What to do at QB?

[anewdawn]

On 2/18/2021 at 5:30 PM, Broncofan said:

The changes to the 5th year option guarantee and amounts are confirmed in multiple sources.   It probably explains why CLE & BAL want to extend both Baker & Lamar Jackson early - they have to lock in 5th year options at transition tag prices that are fully guaranteed once the team exercises it - not the following year.  
 

it’s a game changer to be sure when considering a trade for Darnold (again, Stafford & Watson are far, far, far more preferable, like not even close lol).  And it makes going after Darnold far riskier - and if the FO was serious about it in November as Lock, Klis & Albright all referenced - that speaks massive volumes about their long-term doubts on Lock. 
 

 

Speaking of Lamar Jackson does anyone see the possibility of the Ravens trading him for Watson?  If I was the Ravens I would do that trade in a heartbeat.  My thinking is that it does not appear that the Ravens will win with him.  I mean he is great but I truly think Watson is better.  So Houston saves face in getting a young MVP qb and the Ravens get a young great qb who will equate to more playoff wins for the Ravens -imo.  If I'm the Ravens and thinking strictly from a team first mentality you have to strongly consider this.  Jackson needs to run less eventually and become more of a passer.  Essentially Jackson has to become more like Watson versus Watson becoming more like Jackson so the opportunity now exists to obtain Watson.  Though the outcome of this trade likely results in Lamar derailing and demanding Houston trade him - lmao.  PS if I'm the Ravens I keep this trade simple.  Jackson for Watson and I even might swap a few firsts for a few seconds as the optics look good in doing that but in reality the difference in overall picks (Baltimore's late firsts versus Houston's early seconds) is negligible.  I think its a trade Houston can definitely sell to its fanbase and everyone else for that matter!  I'm surprised that no one else seems to be considering this............. 

[bMiller031]

6 hours ago, anewdawn said:

Speaking of Lamar Jackson does anyone see the possibility of the Ravens trading him for Watson?  If I was the Ravens I would do that trade in a heartbeat.  My thinking is that it does not appear that the Ravens will win with him.  I mean he is great but I truly think Watson is better.  So Houston saves face in getting a young MVP qb and the Ravens get a young great qb who will equate to more playoff wins for the Ravens -imo.  If I'm the Ravens and thinking strictly from a team first mentality you have to strongly consider this.  Jackson needs to run less eventually and become more of a passer.  Essentially Jackson has to become more like Watson versus Watson becoming more like Jackson so the opportunity now exists to obtain Watson.  Though the outcome of this trade likely results in Lamar derailing and demanding Houston trade him - lmao.  PS if I'm the Ravens I keep this trade simple.  Jackson for Watson and I even might swap a few firsts for a few seconds as the optics look good in doing that but in reality the difference in overall picks (Baltimore's late firsts versus Houston's early seconds) is negligible.  I think its a trade Houston can definitely sell to its fanbase and everyone else for that matter!  I'm surprised that no one else seems to be considering this............. 

Really good point. I’ve wondered about this idea for all non-KC teams with a promising but not elite QB (ARI, LAC, CLE, BAL, CIN, SEA?, etc.)

[anewdawn]

1 hour ago, bMiller031 said:

Really good point. I’ve wondered about this idea for all non-KC teams with a promising but not elite QB (ARI, LAC, CLE, BAL, CIN, SEA?, etc.)

But it only makes sense with certain qbs.  Like I don't think Seattle can pull it off as Wilson has a no trade clause and wont accept going to the donkey show that is Houston.  I keep hearing Houston wants a qb back which makes sense to me.  Lamar is still on the cheap.  Houston I take it would have the common sense if they were to do something like this to only pay a percentage of the signing bonus per year so they don't get screwed again upon signing their new qb.  Like 65mill signing bonus spread over 5 years.  Honestly though I have a feeling it will get ugly between Houston and Watson.  I have a feeling they will force his hand to sit.  I think all the nfl owners would also be pulling for this too - they don't want to become like the nba but it will happen sooner rather than later. Sitting Watson will likely get them the first pick or close to it next year and that's when I would deal him for more picks.  The only way I see a trade this year is along the lines of what I propose.  Sorry I think Tua could be ok but I'm not sold on him and I feel the same way about Darnold.  In giving up Watson Houston would naturally want someone more than capable back or a high pick to get their own guy.  Again don't see  Watson wanting the NYJ but possibly Miami.

