The QB Thread: Everything Carr, Stidham and beyond...

[Darbsk]

1 hour ago, bucksavage1 said:

Direct correlation of why the Raiders the last 20 years have been one of the worst franchises in the NFL.

Not making the right moves where other teams are like the Eagles and Chiefs  

We should of traded Carr 2-3 seasons ago and stop trying to surround this guy.

 

Again, it’s good in theory and you’re right, both the Chiefs and Eagles have made great moves. But, for every Eagles there’s a Jags or Redskins or Bears. I think the right approach, even if we are going to try and draft a QBoTF is to try and give him a solid team to step into, like the Eagles and Chiefs did very successfully.
 

We’ve never had good player acquisition and drafting for the last 20 years, I think even if we’d drafted a Fields or Murray or Haskins or Mac Jones we would have given him a Bears or Jags like situation to learn it and it would very likely failed spectacularly. 
 

IMHO the right approach is build a team then slide the young QBoTF in to a situation he can manage. Just throwing a rookie in I think has a really low chance of working in our particular situation with the rosters we’ve had. This year might actually be the best time, we’ve got WRs, a RB or two and a TE and some draft picks and $$ to help the OLine. Previous to that you’re hoping for a miracle IMO.

[BobbyPhil1781]

These dudes just love hindsight and wanting to be right.

Fact of the matter is we were a playoff team last year and only got better on offense w/ our off-season moves. In theory, we should've improved and everyone expected us to but that hasn't happened. There are many factors to this but people want the QB to shoulder the entire blame when there's plenty to pass around. I personally think right now would be a dreadful time for a young QB until we get the pieces in place to protect him. Have to feel that will be a focal point of the off-season or else we're in for the same **** next year.

[dante9876]

1 hour ago, Darbsk said:

Again, it’s good in theory and you’re right, both the Chiefs and Eagles have made great moves. But, for every Eagles there’s a Jags or Redskins or Bears. I think the right approach, even if we are going to try and draft a QBoTF is to try and give him a solid team to step into, like the Eagles and Chiefs did very successfully.
 

We’ve never had good player acquisition and drafting for the last 20 years, I think even if we’d drafted a Fields or Murray or Haskins or Mac Jones we would have given him a Bears or Jags like situation to learn it and it would very likely failed spectacularly. 
 

IMHO the right approach is build a team then slide the young QBoTF in to a situation he can manage. Just throwing a rookie in I think has a really low chance of working in our particular situation with the rosters we’ve had. This year might actually be the best time, we’ve got WRs, a RB or two and a TE and some draft picks and $$ to help the OLine. Previous to that you’re hoping for a miracle IMO.

Problem with this theory is you got to hope you can find a good qb later in the draft. Cause the average to above average qb is going to either keep you from getting an early pick. 

 

I not sure how you call jags or bears a failing situation. That's only the case if you plan on winning year two of their careers. Year 3 or 4 is when you know it failed. Both young qb are improving. Both are slowly getting pieces added to them to help them get better. Bears have a ton of cap space and draft picks and a young qb. I much rather be where they at than where we at right now. Even gruden had the right idea of the roster had to be build up. He just botch the picks and execution in free agency. 

Eagles didn't have a good team for Hurts to step into either. They build a good team around him while he is still under a manageable contract. Look at the 2019 amd 2020 eagles. Look at the rosters and look at roster now and how much change over its been, from players to the coaching staff. 

Waiting for a team to be built or perfect to get a young qb isn't going to work unless you hit on a good qb drafted outside the top 10. 

If we inside top 10 this year, draft a qb, trade carr or release if he don't wave it, let stidham start a year, continue to build team, trade guys with no future here, start young qb at end of next season , than fresh start season after that. 

[big_palooka]

This is why Rich was a winner. Never made excuses. Competed, took accountability, got in teammates faces who were holding them back from anything but winning football games. True leadership from the QB spot. 

