the free agent frenzy 2021 - a thread to discuss what teams with money are doing with it

[MacReady]

The identity of the Packers for the 18-ish of the past 20+ years is not conducive to winning Super Bowls.

It has basically been see if theatrics at the QB position works.

20+ years of HOF QB play and two years of dominant defensive play and guess where the Super Bowls came.

Love doesn’t have to be great, he just has to be good, and we need to change our identity to teams thinking of how they’re going to play our defense BEFORE they worry about our offense.

That’s it for today.

[Les Punting]

Lance is a somewhat challenging scout do to several factors (competition level, lack of game film, a run-heavy offense). From what I've seen, he's kind of a mess. His release isn't particularly efficient. He telegraphs everything. He doesn't see the field well, he just takes off running half the time instead of working through his reads. His deep balls are often not just inaccurate but comically inaccurate. That's a problem. As NDSU was a run first team, Lance would only throw 10-15 times/game, most of them were short throws from well set up play action. His "showcase" vs. Central Arkansas wasn't very impressive. He just doesn't have the chops to carry an offense throwing the ball. He certainly has some tools to develop, but he's probably the least NFL ready of all the top QB prospects.

[Norm]

2 minutes ago, Les Punting said:

Lance is a somewhat challenging scout do to several factors (competition level, lack of game film, a run-heavy offense). From what I've seen, he's kind of a mess. His release isn't particularly efficient. He telegraphs everything. He doesn't see the field well, he just takes off running half the time instead of working through his reads. His deep balls are often not just inaccurate but comically inaccurate. That's a problem. As NDSU was a run first team, Lance would only throw 10-15 times/game, most of them were short throws from well set up play action. His "showcase" vs. Central Arkansas wasn't very impressive. He just doesn't have the chops to carry an offense throwing the ball. He certainly has some tools to develop, but he's probably the least NFL ready of all the top QB prospects.

This is what I felt closer too. But I think I came in with expectations maybe too high after the buzz about him here in the Dakotas, I actually missed that central arkansas state game, think I worked, but I heard it wasn't great but that's not a huge surprise given circumstance. But I'm not intrigued enough to take another long look and try and be open minded since opinions vary pretty wide here

[Packerraymond]

1 hour ago, Outpost31 said:

The identity of the Packers for the 18-ish of the past 20+ years is not conducive to winning Super Bowls.

It has basically been see if theatrics at the QB position works.

20+ years of HOF QB play and two years of dominant defensive play and guess where the Super Bowls came.

Love doesn’t have to be great, he just has to be good, and we need to change our identity to teams thinking of how they’re going to play our defense BEFORE they worry about our offense.

That’s it for today.

We'll have to trade Love in 3 years though to keep winning Super Bowls.

[deathstar]

3 hours ago, CrazyJoeDavola said:

Just wanted to kind of nitpick here lol. Lance's footwork isn't what most would consider great. He has some issues at the top of his drop which lead him to have to reset. The rest you said is true as he made adjustments and has a great release with a substantial arm. The offense does not have the TE or RB as the #1 read though. The RB in particular caught very few passes in the offense other than an occasional screen pass. The TE isn't really utilized much in that offense until the redzone. His number 1 read is generally outside and for much of the year his number 2 read was run.

Different views on this board are like *******s, everyone’s got em.

[incognito_man]

2 hours ago, Packerraymond said:

We'll have to trade Love in 3 years though to keep winning Super Bowls.

not if he signs a 2nd contract like Rodgers

[deathstar]

4 hours ago, Les Punting said:

Lance is a somewhat challenging scout do to several factors (competition level, lack of game film, a run-heavy offense). From what I've seen, he's kind of a mess. His release isn't particularly efficient. He telegraphs everything. He doesn't see the field well, he just takes off running half the time instead of working through his reads. His deep balls are often not just inaccurate but comically inaccurate. That's a problem. As NDSU was a run first team, Lance would only throw 10-15 times/game, most of them were short throws from well set up play action. His "showcase" vs. Central Arkansas wasn't very impressive. He just doesn't have the chops to carry an offense throwing the ball. He certainly has some tools to develop, but he's probably the least NFL ready of all the top QB prospects.

This is as bad of a take as you’ll see on this board. 

