NFL News & Notes

[Packerraymond]

You pay Watson easily, Josh Allen you wait for one more year, if he has a similar year, you pay him.

Jackson and Murray are tough cases, their games won't age well because they aren't Wilson, they need the mobility to remain elite. I'd still give them 1 deal as a GM unless the offer I got for them was insane, but that's a niche player that a coordinator is going to have to have a special offense for. Don't know if you'll get that package for them.

The rest are obvious no pays. Mayfield will be tough as you said, but he's not worth it.

[pacman5252]

1 hour ago, Outpost31 said:

Lol.  And you want me to admit I was wrong (I was) about the Bears when I said it while commiserating their excellent defense and our terrible defense. 

They should never have re-signed Wentz.
They should have traded Wentz for three first round draft picks as soon as Foles helped them win a Super Bowl

Foles was still signed for 2018. 

They would certainly have gotten at least two first round picks for Wentz, likely 3.  If Sam Bradford got them a first, Wentz would have gotten them three firsts. 

So that's Darnold, Josh Allen, Josh Rosen or Lamar Jackson they would have drafted with one of those first round picks.  A 50/50 shot, and also add two more first round picks.

This isn't hindsight, either.  This is exactly what I told you they should have done before they re-signed Wentz.

There is one type of QB you re-sign and hope they're good enough to break that 13% barrier, and that's the Mahomes type.

And only their second contract. 

But there's a reason why Brady is the only old QB who has won multiple Super Bowls after their second contract, and that's because he takes less than he's worth.  That and selling out the way the Broncos did, but I don't want the Packers to win a Super Bowl and then go 10 years in that 5-7 win range the way the Broncos are because they sold out. 

Wentz was NOT that Mahomes type. 

Even in 2017 when he was leading in MVP talk there were warning signs.  60% completion, only 7.5 yards per attempt after 6.2 yards per attempt in his rookie year. 

There was also talk of him being socially stupid, and THAT was the biggest thing in all of this.  If you're about to pay the leader position, the most important position, that much of your cap, you better be damn sure he's got the complete and total confidence of the whole entire team.

I'll tell you the future again so that again in  the future you can scoff it aside and act like I don't know what I'm talking about when I do.

The 2017 draft class.

Patrick Mahomes is the only one you re-sign.

Trubisky is an obvious no. 

Lots of people would say Watson is an obvious yes, but he's not.  He's absolutely an obvious yes if your former coach/GM didn't just wreck your team.  But where's the talent on t hat Texans team?  You're only harming your own team and Watson by keeping him there.  That team is 5 years from competing for a Super Bowl WITH a regular amount of draft capital.  They don't have that regular amount.  By the time they get the right head coach and have the right draft hits and free agency hits, Watson is going to be 30 years old and now suddenly he can't carry that offense the way he otherwise could have at 25.  Even without a GM, the Texans could have gotten Sam Darnold plus the 1st overall pick and the Seahawks first round pick, plus the Jets 2021 first round pick for Deshaun Watson.  You roll with Darnold until his contract runs out, maybe even give him a damn cheap contract for all that physical talent, and you watch out for your Hurts, your Wilson, your Cousins in the later rounds of the draft with an eye on someone you can develop slowly (like we just did with Love). 

2018 draft class. 

Mayfield you trade away ASAP.  Dude's not terrible, but his personality is.  Since you're the Browns I think you have to pay him whatever he asks for though.  Sucks to be a Browns GM because that fanbase would eviscerate him if he did the smart thing. 

Sam Darnold - Jets should have traded him already.  For whatever they could have gotten.  He was ruined and wrecked by two terrible coaching staffs, poor kid.

Josh Allen - Nope.  Any QB needs that much help added to the offense just to get above 7 yards per attempt and 60% completion isn't the type who is going to be able to carry a team once they're paid too much to keep that offensive talent around him.  Although again, with the Bills, that GM kinda has to.  Can't blame him for not doing the smart thing and trading Allen for four first round draft picks. 

