2023 Off-season Talk

[xrade]

31 minutes ago, Bobby816 said:

But to say he's not elite is quite baffling to me.

Because he wasn't last year.  You can cite whatever you excuses you want but the fact is he played just average last year.  Could it be an anomaly?  Sure.  But a  smart GM would not take on that cap busting contract just to find out.  A desperate one would.

If he was not 40.  If he was not so flaky and waffling on retiring. It would be a little more digestible.  But history suggests his best days are behind him.  He WAS elite.  Not so sure anymore.

[Rockice_8]

2 minutes ago, xrade said:

Because he wasn't last year.  You can cite whatever you excuses you want but the fact is he played just average last year.  Could it be an anomaly?  Sure.  But a  smart GM would not take on that cap busting contract just to find out.  A desperate one would.

If he was not 40.  If he was not so flaky and waffling on retiring. It would be a little more digestible.  But history suggests his best days are behind him.  He WAS elite.  Not so sure anymore.

Pretty easy to see why he would decline.  Broken thumb, traded best WR and the one they drafted was raw and injured most of the year.  Once Watson got healthy can comfortable they start winning and he was playing well again.

Could it be natural decline sure he's nearly 40 but there are clear reasons to see why a decline was inevitable.  I would take that risk assuming he return to his near elite form.  Carr is a good fall back plan too.

[xrade]

5 minutes ago, Rockice_8 said:

Pretty easy to see why he would decline.  Broken thumb, traded best WR and the one they drafted was raw and injured most of the year.  Once Watson got healthy can comfortable they start winning and he was playing well again.

Could it be natural decline sure he's nearly 40 but there are clear reasons to see why a decline was inevitable.  I would take that risk assuming he return to his near elite form.  Carr is a good fall back plan too.

Could be.  But there are too many other factors to take into consideration.

If Rodgers reverted to his elite ways he would certainly move up to #2 on my list behind Carr.  The reason why #2 and not 1 is not because of play but because of his contract and his potential to just hang it up.  I said it before and I'll say it again.  What if we get Rodgers and he decides to hang it up next year.  We will be right back here but with massive dead money and cap hit.  If he decides to play into his age 42 season and then retire, we still have majore dead money but no cap hit.

[KingOfNewYork]

2 hours ago, Rockice_8 said:

Wins are not a QB stat.  Put Brady on OAK and he isn't the GOAT and probably isn't winning anything either.  Carr dealt with bottom 5 defenses his entire career.  No QB is overcoming that to "win" as you say.  Brady was winning Superbowls scoring under 20 ppg.  He played with top 10 defenses and that was a huge reason for his success.  Brady wins 17-14 and get all the praise because they won.

Put Carr in a better situation and there is no reason to see him have more success in the winning department.  Carr is a top 12-16ish QB that's plenty good to win.

None of what you said you can prove, it’s all hypotheticals. 

Wins should be what matters not who you like, who might do better if the sky wasn’t cloudy or if the game was in a dome or if the coin toss was tails instead of heads or none of that BS.

You play to WIN. Wins are a team stat and this is a team sport. 

[Bobby816]

18 minutes ago, KingOfNewYork said:

None of what you said you can prove, it’s all hypotheticals. 

Wins should be what matters not who you like, who might do better if the sky wasn’t cloudy or if the game was in a dome or if the coin toss was tails instead of heads or none of that BS.

You play to WIN. Wins are a team stat and this is a team sport. 

Based on that logic every team that has the same record as another team is in a similar situation. Which we know isn’t the case as fans.

As I pointed out based on that logic… you can put Mahomes on any team and they’re a SB contender. Because Mahomes wins but lots of teams don’t.

 

This logic completely takes out every factor besides QB. Coaching, system, OL, RBs, WRs TEs, how good the defense is. This being a huge one for me. Carr can have a stat line of 3 TDs 0 INTs and lose the game 34-31. So Carr wasn’t good bc LV lost that day. This is what happens when making crucial moves for a franchise are looked at as just a single thing.

