PDA

View Full Version : Broncos QB going forward - where to find one if Siemian isn't the answer in 2018



Tned
08-30-2017, 07:10 AM
OK, for a moment (I know I've been on the other side of this debate), let's assume that Siemian struggles this year and doesn't lock down the spot going forward.

We've just seen Stafford's contract, and I know Frank Schwab of USA Today (formerly locally at the Gazette) thinks that Cousins may go as high as $32 million a year for two reasons:

1. He'll arguably be the best, young free agent QB to ever hit the market
2. If you look at that salary as a percentage of salary cap, it's inline with what QBs were getting a decade or so ago (arguing these inflated salaries are on par with salary cap increase).

So, if Cousins is going to command $30+ million a year, do the Broncos go after him or Brees or any other QB that reaches the open market (assuming any of them do)?

Do the Broncos try and trade for a Brees or another veteran QB?

Do they go back to the draft, and if so, continue to pick QBs in the late first/early second or pay the piper and move up for a top five pick?

Do they try and develop a Lynch, Kelly, Sloter already on their roster?

chazoe60
08-30-2017, 08:10 AM
Trade for Rivers.

Slick
08-30-2017, 08:32 AM
They're going to have to sell out and get a top 3 pick because they won't be bad enough anytime soon to be able to pick that high.

I wouldn't mess with Brees or Rivers unless they can make a really sweet deal.

Traveler
08-30-2017, 08:47 AM
IMO, Denver's salary structure can't handle a $25+ million QB by trade or FA. They would have to dismantle major parts of the defense with major cap ramifications. Only way forward is the draft.

Say for instance they finally could pry McCarron loose from CIN. Word is he would want his contract renegotiated before any trade took place. As to Brees, I have yet to see him yield any ground in his contract negotiations, thus getting paid the max rate for QB's. Forget Rivers!

Not too many avenues for Denver to get better at the position unless they finally get lucky in the draft. Maybe Elway should let Kubiak scout and select QB's since he seems to have problems in evaluating them.

weazel
08-30-2017, 08:54 AM
This is a very good QB draft, I would say draft one even if you think he's the answer

Freyaka
08-30-2017, 10:00 AM
I think we've gotta draft one this year even if T-Sim looks good. I just don't think Lynch is going to grow into that guy, we've gotta prepare for that and bring someone in. Now that Stafford is gone, I'm not thrilled with any of the prospects. I mean I guess you could draft a QB and sign Brees.

There is talk that Brady wants to finish up his career in Denver and that he won't be returning to New England next year, I suppose that is an option, but I'd refuse to watch a single game next year if it happened....

Rivers is a bad option...no thank you. Cousins is kinda overrated IMO. And then of course there's Kelly...


Or we could trade all of our draft picks for next year + CJ anderson for Luck...At least we could if this was madden.

PatriotsGuy
08-30-2017, 10:04 AM
There is talk that Brady wants to finish up his career in Denver and that he won't be returning to New England next year, I suppose that is an option, but I'd refuse to watch a single game next year if it happened....



Where in the world is there this "talk"?

Cugel
08-30-2017, 10:05 AM
IMO, Denver's salary structure can't handle a $25+ million QB by trade or FA. They would have to dismantle major parts of the defense with major cap ramifications. Only way forward is the draft.

Say for instance they finally could pry McCarron loose from CIN. Word is he would want his contract renegotiated before any trade took place. As to Brees, I have yet to see him yield any ground in his contract negotiations, thus getting paid the max rate for QB's. Forget Rivers!

Not too many avenues for Denver to get better at the position unless they finally get lucky in the draft. Maybe Elway should let Kubiak scout and select QB's since he seems to have problems in evaluating them.

At some point Elway has to get over his idiot fixation with 6'7" QBs. "Paxton is tall." Go back to the draft and get a 1st round QB. That's what he will do. And they will let Sloter (if he's here) and Chad Kelly compete to start.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
08-30-2017, 10:13 AM
Where in the world is there this "talk"?

That's what I was wondering. I don't believe it.

