This Is Rival Talk v1.0

[MacReady]

Just now, JBURGE said:

One can make an argument that Cleveland did it when they traded their rights for Wentz, the Titans for Goff, and the Rams for RG3. The Colts also this year for Darnold. 

Some to different degrees than the others. You could argue it worked out in the long run for every team, but they all went through some crap for a while to get there. 

Not the same since rookies who have never played a down in the NFL don't have as much value. 

[JBURGE]

4 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Not the same since rookies who have never played a down in the NFL don't have as much value. 

You could at least compare the RG3 deal... #2 for #6, #~38 and two more 1sts. That's gotta be close to what a top QB would get now, no? Two 1sts and a 2nd? Or are we thinking more

[KingOfTheNorth]

10 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

That one was tarnished by Cutler asking out.  Value always drops when a player vocally wants out.  Still, 25 touchdowns/18 interceptions... That was Cutler's best year.  That's not the promise Wentz/Rodgers/Goff provide. 

The Broncos ended up getting D. Thomas through a bunch of trades, as well as other players (including Eric Decker).  Broncos won Super Bowl with those two players, Bears were in purgatory for 8 years.  Broncos won that trade, and haivng Thomas and Decker allowed them to get Manning. 

Imagine the haul a team would get from a player like Wentz/Goff/Rodgers after a Super Bowl win without the player requesting a trade.

The long-lasting impact would help set up a dynasty the same way the Herschel Walker trade helped set up the Cowboys dynasty. 

The Bears did go the NFC title game with Cutler. Not sure I would call that purgatory. Cutler also led the league in yards passing the year before he was traded. So while having hindsight tells us Cutler will never be that good. At the time of the trade, Cutlers value was at an elite QB level.

It also took the Broncos until 2013 to make it to the Super Bowl (2015 to win one). And that was only after they acquired an ALL Pro QB in Peyton Manning, and had a few bad seasons. One of those gave them the 2nd overall pick so they could take SB MVP Von Miller.

Edited December 12, 2018 by KingOfTheNorth

[vegas492]

57 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

I just want to see one team one time in my life take that risk of trading a QB at the height of their value and get a massive load to build a dynasty with. 

I stated after the Eagles Super Bowl win that if I were the Eagles, I'd roll with Foles and trade Wentz for an absolute monster haul, probably three first round picks AND a player. 

I obviously got laughed at by anyone I suggested it to, but look at the Eagles right now. 

.500 with him, below that without him. 

I just hope some day in my lifetime that trade gets made. 

I want to jump in on this line of thought and expand it a little.

Someone on another thread said we will be lost when Rodgers isn't the QB of the Packers.  I remember feeling that way at the end of the Favre era.  That turned out fine.

And now?  Seems like more and more rookies come into the league and have success early.  I'm unsure exactly why, but I can't help but think that the spread offenses have really helped the young guys.  When the day comes, I have faith that the new quarterback, whomever he may be, will have a better chance at succeeding in today's NFL.

I think you can build a very sound argument that the best time to win a Super Bowl is with a QB under a rookie contract.  In this era where QB's are playing a lot longer, it will be interesting to see if that argument remains true.

[Pool]

@Outpost31 In no way did DEN win the Cutler trade. Cutler never turned out to be what the Bears wanted but he was far better than what DEN drafted with those picks. Robert Ayers, Alphonso Smith, Kyle Orton, and Richard Quinn. If anything this proves just how overrated draft picks are. Orton was by far the best player they got in that deal and he was more than expendable for the Bears with them getting Cutler.

[MacReady]

@Pool, Broncos won Super Bowl with picks acquired in trade.  Bears did not win Super Bowl.  Broncos won.  It's that simple.

If Broncos hadn't needed D. Thomas, yeah, Bears won by every other metric.  Since D. Thomas had an impact on a Super Bowl win... Unless the goal for NFL teams is to not win a Super Bowl, Bears lost, Broncos won.

[Pool]

1 minute ago, Outpost31 said:

@Pool, Broncos won Super Bowl with picks acquired in trade.  Bears did not win Super Bowl.  Broncos won.  It's that simple.

If Broncos hadn't needed D. Thomas, yeah, Bears won by every other metric.  Since D. Thomas had an impact on a Super Bowl win... Unless the goal for NFL teams is to not win a Super Bowl, Bears lost, Broncos won.

They won the Super Bowl 7 years after that trade. None of the players they drafted from that trade were on that team. I'm not sure where you are getting D. Thomas from. He wasn't drafted with the Bears picks. 

[malak1]

3 hours ago, Outpost31 said:

If Broncos hadn't needed D. Thomas, yeah, Bears won by every other metric.  Since D. Thomas had an impact on a Super Bowl win... Unless the goal for NFL teams is to not win a Super Bowl, Bears lost, Broncos won.

Makes sense. A player, unrelated to the cutler trade, won a super with the Broncos, so the bears were the losers in the trade lol. 

[MacReady]

3 hours ago, Pool said:

They won the Super Bowl 7 years after that trade. None of the players they drafted from that trade were on that team. I'm not sure where you are getting D. Thomas from. He wasn't drafted with the Bears picks. 

D. Thomas and Eric Decker were both drafted with picks that directly or indirectly came from the Cutler trade.  The Broncos traded the picks a billion times.  Draft capital equaled Decker/Thomas/ a  bunch of other picks, so you're wrong.  

