Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who would you bring in at QB during the offseason, and why?

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

  • armedequation
    replied
    Spice - i think jones may be best in the "technical" department. Thats what makes him the most pro ready qb in this draft. he knows he doesnt have the strongest arm or the athletacism but his preparedness and knowledge of defenses puts him up there with the rest. I sometimes think that the mental aspect and work ethic gets put on the back seat to being super athletic and i dont agree with that. leads to jamarcus russell and as we all know paxton lunch

    Leave a comment:


  • Blinder_Tu22
    replied
    This actually makes sense, I wasn't too sold on Jones, but explained like that, yeah, he'd be a solid pick.

    Leave a comment:


  • Spice 1
    replied
    Originally posted by armedequation View Post
    Here's the A&M game Sarkisian's talking about.



    First play is the one Sarkisian mentions. Beyond that, I think you see both reasons why he'd be good in SF, and things that make you wonder if he's really that much better than Garoppolo right now. What I mean is a lot of underneath YAC offense, crossers open for days, and then things get dicey when they do take shots. One of the biggest positives for Jones is how good he was against the blitz, and that is really important I think. This game helps to paint the picture though. Would he be good against pressure in the same way Herbert was last season, or does Alabama's offense have a little to do with it? I'll let the experts break that one down. It's just a question I have. I feel like we wouldn't be having this conversation though if people didn't think Jones is as good or better than Tua. I would rather have Jones than Tua. I'd also rather have Fields or Lance than Jones though. Watching Josh Allen in the playoffs last season reminded me of Elway, and how a QB like that can carry an offense. Allen was the most valuable offensive player I saw in the playoffs last season.

    Regardless, I'm not jumping up and down asking for a quarterback at the top of this draft. I'm not going to claim to know more about Lock than the front office does, so if they stay the course I just hope they do a good job supplementing the team in the draft.

    Leave a comment:


  • FR Tim
    replied
    To my thinking it is more then “who do you draft at QB “.

    Broncos need the choose a direction and commit. Whether that is Lock, #9 or a vet winning the starting job, it is about focused leadership. Who are the Broncos? Because all decisions domino into place, even before the QB IMO.

    What type of team do the Broncos want to be? Finesse? Power? RPO? What wins and can be achieved?Are the coaches the right coaches to teach and run the system? Are the players the right players to maximize the system?

    For example. Most agree they need to choose an OT. So they are on the board in the 2nd. Multiple choices to be made. Not as easy as BPA. Do you select the mauler or the athletic puller? Which best fits the expected system. Or what if the system may change in a season. Then what? How do you possibly draft effectively with so much instability. The main reason bad teams remain bad teams.

    Also why what Ravens and Cardinals did was so impressive. They went all in on bold choices. Can the Broncos?

    At the moment, I see a fit between a projected Lock skillset and the system they are expecting to run. Which potential QB draft pick or get also fits Shurmurs system? Or are you letting a lame duck OC influence your draft and future QB?

    Paton has some tough choices to make. QB being only one part of the stability and identity problems he is facing.
    Last edited by FR Tim; 04-23-2021, 09:03 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • armedequation
    replied
    heres a good read on jones:

    https://www.si.com/.amp/nfl/2021/04/...ma-nfl-special

    Leave a comment:


  • Capt. Jack
    replied
    If we give a 5th round pick for Teddy Bridgewater, and have him restructure his contract to a reasonable number, It shouldn't be too bad?

    Leave a comment:


  • myoung
    replied
    Originally posted by FR Tim View Post

    The vet QB is needed in the room for either Lock or QB#9. IMO it is not about competition, it is more about preparations and balance. The “chemistry “ of the situation.

    I just think it would be difficult to share the reps, responsibilities and to design the offense to best utilize the skillsets of two developing QBs. Because in reality Lock is still a project.

    A vet avoids the importance of sharing reps. The chosen QB gets the majority. How do you see that look if there is a competition going on between Lock and #9? Or any rd for that matter. The vet knows the league and the in game adjustments to the emotions and pressures. That presence is needed on the sideline, in practice and in the film room. Not Lock and #9 or #71 looking at each other with suspicion and envy of a competition.

    The role of the vet for this team is critical IMO. So far Paton and coaches don’t seem to agree. At the moment I prefer they stick with Lock. But prepared for #9 to be the QB of the future. Just hope the decision to move Lock is the next decision. Team

    And I agree the free agent options are getting worse. Just saw G. Smith re-signed. Who now? Bortles? Barkley? Bridgewater on a dramatic salary cut? Going to be interesting to see which path Paton chooses.
    The problem is that Bridgewater wants to compete for a starting gig. I don't think he wants to come mentor the young kid. If he is the choice, I am guessing it will be to come in and compete for #1, not to be a babysitter for Lock.

