Jump to content


Photo

QB teams


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#21 SoTier

SoTier

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 362 posts

Posted 19 September 2017 - 09:31 AM

The list is

 

 

Pretty good list.  I would make a few adjustments.

 

PROBABLE:  (5 Teams)

Buffalo, New York Jets and San Francisco are the only ones I consider absolutely certain.

Jacksonville is almost a certainty.  This is Bortles last chance.

Arizona is highly likely.  Palmer will be 38 and is looking like crap.

 

POSSIBLE:  (7 Teams)

Cleveland likes Kizer, but I don't see them passing on a Top 5 QB if he is staring them in the face.

New Orleans is a definite possibility.  Brees will be 39 and a free agent.

Pittsburgh is a wild card nobody has mentioned.  But Roethlisberger has been talking retirement for 2-3 seasons now.

Denver is getting decent production from Siemien right now, but I don't expect that to continue.  And Lynch has been a bust so far.

San Diego and the New York Giants will keep Rivers/Manning for at least another season.  But they will be 36 and 37, so both teams may be looking to the future.

Washington has been unwilling to give Cousins a contract.  Will they finally cave, or finally let him walk?

 

UNLIKELY:  (5 Teams)

St. Louis invested too much in Goff to give up after 2 seasons, regardless of how he plays.  Same with Philadelphia and Wentz.

Minnesota likes Bradford, and still has Bridgewater as a fall-back option.  They are slightly possible, but I think unlikely.

Cincinnati isn't going to move on from Dalton.  He's been solid for too long.

Miami isn't moving on unless Tannehill has a serious setback with his injury.  Same situation as Dalton.

 

NO WAY:  (15 Teams)

Baltimore isn't moving on from Flacco.  He's been a solid QB and his contract is too expensive to dump.

Indianapolis isn't moving on from Luck.  See Baltimore/Flacco.

Houston, Kansas City and Chicago just drafted their QBs of the future.

New England either keeps Garoppolo or Brady plays another year.  Possibly both. 

Tennessee, Oakland, Dallas, Detroit, Green Bay, Carolina, Atlanta, Tampa Bay, Seattle all have relatively young franchise QBs.

 

Good analysis.  I pretty much agree.  I will add these points.

 

Concerning the Rams and Eagles: they aren't cutting bait on either Goff or Wentz at this point since they're only 2nd year players.  I've watched parts of both Rams games just to see how Goff is doing, and he is much improved over his rookie season.  It's like night and day.  Of course the Rams have added some pieces, most notably a new coaching staff.   Wentz doesn't seem to have improved as much as Goff, but he was better last season.

 

That the Pats traded Brissette rather than Garoppolo says that they like him more than any of the other QBs they've drafted since Brady.  Is he franchise QB material though?  As Brock Osweiler has demonstrated, there's a huge difference between being a competent backup QB who can win a few games and a good starting QB ... and nobody knows which side any QB falls on until he gets to play as a starter for more than a few games.

 

Some of the teams that might appear to need new QBs because their established franchise QBs are struggling like Cincinatti and the Giants need to fix their OLs.  The Bills need that, too, although I have no doubt that they're going to draft a QB in the first round of 2018 whether there's a good prospect available or not.


Edited by SoTier, 19 September 2017 - 09:32 AM.


#22 yungmack

yungmack

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,872 posts

Posted 19 September 2017 - 09:43 AM

I think the Giants have to be added to the list of team potentially dating high and drafting a QB.  Eli is old and they suck.
 
Jags, Jets, Bengals, Colts???, Chargers?, Cards look bad, Niners.  Probably left some off.

Denver. And if the season goes to pieces and he has a shot at Darnold, would Carroll pick him?

#23 BringBackFergy

BringBackFergy

    Eternally Optimistic Some of the Time

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,283 posts

Posted 19 September 2017 - 09:58 AM

 

The Bills FO hasn't "thought things through" as far as building a winning team since 2001.  They shuffle and reshuffle their first and second round picks among DBs, RBs, and WRs that they use as replacements for the previous first and second round DBs, RBs, and WRs that they've kicked to the curb through trades and FA.  They sprinkle in a few other positions just so it's not too obvious. They'll also occasionally add big name FAs to con the fans into thinking they're trying to build a winner like Takeo Spikes, Terrell Owens, and Mario Williams.  When the fans get really restless, they draft a QB: Losman in 2004, Manuel in 2013, and some college QB to be named later in 2018.  The Bills players they choose to extend are sometimes fan faves like Kyle Williams but oftentimes JAGs like Chris Kelsay, but they're seldom the most talented guys on the team.  

 

Marcel Dareus is the rare true talented player they've chosen to pay -- at least for now -- and yes, he is worth his $$$.  The problem with Dareus' contract, if there's any real problem at all and not simply FO propaganda in preparation of dumping him before next season, is that the contract is poorly written in its effects on the Bills cap situation.  That's solely on the Bills FO because teams that are interested in winning always find ways to not only keep their best talent but also slurp up the younger talent that teams like the Bills, Indy, Cincinatti, and NO can't "afford" to keep because they have morons writing cap unfriendly contracts reminiscent of the early years of the salary cap era.

I have to give this a big Tony Montana "Jes"