wppete Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 This will be our QB depth next year: 1. Tyrod Taylor 2. Cardale Jones 3. Nathan Peterman TJ Yates will be released Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffismagic Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 This will be our QB depth next year: 1. Tyrod Taylor 2. Cardale Jones 3. Nathan Peterman TJ Yates will be released I doubt Cardale will be kept. Sean seems to delight in cutting players he did not draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigK14094 Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 How come EJ is not on this list? Wasn't he proclaimed as best #2 in NFL last season. connor cook is #2 in Raiderland. EJ is #3...........and fading. This will be our QB depth next year: 1. Tyrod Taylor 2. Cardale Jones 3. Nathan Peterman TJ Yates will be released Cardale doesn't have the head to play at the pro level.........immature approach to business....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2o Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 I doubt Cardale will be kept. Sean seems to delight in cutting players he did not draft. If that were his sole criteria for cuts this team would look a lot different than it does right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 Agreed that there is no real reason to rank Jones over Mahomes or Trubisky at this point, but on the other hand, none of them have logged any real NFL playing time, so there's not much reason to prefer them to Cardale either right now. Well, no. Mahomes and Trubisky were top 10 picks. Cardale was taken in the bottom of the 4th. There's certainly a compelling reason to prefer the better prospects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 (edited) Well, no. Mahomes and Trubisky were top 10 picks. Cardale was taken in the bottom of the 4th. There's certainly a compelling reason to prefer the better prospects.A year earlier though Cardale was a top 10 pick. His raw talent is at least on par with those guys. The consistency isn't there buts it's not crazy to think that someone prefers his upside. We've still never seen him lose a game. I'm not saying that it's right or wrong but it's not that they are better talents. Edited June 10, 2017 by Kirby Jackson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saxum Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 Not this guy?? Second round baby! @salsports "In the three media-open OTAs, Hackenberg hit reporters with passes twice." http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2017/06/assessing_christian_hackenbergs_play_after_jets_ot.html?utm_content=buffer72207&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer#incart_river_index @miketanier So if a quarterback hits a reporter during OTAs, but he does it while standing tall in the pocket, does that make him a quality backup? We need to teach QBs to throw at the three stooges from the Buffalo News. I can't wait to play the Jets this year. You have to unless you want to play Madden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saxum Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 I've said it before & I'll say it again: nobody knows backup QBs like Neil Greenberg of the Washington Post. So you are doubling down or reminding us WHY not to give any credit to list, which? Agree it's a terrible list. How is AJ McCarron worse than Brandon Weeden? It truly is. Brandon Weeden is listed under "useful stand ins" at 5th overall. I doubt the person who made the list has ever watched a football game. Exactly. Inflated rookie grades in some cases for potential/ I rue the day they invented those ridiculous URL shorteners. First, you have no idea what site you're actually being directed to - could be malwareupyobutt.com for all you know. Second, most workplaces don't allow them to be followed, for reason #1 above. Useless. Have same kind of issue at work. Only reason why I see for it is so poster can get some sort of kickback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 I don't think that the list is horrible but it's pretty subjective. Fitz is WAY too low but in general it's tough to have a real list. If I read the list's methodology correctly, it's a bastard mixture of subjective and objective. For players with experience in the NFL, they look at that experience with no adjustment for how deep the experience goes or weighting for recent For players without experience in the NFL, they look at an "average" figure for rookies with some mysterious "adjustment" That's why you have old warhorses like Schaub, who genuinely had some good seasons in the NFL until something "broke" in him but who is highly tenuous to be able to get something done now, ranked above Anderson and Cook; why you have guys like Fitzpatrick, who actually has a good record of being able to come in as a backup and engineer a comeback and win a game but who has repeatedly stunk up the place as an established starter, listed as "clipboard holder"; and why you have guys who have never played a game in the NFL listed higher than guys who have shown they can get it done. Silly list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 I doubt Cardale will be kept. Sean seems to delight in cutting players he did not draft. ....so his ONE AND ONLY draft makes a trend as a rookie HC?.......next time you have a thought, spare us and save it....Jesus...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriveFor1Outta5 Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 (edited) If I read the list's methodology correctly, it's a bastard mixture of subjective and objective. For players with experience in the NFL, they look at that experience with no adjustment for how deep the experience goes or weighting for recent For players without experience in the NFL, they look at an "average" figure for rookies with some mysterious "adjustment" That's why you have old warhorses like Schaub, who genuinely had some good seasons in the NFL until something "broke" in him but who is highly tenuous to be able to get something done now, ranked above Anderson and Cook; why you have guys like Fitzpatrick, who actually has a good record of being able to come in as a backup and engineer a comeback and win a game but who has repeatedly stunk up the place as an established starter, listed as "clipboard holder"; and why you have guys who have never played a game in the NFL listed higher than guys who have shown they can get it done. Silly list. I agree that these types of list are silly. In reality the backup QB position is weak across the league. Backup QB's in a starter role generally equal losses. Even if the list were better composed, I feel that ranking backup QB's is a waste of time.I doubt Cardale will be kept. Sean seems to delight in cutting players he did not draft. It will also be completely justifiable after Cardale stinks up the joint this preseason. I don't blame McD for wanting his own guys. Who doesn't want to have ownership over their own success or failure? It's not as if anyone on the roster he inherited had ever won anything. This will be our QB depth next year: 1. Tyrod Taylor 2. Cardale Jones 3. Nathan Peterman TJ Yates will be released I'm thinking this1. Tyrod Taylor 2. Nathan Peterman 3. T.J Yates Edited June 10, 2017 by DriveFor1Outta5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 I agree that these types of list are silly. In reality the backup QB position is weak across the league. Backup QB's in a starter role generally equal losses. Even if the list were better composed, I feel that ranking backup QB's is a waste of time. It will also be completely justifiable after Cardale stinks up the joint this preseason. I'm thinking this 1. Tyrod Taylor 2. Nathan Peterman 3. T.J Yates .....looks pretty accurate to me....if Peterman is the PS choice, crapshoot would be another team poaching him but he has to go to their active 53........