    My concern is that Bridgewater would probably win the starting job and we would replace our bottom 5 QB with a bottom 10 QB and continue to waffle between 6-9 wins for a few years.

    Leave a comment:


  • FR Tim
    replied
    Originally posted by sra84 View Post

    Not that important. If it's strictly for a backup, then fine. But there is no vet QB available, either thru free agency or trade, that should be considered as a competitor for the starting position, or who is, in all probability, not as informed on Shurmur's system than Drew is.

    ​​​​​​
    The vet QB is needed in the room for either Lock or QB#9. IMO it is not about competition, it is more about preparations and balance. The “chemistry “ of the situation.

    I just think it would be difficult to share the reps, responsibilities and to design the offense to best utilize the skillsets of two developing QBs. Because in reality Lock is still a project.

    A vet avoids the importance of sharing reps. The chosen QB gets the majority. How do you see that look if there is a competition going on between Lock and #9? Or any rd for that matter. The vet knows the league and the in game adjustments to the emotions and pressures. That presence is needed on the sideline, in practice and in the film room. Not Lock and #9 or #71 looking at each other with suspicion and envy of a competition.

    The role of the vet for this team is critical IMO. So far Paton and coaches don’t seem to agree. At the moment I prefer they stick with Lock. But prepared for #9 to be the QB of the future. Just hope the decision to move Lock is the next decision. Team

    And I agree the free agent options are getting worse. Just saw G. Smith re-signed. Who now? Bortles? Barkley? Bridgewater on a dramatic salary cut? Going to be interesting to see which path Paton chooses.

    Leave a comment:


  • sra84
    replied
    Originally posted by samparnell View Post

    How important do you think it is to get a veteran QB in the meeting room?
    Not that important. If it's strictly for a backup, then fine. But there is no vet QB available, either thru free agency or trade, that should be considered as a competitor for the starting position, or who is, in all probability, not as informed on Shurmur's system than Drew is.

    ​​​​​​

    Leave a comment:


  • armedequation
    replied
    Originally posted by jazzbodog View Post

    So would you take our word that we did indeed "vomit" if the Broncos signed him or would we all have to send you a video for proof?
    nah not to me...just post it here

    Leave a comment:


  • jazzbodog
    replied
    Originally posted by armedequation View Post
    i almost want to see us sign bridgewater just to see how many of you throw up....
    So would you take our word that we did indeed "vomit" if the Broncos signed him or would we all have to send you a video for proof?

    Leave a comment:


  • armedequation
    replied
    if we get bridgewater and draft lance im fine with that if teddy is cut. i dont want to spend a draft pick and pay his salary. minn let him go because they didnt think he could get healthy with that injury. NO doesnt really count because they had brees. The panthers are rebuilding. new coach...new qb

    like i said we get him and have him start until drafted qb is ready. if drafted qb is ready week 1 then teddy backs them up

    Leave a comment:


  • orange crush75
    replied
    Originally posted by myoung View Post

    Should have read the whole post and some of my other posts before posting. I said, if we keep him I hope for the best but expect the worst. Just because I will cheer for every player on the team doesn’t mean I can’t hope for a change.

    I also want the team to win more games!!!
    Yeah , I should have added that not talking about you only . And your right i did miss the part where you said you hope for the best . My apologies

    I too want more wins

    Leave a comment:


  • samparnell
    replied
    Originally posted by sra84 View Post

    It would seriously annoy me because QB is our biggest problem and Bridgewater does absolutely nothing to help.

    Bridgewater is not competition for a supposed franchise QB. Bridgewater is a backup. If he's competition for Lock, that tells you how bad Lock is, if there's a chance Bridgewater can possibly beat him out.

    There's a reason that Minnesota and New Orleans moved on from him and why Carolina is looking to move on from him.

    A move to get Bridgewater, or even someone like Minshew, would be yet another failure for this organization to adequately evaluate the QB position and make the right decision.
    How important do you think it is to get a veteran QB in the meeting room?

    Leave a comment:


  • sra84
    replied
    Originally posted by armedequation View Post
    i almost want to see us sign bridgewater just to see how many of you throw up....
    It would seriously annoy me because QB is our biggest problem and Bridgewater does absolutely nothing to help.

    Bridgewater is not competition for a supposed franchise QB. Bridgewater is a backup. If he's competition for Lock, that tells you how bad Lock is, if there's a chance Bridgewater can possibly beat him out.

    There's a reason that Minnesota and New Orleans moved on from him and why Carolina is looking to move on from him.

    A move to get Bridgewater, or even someone like Minshew, would be yet another failure for this organization to adequately evaluate the QB position and make the right decision.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X