Lamar Jackson - OMG, this is the easiest one in the world.  With every hit he takes his value drops.  You trade him the minute you exercise his fifth year option.  Especially since you're the Ravens and have had frequent success over the past 20 years. 

2019 draft class

Kyler Murray you trade, too.  I seem to be the only one who can comprehend why quarterbacks suddenly fall off the face of the earth a season or two after their team stops trading first round picks for receivers and using high picks on offensive linemen, using high dollars to sign offensive linemen, etc. 

Daniel Jones - Trade him now.  If you can get anything for him. 

Dwayne Haskins - Honestly just cut him. 

 

I feel like people like you would only resign a QB if they are clear cut top 5 QBs. I'll say I don't think the "next man up" should always sign market setting contracts, but there is also value in stability. Teams like NY and Denver won with SBs over priced capable QBs.

It also takes 2 to tango on trades. Historically nobody has given up anything of real value for a struggling QB. Rosen got a second 1 year after drafted and that is about it.

As far as grading the QBs

-Watson was not a bad resign (top 10 QB who doesn't need his legs).

-Murray is interesting (can throw but needs his legs). 

-Allen needs one more year. If you look at him though, he has a gun and is making tight window throws. I wouldn't want to give him market setting money, but I'd potentially commit.

-Jones should get one more year (bad system, has shown a little life)

-Jackson you ride with, tag until he breaks

[Mazrimiv]

The beauty of the "don't give your young starting QB a 2nd contract unless he is Mahomes" take is that no team with a competent QB will ever actually do it.  The take is never proven to be either correct or incorrect, and you can literally say whatever you want about how it would have worked out had a team done it.  The Bayless/Cowherd types have made a career of this.

Edited December 9, 2020 by Mazrimiv

[Leader]

55 minutes ago, pacman5252 said:

Murray is interesting (can throw but needs his legs).

Cant throw now cause he got squashed and his shoulder's hurt. If I had to guess which player - Murray or Jackson - would break down (or get broken) first because of their style of play - I'd select Murray - because of his smaller size.

57 minutes ago, pacman5252 said:

-Allen needs one more year. If you look at him though, he has a gun and is making tight window throws. I wouldn't want to give him market setting money, but I'd potentially commit.

A consideration here is he's a market fit. He loves Buffalo and they love him. Dont know if that equates into a hometown discount - but its a factor. Not everybody loves Buffalo.

[incognito_man]

22 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

The beauty of the "don't give your young starting QB a 2nd contract unless he is Mahomes" take is that no team with a competent QB will ever actually do it.  The take is never proven to be either correct or incorrect, and you can literally say whatever you want about how it would have worked out had a team done it.  The Bayless/Cowherd types have made a career of this.

I've never heard any talking head suggest trading away "good" young QBs. That's the point here: nobody even really considers it.

[vegas492]

I watched Jackson try to throw the football last night.  Woof.  If I'm the Ravens, I'm not doing a long term deal with him.  The second those legs go, he is done.  Do the 5'th year option, franchise twice if necessary.  He's a unique running talent, but he's about as poor a thrower of the football as you can get.  

Mayfield.  I disagree a little.  I think he fits Cleveland perfectly.  He's a punk.  He's got an aggressive streak.  And I think they dig that about him.  I think that is a good fit of player and city.  

[incognito_man]

1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

I watched Jackson try to throw the football last night.  Woof.  If I'm the Ravens, I'm not doing a long term deal with him.  The second those legs go, he is done.  Do the 5'th year option, franchise twice if necessary.  He's a unique running talent, but he's about as poor a thrower of the football as you can get.  

Mayfield.  I disagree a little.  I think he fits Cleveland perfectly.  He's a punk.  He's got an aggressive streak.  And I think they dig that about him.  I think that is a good fit of player and city.  

I don't think Mayfield is serious enough to win a SB with. If they ever made it that far, dude would party too hard leading up to it anyway.

