The Frankish Reich Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 What you are essentially saying is that the boat is well-designed with the exception that it has a gaping hole in the bottom. You know as well as I do that the NFL of today is not the NFL of 10-15 years ago. The game is built around the qb. You can have roster flaws and still be successful if you have a franchise qb. You can have a solid roster but without a legitimate franchise qb you go nowhere. It's been that way for years. What's perplexing to the point of being weird is that this organization continues to act almost to the point of indifference toward finding a solution at qb, a solution that will diminish many of the other problems plaguing this clueless organization. Where's the urgency? No one is arguing that finding a franchise qb is easy, because it's not. But this organization has let opportunities go by only to let other teams prosper by our passivity on this issue. It's not only crazy----it is an act of malfeasance. What is the point of making a bold and expensive draft day maneuver to acquire Watkins, a receiver in a receiver rich draft class when you don't have a good enough qb to utilize his sterling talents? If you are going to make a bold move why not do it for a qb who when developed can elevate a roster? As I said in other posts this sleepy front office has had opportunities to select good qb prospects. They let the opportunities slip by to the benefit of other franchises. If an organization has failed for more than a generation one would think that more urgency would be demonstrated to correct the problem that would give you the best opportunity to be successful. With respect to your comment that he has been hamstrung by changing systems and coaches my response is simple and blunt: Bullshiiit! Doug Whaley is the GM. It doesn't matter what fool is coaching his team and what ill-fitting system he is running. The priority for the GM is to acquire a legitimate franchise qb to give his team the best chance to succeed. No more excuses. The problem with moving up to get Watkins ... remember, this was kind of a doubling down on EJ Manuel, who was and always will be the death of Whaley as a GM. After that rookie year, Whaley and his team believed they saw an NFL QB in Manuel, but one who wouldn't be able to show his talent until he had the talented targets to work with. Hence, Sammy. Which in retrospect makes it all the more weird that he (and probably Marrone) suddenly saw the light and abandoned EJ for Kyle Orton just a few games into EJ's second year.
BADOLBILZ Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 I don't agree that Whaley has no plan. He has explained his plan a couple of times. You need to acquire and then pay premium players at #1 WR, #1 CB, pass rusher, left tackle and Quarterback and then you can afford one additional "playmaker" on each side of the ball. I my view (and others may disagree) in Watkins, Glenn, Hughes, Dareus they have some of those cornerstones and I'd add Gilmore too (because I would not let him walk). McCoy is this roster's 'luxury item' if you want to put it like that. The one thing he hasn't done yet of course is find the Quarterback and it is undoubtedly the case that the clock is ticking on Whaley in terms of finding that guy. In terms of the rest of the roster he has been hamstrung a little by the constant change of systems. There have been some 'need' selections - normally in the 2nd round (Koundjio, Woods, Ragland) and his overall draft record is average. Luckily he has been very adept at finding those scrap heap UFAs at vet minimum which has offset some of the misses on mid to late round system fits - Ross Cockrell comes immediately to mind. Anyway... I am sure Foles is not a long term plan. That is how I see it as well. I don't buy the "this is a 5-11" roster talk because they actually have most of the hard stuff to get.........front line *talent* at key positions. They've got some patching to do.......and I've maintained all along that they knew the one additional playmaker should have been a WR.......but I'd hardly be surprised if they fielded a team that made a deep playoff run. Things happen........that Denver team that won a SB two years ago could just as easily have missed the playoffs if not for a few bounces and they were fortunate to get two very banged up opponents in the AFC playoffs.......Pitt and NE. Who is to say that the AFC might not be down again next year? It could happen. Regardless of whether people believe that starting Foles or Cardale is "tanking" or not..........I think even taking what the players may perceive as a "step back" with such a veteran laded roster would be another mistake for the franchise.......and those would be considered steps back by the players.