Hawgdriver
08-30-2017, 10:14 AM
QB orchard. Rain has been strong this year, will be good harvest in 2018. Siemian sucking means a crappy record and legit pick among several prospects.

Freyaka
08-30-2017, 10:15 AM
Where in the world is there this "talk"?

http://fanbuzz.com/nfl/dan-patrick-tom-brady-new-england-patriots-denver-broncos-career/

Dan Patrick is saying it, I've heard it from a few other sources. I believe King suggested it awhile back. I can't find anything else, but it's popped up several times this year.

If you guys go with Jimmy G next year and Brady feels like he still wants to play, where else would he go? It make sense, I just don't want it to happen because well... yuck...

It is just that right now, talk. Nothing substantiated, but it does make sense if he doesn't retire at the end of this year IMO.

Hawgdriver
08-30-2017, 10:17 AM
http://fanbuzz.com/nfl/dan-patrick-tom-brady-new-england-patriots-denver-broncos-career/

Dan Patrick is saying it, I've heard it from a few other sources.

If you guys go with Jimmy G next year and Brady feels like he still wants to play, where else would he go? It make sense, I just don't want it to happen because well... yuck...

North would have a forever-boner if this came to pass.

PatriotsGuy
08-30-2017, 10:17 AM
http://fanbuzz.com/nfl/dan-patrick-tom-brady-new-england-patriots-denver-broncos-career/

Dan Patrick is saying it, I've heard it from a few other sources. I believe King suggested it awhile back. I can't find anything else, but it's popped up several times this year.

If you guys go with Jimmy G next year and Brady feels like he still wants to play, where else would he go? It make sense, I just don't want it to happen because well... yuck...

Okay so one person is saying it.

Freyaka
08-30-2017, 10:20 AM
Okay so one person is saying it.

No, like I said, Peter King and I've heard it from other sources I just don't have them at the moment because it's impossible finding random sources from weeks ago that you didn't bother to document.

Lets look at it from this angle. Do you see the Patriots keeping him if he comes back next year? I mean eventually they have to move on to other options or they will be stunting their future. Obviously it all comes down to how much they feel that Jimmy G is the future.

But if he leaves New England with a desire to play, what other team seems more likely? He just witnessed his friend and rival milking us for one more ring, as much as it would disgust me having him here, we'd probably get another ring.

Hawgdriver
08-30-2017, 10:21 AM
Okay so one person is saying it.

I count 5:

DP
King
Frey
PAG
Hawg

Where there's smoke...

NightTerror218
08-30-2017, 12:02 PM
I think Elway with give lynch another year. He knew he was drafting a project. And you got maintain a great team being the browns and drafting a 1st round QB every 2 years.

Freyaka
08-30-2017, 12:12 PM
I think Elway with give lynch another year. He knew he was drafting a project. And you got maintain a great team being the browns and drafting a 1st round QB every 2 years.

I think if we'd seen growth and he just wasn't quite there, I'd agree with you, but IMO he regressed. He may get another year, but we'll have someone else he'll be competing with, he's going to have a very hard uphill battle if he expects to ever win a starting job and we've really never seen him overly eager to put in the work needed. Heck, he thought he'd done enough to win the job this year when everyone could tell that was laughable.

Joel
08-30-2017, 02:20 PM
They're going to have to sell out and get a top 3 pick because they won't be bad enough anytime soon to be able to pick that high.
That's basically been my hope/expectation for a while, unless we just flat get lucky with a lower guy. That said, the collective career arcs of QBs over the past couple decades suggest late 1st rounders are about as likely to do as much as even the #1 overall pick, mainly because NEITHER has very GOOD chances: Just several times better than anyone and everyone drafted lower. Statistically, #32~#1, and both about twice as good as #33—#64, then you might as well draw names out of a hat.


I wouldn't mess with Brees or Rivers unless they can make a really sweet deal.
I strongly second that also. Slightly less so for Rivers, who's younger and played several seasons under McCoy. Brees though... OK, Denver had the oldest starting QB to EVER win a SB when Elway did at 38, then broke that record when Manning did it at 39, but that doesn't mean we can do it a THIRD time with Brees at 40.


