They didn't use the "get QB in 7th round" philosophy. They have used the "pay a free agent $100 million" philosophy. They have used the "draft a QB in the second round to learn behind Manning" philosophy. They have used the "draft a QB in the first round" philosophy.
It just happens that two of those three philosophies appear to have come up dry, and at the same time they lucked into the "holy shit, we found a gem in the 7th that's bailing out our bad high pick mistakes, and we wonder if that gem will become a diamond" philosophy.
I don't have to retract anything. Remember, you established the meaning of "on par" when comparing QBs and using your use of the terms, then Carr's second season and Siemian's first, were much closer to being "on par" than Siemian in Lynch's play last year.
As to Lynch. I didn't say that people said he would go in the 4th, but that he was a 2nd to 4th round talent, but due to the fact that so many teams had holes at QB, that he was going to go in the first (some said he could fall to early 2nd, especially earlier in the pre-draft period) purely based on his physical tools, which is much different than football talent. Almost all of those same experts you refer to talked about him needing 2-3 years, because while he had very impressive physical tools, he was far from an NFL ready QB.
Value doesn't come into play when ranking players, unless that IS how you are ranking them, such as some might make a case for a Hyundai being better than a Mercedes, when you bring "value" into play.
On pure performance, you are sitting with:
Rivers
Carr
Smith
Siemian
An argument could be made, just not a good one, that Carr is better than Rivers (due to Rivers has a long body of work, but Carr could take the crown) and Siemian could push for third place, but would be a major upset to be considered the 2nd best or best QB when the season is over.
In other news I'm glad we had the cap to gamble on Jamaal because he's back.
Jamaalocaust is upon us!
Originally Posted by Sting
How can anybody tell at this point? The Patriots are still absolutely loaded with talent. They are the NFL equivalent of the Golden State Warriors right now. They went out and signed a bunch of FAs too and crushed everybody in FA. Let's not forget that. Even if you discount all that, they're still the defending SB Champions who won 2 out of the last 3 and only lost to Denver because the game was played in Denver and because their kicker missed an extra point, so they needed a 2-pt. conversion and Chris Harris made a great play.
They are, with good reason, an overwhelming favourite to win it all again too. Will the loss of Edelman change anything? With a lot of teams it would absolutely matter. But the Patriots seem to pull effective players out of their butts all the time if they need to so they have plenty of guys to try and replace Edelman's production. They probably will manage. They won 3 of 4 without Brady last year.
The Broncos meanwhile have an absolute boatload of uncertainty starting with the QB position, and extending to the entire offense. And the defense too if they keep losing DL at this rate! Kerr was the only serious looking injury I saw.
Last edited by Cugel; 08-26-2017 at 11:16 PM.
What valuable insight do you have to fixing the problem this season? Because last I checked there isn't anyone on our roster who outperformed Trevor, nor is there any proven QB's on the waiver wire that would be an improvement.
So basically, worry about building a franchise next year. This year, we've got what we've got.
I totally get not being satisfied with what we've got, but bitching about it incessantly, it's not going to change anything. When the off-season comes up, we'll see what Elway does there, for now, there isn't a dang thing any of us can do about TS. He's our starter until further notice.
Last edited by Freyaka; 08-28-2017 at 03:35 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)