LGR4GM Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 Eh I think there's more to a tank than that Tank: The act of purposefully losing a season to acquire as many high end assets as possible in the draft I think there needs to be some element of purposefully losing for it to be considered a tank Trading off all valuable assets leads to losing. Quote
WildCard Posted February 16, 2018 Author Report Posted February 16, 2018 I think signing McCarron would be with good intentions, but would end up as a tank. The only benefit would be cap room saved by ditching TT. I also think Beane/Daboll/McDermott have other plans rather than taking a step back, be it moving up and getting Rosen or Mayfield, trading for Foles, or making a play for Cousins. What kind of message does it send to the vets if they sign McCarron ? If it's good intentions, then it's not a tank Far as the message goes to the vets, it can't possibly be any worse than the messages we sent trading Watkins, Dareus, and everything else we did last offseason. We made the playoffs for the first time in 17 years despite everyone claiming a tank; I wouldn't worry about the messages we send Trading off all valuable assets leads to losing. We traded off all valuable assets this last season. Quote
Gramps Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 (edited) And also lead the bills to the big game? You think Tyrod is taking us to the Superbowl? A QB is only as good as the offense surrounding him. His stats are pretty darn good, especially the low # of picks. TD passes are low, but given what he had to throw to, I give him a pass. If it's good intentions, then it's not a tank Far as the message goes to the vets, it can't possibly be any worse than the messages we sent trading Watkins, Dareus, and everything else we did last offseason. We made the playoffs for the first time in 17 years despite everyone claiming a tank; I wouldn't worry about the messages we send We traded off all valuable assets this last season. It may start as good intentions, but McCarron is limited in NFL experience and it might well end up a tank. And like you said, we made the playoffs - why would you not build on that instead of taking a step back ? Edited February 16, 2018 by Gramps Quote
inkman Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 It isn't above the average. It's about having to be extra careful now if you're more than 15yrds down field. How many passes per game in 2001, versus 2017. Your conviction is admirable Quote
WildCard Posted February 16, 2018 Author Report Posted February 16, 2018 (edited) It may start as good intentions, but McCarron is limited in NFL experience and it might well end up a tank. And like you said, we made the playoffs - why would you not build on that instead of taking a step back ? Anything we do at QB short of signing Cousins will be a step back. I'm being nitpicky, but with this board's history of tank debates, I think a tank needs to be losing intentionally despite viable alternatives to get better for the following season. I do not think there are any viable alternatives to build off of this playoff success, especially at QB. I think McCaron might actually be the best option we have. Edited February 16, 2018 by Jokertecken Quote
TrueBlueGED Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 True, he was. I'm on the train of pick a QB every year. As far as where we pick, we have more than enough ammo to move up McCaron is what he is. I'd sign him on a 3 year deal for cheap. Worst case scenario he plays this year and is a backup the next. Best case, he tuns out to be something. Those odds may be 10/90, but depending on the price and what we need right now, I think he's a great fit Because it's luck Credit to True, he's been saying the QB process is luck for years now, and he's right. Figure I should give him some credit here, seeing as he's rarely correct This conversation went way too fast for me to jump in now, but don't think I didn't notice this. You've got one solid backhanded compliment headed your way. My revenge may not be swift, but it shall be righteous. Quote
WildCard Posted February 16, 2018 Author Report Posted February 16, 2018 This conversation went way too fast for me to jump in now, but don't think I didn't notice this. You've got one solid backhanded compliment headed your way. My revenge may not be swift, but it shall be righteous.Was wondering what took you so long :lol: Quote
Gramps Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 Anything we do at QB short of signing Cousins will be a step back. I'm being nitpicky, but with this board's history of tank debates, I think a tank needs to be losing intentionally despite viable alternatives to get better for the following season. I do not think there are any viable alternatives to build off of this playoff success, especially at QB. I think McCaron might actually be the best option we have. Trading for Foles if available would be a step up. Quote
LGR4GM Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 Trading for Foles if available would be a step up.Only if it costs a second and you still draft a qb Quote
Taro T Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 How were they called? In 2001 what was a pass interference penalty worth in yards, 15 right? What is it now. Roughing the passer isn't about how many but how. The literally definition has changed. Go plant your helmet in a qbs chest see what happens. The league protects qbs and favors passing. I'd rather an elite defense with a good qb then an elite defense with Tyrod. Tyrod will never win a Superbowl. In college football, in 2001 PI 15 or more yards downfield was a 15 yard penalty. As it also is today. In the NFL, in 2001 PI was a spot foul regardless where it occurred. As it is today. Quote