QB orchard. Rain has been strong this year, will be good harvest in 2018. Siemian sucking means a crappy record and legit pick among several prospects.
If next years QB class truly is deep and broad, well, this is what I've been advocating for a while, either by "mortgaging the future" to trade into the top five or gritting our teeth and riding the best of our bad current QBs long enough he proves that he's either 1) a franchise QB or 2) never will be, in which case we'll get a top five pick naturally (if painfully.) There's only path to a Von Miller; trying to make the playoffs annually AND draft HoFers annually is why Shanny doesn't coach Denver anymore.

As for Brady: He's done. This is the year the wheels come off the bus in flames.

Slick
08-30-2017, 02:31 PM
It's basically all Denver is missing. The team is good enough everywhere else to compete for titles for a few years. I think that's why some of us are so hard on Trevor.

Denver desperately needs good QB play in a hurry.

Joel
08-30-2017, 02:57 PM
It's basically all Denver is missing. The team is good enough everywhere else to compete for titles for a few years. I think that's why some of us are so hard on Trevor.

Denver desperately needs good QB play in a hurry.
Now, there I disagree; part of why I was all-in on waiting for a decent QB draft and a decently low pick was because I felt (and still do) that even if we DID manage to get our hands on the next John Elway, failing to first transform our Swiss cheese line into some semblance of run support to relieve the figurative pressure and pass protection to relieve the LITERAL pressure would ruin him in short order. What's the difference between Tony Romo and Dak Prescott?

Answer: All the people who laughed at Jerry Jones for spending a 1st round pick on a C in 2013. The year I groused about drafting Sly in the 1st when we already had Big Vick and Potroast but NO offensive linemen, only to be told Sly was sure-fire can't miss 1st rounder who'd make me eat my words for a decade. Turns out he couldn't even stay on the team HALF that long. Meanwhile, Dallas took Zack Martin #16 overall a year later, after already having taken Tyron Smith #9 overall in 2011, and upgraded Doug Free to La'el Collins for a song when character concerns pushed him out of the draft entirely.

A legit QB is NOT all we're missing: We've got Leary, yeah, but I still think Paradis is underpowered, we still don't know if Bolles will be a legit LT, we still don't know if Watson can stay healthy enough to be a legit RT, and all we have at RG is a big legit question mark. That's before we even get into things like a clear cut choice to start at TE, a slot receiver, a coverage LB who's not just Brandon Marshall trying to be two places at once, a NT worthy of the name, a successor to Malik Jackson....

There's a reason we missed the last postseason, and it wasn't just Siemian punching WAY above a rookie 7th rounders weight.

Freyaka
08-30-2017, 02:58 PM
It's basically all Denver is missing. The team is good enough everywhere else to compete for titles for a few years. I think that's why some of us are so hard on Trevor.

Denver desperately needs good QB play in a hurry.

I get that side of it, but people need to realize even IF we find the right QB, it may be 2-3 years of struggle. It's rare that you find that diamond in the rough that is instantly pro bowl ready.

TS more likely than not won't be that guy, could be, but we'll probably draft someone next year, but in the meantime he's what we've got so hopefully we can be patient and understand Rome wasn't built in a day.

Tned
08-30-2017, 03:20 PM
I get that side of it, but people need to realize even IF we find the right QB, it may be 2-3 years of struggle. It's rare that you find that diamond in the rough that is instantly pro bowl ready.

TS more likely than not won't be that guy, could be, but we'll probably draft someone next year, but in the meantime he's what we've got so hopefully we can be patient and understand Rome wasn't built in a day.

True, but for this hypothetical, Siemian shows this year that he isn't a good answer going forward. I'm not convinced that will be the case and think he will likely show a decent first to second year jump, as is often the case, but for the hypothetical, we assume he won't.

The reason is that I think Stafford's contract shows that going after a big name FA QB isn't going to be an option.

HORSEPOWER 56
08-30-2017, 03:22 PM
Sloter and Kelly battle it out in camp next year. Done.

Cugel
08-30-2017, 04:04 PM
The problem Elway faces is this:

1. You need a top 10 QB to win the SB. He's all about winning the SB. There is an exception once every 10 years for a team with an historically great defense like the '85 Bears, the 2000 Ravens, & the 2015 Broncos. This team has used up it's exception. There will be no repeat performance - not that way.