IMO, execution falls on the QB. Coaches teach it all week, it's the QBs job to execute and hold those accountable who don't. Rich understood that better than anyone. 

[NYRaider]

14 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

This is why Rich was a winner. Never made excuses. Competed, took accountability, got in teammates faces who were holding them back from anything but winning football games. True leadership from the QB spot. 

IMO, execution falls on the QB. Coaches teach it all week, it's the QBs job to execute and hold those accountable who don't. Rich understood that better than anyone. 

That's one of the biggest issues plaguing this team, imo. Not to take anything away from Carr's leadership because he did rally the team last year. But in the years that Carr has had success he has done it with a very specific type of head coach. JDR, Gruden, and Rich were all very ra-ra type of leaders that could motivate guys. Carr just isn't that type of leader and I think it's amplified when we have a head coach that isn't really that type of leader either. 

From what I've heard JMD has become too chill because he has PTSD from his time in Denver. 

[Darbsk]

2 hours ago, dante9876 said:

Problem with this theory is you got to hope you can find a good qb later in the draft. Cause the average to above average qb is going to either keep you from getting an early pick. 

 

I not sure how you call jags or bears a failing situation. That's only the case if you plan on winning year two of their careers. Year 3 or 4 is when you know it failed. Both young qb are improving. Both are slowly getting pieces added to them to help them get better. Bears have a ton of cap space and draft picks and a young qb. I much rather be where they at than where we at right now. Even gruden had the right idea of the roster had to be build up. He just botch the picks and execution in free agency. 

Eagles didn't have a good team for Hurts to step into either. They build a good team around him while he is still under a manageable contract. Look at the 2019 amd 2020 eagles. Look at the rosters and look at roster now and how much change over its been, from players to the coaching staff. 

Waiting for a team to be built or perfect to get a young qb isn't going to work unless you hit on a good qb drafted outside the top 10. 

If we inside top 10 this year, draft a qb, trade carr or release if he don't wave it, let stidham start a year, continue to build team, trade guys with no future here, start young qb at end of next season , than fresh start season after that. 

OK to answer those points one by one:
 

If we built a decent team then we could always trade up to take a QB. Especially as if the team is decent you can risk using draft picks in a trade to get that missing piece as you don’t need them so to plug massive holes.

Jags drafted Bortles and Gabbert if you recall and are currently on their third very high pick QB who may or may not work out and have been terrible for years apart from one freak season.

Bears of course drafted Trubisky first and though they did surprise one year it was a flash in the pan, they are now on Fields and he doesn’t look particularly promising, maybe he works out, maybe he doesn’t but again, it’s not their first try which was the point I was trying to make. 
 

The Eagles had a very good defence, great OLine and a few nice pieces. I think BP expanded on that in a different post. They weren’t a typical rebuilding team obviously and clearly were a good landing spot for a rookie to be eased in and not thrown to the wolves.
 

Nobody ever said try and get a perfect team, if it was perfect you wouldn’t need a QB 😄 but in order to maximise the chances of success I personally think you need to have a couple QB friendly weapons, a decent OLine to protect your young asset and at least a competent defence that can get you out of a hole. That stands to reason for me, and as I said earlier, if you do get a good basic team and are not drafting high, then great! You don’t need all your draft capital urgently so you can afford to trade up to get your guy. It’s really not complicated 😁

[dante9876]

27 minutes ago, Darbsk said:

OK to answer those points one by one:
 

If we built a decent team then we could always trade up to take a QB. Especially as if the team is decent you can risk using draft picks in a trade to get that missing piece as you don’t need them so to plug massive holes.

Jags drafted Bortles and Gabbert if you recall and are currently on their third very high pick QB who may or may not work out and have been terrible for years apart from one freak season.

Bears of course drafted Trubisky first and though they did surprise one year it was a flash in the pan, they are now on Fields and he doesn’t look particularly promising, maybe he works out, maybe he doesn’t but again, it’s not their first try which was the point I was trying to make. 
 