 

You bring in Rodgers. This might make Wilson and Moore be star WRs. Might make the OL better bc they have confidence when blocking and a QB that knows when to get rid of the ball. Makes Hall better bc teams have to respect the pass. It creates a winning culture for our young roster. Which is huge. Defense plays better bc they don’t have as much pressure on them. Not on the field as much. Meaning less injuries even perhaps.

 

It’s not as simple as player A has a record of 8-8. So he doesn’t make us better.

[Rockice_8]

1 hour ago, KingOfNewYork said:

None of what you said you can prove, it’s all hypotheticals. 

Wins should be what matters not who you like, who might do better if the sky wasn’t cloudy or if the game was in a dome or if the coin toss was tails instead of heads or none of that BS.

You play to WIN. Wins are a team stat and this is a team sport. 

Not sure what I'm trying to prove really.  I said wins are team stat did I not?  I'm not the one discounting Carr because of his W/L record or stats in the cold.  I believe that is you. 

I want to win which is why I want Rodgers or Carr the two best QBs available.  I'm not some Carr fan boy here just calling it like I see it.  If we can't get Rodgers I want Carr because I want to win.  Are you trying to argue that Jimmy G is better because he wins? 

Edited February 15, 2023 by Rockice_8

[Bobby816]

24 minutes ago, Rockice_8 said:

Not sure what I'm trying to prove really.  I said wins are team stat did I not?  I'm not the one discounting Carr because of his W/L record or stats in the cold.  I believe that is you. 

I want to win which is why I want Rodgers or Carr the two best QBs available.  I'm not some Carr fan boy here just calling it like I see it.  If we can't get Rodgers I want Carr because I want to win.  Are you trying to argue that Jimmy G is better because he wins? 

He’s been tightly wound recently 😉 

[Rockice_8]

35 minutes ago, Bobby816 said:

He’s been tightly wound recently 😉 

Honestly not even sure what he's trying to argue.  That I want Carr because I like him and don't care about wins?

[KingOfNewYork]

1 hour ago, Rockice_8 said:

Not sure what I'm trying to prove really.  I said wins are team stat did I not?  I'm not the one discounting Carr because of his W/L record or stats in the cold.  I believe that is you. 

I want to win which is why I want Rodgers or Carr the two best QBs available.  I'm not some Carr fan boy here just calling it like I see it.  If we can't get Rodgers I want Carr because I want to win.  Are you trying to argue that Jimmy G is better because he wins? 

Not trying to prove anything. My point is when y’all like someone y’all make a bunch of excuses. “Oh Carr isn’t bad in cold weather his numbers just aren’t high” like what.

The goal should be to win but the goal isn’t, which is my point. All these options we have are flawed in one way or another, this theory that option X would result in a specific outcome is ridiculous as well, especially when a guy like Carr has never done anything to warrant this level of hype. 

I don’t care who’s playing Quarterback personally as long as we win. I don’t want a 225 yard Quarterback, I want a winning Quarterback.  I want to win games.

[ekill08x]

9 minutes ago, KingOfNewYork said:

Not trying to prove anything. My point is when y’all like someone y’all make a bunch of excuses. “Oh Carr isn’t bad in cold weather his numbers just aren’t high” like what.

The goal should be to win but the goal isn’t, which is my point. All these options we have are flawed in one way or another, this theory that option X would result in a specific outcome is ridiculous as well, especially when a guy like Carr has never done anything to warrant this level of hype. 

I don’t care who’s playing Quarterback personally as long as we win. I don’t want a 225 yard Quarterback, I want a winning Quarterback.  I want to win games.

I want a winning team. Ballgame. 

[GangGreen420]

I still can’t believe we hired Nathaniel Hackett

[JetsandI]

33 minutes ago, GangGreen420 said:

I still can’t believe we hired Nathaniel Hackett

Is that worse than Brian Scottenheimer being OC for Cowboys?  lol.

[Greene N White]

9 hours ago, Bobby816 said:

I'll try and do a rather quick write up of the pros and cons for each guy and tell you why I have them ranked the way I do.

The way I have them listed is the order I want us to go. 