2. Right now, there's no top 10 Qb on the roster. Paxton flamed out. Trevor is an overachiever, Sloter and Kelly are completely raw & unproven.

3. If Trevor is the next Alex Smith that will be good enough for about 10 wins and a playoff berth. That's not good enough. But, if it looks like Trevor is progressing through the season and especially if he plays well in the playoffs, they will sign him to a long term contract for starter money, and Paxton & Kelly can compete to be the backup.

4. IF Trevor convinces Elway that he's never going to be the next Derek Carr, then things get more complicated. In that case they probably open up the competition to Kelly, Sloter, a 1st or 2nd round pick, and Paxton.

5. If they decide we need a veteran NOW then they make a play for Brees or some other veteran.

Northman
08-30-2017, 04:07 PM
Where in the world is there this "talk"?

Shut the **** up PG! Let my guy come to Denver for Christ sake! You have enough damn rings! lol

MOtorboat
08-30-2017, 06:19 PM
I think this rule applies to any NFL GM: Draft the quarterback you believe is best and available to you in the first or second round, try to develop him for a few years, and keep doing it over and over again until you hit or you get fired.

chazoe60
08-30-2017, 10:55 PM
I think this rule applies to any NFL GM: Draft the quarterback you believe is best and available to you in the first or second round, try to develop him for a few years, and keep doing it over and over again until you hit or you get fired.

I'm afraid to go back and look at all the playerrs we could have had instead of Paxton Lynch. :sad:

MOtorboat
08-30-2017, 11:03 PM
I'm afraid to go back and look at all the playerrs we could have had instead of Paxton Lynch. :sad:

That's a useless exercise (no offense). Lynch was the clear consensus pick at that point if Denver went quarterback. Prescott is the obvious replacement here, but no one saw him as any higher than a third round pick.

chazoe60
08-30-2017, 11:12 PM
That's a useless exercise (no offense). Lynch was the clear consensus pick at that point if Denver went quarterback. Prescott is the obvious replacement here, but no one saw him as any higher than a third round pick.

I mean guys at other positions. And I realize it's a useless exercise just as a first round QB who can't play is useless.

turftoad
08-30-2017, 11:13 PM
That's a useless exercise (no offense). Lynch was the clear consensus pick at that point if Denver went quarterback. Prescott is the obvious replacement here, but no one saw him as any higher than a third round pick.

Exactly. We weren't the only ones that passed on Prescott more than twice!

7DnBrnc53
08-30-2017, 11:16 PM
1. You need a top 10 QB to win the SB. He's all about winning the SB. There is an exception once every 10 years for a team with an historically great defense like the '85 Bears, the 2000 Ravens, & the 2015 Broncos. This team has used up it's exception. There will be no repeat performance - not that way.

In 01, 03, and 04, Tom Brady wasn't really a top-10 QB. Those teams were carried more by the defense than Brady.


As for Brady: He's done. This is the year the wheels come off the bus in flames.

Joel, I hope you are right. This NE team isn't looking quite as good as people thought. They have no Edelman (him and Brady really developed a rapport the past three years), Dwayne Allen is a downgrade from Martellus Bennett, and their pass rush will struggle since Ninkovich retired and Ealy doesn't fit their team.

Joel
08-30-2017, 11:18 PM
I think this rule applies to any NFL GM: Draft the quarterback you believe is best and available to you in the first or second round, try to develop him for a few years, and keep doing it over and over again until you hit or you get fired.
I still think it depends on the overall quality of the specific team and draft class. If a team's bad enough to have many big weaknesses yet NOT bad enough for a high draft pick, immediately going all-in for a QB can be a mistake, especially in a weak QB draft. Just like every position, great QB drafts tend to come in waves; the 3rd best QB might be Rapistburger one year and Jason Campbell the next (and ACTUALLY WERE in '04 and '05.) The '83 draft had half a dozen 1st round QBs, half of whom are in the HoF; a year later, the first QB was Esiason early in the 2nd, and he probably was the best of '84s QBs.