[BullsandBroncos]

If I'm being realistic, some other team beats us to Watson. We sign Andy Dalton or some other schlub and pick Micah Parsons or Patrick Surtain in the 1st. I don't like that CB from VT. In fact, I don't care for any player that opted out. Especially if it was their Junior year and they only played 1 season.

Edited February 24, 2021 by BullsandBroncos

[bMiller031]

17 hours ago, BullsandBroncos said:

If I'm being realistic, some other team beats us to Watson. We sign Andy Dalton or some other schlub and pick Micah Parsons or Patrick Surtain in the 1st. I don't like that CB from VT. In fact, I don't care for any player that opted out. Especially if it was their Junior year and they only played 1 season.

Assuming the 4 QBs go before 1.9, it seems we’re rooting for WRs to go early. Having the choice between Parsons, Surtain, Farley, etc. is not a bad outcome at all tbh. 

I’d be curious to hear thoughts but it seems to me that Watson being traded after draft day is an advantage for us competing with MIA & CAR.. though it could also benefit the WAS/SF types picking after 1.9... thoughts?

[Broncofan]

14 minutes ago, bMiller031 said:

I’d be curious to hear thoughts but it seems to me that Watson being traded after draft day is an advantage for us competing with MIA & CAR.. though it could also benefit the WAS/SF types picking after 1.9... thoughts?

It's a definite advantage in that 4 teams will decide to go another route with a Rd1 QB, and won't have higher draft capital that's known like NYJ/MIA, and even CAR will.    It's an even bigger disadvantage to Houston, in that they narrow their buyer pool significantly, with the understanding that Watson still has to approve teams from that buyer pool as well.

The Houston FO would be wise to either deal Watson before the April draft (when the pick value is known, and their buyer pool is at its highest number), or try and mend fences with Watson in a tangible way before then.  History has shown that when teams wait to trade players who don't want to play for them and hold out, the return goes down, not up - simply because the buyer pool shrinks post-draft than pre-draft.   

The latter scenario (of mending fences with Watson) seems unlikely given their history.   The former scenario (making a trade at highest return, pre-April draft), however - also requires a rational, and football-first minded FO.   Those haven't been the moves the FO has made since VP Easterby has seized greater control after BOB's exit, however (from Palcic's firing onwards).    In short, expecting Houston's FO to act rationally is far from a given.

[bMiller031]

1 hour ago, Broncofan said:

It's a definite advantage in that 4 teams will decide to go another route with a Rd1 QB, and won't have higher draft capital that's known like NYJ/MIA, and even CAR will.    It's an even bigger disadvantage to Houston, in that they narrow their buyer pool significantly, with the understanding that Watson still has to approve teams from that buyer pool as well.

The Houston FO would be wise to either deal Watson before the April draft (when the pick value is known, and their buyer pool is at its highest number), or try and mend fences with Watson in a tangible way before then.  History has shown that when teams wait to trade players who don't want to play for them and hold out, the return goes down, not up - simply because the buyer pool shrinks post-draft than pre-draft.   

The latter scenario (of mending fences with Watson) seems unlikely given their history.   The former scenario (making a trade at highest return, pre-April draft), however - also requires a rational, and football-first minded FO.   Those haven't been the moves the FO has made since VP Easterby has seized greater control after BOB's exit, however (from Palcic's firing onwards).    In short, expecting Houston's FO to act rationally is far from a given.

Agreed. So, as Broncos fans, we should be rooting for 

a) Watson NOT to be traded before the draft

b) Watson NOT to soften his stance towards staying in HOU

c) MIA, CAR, SF, CHI, & WAS to make major QB commitments during (or soon after) the draft

 

[Broncofan]

9 minutes ago, bMiller031 said:

Agreed. So, as Broncos fans, we should be rooting for 

a) Watson NOT to be traded before the draft

b) Watson NOT to soften his stance towards staying in HOU

c) MIA, CAR, SF, CHI, & WAS to make major QB commitments during (or soon after) the draft

 

I wouldn't object if Denver just won the bidding outright before the draft, but yes, if you want Denver to have an even better chance, and perhaps at lower price, that's the path.   I would not really worry about Chicago or Washington, though - Chicago's O is not that attractive for a QB to go to - and IMO there's no way Watson's agreeing to go to another poorly-run FO like we're seeing in WFT.   