[incognito_man]

1 minute ago, deathstar said:

This is as bad of a take as you’ll see on this board. 

I think it's what of the best takes I've read on this board, honestly. We could use more independent reviews exactly like this from people who watch full games.

 

[deathstar]

Just now, incognito_man said:

I think it's what of the best takes I've read on this board, honestly. We could use more independent reviews exactly like this from people who watch full games.

 

I agree with your second sentence. Unfortunately I don’t believe the quoted post was an example of that. There’s zero chance you watch Lance and believe he can’t get through a progression or that his release is inefficient. 
 

... lol

[CrazyJoeDavola]

4 hours ago, Les Punting said:

Lance is a somewhat challenging scout do to several factors (competition level, lack of game film, a run-heavy offense). From what I've seen, he's kind of a mess. His release isn't particularly efficient. He telegraphs everything. He doesn't see the field well, he just takes off running half the time instead of working through his reads. His deep balls are often not just inaccurate but comically inaccurate. That's a problem. As NDSU was a run first team, Lance would only throw 10-15 times/game, most of them were short throws from well set up play action. His "showcase" vs. Central Arkansas wasn't very impressive. He just doesn't have the chops to carry an offense throwing the ball. He certainly has some tools to develop, but he's probably the least NFL ready of all the top QB prospects.

I agree he is a tough one to scout mainly due to competition level. He started 16 games which is plenty to get an understanding of what he is all about. Describing him as quite a mess seems a little hyperbolic. He is a young guy that’s really only focused on being a QB for a couple years now. I disagree on his release. Looks to be pretty good by my eye. Also disagree on telegraphing things. If he did this he would have thrown more interceptions than just the one. Running wasn’t because he doesn’t see the field more of a built in read of the offense which is another hurdle in scouting him. Again a bit hyperbolic saying his deep accuracy is comically bad. He was somewhat inconsistent but far from comically bad. He has all the tools to be a good QB in the NFL. According to your assessment it sounds like you view him as a late round flyer. 

[craig]

The range of evals on Lance may not be unique to this board.  NFL teams may have some of that scatter as well.  Part of the unpredictability of the draft.  

[KFP7]

6 hours ago, Outpost31 said:

The identity of the Packers for the 18-ish of the past 20+ years is not conducive to winning Super Bowls.

It has basically been see if theatrics at the QB position works.

20+ years of HOF QB play and two years of dominant defensive play and guess where the Super Bowls came.

Love doesn’t have to be great, he just has to be good, and we need to change our identity to teams thinking of how they’re going to play our defense BEFORE they worry about our offense.

That’s it for today.

does it come at the expense of being terrible for an unknown amount of time in between super bowls?  

[Toddfather]

58 minutes ago, KFP7 said:

does it come at the expense of being terrible for an unknown amount of time in between super bowls?  

I live in Tampa and oh boy are the Bucs fans back. Flags and shirts everywhere. However, up until last season that fan base wasn't exactly "dedicated". The true fans thought the owners cared too much about soccer etc etc etc. I would rather be competitive and in the playoffs regularly for 20 years than have two SB winning seasons surrounded by a lot of losing. Either way both teams have two rings in 20 years. I just thing it's more enjoyable as a fan if your organization is run closer to the Packers than the Bucs. Just my opinion.

[incognito_man]

3 hours ago, deathstar said:

I agree with your second sentence. Unfortunately I don’t believe the quoted post was an example of that. There’s zero chance you watch Lance and believe he can’t get through a progression or that his release is inefficient. 
 

... lol

I've never watched him play but if the counter example is a badly thrown, zero safety help deep ball and a nice (but incomplete) end zone pass I'm definitely not convinced that it's a bad take to question his deep accuracy, progression, field reading ability, or reliance on running game to open up passing lanes.

Edited April 13, 2021 by incognito_man

[deathstar]

3 hours ago, incognito_man said:

I've never watched him play but if the counter example is a badly thrown, zero safety help deep ball and a nice (but incomplete) end zone pass I'm definitely not convinced that it's a bad take to question his deep accuracy, progression, field reading ability, or reliance on running game to open up passing lanes.

Okay. I’m not sure what you’re referring to as a bad pass and I’m not convinced you’re actually interested in learning about Lance as a prospect. I’m not interested in whatever you’re trying to do here, so have a good evening.