FireChan Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 (edited) The problem with moving up to get Watkins ... remember, this was kind of a doubling down on EJ Manuel, who was and always will be the death of Whaley as a GM. After that rookie year, Whaley and his team believed they saw an NFL QB in Manuel, but one who wouldn't be able to show his talent until he had the talented targets to work with. Hence, Sammy. Which in retrospect makes it all the more weird that he (and probably Marrone) suddenly saw the light and abandoned EJ for Kyle Orton just a few games into EJ's second year. It doesn't make it weird because Whaley didn't see the light in regards EJ, Marrone did. I would bet just about anything that Whaley was against Marrone benching EJ. And that's the guy this fanbase wants picking their next QB? That is how I see it as well. I don't buy the "this is a 5-11" roster talk because they actually have most of the hard stuff to get.........front line *talent* at key positions. They've got some patching to do.......and I've maintained all along that they knew the one additional playmaker should have been a WR.......but I'd hardly be surprised if they fielded a team that made a deep playoff run. Things happen........that Denver team that won a SB two years ago could just as easily have missed the playoffs if not for a few bounces and they were fortunate to get two very banged up opponents in the AFC playoffs.......Pitt and NE. Who is to say that the AFC might not be down again next year? It could happen. Regardless of whether people believe that starting Foles or Cardale is "tanking" or not..........I think even taking what the players may perceive as a "step back" with such a veteran laded roster would be another mistake for the franchise.......and those would be considered steps back by the players. Yeah and very fortunate to get the banged up Panthers in the SB That team was the truth Badol. Player for player, they were better than the Bills. They caught some breaks but so does everybody who wins a Super Bowl. Including the Pats. Edited February 20, 2017 by FireChan
The Frankish Reich Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 It doesn't make it weird because Whaley didn't see the light in regards EJ, Marrone did. I would bet just about anything that Whaley was against Marrone benching EJ. And that's the guy this fanbase wants picking their next QB? Yeah and very fortunate to get the banged up Panthers in the SB That team was the truth Badol. Player for player, they were better than the Bills. They caught some breaks but so does everybody who wins a Super Bowl. Including the Pats. Well, you may very well be right. But Whaley was the GM. Whaley was the guy who brought in Orton out of retirement. And it must have occurred to him that Orton wasn't likely to just be EJ injury insurance, and that there was a very good chance he would be viewed (and used) as EJ Sucks insurance. So I don't see how Whaley skates on any of this. I know you're not one of his defenders here, but the defenders seem to be stuck in logical fallacy: Whaley's performance hasn't been bad because he's a poor judge of talent; it's been bad because he is weak and his opinions have been continuously overruled by [choose one, or more] Nix, Marrone, Pegulas, Ryan ...
Dorkington Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 How long should a GM be given until they find a Hall of Fame level QB?
OldTimer1960 Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 If the Chiefs sign/trade for Romo, Alex Smith would be a nice option for this team. He isn't great, but is a very competent starter. Get Smith and draft Corey Davis or Mike Williams and this team would be better
FireChan Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 (edited) Well, you may very well be right. But Whaley was the GM. Whaley was the guy who brought in Orton out of retirement. And it must have occurred to him that Orton wasn't likely to just be EJ injury insurance, and that there was a very good chance he would be viewed (and used) as EJ Sucks insurance. So I don't see how Whaley skates on any of this. I know you're not one of his defenders here, but the defenders seem to be stuck in logical fallacy: Whaley's performance hasn't been bad because he's a poor judge of talent; it's been bad because he is weak and his opinions have been continuously overruled by [choose one, or more] Nix, Marrone, Pegulas, Ryan ... Whaley waited to bring KO on board until August, basically insuring EJ would get the first handful of games as starter no matter how terrible he was. There's a real argument to be made that if we sign Orton sooner, he starts sooner or right out of the gate and we make the postseason in 2014. All the rest is just Whaley propaganda. "He didn't draft EJ because Nix was GM, but he got Kiko who turned into McCoy!" "Nix was still GM when Hughes was acquired, but that was all Doug!" "He didn't want any of the guys who sucked, that was Rex!" How long should a GM be given until they find a Hall of Fame level QB? Who is demanding a Hall of Fame level QB? Oh, right. Nobody. Edited February 20, 2017 by FireChan
The Frankish Reich Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 Whaley waited to bring KO on board until August, basically insuring EJ would get the first handful of games as starter no matter how terrible he was. There's a real argument to be made that if we sign Orton sooner, he starts sooner or right out of the gate and we make the postseason in 2014. All the rest is just Whaley propaganda. "He didn't draft EJ because Nix was GM, but he got Kiko who turned into McCoy!" "Nix was still GM when Hughes was acquired, but that was all Doug!" "He didn't want any of the guys who sucked, that was Rex!" Who is demanding a Hall of Fame level QB? Oh, right. Nobody. Right. And of course Whaley could've traded down (not up) in 2014 to get either of the next two non-Manziel QBs selected: Bridgewater or Carr. Or any one of the Sammy comparables who went later in that draft.
OldTimer1960 Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 (edited) How long should a GM be given until they find a Hall of Fame level QB? Between Buffalo, NE, Jets and Miami there are > 200 seasons in the NFL and I can think of Kelly, Marino, Brady and Namath as HOF level QBs. So about once every 50 years? Edited February 20, 2017 by OldTimer1960
FireChan Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 Right. And of course Whaley could've traded down (not up) in 2014 to get either of the next two non-Manziel QBs selected: Bridgewater or Carr. Or any one of the Sammy comparables who went later in that draft. If Darby doesn't return to 2015 form this year, what are the odds we hear about how he was a "Rex pick" because Rex's system needs CB's? The propaganda is real, and quite scary. We may have DW shoved down our throat for another 5 years if he keeps his tendrils in the Pegulas.
CommonCents Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 If Darby doesn't return to 2015 form this year, what are the odds we hear about how he was a "Rex pick" because Rex's system needs CB's? The propaganda is real, and quite scary. We may have DW shoved down our throat for another 5 years if he keeps his tendrils in the Pegulas. Half the fan base buys the baloney right along with the Pegulas. Look at them all putting Mike Williams and Corey Davis on their boards at 10. Hey wait a minute!! You already invested multiple 1st's and a mid round pick on your "superstar" WR, your telling me he isn't good enough that Whaley can just add a complementary side kick?! Another often downplayed failure.
