Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The 2021 QB Crow thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • RockWarrior84
    replied
    Fangio loves Teddy. But I do not think Paton got a true evaluation of Lock and looking at a young player with 2 OCs does not help. I think Lock will remain unless he is packaged for a trade of a big name QB. If we draft a new QB Lock will
    likely be incumbent. I think Lock on roster was why Fields was not drafted but Fangio screwed up the evaluation by doing anything to give Teddy the starting job that Lock. I know
    Lock had his issues and after 1st preseason game I thought it looked like he took big strides in progressing as a QB. Teddy was Teddy.

    Leave a comment:


  • 58Miller
    replied
    Originally posted by Buckeye Bronco View Post

    FACT - The Bengals staff and coaches were focused on Burrow. The game planning, all of the camps, etc. The Bears were not.

    FACT - Fields had the highest QB PFF score week 9 and, he received the highest of all rookies multiple weeks. Now I'm not saying he was great, but ALL of the cards were stacked against him being successful.

    You can keep bootlicking the staff, but by all measures, this was a poor choice. Look at the dollars going to Bridgewater vs. the highest paid CB in the league...
    I agree on the Bengals staff focused on Burrow. He also has played well and made a huge leap from last year.

    Will see what Fields does next season.

    Leave a comment:


  • sra84
    replied
    Originally posted by Buckeye Bronco View Post

    The flaw in your thinking here is assuming all teams and situations are static.

    If Fields is drafted his season most likely wouldn’t mirror what’s transpired in Chicago. They’re a terrible team, with the one of the worst offensive lines, he didn’t get first team reps until weeks into the season, etc. etc.

    I’m pretty sure Joe Burrows rough rookie campaign ended in injury too…
    The thread was simply to compare how the quarterbacks did this year. Obviously their situations were different. But, especially with Bridgewater, Darnold and Winston, there was the chance to see how good they could be as the starter. None really impressed and all 3 eventually got injured.

    Leave a comment:


  • Buckeye Bronco
    replied
    Originally posted by 58Miller View Post
    I would give Burrow having Taylor develop him and the offense is better than Fields with Nagy.
    That said Burrow took over a 2-14 team. Fields inherited an 8-8 team. The Bears have been better when Fields hasn't played, they look like they will go 5-2 without him. That is a fact. Hopefully the Bears bring in a coach who can develop the kid, no one questions his physical talents.
    FACT - The Bengals staff and coaches were focused on Burrow. The game planning, all of the camps, etc. The Bears were not.

    FACT - Fields had the highest QB PFF score week 9 and, he received the highest of all rookies multiple weeks. Now I'm not saying he was great, but ALL of the cards were stacked against him being successful.

    You can keep bootlicking the staff, but by all measures, this was a poor choice. Look at the dollars going to Bridgewater vs. the highest paid CB in the league...

    Leave a comment:


  • 58Miller
    replied
    Originally posted by Buckeye Bronco View Post

    He was undoubtedly better, but once again this was a much different situation. Joe was the starter on day one and the offense was built around him. Nagy didn't want Fields to start, he didn't get 1st ream reps until many weeks into the season, and the offense was designed for Dalton.
    I would give Burrow having Taylor develop him and the offense is better than Fields with Nagy.
    That said Burrow took over a 2-14 team. Fields inherited an 8-8 team. The Bears have been better when Fields hasn't played, they look like they will go 5-2 without him. That is a fact. Hopefully the Bears bring in a coach who can develop the kid, no one questions his physical talents.

    Leave a comment:


  • Buckeye Bronco
    replied
    Originally posted by 58Miller View Post

    I'm gonna say Burrow was a lot better.

    'Player: Comp.% TD / Int Yards
    Burrow. 65. % 13 / 5. 2,688

    Fields. 59%. 7 / 10 1,870
    He was undoubtedly better, but once again this was a much different situation. Joe was the starter on day one and the offense was built around him. Nagy didn't want Fields to start, he didn't get 1st ream reps until many weeks into the season, and the offense was designed for Dalton.

    Leave a comment:


  • 58Miller
    replied
    Originally posted by Buckeye Bronco View Post

    The flaw in your thinking here is assuming all teams and situations are static.

    If Fields is drafted his season most likely wouldn’t mirror what’s transpired in Chicago. They’re a terrible team, with the one of the worst offensive lines, he didn’t get first team reps until weeks into the season, etc. etc.