No GM can afford to keep spending their 1st rounder on a QB year after year until he finds a good one; that's Cleveland thinking. You can't draft what isn't there, nor use a single position to solve every problem. Even if a team IS so bad it "earns" a top three pick, it's still unwise (IMHO) to pass up on the kind of perennial All Pros and potential HoFers available there just because none of them happen to be a QB: Draft the Von Miller you can build a franchise around for the next decade, and if you still need a QB you can always trade up next year and/or wait for a deep QB class.

Everyone says Oakland blew it drafting JaMarcus Russell in '07, but if they'd had a crystal ball and took the best of all those rookie QBs, here were their options:

#22 Brady Quinn
#36 Kevin Kolb
#43 Drew Stanton
#92 Trent Edwards
#103 Isaiah Stanback
#151 Jeff Rowe
#174 Troy Smith
#205 Jordan Palmer
#217 Tyler Thigpen

So was the mistake drafting Russell, or drafting a QB AT ALL? The #1 overall pick gave them a shot at ANY rookie; the 1st round alone featured Megatron, Joe Thomas and Joe Staley (FAR better options for a cellar dweller in need of a young QB to groom) AP and Beast Mode, Revis Island and Greg Olsen. A year later, Flacco lasted til #18, but Matty Ice went #3 overall and Oakland could've had him: They took McFadden at #4, because they "already had" their QB.

Simple Jaded
08-30-2017, 11:21 PM
The draft, **** Kirk Cousins to hell.

Simple Jaded
08-30-2017, 11:22 PM
In 01, 03, and 04, Tom Brady wasn't really a top-10 QB. Those teams were carried more by the defense than Brady.



Joel, I hope you are right. This NE team isn't looking quite as good as people thought. They have no Edelman (him and Brady really developed a rapport the past three years), Dwayne Allen is a downgrade from Martellus Bennett, and their pass rush will struggle since Ninkovich retired and Ealy doesn't fit their team.

Joel's been saying Talid is done since he's been here.

Joel
08-30-2017, 11:42 PM
In 01, 03, and 04, Tom Brady wasn't really a top-10 QB. Those teams were carried more by the defense than Brady.

Joel, I hope you are right. This NE team isn't looking quite as good as people thought. They have no Edelman (him and Brady really developed a rapport the past three years), Dwayne Allen is a downgrade from Martellus Bennett, and their pass rush will struggle since Ninkovich retired and Ealy doesn't fit their team.
There's a reason Manning's the oldest starting QB to win a SB, and Elway before him. Everyone who watched those games knows both were mere shadows of their first ballot HoFer selves by then, though that was still better than most. No amount of anti-concussion water from indicted business partners can halt time in its tracks.

Speaking of which, I can't imagine the NFL letting anyone but Tom Terrific get away with the kind of need-to-know diet he maintains all day, every season. When I say it's unclear whether what he sips on the sideline instead of Gatorade is even LEGAL, I don't mean (just) under the CBA: I mean under FEDERAL LAW.

Joel
08-30-2017, 11:43 PM
Joel's been saying Talid is done since he's been here.
Talid's not 40.

MOtorboat
08-30-2017, 11:52 PM
I still think it depends on the overall quality of the specific team and draft class. If a team's bad enough to have many big weaknesses yet NOT bad enough for a high draft pick, immediately going all-in for a QB can be a mistake, especially in a weak QB draft. Just like every position, great QB drafts tend to come in waves; the 3rd best QB might be Rapistburger one year and Jason Campbell the next (and ACTUALLY WERE in '04 and '05.) The '83 draft had half a dozen 1st round QBs, half of whom are in the HoF; a year later, the first QB was Esiason early in the 2nd, and he probably was the best of '84s QBs.

No GM can afford to keep spending their 1st rounder on a QB year after year until he finds a good one; that's Cleveland thinking. You can't draft what isn't there, nor use a single position to solve every problem. Even if a team IS so bad it "earns" a top three pick, it's still unwise (IMHO) to pass up on the kind of perennial All Pros and potential HoFers available there just because none of them happen to be a QB: Draft the Von Miller you can build a franchise around for the next decade, and if you still need a QB you can always trade up next year and/or wait for a deep QB class.