The other 3 teams you listed (and NYJ, just to be safe & complete) are fair to root for investing in other QB situations.    As long as we all recognize that Houston's FO acting rationally is also a complete wild card lol.

Edited February 24, 2021 by Broncofan

[jsthomp2007]

1 hour ago, Broncofan said:

I wouldn't object if Denver just won the bidding outright before the draft, but yes, if you want Denver to have an even better chance, and perhaps at lower price, that's the path.   I would not really worry about Chicago or Washington, though - Chicago's O is not that attractive for a QB to go to - and IMO there's no way Watson's agreeing to go to another poorly-run FO like we're seeing in WFT.   

The other 3 teams you listed (and NYJ, just to be safe & complete) are fair to root for investing in other QB situations.    As long as we all recognize that Houston's FO acting rationally is also a complete wild card lol.

And, we'd keep our 1.9 pick this year to go pickup Surtain, or Parsons.  

[AKRNA]

On 2/17/2021 at 2:25 PM, thebestever6 said:

He hasn't had issues in years though and is a future first ballot hall of famer I'd doubt it would have that kinda blow back.

Man, I just saw this. Ben should never be in the HOF. I think he had maybe one good performance in the playoffs. He was usually awful and cost Pitt chances at multiple rings with 3-4 turnover performances. 

Pitts dominance during those years was solely due to **** LeBeau, a worthy HOF member. It had little to nothing to do with Big Ben.

[thebestever6]

5 hours ago, AKRNA said:

Man, I just saw this. Ben should never be in the HOF. I think he had maybe one good performance in the playoffs. He was usually awful and cost Pitt chances at multiple rings with 3-4 turnover performances. 

Pitts dominance during those years was solely due to **** LeBeau, a worthy HOF member. It had little to nothing to do with Big Ben.

Cardinals Superbowl? I thought he looked like he was playing 7 on 7 against our defense in that title game?

 

 

Lebeau who made Tim Tebow look like a Hall of Famer ? Yeah I'm not following.

[broncos67]

3 hours ago, thebestever6 said:

Cardinals Superbowl? I thought he looked like he was playing 7 on 7 against our defense in that title game?

 

 

Lebeau who made Tim Tebow look like a Hall of Famer ? Yeah I'm not following.

Lol, Lebeau is a Hall of Famer. Tebow winning that game doesn't negate his longstanding performance. Come on.

[bMiller031]

 

[jolly red giant]

45 minutes ago, bMiller031 said:

 

Well - if he goes to the Raiders then Paton has no choice but to sell the farm for Watson. The problem is that Watson may not want to play in the same division as Mahomes, Herbert and Wilson.

However, if he goes to the Dophins then it makes things a bit easier in terms of trying for Watson. 

Imaging playing in a division with Mahomes, Herbert and Wilson and not having a QB of any consequence to compete with? Jeez - it would be a long 10-15 years.

[Broncofan]

4 hours ago, bMiller031 said:

 

 

4 hours ago, jolly red giant said:

Well - if he goes to the Raiders then Paton has no choice but to sell the farm for Watson. The problem is that Watson may not want to play in the same division as Mahomes, Herbert and Wilson.

However, if he goes to the Dophins then it makes things a bit easier in terms of trying for Watson. 

Imaging playing in a division with Mahomes, Herbert and Wilson and not having a QB of any consequence to compete with? Jeez - it would be a long 10-15 years.

The piece reads more that Wilson gave his notice for SEA to do 2 things:

1.  Fix the OL.

2.  Start listening to his input on the O - for which he probably deserves credit.   The SEA O is very vanilla in their pass game complexity, and it's a huge reason why Wilson takes so many hits.   

 

 

Both DK Metcalf & Tyler Lockett noted the solution D's used to solve SEA's O...difference being, Lockett mentioned this one year earlier, at the end of the 2019 season - and nothing was done.  Now it's both of them and Wilson seeing the obvious.  So not hard to see where Wilson's coming from here.

 

All of which to say - it seems far more likely that Wilson is staying in SEA.    That O needs an overhaul, for sure.  And addressing the OL is a no-brainer there.   

Watson on the other hand, doubled down...hard.   He's likely never playing a snap in a HOU uniform.  It seems like it's only a matter of when, not if.  Can't really say it's hard to blame Watson, given all the history.