Besides, like I said, Cutler doesn't even count in what I'm saying.  Cutler had a ton of yardage and went to the pro bowl, but he was a turnover machine in Denver and still got two first round picks. 

Imagine what a team could do with a non-turnover machine like Wentz/Goff if they traded them before killing their cap space and re-signing them. 

Edited December 14, 2018 by Outpost31

[MacReady]

1 minute ago, malak1 said:

Makes sense. A player, unrelated to the cutler trade, won a super with the Broncos, so the bears were the losers in the trade lol. 

How many times do I have to tell you I'm not interested in discussing things with you does it take before you leave me alone? 

[JAF-N72EX]

On 9/2/2018 at 4:05 PM, Outpost31 said:

On 9/2/2018 at 3:27 PM, Kip Smithers said:

You seriously said what if Mack gets comfortable with a new contract and his play falls off. 

Because that's never happened before in the history of ever.  Every blockbuster trade ALWAYS works out.  Every huge contract ALWAYS works out.  Every player who has three great years ALWAYS has five more great years.  Right?I just don't see all the massive praise for Mack to be perfectly honest. 

Quote

 

I think the real winners of this trade are the Raiders, Broncos and Chiefs. 

Mack's sack breakdown against teams over the past three years. 

Denver - 10
Chiefs - 5.5
Cleveland, Tampa Bay, NYJ, Tennessee, Dallas - 2
Chicago, Minnesota, Green Bay, Baltimore, Jacksonville, Houston, Carolina, Buffalo, Washington, New England, NYG - 1

 

Care to update this @Outpost31

Nevermind, I know, Mack might get hurt.

Edited December 14, 2018 by JustAnotherFan

[KingOfTheNorth]

9 hours ago, Outpost31 said:

Besides, like I said, Cutler doesn't even count in what I'm saying.  Cutler had a ton of yardage and went to the pro bowl, but he was a turnover machine in Denver and still got two first round picks. 

Imagine what a team could do with a non-turnover machine like Wentz/Goff if they traded them before killing their cap space and re-signing them. 

Hmmm...... lets compare turnovers for both over their first 3 seasons. 3 seasons in Philly for Wentz, and 3 seasons in Denver for Cutler.

Wentz: 40 games played - 60 Turnovers 32 fumbles, 28 Ints.

Cutler: 37 games played - 61 Turnovers 24 fumbles, 37 ints.

So just to make sure I am understanding you. Cutler wouldn't have the trade value of Wentz, because he has 1 more turnover than him in 3 seasons?

Also keep in mind that Wentz had a severe knee injury at the end of his 2nd year. I would think that decreases trade value.

If your going to include Wentz as QB who fits your criteria, then I don't understand why you don't include Cutler.

 

Edited December 14, 2018 by KingOfTheNorth

[MacReady]

Just now, KingOfTheNorth said:

Hmmm...... lets compare turnovers for both over their first 3 seasons. 3 seasons in Philly for Wentz, and 3 seasons in Denver for Cutler.

Wentz: 40 games played - 60 Turnovers 32 fumbles, 28 Ints.

Cutler: 37 games played - 61 Turnovers 24 fumbles, 37 ints.

 

That's a really good job making numbers look in your favor.  And then there's also the point I led with... Cutler WANTED out.  His value took a hit the minute teams knew he wanted out.  He also had leadership concerns throughout his entire career and had a 7-9 season followed by an 8-8 season while Wentz helped his team clinch the #1 seed in his second year. 

So when you consider that Cutler had 5 more turnovers and 16 less touchdowns, yeah, I'd consider that a turnover machine. 

Wentz - 40 turnovers (fumbles lost are the only fumbles that should count)
Cutler - 45 turnovers

Wentz - 10,152 passing yards
Cutler - 9024 passing yards

Wentz - 70 touchdowns
Cutler - 54 touchdowns

Eagles -
 

[MacReady]

7 hours ago, JustAnotherFan said:

Care to update this @Outpost31

Nevermind, I know, Mack might get hurt.

I'd love to update my thoughts on it if you weren't a ****** *** right off the bat suggesting I said Mack might get hurt as a reason why it wasn't a good trade.  But since you were a ******* *** right off the bat suggesting I said Mack might get hurt as a reason why it wasn't a good trade, no.  I don't care to update that. 

[KingOfTheNorth]

2 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

So when you consider that Cutler had 5 more turnovers and 16 less touchdowns, yeah, I'd consider that a turnover machine. 

Why does the amount of TDs matter into the label of "Turnover Machine"?  A TD doesn't washout a turnover.

9 hours ago, Outpost31 said:

Besides, like I said, Cutler doesn't even count in what I'm saying.  Cutler had a ton of yardage and went to the pro bowl, but he was a turnover machine in Denver and still got two first round picks. 

All I was responding to was the turnover claim. Cutler wanting out, TD's, Passing Yards are all nice stats to use. But they weren't what you were claiming as your measuring criteria. To call Cutler a turnover machine and say Wentz isn't seems like a stretch considering they are separated by 5 turnovers for 3 seasons. Cutler was at the time of the trade considered an up and coming QB with the talent to be on an All Pro level. Multiple teams were interested in acquiring him. This talk of his trade value being lowered because teams knew he wanted out is negated by the fact that multiple teams were trying to trade for him. It wasn't like the Broncos only had 1 offer and had to take it.

Also, saying the Broncos won the trade because they won a Super Bowl 7 years later with Decker and Thomas on the team is weak. Not even going to get into this because it is nonsense.