Everyone says Oakland blew it drafting JaMarcus Russell in '07, but if they'd had a crystal ball and took the best of all those rookie QBs, here were their options:

#22 Brady Quinn
#36 Kevin Kolb
#43 Drew Stanton
#92 Trent Edwards
#103 Isaiah Stanback
#151 Jeff Rowe
#174 Troy Smith
#205 Jordan Palmer
#217 Tyler Thigpen

So was the mistake drafting Russell, or drafting a QB AT ALL? The #1 overall pick gave them a shot at ANY rookie; the 1st round alone featured Megatron, Joe Thomas and Joe Staley (FAR better options for a cellar dweller in need of a young QB to groom) AP and Beast Mode, Revis Island and Greg Olsen. A year later, Flacco lasted til #18, but Matty Ice went #3 overall and Oakland could've had him: They took McFadden at #4, because they "already had" their QB.

I disagree.

Valar Morghulis
08-31-2017, 01:01 AM
I am one of the few Tom Brady fans on here, but no way do I want him in Denver..... Remember manning went from world beater to pensioner in half a season.

I would take cousins, if he would accept the same deal manning took five years ago.

No thanks to rivers or brees, I like Macarron, but if we are putting the franchise on the back of a average to good quarterback, I would rather have a cheaper option.

We would need to draft high, and bring in a vet and let them plus Kelly and whoever else is on the roster compete

Canmore
08-31-2017, 01:12 AM
Sloter and Kelly battle it out in camp next year. Done.

The only battle Kelly will be dealing with is his OWN demons.

Poet
08-31-2017, 08:03 AM
I get that side of it, but people need to realize even IF we find the right QB, it may be 2-3 years of struggle. It's rare that you find that diamond in the rough that is instantly pro bowl ready.

TS more likely than not won't be that guy, could be, but we'll probably draft someone next year, but in the meantime he's what we've got so hopefully we can be patient and understand Rome wasn't built in a day.

If circumstances were different he'd never have made the team - had Sanchez not shit the bed he probably would have been cut. He's not owed patience - he's a starting QB in a great situation. The mother ****** isn't a cookie and we're not standing over the oven making sure he's not getting burned. You're either the real deal or you're not.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
08-31-2017, 08:06 AM
We're gonna Sloter the competition! :lol:

Poet
08-31-2017, 08:08 AM
We're gonna Sloter the competition! :lol:

I want to believe in the young man so I'm going to. I want to believe that TS will be more than a vanilla whitebread mayonnaise slice. So I'm going to. But if he sucks, or is just meh, he should be booed everywhere he goes and be forced to wear a cone of shame!

Tned
08-31-2017, 08:13 AM
If circumstances were different he'd never have made the team - had Sanchez not shit the bed he probably would have been cut. He's not owed patience - he's a starting QB in a great situation. The mother ****** isn't a cookie and we're not standing over the oven making sure he's not getting burned. You're either the real deal or you're not.

If circumstances were different, CJ and Harris wouldn't be on this team. He won the job, twice.

Shazam!
08-31-2017, 09:00 AM
Waiting for a 100% Chad Kelly.

weazel
08-31-2017, 09:13 AM
I just heard Tom Brady bought a house in Denver...

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
08-31-2017, 09:35 AM
I just heard Tom Brady bought a house in Denver...

No you didn't

Freyaka
08-31-2017, 09:58 AM
If circumstances were different he'd never have made the team - had Sanchez not shit the bed he probably would have been cut. He's not owed patience - he's a starting QB in a great situation. The mother ****** isn't a cookie and we're not standing over the oven making sure he's not getting burned. You're either the real deal or you're not.

If situations were different TD wouldn't have made the team, Rod Smith wouldn't be our all time leading receiver, Chris Harris JR would have washed out of the league. Situations aren't different... So yes, be patient.

Tned
08-31-2017, 10:49 AM
If situations were different TD wouldn't have made the team, Rod Smith wouldn't be our all time leading receiver, Chris Harris JR would have washed out of the league. Situations aren't different... So yes, be patient.