    I’m pretty sure Joe Burrows rough rookie campaign ended in injury too…
    I'm gonna say Burrow was a lot better.

    'Player: Comp.% TD / Int Yards
    Burrow. 65. % 13 / 5. 2,688

    Fields. 59%. 7 / 10 1,870

    Leave a comment:


  • Buckeye Bronco
    replied
    Originally posted by sra84 View Post
    I think someone said it in a thread a few weeks ago....this was like debating which stinks worse: dog or cat droppings.

    Bridgewater stunk, then got hurt.

    Darnold stunk, then got hurt. I guess I will say Bridgewater was better than Darnold, but it wasn't by much.

    Winston was injured early on.

    Lock was a non-factor until the last 4 games.

    Fields, not surprisingly, struggled as a rookie and also dealt with injuries.

    Don't know if there's any winners in this debate.
    The flaw in your thinking here is assuming all teams and situations are static.

    If Fields is drafted his season most likely wouldn’t mirror what’s transpired in Chicago. They’re a terrible team, with the one of the worst offensive lines, he didn’t get first team reps until weeks into the season, etc. etc.

    I’m pretty sure Joe Burrows rough rookie campaign ended in injury too…

    Leave a comment:


  • sra84
    replied
    I think someone said it in a thread a few weeks ago....this was like debating which stinks worse: dog or cat droppings.

    Bridgewater stunk, then got hurt.

    Darnold stunk, then got hurt. I guess I will say Bridgewater was better than Darnold, but it wasn't by much.

    Winston was injured early on.

    Lock was a non-factor until the last 4 games.

    Fields, not surprisingly, struggled as a rookie and also dealt with injuries.

    Don't know if there's any winners in this debate.

    Leave a comment:


  • Buckeye Bronco
    replied
    Just going to bump this…

    Leave a comment:


  • DENVERSB50CHAMP
    replied
    Originally posted by Hadez View Post
    After the horrible effort Teddy deserves the hate. I would rather have a QB who will block on run plays and throw slants than whatever Teddy allegedly adds to a football team.

    Every snap the Broncos allow that coward Teddy to take shows they lost the 2021 QB Crow thread imo

    Spot On !!

    Leave a comment:


  • RocketArm006
    replied
    Originally posted by Hadez View Post
    We probably do not have a qb imo because if the coaching we picked.

    Do we pass Allen if we have an offensive head coach and take a defensive blue chip prospect? Do we pass on Mac Jones / Fields for another blue chip defensive prospect? If we have an offensive coach do they maybe push for a trade to get Mahomes or another qb?

    I get it sucks to swing and miss but never taking a swing is not the answer either.
    This is the problem with the organization. Old school thinking with old school coaches who want a safe vet QB. Same results year in and year out. I agree. I’d rather take a swing on a blue chip QB than constantly bring in washed up vet QBs.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hadez
    replied
    We probably do not have a qb imo because if the coaching we picked.

    Do we pass Allen if we have an offensive head coach and take a defensive blue chip prospect? Do we pass on Mac Jones / Fields for another blue chip defensive prospect? If we have an offensive coach do they maybe push for a trade to get Mahomes or another qb?

    I get it sucks to swing and miss but never taking a swing is not the answer either.

    Leave a comment:


  • FR Tim
    replied
    The question of what are the suggestions for a plan go deeper then which QB is drafted, signed, or traded for.

    IMO it revolves more around the coaching concepts and system. Who are the Broncos? What is their offensive philosophy? Do they draft or sign the players to support these systems? At the moment, I don’t think they are in any way stable or have a direction.

    The QBs ( Jackson, Allen, Fields, Jones) mentioned above as “ missed opportunities”. Would any of them be utilized as they should or developed to their current levels of success with the revolving coaches and changing systems the Broncos have had over the last few years?

    Impatience and poor decisions of OCs are just as critical ( arguably more) then the choice of QB. IMO the QBs mentioned would have been mismanaged and squandered the development as most bad teams do.

    Fix the coaching and settle on an identity first, then develop a QB in that system.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hadez
    replied
    After the horrible effort Teddy deserves the hate. I would rather have a QB who will block on run plays and throw slants than whatever Teddy allegedly adds to a football team.

    Every snap the Broncos allow that coward Teddy to take shows they lost the 2021 QB Crow thread imo

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X