LGR4GM Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 In college football, in 2001 PI 15 or more yards downfield was a 15 yard penalty. As it also is today. In the NFL, in 2001 PI was a spot foul regardless where it occurred. As it is today. Hmm, good to know. I was mistaken. Quote
MattPie Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 Trading for Foles if available would be a step up. Fun fact: Taylor has a better career QB passer rating than Foles. Foles in 2013 has the league-leading rating, but otherwise his best season rating is less than Taylor's worst (for seasons with more than 100 pass attempts, i.e. a starter). Foles put together a string of 6 good games as the Eagles starter this year that happened to take them to the Championship. Betting on that to continue is dubious based on past performance. Quote
Gramps Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 Fun fact: Taylor has a better career QB passer rating than Foles. Foles in 2013 has the league-leading rating, but otherwise his best season rating is less than Taylor's worst (for seasons with more than 100 pass attempts, i.e. a starter). Foles put together a string of 6 good games as the Eagles starter this year that happened to take them to the Championship. Betting on that to continue is dubious based on past performance. I'll take Foles based on those 6 games, especially his playoff and SB performance. Quote
LGR4GM Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 I'll take Foles based on those 6 games, especially his playoff and SB performance.If we get Philly offensive coordinator too then sure. Quote
Gramps Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 If we get Philly offensive coordinator too then sure. Newsflash - he's the head coach of the Colts. I'd take my chances on Daboll with Foles. Quote
LGR4GM Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 Newsflash - he's the head coach of the Colts. I'd take my chances on Daboll with Foles.I actually do know that. Point being Foles benefited from the system run in Philly. I have no problem with Dabol. No idea what his offense will look like. Not sure if it will replicate Philly though. Quote
JujuFish Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 I actually do know that. Point being Foles benefited from the system run in Philly. What about 2014 when his OC was Pat Shurmur? Quote
Gramps Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 I think most on this board would be thrilled with Foles for a few years and a QB selected at 21 or 22. Quote
TrueBlueGED Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 I think most on this board would be thrilled with Foles for a few years and a QB selected at 21 or 22. Foles got hot at the right time. Sorta like Joe Flacco a few years ago. And much like Joe Flacco, we shouldn't get fooled into thinking he's actually good. Quote
Gramps Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 Foles got hot at the right time. Sorta like Joe Flacco a few years ago. And much like Joe Flacco, we shouldn't get fooled into thinking he's actually good. Oh I dunno about that ... Flacco's career stats are pretty good and he's got a ring. Beggars can't be choosers. We have a starting QB that everyone wants to run outta town and a backup with a noodle arm that is looking at 3rd string next year. Quote
TrueBlueGED Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 Oh I dunno about that ... Flacco's career stats are pretty good and he's got a ring. Beggars can't be choosers. We have a starting QB that everyone wants to run outta town and a backup with a noodle arm that is looking at 3rd string next year. You have a much different definition of "pretty good" than I do. And I'm a borderline Tyrod fan compared to most of this place :) Quote
Gramps Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 You have a much different definition of "pretty good" than I do. And I'm a borderline Tyrod fan compared to most of this place :) Are you a Jim Kelly fan ? He's in the HOF with similar stats. http://www.nfl.com/player/jimkelly/2501579/careerstats http://www.nfl.com/player/joeflacco/382/careerstats Quote
TrueBlueGED Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 Are you a Jim Kelly fan ? He's in the HOF with similar stats. http://www.nfl.com/player/jimkelly/2501579/careerstats http://www.nfl.com/player/joeflacco/382/careerstats ....... .. .... I'm going to make this as nice as I possibly can: comparing stats from now to the mid-80s mid-90s without adjusting for era is akin to comparing gas prices without adjusting for inflation. Quote
Gramps Posted February 16, 2018 Report Posted February 16, 2018 ....... .. .... I'm going to make this as nice as I possibly can: comparing stats from now to the mid-80s mid-90s without adjusting for era is akin to comparing gas prices without adjusting for inflation. Whatever dude ... football the game hasn't changed that much. And do tell ... how do we adjust for "era" ? Quote
WildCard Posted February 16, 2018 Author Report Posted February 16, 2018 Whatever dude ... football the game hasn't changed that much. And do tell ... how do we adjust for "era" ?Same way you do for Gretzky and Ruth, relative comparisons to their peers I actually do know that. Point being Foles benefited from the system run in Philly. I have no problem with Dabol. No idea what his offense will look like. Not sure if it will replicate Philly though. Foles got hot at the right time. Sorta like Joe Flacco a few years ago. And much like Joe Flacco, we shouldn't get fooled into thinking he's actually good. Agreed on both Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.