We've all just seen the HOF talk of TD and revisited the story that he was about to walk away and retire before playing a regular season game. If not for the one hit on special teams, he wouldn't be on the team and wouldn't be in the HOF.

The NFL is full of stories of guys that would never have gotten a shot if not for ______. It's what they do after they get the shot that matters.

Freyaka
08-31-2017, 12:26 PM
We've all just seen the HOF talk of TD and revisited the story that he was about to walk away and retire before playing a regular season game. If not for the one hit on special teams, he wouldn't be on the team and wouldn't be in the HOF.

The NFL is full of stories of guys that would never have gotten a shot if not for ______. It's what they do after they get the shot that matters.

Exactly, like it or not, he got his shot, he's our starter TWO YEARS IN A ROW. See what this year brings. If he doesn't wow this year he won't make it to year three starter and we're no worse for the wear.

Moaning and complaining before he's taken a single regular season snap this year isn't doing anyone any good.

weazel
08-31-2017, 12:43 PM
No you didn't

it's in a gated Seniors community so he's in it for the long haul. more smoke!

Krugan
08-31-2017, 12:44 PM
INSTANT GRATIFICATION!!!!!

Thats all, cant have more, either its now or never...

Makes me wonder if most footballs fans even have to time enjoy a good stroke, or if it just needs to be happy ending rtf now!~

Freyaka
08-31-2017, 12:46 PM
INSTANT GRATIFICATION!!!!!

Thats all, cant have more, either its now or never...

Makes me wonder if most footballs fans even have to time enjoy a good stroke, or if it just needs to be happy ending rtf now!~

I try not to think about anyone here's "strokes"

Krugan
08-31-2017, 01:20 PM
Because im bored, here are some stats. Wonder if any of these guys would have lasted in this day and age.

11 games; 155-293 for 1749 yards; 9 TD; 18 INT; 55.9 passer rating.

11 games; 123-259 for 1663 yards; 7 TD; 14 INT; 54.9 passer rating. This guy only had one season with a passer rating over 90, just not good enough....

14 games; 195-363 for 2282 yards; 8 TD; 13 INT; 65.5 passer rating.

16 games; 326-575 for 3739 yards; 26 TD; 28 INT (ouch!); 71.2 passer rating.

16 games; 320-526 for 3284 yards; 17 TD; 16 INT; 76.9 passer rating.

None of those are trevors, but all of those are HoF, or Future HoF qbs, my guess is, as we sit here now, with the cant wait mentality that is today, these guys may never have had a chance to grow into what they all became.

Freyaka
08-31-2017, 01:30 PM
Because im bored, here are some stats. Wonder if any of these guys would have lasted in this day and age.

11 games; 155-293 for 1749 yards; 9 TD; 18 INT; 55.9 passer rating.

11 games; 123-259 for 1663 yards; 7 TD; 14 INT; 54.9 passer rating. This guy only had one season with a passer rating over 90, just not good enough....

14 games; 195-363 for 2282 yards; 8 TD; 13 INT; 65.5 passer rating.

16 games; 326-575 for 3739 yards; 26 TD; 28 INT (ouch!); 71.2 passer rating.

16 games; 320-526 for 3284 yards; 17 TD; 16 INT; 76.9 passer rating.

None of those are trevors, but all of those are HoF, or Future HoF qbs, my guess is, as we sit here now, with the cant wait mentality that is today, these guys may never have had a chance to grow into what they all became.

Good luck with that. Most likely response will be that it doesn't matter because those players played in a different era. This basically gives them an out to completely dismiss you without providing any kind of a real counter-argument.

Krugan
08-31-2017, 01:34 PM
Good luck with that. Most likely response will be that it doesn't matter because those players played in a different era. This basically gives them an out to completely dismiss you without providing any kind of a real counter-argument.

Im sure you are right, but its just as valid then as it is now, other then we as a people seem to have no patience at all.

Im not sure why its okay for some players to get a window of development and other dont. And im not a TS fan, but im realistic enough to see its year 2 being a starter and it takes time to be good at something.

