Bing Bong

Despite my screen name I'll give Peterman a chance to not chuck up pick6s as backup

worth a 3rd or 4th though?

can somebody explain to me why players do this? are they still getting the same amount of money, just later in time?

... what on Earth ... let me guess, he's a great bridge QB that will serve as a great mentor to our rook.

he is really overrated on this board.

who gives a flying **** who's mentoring him, he's a grown man. He obviously didn't take a page from Tyrod's book he throws picks off his back foot for fun.

any post that's not Dunkirk Don is alright by me I hate the "what happened to the great posters like Teef and.... ?" posts Quit slobbing knob dude

he won the MVP. You always have to give us your dumb opinion on the 2015 MVP.

semen is a lot funnier if we're making fun of names here

good backup

Whaaaaaat GET HIM

I seriously doubt we get cam but anyone who doesn't think he's a phenomenal quarterback is a moron The process of not acquiring MVP talent?

I want to feed the QB to the wolves. Sink or swim baby. Better than taking a loss with someone's backup QB

I screwed up the thread asking people to pose an argument. I should have just started a thread "I DON'T WANT A BRIDGE QUARTERBACK STARTING" and let the fights begin

That's not too specific. But this is what I'm driving at. I think we can list more situations where this was a bad idea than a good one. Tom Savage over Deshaun Watson?!?

It's intention, Bledsoe wasn't a bridge, he was the franchise. At the time, Tom Brady was our Nate Peterman for all the Patriots knew.

I'm agreeing with Gugny, they're not drafting these quarterbacks to start. Brady's longevity outlasted Garoppolo's rookie contract, they simply wanted to get rid of Brees, not use him as a bridge. Bledsoe got hurt, Patriots never imagined TB12 would turn into what he was, otherwise Bledsoe would have finished his career in NE. We obviously don't have a clear definition of a bridge, but I go with Gugny in that a bridge is a guy you bring in with no future plans for the sole purpose of keeping your prized rook on the bench.

I should have posed a better question, as in what team in our situation, brings in a bridge and drafts a rookie with the intention of starting the bridge, and had success. As in is the bridge worth it? Sure the team can go 4-12 never start their, rook, and he turns out great once he starts. But did he really learn from being under a bad bridge QB? Why shouldn't he have started anyway. I guess there's no telling with that philosophy since we're dealing with hypotheticals and revisionist history. Flutie to Brees, Bledsoe to Romo, Kitna to Palmer, Warner to Eli all make sense. I think Maddox was a total fluke, didn't Big Ben win the SB his rookie year?

I'm sorry Syracuse made the Dance over Notre Dame ndirish1978. They were genuinely robbed, especially with their best player coming back in time for the tourney.

I want to see him on the Rams, they are becoming my favorite NFC team.

Alright then, I'll count Favre-Rodgers but I guess I want to see something more similar to our situation, and I don't see much. Like I don't call Favre a bridge, he's the franchise until he calls it quits. If we're looking at bringing in some mediocre backup QB in the name of giving a rook time on the bench, not gonna be happy. What? I love Favre, one of my all time favorites!

huh? Saquon Barkley, the top 5 projected RB.

sort of want I'm arguing for. I don't want Matt Moore starting over Sam Darnold or *name a rook*, just because of the bridge idea. I want the best QB in camp. The Texans handled a situation like that moronically last year. dude Favre literally made attempts to turn the team against Rodgers over and over again. Embarrassed him whenever possible. And it's not like Favre taught Rodgers tape or work ethic lol, he didn't do it himself. He was hardly the model for a young QB. Michael Jordan destroyed many young teammate's confidence cause he was a psychopath for competition.

strong offensive line, 2 great WRs (Gordon is still elite somehow), Saquon Barkley. The only supposed weakness is Tyrod, and he's never had this talent around him on offense. If he still plays the same way, so be it. But if his weakness is "throwing receivers open", he's got receivers that simply get open (also known as good receivers). Rooting for him to drop several bombs to Gordon next year.

Rodgers benefitted from hating Favre to the point where he was trying to out compete a legend. Same for Steve Young. I get that argument. Favre, if anything, inadvertently made his enemy stronger. (I read Favre's biography, "Gunslinger", it was great)