The Eagles had a very good defence, great OLine and a few nice pieces. I think BP expanded on that in a different post. They weren’t a typical rebuilding team obviously and clearly were a good landing spot for a rookie to be eased in and not thrown to the wolves.
 

Nobody ever said try and get a perfect team, if it was perfect you wouldn’t need a QB 😄 but in order to maximise the chances of success I personally think you need to have a couple QB friendly weapons, a decent OLine to protect your young asset and at least a competent defence that can get you out of a hole. That stands to reason for me, and as I said earlier, if you do get a good basic team and are not drafting high, then great! You don’t need all your draft capital urgently so you can afford to trade up to get your guy. It’s really not complicated 😁

1. Trading up for a qb rarely works. Unless you trading up 1 or 2 spots and aing giving up a bunch if picks. You have to have a front office extremely good at drafting and building a team to make that successful. 

The best results have come from bottoming out. I remember when the whole forum was making fun of the bills, cause they keep starting a guy who threw like 100 interceptions in one half. A few years later, same head coach. They got a top qb and a top defense. 

Bears drafted the wrong guy but still built a good enough roster to to get to a playoff game. If the problem is that we might get a bad young qb, than the whole league would just keep their avg qbs. 

Jags have more playoff wins than the Raiders since carr has been in the league. That's not all carrs fault. But they have built,  burn down and starting to build again. Their defense has more talent than ours. They have a young qb who the verdict is still out on. Add ridley next year and he can have a josh allen, jalen hurts jump. We don't know? 

 

The eagles could have stayed with their version of carr in wentz. But they didn't. The drafted a qb right behind him cause they saw a chance to get better at the position. Hurts wasn't better than wentz his first start. I don't expect a rookie to be better than carr. But the way carr contract is set up, if he not a fit for Josh playbook, it would be silly to guarantee his deal, so a rookie can sit behind him. You tying up cap with the hope carr turns it on again. There is so many cheap qbs you can use as a bridge. 

 

We don't have a good basic team now. It be silly to wait two years to get a good basic team, than trade up for a young qb than have to wait 2 or 3 years for him to adjust to the game. You keep saying thrown to the wolves. We don't have to start the rookie 1st year and even if we did, he doesn't have to win and the offense side of the ball do have some decent pieces for a rookie qb. The oline is as far as everybody wants to believe. Get a qb that moves their feet and gets rid of the ball, it won't be as bad. 

 

Unless you think carr is in here for the long haul, you made his contract with a get out of jail free card. Use it. 

[Darbsk]

8 hours ago, dante9876 said:

1. Trading up for a qb rarely works. Unless you trading up 1 or 2 spots and aing giving up a bunch if picks. You have to have a front office extremely good at drafting and building a team to make that successful. 

The best results have come from bottoming out. I remember when the whole forum was making fun of the bills, cause they keep starting a guy who threw like 100 interceptions in one half. A few years later, same head coach. They got a top qb and a top defense. 

Bears drafted the wrong guy but still built a good enough roster to to get to a playoff game. If the problem is that we might get a bad young qb, than the whole league would just keep their avg qbs. 

Jags have more playoff wins than the Raiders since carr has been in the league. That's not all carrs fault. But they have built,  burn down and starting to build again. Their defense has more talent than ours. They have a young qb who the verdict is still out on. Add ridley next year and he can have a josh allen, jalen hurts jump. We don't know? 

 

The eagles could have stayed with their version of carr in wentz. But they didn't. The drafted a qb right behind him cause they saw a chance to get better at the position. Hurts wasn't better than wentz his first start. I don't expect a rookie to be better than carr. But the way carr contract is set up, if he not a fit for Josh playbook, it would be silly to guarantee his deal, so a rookie can sit behind him. You tying up cap with the hope carr turns it on again. There is so many cheap qbs you can use as a bridge. 

