practice this long term. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 2 minutes ago, Forge said: I feel like people don't appreciate the variance that comes with single elimination tournaments such as the NFL playoffs. A lot of stuff can happen. Have to have those winning records to have a chance. After that, it's a matter of winning 3 games (I'd say 4, but it's just so rare that it happens, your chances are kind of shot if you don't have that bye week) There's even a ton of variance outside of just the playoffs. If Taylor Rapp doesn't blow that coverage, there's a decent chance the Rams beat the 49ers in Week 16. If that happens, the 49ers may well have been playing in the Divisional Round. If that happens, there's no guarantee the 49ers make it to where they are now. So many things have to go right if you aren't the Patriots to make it to the Super Bowl. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAF-N72EX Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 1 minute ago, BayRaider said: We are not discussing the past though. We are discussing how paying your QB a ridiculous amount of money stumps your roster. Your argument was that paying QB's big bucks usually don't fare well. My rebuttal to this is using Rodgers as an example (since you brought him up) as to how much more successful the Packers could have been had they invested more money into FA to build a defense around him and we wouldn't be having this discussion. Instead, they just kept using the draft and whiffing on picks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 2 minutes ago, flyers0909 said: Even if this is the right move, I don't think we'll ever see it done. It could be the right move more times than not, but if you miss on that rookie QB it costs the GM their job. There's just not stability in the GM position where you can practice this long term. Definitely agree you'll never see it done. Not when there are real world risks such as employment on the line. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAF-N72EX Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 I say we blame this all on Belichick/Brady and get it over with. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
43M Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 (edited) Lets all just ignore that there are teams out there that have huge amounts of money to spend every offseason, yet still somehow suck every year. Also ignore that the vast majority of SB QBs over the last 2 decades, especially SB winning QBs, have been franchise QBs. No, lets just pretend that signing a QB to a big contract ruins a teams chances. Lets not talk about how hard it is to make it to a SB in general, or factor in how things like coaching, regression and team building through the draft can affect a team year after year. No....just never pay a QB, and keep drafting a new QB every 5 years or so. Thats obviously the recipe for success. After all, we know that there are 5 or so franchise talents in every single draft, so there will always be an abundance of talent to choose from. Cant believe teams havent figured this out yet. Steelers were much better off this year after Ben went down, thats for sure.... Edited January 20, 2020 by FourThreeMafia 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAF-N72EX Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 5 minutes ago, flyers0909 said: Even if this is the right move, I don't think we'll ever see it done. It could be the right move more times than not, but if you miss on that rookie QB it costs the GM their job. There's just not stability in the GM position where you can practice this long term. See Pace/Nagy and Bears for reference. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
43M Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 2 minutes ago, JustAnotherFan said: I say we blame this all on Belichick/Brady and get it over with. Id rather blame Joe Flacco. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAF-N72EX Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 Just now, FourThreeMafia said: Id rather blame Joe Flacco. Or Dalton for that matter. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronjon1990 Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 (edited) 25 minutes ago, JustAnotherFan said: Yet, to use Rodgers as an example. If the Packers had actually invested money into FA over the last 10 years to build a defense around him then I bet we would not be having this conversation. Plus, I'd take the worst 13-3 team making the conference championship over the best 8-8 roster of all time each and every day The whole "worst 13-3 roster ever" argument is asinine. The team made the conference championship. They had a better shot at making the Superbowl than 87% of a league that shows incredible fluidity year in and year out on the whole. The entire final 8 were teams who have paid (or will be following that tradition and paying) their QB. The only playoff QB this entire cycle who was even questionable was Tannehill, and he probably silenced those questions overall. Yet we're actually expected to entertain not paying a QB? Why? To be the Browns? Bungles? Dolphins? Redskins? Drop a 1st rounder on a guy who has never taken a pro snap and gamble on being saddled to him for the next 5 years? Show me the SB contender who let a pay-worthy QB walk. Show me the team that took a QB high last year/this year who honestly has a shot at winning their division in 2020. Cardinals? Naw. Skins? Nope. Bengals? Browns? Giants? No. I get not overpaying a QB, but you never let one walk without a contingency plan. Rams starting Bortles? Really? Chiefs rolling with Henne/Moore? Ravens going all in on RG3? 9ers trotting Beathard out? Vikings starting Mannion? People severely underestimate how few true starting caliber QBs there are in the league and seem to forget that the backup quality in the league isn't exactly plug-and-play level. Cheap QBs are cheap for a reason and a draft mistake your franchise years behind the curve. Edited January 20, 2020 by ronjon1990 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFlaccoSeagulls Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 I think the bigger take here is that once you have a QB on a rookie contract who is capable of winning a Superbowl, you MUST hit that window, otherwise chances aren't good that once you hit that 2nd contract with that QB you'll be able to make it to the Superbowl. It'll be interesting to see what happens to the Texans, Ravens and Chiefs once those 3 QB's hit that 2nd contract and see how good those teams become. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malik Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 Data samples are two small for the vast majority of any and all statistics related to the NFL. The playoffs themselves are random and chaotic where a "lesser" team can often beat a better one purely off of a being a better match up and fluke occurrence in that 1 game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted January 20, 2020 Author Share Posted January 20, 2020 50 minutes ago, flyers0909 said: Even if this is the right move, I don't think we'll ever see it done. It could be the right move more times than not, but if you miss on that rookie QB it costs the GM their job. There's just not stability in the GM position where you can practice this long term. It’ll never be done, and I acknowledge that, but I am 100% convinced it is the best move. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rivers Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 1 hour ago, JustAnotherFan said: Wait? Are you suggesting that KC would be better off not paying Mahomes and letting him walk? Mahomes might be THE exception though. I think the OP is saying that quality other players are required, rather than the higher % cap QB's. I think Mahomes would be the lone exception though, he is that good. Nice thread and info OP, good one. What if the league removed the QB from the cap, let the owner pay the QB's whatever, yet not ruin the cap for the rest of the team? CBA table ever mention this? 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.