FireChan Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 Half the fan base buys the baloney right along with the Pegulas. Look at them all putting Mike Williams and Corey Davis on their boards at 10. Hey wait a minute!! You already invested multiple 1st's and a mid round pick on your "superstar" WR, your telling me he isn't good enough that Whaley can just add a complementary side kick?! Another often downplayed failure. Well when drafting a WR high resulted in so much success from our passing attack, it's hard to say no, eh?
Dorkington Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 Whaley waited to bring KO on board until August, basically insuring EJ would get the first handful of games as starter no matter how terrible he was. There's a real argument to be made that if we sign Orton sooner, he starts sooner or right out of the gate and we make the postseason in 2014. All the rest is just Whaley propaganda. "He didn't draft EJ because Nix was GM, but he got Kiko who turned into McCoy!" "Nix was still GM when Hughes was acquired, but that was all Doug!" "He didn't want any of the guys who sucked, that was Rex!" Who is demanding a Hall of Fame level QB? Oh, right. Nobody. Generally speaking, a QB that is in the top 10 in performance over the course of their career is likely to end up in the HoF. At least imo.
FireChan Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 Generally speaking, a QB that is in the top 10 in performance over the course of their career is likely to end up in the HoF. At least imo. In what measure? Yards? Passer rating? TD's thrown? TD/INT ratio?
Dorkington Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 In what measure? Yards? Passer rating? TD's thrown? TD/INT ratio? Yes.
The Frankish Reich Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 In what measure? Yards? Passer rating? TD's thrown? TD/INT ratio? I can't seem to find a link to the Bill James classic list of factors that go into choosing a player for induction into the baseball HOF, but some of the same factors apply in the NFL. Take for example Terrell Davis. Short career, so the career counting stats aren't there. But then: - Was he the best player on his team (over the course of a few years minimum): Yes. - Was he the best player at his position (over a similar time frame): Yes. And I can't remember if it was a James factor, but clearly "did he win a championship/multiple championships" (Yes) or "did he have notable/sustained playoff successes" (think Jim Kelly) also play into this. As far as HOF QBs go, you gotta be lucky (Starr/Favre/Rodgers, Montana/Young, Bradshaw/Ben) to have more than one in your team's history ...
FireChan Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 (edited) I can't seem to find a link to the Bill James classic list of factors that go into choosing a player for induction into the baseball HOF, but some of the same factors apply in the NFL. Take for example Terrell Davis. Short career, so the career counting stats aren't there. But then: - Was he the best player on his team (over the course of a few years minimum): Yes. - Was he the best player at his position (over a similar time frame): Yes. And I can't remember if it was a James factor, but clearly "did he win a championship/multiple championships" (Yes) or "did he have notable/sustained playoff successes" (think Jim Kelly) also play into this. As far as HOF QBs go, you gotta be lucky (Starr/Favre/Rodgers, Montana/Young, Bradshaw/Ben) to have more than one in your team's history ... Dork is just king of saying things that sound reasonable but don't hold up under cursory examination. "Top 10 in performance" actually means nothing. There's no definition behind it. Between that and his penchant for making sweeping, incorrect claims like, "How long until a GM is fired for not finding a HoF QB," he gets the responses he's not looking for. HoF is very mutlfactorial and very subjective, IMO. Edited February 20, 2017 by FireChan
Dorkington Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 Dork is just king of saying things that sound reasonable but don't hold up under cursory examination. "Top 10 in performance" actually means nothing. There's no definition behind it. Between that and his penchant for making sweeping, incorrect claims like, "How long until a GM is fired for not finding a HoF QB," he gets the responses he's not looking for. HoF is very mutlfactorial and very subjective, IMO. Listen, you guys constantly harp on various statistics as a reason why Tyrod isn't good enough. It's reasonable to assume you want someone better, and you want said better QB to be consistently better. If you get a QB that is better in total yards, completion percentage, total TDs, etc, they will be easily a top 10 QB in many metrics. And if said QB is top 10 in those metrics for multiple years, it's pretty likely they're going to the HoF (unless you happen to be hated like TO). So again, how long do you give a GM before they find a top 10/potential HoF QB?
Just in Atlanta Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 He also has, by far, the fewest amount of attempts at 436. This was a run-first offense that led the league in rushing. By that very fact, you should be surprised if his passing yards were high. On another note, he also had one of the lowest interception rates and I believe he led the league in quarterback rushing. I understand if you don't like his ability, and there are several things not to like, but don't let that interfere with your logic. You're cherry picking. It's a valid point that next year's season could be in doubt after dumping Tyrod. Our offense was pretty good. And he is not the reason we didn't go to the playoffs. Thank you. I cringe every time someone says it's a tankjob if we don't keep the 25th best passer. Such a ridiculous statement
Recommended Posts