 

We don't have a good basic team now. It be silly to wait two years to get a good basic team, than trade up for a young qb than have to wait 2 or 3 years for him to adjust to the game. You keep saying thrown to the wolves. We don't have to start the rookie 1st year and even if we did, he doesn't have to win and the offense side of the ball do have some decent pieces for a rookie qb. The oline is as far as everybody wants to believe. Get a qb that moves their feet and gets rid of the ball, it won't be as bad. 

 

Unless you think carr is in here for the long haul, you made his contract with a get out of jail free card. Use it. 

Haha, then I guess we have differing ideas on what will work. Both ideas could work, I prefer to go one way and you the other. Fair enough 😀

It just seems to me that one way has a greater chance of success based on what other teams have done. 

[NYRaider]

11 hours ago, dante9876 said:

1. Trading up for a qb rarely works. Unless you trading up 1 or 2 spots and aing giving up a bunch if picks. You have to have a front office extremely good at drafting and building a team to make that successful. 

The best formula is to build a talented team and then draft a QB. Guys like Mahomes, Herbert, Lamar, etc. weren't top 5 picks but they all just went to teams that already had a ton of established talent. I agree that giving up a ton of draft capital, especially for an unproven player, makes it difficult to build a contending team though. 

I personally think I prefer the 2024 QB class with guys like Ewers/Williams over the 2023 class though. 

[NYRaider]

11 hours ago, dante9876 said:

Unless you think carr is in here for the long haul, you made his contract with a get out of jail free card. Use it. 

I think there's a good chance that Carr is retained and that we try to tweak the roster to make one more push with our current core group of guys, especially with his $33M cap hit. I don't think there's really any chance  that he makes it to the final two years of his deal though where he's set to make $43M. 

If we're looking for a bridge guy I think Jimmy G makes a ton of sense. 

[big_palooka]

1 hour ago, NYRaider said:

I think there's a good chance that Carr is retained and that we try to tweak the roster to make one more push with our current core group of guys, especially with his $33M cap hit. I don't think there's really any chance  that he makes it to the final two years of his deal though where he's set to make $43M. 

If we're looking for a bridge guy I think Jimmy G makes a ton of sense. 

I don't see them bailing on Carr. Davis wouldn't allow it most likely. 

Guess is, they run it back on offense. Shore up the Oline with a piece or two and all resources go into rebuilding the defense. 

[NYRaider]

Just now, big_palooka said:

I don't see them bailing on Carr. Davis wouldn't allow it most likely. 

Guess is, they run it back on offense. Shore up the Oline with a piece or two and all resources go into rebuilding the defense. 

I agree. Carr's cap hit is still manageable next year and there's probably not a better option in terms of someone that gives us a chance to win next year if we move on. I think the majority of the offense will be back with the exception of maybe Darren Waller. 

Offensively I'd like to see us add a deep threat WR, a reunion with Agholor would make a ton of sense. And address the offensive line, Kolton/Parham look like building blocks, I'd target guys like Isaiah Wynn and Nate Davis. 

Defensively I think we need to commit to building in the trenches. Ideally we'll bring in another veteran and use our first round pick on a DL as well. Carter/Anderson and someone like Hargrave or Davenport would be insane. 

[true2form]

All I want to see is improvement in the 2nd half of the season.  Like, can we play a full game for a change, even if we lose.  

Glad to see they are not afraid to get rid of dead weight like Abram as well.  If you're not onboard, then get out.  Use the rest of the season to evaluate the roster and make the decisions for the offseason before we even get there on who to keep and who to target.

[NYRaider]

7 minutes ago, true2form said:

All I want to see is improvement in the 2nd half of the season.  Like, can we play a full game for a change, even if we lose.  

Nothing about the last two weeks indicates that this team is going to turn the corner anytime soon. 

[BobbyPhil1781]

32 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

Nothing about the last two weeks indicates that this team is going to turn the corner anytime soon. 

More time in a new, complex system might suggest otherwise. We've seen crazier things happen