 

Aaron Rodgers

Pros: And elite QB, knows how to win big games, makes the guys around him better, knows the system and our OC very well, Rarely turns the ball over, offers us the chance to win right now creating a winning environment for these young guys.

Cons: He will cost a good amount of draft capital, IMO he's likely only playing 2 years, so we'd have to pay him for 2 years probably with him not even on the roster.

 

Derek Carr

Pros: Is a very good QB (I have him around the 10-15 range), is a warrior and rarely misses time (has only missed 3 games in 9 seasons), Has more game winning drives than any QB in the last 9 seasons, hasn't ever played with a great defense where he doesn't have to do as much, consistently will give us that 25 TD type seasons or better, still only 31 and in his prime. He will play his whole contract with us. Won't cost us draft capital allowing us to continue the youth movement. Fits the system.

Cons: Likely going to look like he's getting top QB money (this even though I have in cons, for me is a positive, bc once guys like Burrow, Hurts, Jackson and such get paid, he'll be getting paid about where he sits talent wise), He's good, but not elite. Hasn't shown he can play in cold (once again I have this in cons, but don't think this is an issue, when you live and practice in the cold and are adjusted to it, is 100% different than living in LA or LV and practicing there and then going to the cold to play the game). How will he do with the media? He's shown that he 100% will take the blame when things aren't going good, but also doesn't like criticism well.

 

Jimmy G

Pros: Likely wont cost as much as Carr, When he plays has shown to win, Should be a fit for our system, Familiar with some of the staff, Is consistent in his stats. Has playoff experience. 31, so he still has football years ahead of him. 

Cons: Has an injury history, Has never done enough to make a staff think they're good at QB, has only started on average 8 games a season since his 3rd year in the league, He's coming off an injury. Has had relatively great players around him his whole career, both on offense and defense. Where he hasn't had to do a ton to win games.

 

Lamar Jackson

Pros: He's an elite QB, Can hurt teams in so many ways, Has shown he can win. He's young and should have several good seasons ahead of him if he can stay healthy.

Cons: He's going to cost a ton to trade for. Probably at bare minimum 3 1st rounders +, on top of that you likely have to make him a top 3 highest paid player in the NFL, His style is suited for long term success and he wants a fully guaranteed deal, his skill as a passer doesn't match him being good long term (when his legs go, he wont be the same), he's coming off injury, his work ethic has been in question at times. Not sure he fits our system.

 

Ryan Tannehill

Pros: Wont cost a ton (assuming TEN cuts him or trades him away for nothing), has a winning history, is consistent, has ties to our passing game coordinator and OL coach, fits the system.

Cons: He's older so he's a band-aid (will be 35 when the season starts), very average to above average. Hasn't really ever shown he alone can win games, has relied on RBs and D most his career.

 

1. Aaron Rodgers

2. Derek Carr

3. Jimmy G

4. Lamar Jackson

5. Ryan Tannehill

 

I don't want us to have any other options... that's why I stopped there. 

I have a different order but I am in complete agreeance that these are the only 5 we should be looking at. Unbelievable to me that people are really talking about bringing in guys like baker mayfield.

[Greene N White]

Can't stand the people who claim Carr isn't a "winner". Below are the raiders defensive ranks in points allowed since he entered the league:

2014-32nd

2015-22nd

2016-20th

2017-20th

2018-32nd

2019-24th

2020-30th

2021-26th

2022-26th

 

They are by far the worst defense in the NFL during his tenure as a raider. He has never once played with a defense in the top half of the league. The fact that he won as many games as he did is honestly impressive.

[rickyt31]

lol Rodgers is so dramatic. 

 

I don't know where to rank Rodgers on my list because of the fact he might play 1 year if he decides to come back. Lamar Jackson is my #1, and Carr/Rodgers are tied for me because of the uncertainty that Rodgers will play at least 2 years.

Rodgers only playing one year could just lead to us being out of range to draft the next QB. The only 2 QBs set to hit the market next year is Burrow and Herbert, but we know that's not happening. So on top of trading picks for Rodgers, we may have to plan to trade up for the next QB. I'll be happy with him, but this could backfire if he only plays one year and doesn't win it all.