Freyaka
08-31-2017, 01:44 PM
Im sure you are right, but its just as valid then as it is now, other then we as a people seem to have no patience at all.

Im not sure why its okay for some players to get a window of development and other dont. And im not a TS fan, but im realistic enough to see its year 2 being a starter and it takes time to be good at something.

Nope, gratification must be instant or it is defective.

Poet
08-31-2017, 03:41 PM
Good luck with that. Most likely response will be that it doesn't matter because those players played in a different era. This basically gives them an out to completely dismiss you without providing any kind of a real counter-argument.

Uhh..the fact that those eras are different with radically different rules is a real counter-argument...

Krugan
08-31-2017, 04:07 PM
Uhh..the fact that those eras are different with radically different rules is a real counter-argument...

It really isnt, if your relating to "time to develop". 1 year of shitty play is a lost year yes? whether its 1998 or 2016?

Poet
08-31-2017, 04:12 PM
It really isnt, if your relating to "time to develop". 1 year of shitty play is a lost year yes? whether its 1998 or 2016?

The issue is you'd have to have a reason to think a guy is worth having time to develop. And that's the fatal presupposition because at no point in college, OTA's, or either preseasons has TS looked like he was worth that investment of time. He's our starter, and was our starter, out of a weird set of events. And he wowed the team so much that we made a run at Kaepernick last year and tried to do everything in our power to give Paxton Lynch the job this year.

Krugan
08-31-2017, 04:29 PM
The issue is you'd have to have a reason to think a guy is worth having time to develop. And that's the fatal presupposition because at no point in college, OTA's, or either preseasons has TS looked like he was worth that investment of time. He's our starter, and was our starter, out of a weird set of events. And he wowed the team so much that we made a run at Kaepernick last year and tried to do everything in our power to give Paxton Lynch the job this year.

Im not sure i agree with the Paxton thing entirely. I think they had to at least look at the investment in a live fire setting to see if he had grown at all, i didnt take it as "everything in their power". Being it is a all new coaching group, i think it was good for VJ to at least look.

So really this is more about him being a 7th round pick, and the lack of a flashy back ground or a crap ton of hype.

Brock was a high round draft pick, Paxton, both of these guys are just into their careers and are being called busts, because they havent developed at the rate the masses thing is appropriate now.

Im saying, had the thought process been the same 30 years ago, would those stats not be enough for people to call them busts and teams might have missed out on superbowl winning players?

We dont know what we have after 1 year with a broken offense, much less 2nd year with a new coach, damn.

Poet
08-31-2017, 04:30 PM
Im not sure i agree with the Paxton thing entirely. I think they had to at least look at the investment in a live fire setting to see if he had grown at all, i didnt take it as "everything in their power". Being it is a all new coaching group, i think it was good for VJ to at least look.

So really this is more about him being a 7th round pick, and the lack of a flashy back ground or a crap ton of hype.

Brock was a high round draft pick, Paxton, both of these guys are just into their careers and are being called busts, because they havent developed at the rate the masses thing is appropriate now.

Im saying, had the thought process been the same 30 years ago, would those stats not be enough for people to call them busts and teams might have missed out on superbowl winning players?

We dont know what we have after 1 year with a broken offense, much less 2nd year with a new coach, damn.

I disagree with all of this - but you made a mighty fine post. Thank you for that, and post more. I remember you.

Tned
08-31-2017, 04:41 PM
The issue is you'd have to have a reason to think a guy is worth having time to develop. And that's the fatal presupposition because at no point in college, OTA's, or either preseasons has TS looked like he was worth that investment of time. He's our starter, and was our starter, out of a weird set of events. And he wowed the team so much that we made a run at Kaepernick last year and tried to do everything in our power to give Paxton Lynch the job this year.

They took a run at Kaepernick before Siemian even participated in the offseason programs prior to that year. The previous season, he clearly did "wow" the team, because Kubiak addressed the surprise of keeping him behind Manning and Osweiler, being that he just made plays every time they gave him a shot, and referred to his arm strength.

There was no chance that a team was going to bet their season on a kid that "wowed" them in preseason and did a good job running the scout team, but otherwise had no game action all year.