Jarrett Stidham

[Deadpulse]

1 hour ago, AlNFL19 said:

3 hours ago, Deadpulse said:

@AlNFL19, you work with statistics IRL?

No

[CP3MVP]

4 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said:

Well if it's a non-QB needy team at 1, let's just try and dump 7 picks on them for T-Law. Why settle for 2nd best if we're already in the region. If a QB needy team is 1, 1 and 2 - forget it. This is the risk.

Because who ever has the first pick is taking Lawrence. You’re not getting him the same way the dolphins weren’t getting burrow. The dolphins had 3 number 1’s and it was like nah 

[Apparition]

4 hours ago, CP3MVP said:

Because who ever has the first pick is taking Lawrence. You’re not getting him the same way the dolphins weren’t getting burrow. The dolphins had 3 number 1’s and it was like nah 

What if it's a team that has its franchise QB but he goes down with injury? 

[Dan33185]

Good article on ESPN about Stidham

 

https://www.espn.com/blog/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4820076/moment-wont-be-too-big-for-jarrett-stidham-says-his-former-coach

[Hunter2_1]

8 hours ago, CP3MVP said:

Because who ever has the first pick is taking Lawrence. You’re not getting him the same way the dolphins weren’t getting burrow. The dolphins had 3 number 1’s and it was like nah 

Let's say it's Cinci. They're drafting Lawrence? Or maybe NYG? Detroit? 

Edited May 3, 2020 by Hunter2_1

[CP3MVP]

6 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said:

Let's say it's Cinci. They're drafting Lawrence? Or maybe NYG? Detroit? 

It could be cincy, but I doubt it. When was the last time a team picked number 1 back to back years?

[CP3MVP]

Yea I could see the lions blowing it up firing everyone and taking Lawrence 

[Deadpulse]

47 minutes ago, CP3MVP said:

It could be cincy, but I doubt it. When was the last time a team picked number 1 back to back years?

Cleveland Browns 2017 and 2018

Cleveland Browns 1999 and 2000

Cincinnati Bengals 1994 and 1995

Tampa Bay Buccaneers 1986 and 1987

Tampa Bay Buccaneers 1976 and 1977

 

[Soko]

7 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said:

Let's say it's Cinci. They're drafting Lawrence? Or maybe NYG? Detroit? 

Problem there is that even then, Jacksonville has multiple firsts and will probably be right there picking in the top 5. They can probably put together the best offer if a team with a QB gets #1. 

[CP3MVP]

1 hour ago, Deadpulse said:

Cleveland Browns 2017 and 2018

Cleveland Browns 1999 and 2000

Cincinnati Bengals 1994 and 1995

Tampa Bay Buccaneers 1986 and 1987

Tampa Bay Buccaneers 1976 and 1977

 

So 3 times in the last 30 seasons including the browns who were full blown tanking. 

Edited May 4, 2020 by CP3MVP

[Hunter2_1]

2 hours ago, Yin-Yang said:

Problem there is that even then, Jacksonville has multiple firsts and will probably be right there picking in the top 5. They can probably put together the best offer if a team with a QB gets #1. 

Yeah, we're not getting Lawrence, whichever way you slice it.

 

We'll be a decent team still. We have a poor squad, but we have a plan, we have a QB (contrary to popular belief), we have a savage secondary and we have BB. We'll get 8 wins at least.

Edited May 4, 2020 by Hunter2_1

[Apparition]

I think the question that the organization needs to ask itself is, "What sort of performance from Stidham would give us enough confidence to keep him as the starter for 2021 and beyond?"

The last time the Pats were without Brady for a full season (or close to it), Matt Cassel led the team to an 11-5 record, but that record came with major caveats. For one, the offense had to be completely retooled to suit his skillset. For another, they had the league's easiest schedule, only won three games against teams with winning records, and 4 of the 5 losses were blowouts. Cassel fared decently (well enough to earn him a big payday from the Chiefs), but that season also represented his ceiling. Can we afford a similar performance out of Stidham, knowing that the schedule this year will be far tougher? What will the plan be if the team goes 9-7 or 8-8 and Stidham plays at that 2008 Cassel level, but shows the same sorts of limitations? 

[Deadpulse]

2 hours ago, Starless said:

I think the question that the organization needs to ask itself is, "What sort of performance from Stidham would give us enough confidence to keep him as the starter for 2021 and beyond?"

The last time the Pats were without Brady for a full season (or close to it), Matt Cassel led the team to an 11-5 record, but that record came with major caveats. For one, the offense had to be completely retooled to suit his skillset. For another, they had the league's easiest schedule, only won three games against teams with winning records, and 4 of the 5 losses were blowouts. Cassel fared decently (well enough to earn him a big payday from the Chiefs), but that season also represented his ceiling. Can we afford a similar performance out of Stidham, knowing that the schedule this year will be far tougher? What will the plan be if the team goes 9-7 or 8-8 and Stidham plays at that 2008 Cassel level, but shows the same sorts of limitations? 

Stidham will be 4 years Cassel's junior this season to his 2008 season, for what thats worth. I think the big difference here is that we arent expecting the GOAT QB to come back the following season at the absolute peak of his powers. I am not sure we can use that season and what transpired after it as an indicator as to what Jarrett needs to do. 

 

That being said, I dont think there is anything he can do to secure his spot. Without the defacto best of all time there, you gotta believe BB and Co will constantly be assessing the QB position around the league and CFB. If they think there is a guy that can do better they will bring him in to compete. 

[Apparition]

1 hour ago, Deadpulse said:

Stidham will be 4 years Cassel's junior this season to his 2008 season, for what thats worth. I think the big difference here is that we arent expecting the GOAT QB to come back the following season at the absolute peak of his powers. I am not sure we can use that season and what transpired after it as an indicator as to what Jarrett needs to do. 

 

That being said, I dont think there is anything he can do to secure his spot. Without the defacto best of all time there, you gotta believe BB and Co will constantly be assessing the QB position around the league and CFB. If they think there is a guy that can do better they will bring him in to compete. 

Stidham is only signed through 2022. If he performs above a certain threshold, the team will have to give him a proper NFL starter deal probably after the 2021 season. In other words, the real window in which they can ascertain his value to the team will only last 2 years. It'll be really interesting to see how they evaluate his potential if he shows the kind of growth I mentioned before. I'm sure having Brady around for 20 years has altered the way they evaluate QBs.

[Hunter2_1]

7 hours ago, Starless said:

Stidham is only signed through 2022. If he performs above a certain threshold, the team will have to give him a proper NFL starter deal probably after the 2021 season. In other words, the real window in which they can ascertain his value to the team will only last 2 years. It'll be really interesting to see how they evaluate his potential if he shows the kind of growth I mentioned before. I'm sure having Brady around for 20 years has altered the way they evaluate QBs.

I guess 2021 is the crunch season then, for him. 2021 we'll see 100m in cap space and some serious moves on this team, probably. If it turns out he's no good even with a strong supporting cast (hypothetically) then yeah we have to move on in 2022/3. This season has to be some sort of fact-finding mission for Bill and the coaches. 

I maintain that I think they believe in him though, for now.