[Kepler]

15 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

I don't think Mayfield is serious enough to win a SB with. If they ever made it that far, dude would party too hard leading up to it anyway.

Manziel lite

[pacman5252]

4 hours ago, Leader said:

Cant throw now cause he got squashed and his shoulder's hurt. If I had to guess which player - Murray or Jackson - would break down (or get broken) first because of their style of play - I'd select Murray - because of his smaller size.

A consideration here is he's a market fit. He loves Buffalo and they love him. Dont know if that equates into a hometown discount - but its a factor. Not everybody loves Buffalo.

-As far as Murray, he still isn't playing horrible, just not as good as he was in the beginning of the season (also was playing a tough D). The guy does have a gun and can read a D unlike Jackson. He does need to learn how to use his mobility to extend plays vs just running though.

-We'll see on Allen. He might give a discount. Either way if he keeps playing like he has, he is what you want in a long term starter (some mobility, pass first, built like a truck). He is essentially a young Big Ben.

 

We've been spoiled in GB. Teams have to play with non top 5 QBs. I get not wanting to overpay, but I'd rather have been a fan of the Eli Giants (mediocre with a few runs when the pieces are together) over the Jags/Browns (always looking) the last 15 years.

[Mr Bad Example]

8 hours ago, incognito_man said:

I've never heard any talking head suggest trading away "good" young QBs. That's the point here: nobody even really considers it.

Not a talking head, but I've seen a few quant-minded folks suggest trading away promising young QBs before their 5th yr for a bunch of capital. 

 

Right now it's too early to say if the offensive trend of "low first round QBs are as successful as top of the round QBs" trend will continue. If it does someone may just pull the trigger on that at some point. 

[deathstar]

These Jackson takes are painful. Can’t read a defense or throw? Honestly IMO he’s as hurt by Romans offense as he was helped by it last year.

[vegas492]

12 hours ago, deathstar said:

These Jackson takes are painful. Can’t read a defense or throw? Honestly IMO he’s as hurt by Romans offense as he was helped by it last year.

I respectfully disagree.  That kid can only throw when his running sets it up.  It's like watching a high school team run a read option for 3 quarters and then run a play action off of it.  It leads to wide open guys and you do not need to make a good throw to get it done.

That's the offense built for him.  If you ask him to sit in the pocket, read a defense, and make a throw, you are going to lose.  He doesn't have that skillset.  Mainly I'm talking about arm mechanics and accuracy.  Maybe he can read a defense.  But I know his throwing mechanics are flat out terrible.

I think his OC has built a great offense for him to thrive in.  

[Rainmaker90]

On 12/9/2020 at 10:07 AM, Packerraymond said:

You pay Watson easily, Josh Allen you wait for one more year, if he has a similar year, you pay him.

Jackson and Murray are tough cases, their games won't age well because they aren't Wilson, they need the mobility to remain elite. I'd still give them 1 deal as a GM unless the offer I got for them was insane, but that's a niche player that a coordinator is going to have to have a special offense for. Don't know if you'll get that package for them.

The rest are obvious no pays. Mayfield will be tough as you said, but he's not worth it.

I agree with the basis of what you said.

Jackson and Murray would be untouchable for me. And I'm not so sure you can say they need mobility to be elite. Jackson has nobody to throw to. Andrews and Brown are not anything great. Kyler I project to improve him throwing quite a bit. I think he takes off next year. 

 

With Allen I think I would rather take the risk now, and pay him rather than wait and see if he improves more next year. Either way, someone is paying him so the price is going to be up. 

[AlexGreen#20]

McCaffrey looking like he's out again, that contract is looking brilliant right off the bat. 

Never pay RBs. 

[Packerraymond]

38 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

McCaffrey looking like he's out again, that contract is looking brilliant right off the bat. 

Never pay RBs. 

Christian Mccaffrey is not a running back. Don't care what his position says, a guy who catches 223 balls for 2000 yards and 10 TDs in a 2 year span is not just a running back for the offense he's in.