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 I agree that these types of list are silly. In reality the backup QB position is weak across the league. Backup QB's in a starter role generally equal losses. Even if the list were better composed, I feel that ranking backup QB's is a waste of time. It will also be completely justifiable after Cardale stinks up the joint this preseason. I don't blame McD for wanting his own guys. Who doesn't want to have ownership over their own success or failure? It's not as if anyone on the roster he inherited had ever won anything. I'm thinking this 1. Tyrod Taylor 2. Nathan Peterman 3. T.J Yates I keep going back to it but if Yates is the 3rd QB why waste the roster spot? If you lose Tyrod you can sign "a Yates" (almost certainly Yates himself) the next day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Landing Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 I agree that these types of list are silly. In reality the backup QB position is weak across the league. Backup QB's in a starter role generally equal losses. Even if the list were better composed, I feel that ranking backup QB's is a waste of time. It will also be completely justifiable after Cardale stinks up the joint this preseason. I don't blame McD for wanting his own guys. Who doesn't want to have ownership over their own success or failure? It's not as if anyone on the roster he inherited had ever won anything. I'm thinking this 1. Tyrod Taylor 2. Nathan Peterman 3. T.J Yates If TJ Yates gets cut, I would take that as an indication that McD is comfortable with how well his system gets implemented, and that would be good news. And, if Cardale is showing any signs that he is losing his inconsistency, we should keep him, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 I keep going back to it but if Yates is the 3rd QB why waste the roster spot? If you lose Tyrod you can sign "a Yates" (almost certainly Yates himself) the next day. ...McD may have a conservative "comfort level" with the proverbial "vet presence" on the squad although TJ is hardly a seasoned vet presence......published reports claimed Cardale was struggling with running the "Practice Squad".....so if you cut TJ and TT goes down, are you comfortable with Jones and Peterman?............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriveFor1Outta5 Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 I keep going back to it but if Yates is the 3rd QB why waste the roster spot? If you lose Tyrod you can sign "a Yates" (almost certainly Yates himself) the next day. I understand your point. TJ Yates level players aren't difficult to find. That doesn't mean they wouldn't keep him as a third string QB imo. The coaching staff might value keeping a guy on the roster who will know the offense. It seems like a better scenario than signing a QB off the street a week before a game. Personally I'd prefer to have the same three QB's on my roster for an entire season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 ...McD may have a conservative "comfort level" with the proverbial "vet presence" on the squad although TJ is hardly a seasoned vet presence......published reports claimed Cardale was struggling with running the "Practice Squad".....so if you cut TJ and TT goes down, are you comfortable with Jones and Peterman?............I'm fine with any combination of 1 or 2 young guys. If they deem the young guys not ready I guess Yates gets the number 2 job. If he is the number 3 there is no way I am keeping him vs. an additional guy like Brandon Tate. I understand your point. TJ Yates level players aren't difficult to find. That doesn't mean they wouldn't keep him as a third string QB imo. The coaching staff might value keeping a guy on the roster who will know the offense. It seems like a better scenario than signing a QB off the street a week before a game. Personally I'd prefer to have the same three QB's on my roster for an entire season.It's likely (AT LEAST 75%) that the QB you sign off the street can be Yates. Does that change your opinion? He's not going to end up on another active roster if cut. Certainly not before some of the guys that are out there and others that will be cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriveFor1Outta5 Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 (edited) ...McD may have a conservative "comfort level" with the proverbial "vet presence" on the squad although TJ is hardly a seasoned vet presence......published reports claimed Cardale was struggling with running the "Practice Squad".....so if you cut TJ and TT goes down, are you comfortable with Jones and Peterman?............ Exactly. That's why I could see Yates being kept on the roster as a third stringer. I truly believe that Cardale is going to struggle enough to be cut. That leaves the team with TT, Peterman, and Yates. Why cut Yates in that scenario? Sure you could find someone with equal talent, but the conservative move is to keep the player who is familiar with the coaching staff. McD may not be comfortable with idea of potentially being forced to sign a QB off the street midseason. I'm fine with any combination of 1 or 2 young guys. If they deem the young guys not ready I guess Yates gets the number 2 job. If he is the number 3 there is no way I am keeping him vs. an additional guy like Brandon Tate. It's likely (AT LEAST 75%) that the QB you sign off the street can be Yates. Does that change your opinion? He's not going to end up on another active roster if cut. Certainly not before some of the guys that are out there and others that will be cut. I understand your point. I just don't see a good reason not to carry three QB's. I'd rather have my third string QB practicing and game planning weekly opposed to sitting at home. Edited June 10, 2017 by DriveFor1Outta5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 I'm fine with any combination of 1 or 2 young guys. If they deem the young guys not ready I guess Yates gets the number 2 job. If he is the number 3 there is no way I am keeping him vs. an additional guy like Brandon Tate. It's likely (AT LEAST 75%) that the QB you sign off the street can be Yates. Does that change your opinion? He's not going to end up on another active roster if cut. Certainly not before some of the guys that are out there and others that will be cut. ...at #3, he'd be Donohole's clipboard carrying specialist Shane Matthews at 700 grand a year (years ago)................ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 Well, no. Mahomes and Trubisky were top 10 picks. Cardale was taken in the bottom of the 4th. There's certainly a compelling reason to prefer the better prospects.Lower picks outperform higher picks all the time in the NFL. Cardale has better tools than both those guys, played against a higher level of competition, and won far more big games. I say we should wait and see what happens when they actually play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts