Ray_T
-
Content Count
12,707 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Posts posted by Ray_T
-
-
1 hour ago, TBayXXXVII said:This is why I say NFL fans are sheep for buying into the "franchise QB" crap. If you have an elite QB, pay him... if not, never pay him. Move on. Paying guys like Dak, Jones, Mayfield, Darnold, Cousins, etc anywhere from $30M to $50M+ per year is wasting money and time. If they want more than $10 to $15M AAV, let someone else pay them. If by Y3, you don't feel your QB is worth a big extension/payday, don't pick up the option and draft a guy that year. Let your guy compete with the kid and trade the veteran to a team willing to sell his fanbase fool's gold.
Next year, Young, Stroud, and Richardson will be entering Y4 and will need their 5th year options picked up. If those teams think they have a franchise QB, either give them a long term deal or trade them. There's no need to wait the extra year. If Stroud has a year somewhere between his rookie season and last year, I'm willing to bet Houston would get at least a first round pick and more for him. Giving him $40M+ AAV isn't going to make your team better. Save the money and build the rest of the team to help the new/young guy.
I do agree to a point.
you also need to consider the fan base too.
Dak will never win a superbowl, but the team made the playoffs every year. as long as that continues, I can see why the team wanted to re sign him.
sometimes that process of drafting and developing a new QB can be real hard on the fan base. and if you swing and miss, you are now looking at a minimum of 5-6 years until you are competitive again. Thats an awful lot of revenue you are giving up to try to find THE ONE.
though I think enough signs were there that Dallas likely should have bailed on Dak rather than give him that massive deal last year (was it last year? might have been the year before)
I do think Stroud is likely a keeper. Mayfield I'm still on the fence. he likely fits into the same category as Dak when Dak finished his rookie deal. he probably gets TB into the playoffs. I dont think he gets them a superbowl. but for ownership, that might actually be good enough.
-
3 hours ago, Maximum Overkill said:I watched his entire pro day. It was extremely average IMO. He couldn't hit guys in stride, especially beyond 10 yards. Receivers often had to slow down. That'll get a WR killed in the NFL. I'm not impressed.
That was all with no defense or pressure.
pro day is fine, but I actually prefer to look at game tape.
a pro day doesnt necessarily do a great job of simulating game conditions.
either way, when I see reports all over the map like this it generally means I need to look at the tape and see for myself. no biggie there. I enjoy watching football anyhow.
when there is good concensus on a player I dont often come to a different conclusion when I watch the tape. it does happen but not a lot. for me, these are the situations where I do extra research simply because the opinions on the kid are all over the map. That also means this is potentially where a large steal could be had because the player could be undervalued. I've seen enough good traits in the scouting report that I feel extra research is warranted. it may even be a situation where his value will largely depend on where he actually lands. Nice thing about these guys who are ranked as a late first or early 2nd round pick is that they could actually be drafted by a good team and properly developed.. if drafted top 8 or top 10 its likely expected that the kid will see significant time on the field before his rookie year is done.
-
4 hours ago, DocNiner said:Yes, if the Steelers were able to sign Rodgers and put together a package to get Purdy I think they'd jump at the chance to get him. I just hope it doesn't happen as.I'm fine with Purdy being our QB now and in the future. There have been other QBs to win a superbowl who I consider not as talented as Purdy but it takes more than a QB to win a title. It takes a whole yeam both offensively and defensively. If the 49ers put competent people around Purdy on offense and Saleh can help the defense then I surely think Purdy will win a superbowl.
I think purdy doesnt do as well in Pittsburgh. he had some very good WR, a top notch coach, and a great offense as a whole.
Pittsburgh just doesnt have all of those things. and when things are missing from that combo a player like purdy could have his faults more exposed than before.
I think in Pittsburgh he is meh. a little better than Wilson was but not as good as he was in San fran overall. the last year with CMC hurt and WR in and out of the lineup may be a better indicator of what he does in pittsburgh. he wont be quite that bad, but That is likely more in the ballpark of the kind of numbers he would put up in Pittsburgh.
-
21 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:Really? My son and I were excited for this until we saw the trailers. I figured it would be terrible. We still want to see it though.
It was pretty decent I must say. they also did a reasonable job of doing it in a way that people who dont minecraft will understand it.
while its not the best I've ever seen its pretty good. definitely worth a watch.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, DocNiner said:Normally I would say that this deal could work but the problem I have with it is what to do with the 21st pick in the first round. Surely Ward is gone and likely that Shedeur Sanders is gone before pick 21. We'd have to have a plan in place in case Rodgers gets injured or completely falls flat on his face in terms of production. If we could take that 21st pick and move up some to take Jaxson Dart as I feel he could easily be gone by pick 21. Then there's still the chance that Rodgers plays better than average and gets then49ers into the playoffs. Yes he still has talent and 4 MVPs to his resume but he is 41 so I wonder if the talent he has left in the tank is worth risking just so he can play on the team he wanted to go to when he was drafted. In the end I would say NO to any deal for Rodgers and continue to roll with Purdy. If he fits Shanny's system then why not go with the guy you know can play. He did get himself to a superbowl so I'm pretty sure he's mega hungry and still has a sizeable Chipotle his shoulder to prove people wrong.
I agree.
if you dont have a QB, Rodgers is a nice gamble.
if you do have a QB who is at least decent...... I'm not sure its worth the risk for a 41 year old QB who may or may not still be able to play.
-
2 hours ago, DocNiner said:When I seen this on Facebook it was.speculated that the Steelers would give up their.1st round pick in exchange for Purdy and send Rodgers to the 49ers. Heck the Steelers haven't even signed Rodgers a d O think it'd be a bad.move for the 49ers with gettjng.Rodgers and pick #21. Don't like that scenario at all. Yes Purdy has developed but he'll go into the season with a bunch of previous players gone so I guess we'll see what he's made of then. Not sure if Aiyuk will be ready but they need.him badly. Hopefully CMC can stay healthy but that's a shaky situation. I do look for Ricky Pearsall to make a big leap this year. If we.can stay.healthy we can make some noise even without Rodgers and his traveling circus.
my fear with purdy, is that he can perform in a Shanny system but not anywhere else. He was drafted because he suited the system moreso than for his talent (though it turns out he was more talented than what people generally saw in the pre draft scouting reports)
of course, I could be wrong there.
but I can see where this type of deal would work. Steelers sign Rodgers, retain a certain amount of salary in sending him to San Fran and get Purdy in return (presumably at a cheaper price than theyd normally pay as I cant see this as a straight across trade)
-
I thought he retired last year.
-
8 hours ago, Maximum Overkill said:It's time for Josh Allen to step up, he couldn't even beat a horrible KC squad to go to the Superbowl. I'm not sure why guys like Allen, Lamar, Burrow and Herbert get such long leashes. The eye test isn't good enough, go do it.
Hey, I would hardly call a team thats been in 5 of the last 6 superbowls horrible.
sure I'll fully admit they are not as good as some of the superbowl winning teams of the past, but the bar there is sky high. Team didnt lose a lot of games this year so I think that comment is a bit out of line (unless you are suggesting the whole league is trash except for Philly.... in which case I'll just write it off as a homer comment)
-
people definitely see what they wanna see. and hear what they wanna hear.
from my perspective, the reports on him seem to be all over the map. I'm very serious about this. I see one report saying his pro day was brilliant. another saying it was a bust.
which makes me wonder if some of the people writing these reviews even know anything about football.
I'm gonna try to check out some of the tape on this kid before the draft as clearly there is no concensus about this kid. Granted, when you are not the top ranked QB this might be the reason. But I do have an idea of what I like in a QB prospect and based on the one scouting report, he has at least some of the traits you want to see. From what I can tell, the one thing I'll say is when there is no pressure, hes not gonna make an unforced error.
I fully acknowledge there are not a lot of occasions where there is no pressure at the NFL level but you'd be surprised at how many unforced errors are made by QB's who are drafted early in round 1.
-
14 hours ago, DocNiner said:He wants to be the starter and they are NOT going to jeopardize the development of Brock Purdy
Hey, I dont think there is a whole lot more development for purdy. hes going into his 4th year as a pro.
I think if the 49 ers bring in Rodgers, they NEED to dump Purdy. I dont think there is any question about that.
and are you gonna dump Purdy for an aging vet who might give you one good year (two at most)
I think not. but I have seen an awful lot of strange things happen, so I wont completely rule it out but I dont see this happening unless Shanny thinks Purdy isnt the QB of the future. (which leads me to say they absolutely NEED to trade Purdy if they sign Rodgers.)
-
1 hour ago, jrokh said:He already proved he can play. and play well with a terrible line. If any rookie QB in this draft could excel with a sub-par line, it would be Sanders...
well, the good news is, hes not the consensus top QB in the draft so he can likely be had without breaking the bank
-
Just now, Mufaletta said:The point is the Cowboys are trash
you didnt need to go through all of that to make your point. lots here would tell you that straight away lol
-
10 minutes ago, jrokh said:he had one of the worst lines in front of him in college football, and he was more than good... Sure the NFL is different, but what rookie QB excels with a bad line? Bo Nix had one of if not the top-rated pass blocking lines in the NFL...
I am just telling you what I saw in the scouting report. it does remind me a lot of Dak prescotts scouting report when he turned pro. he was not a first round pick. All I am doing is telling you what I see in the report.
to that end, what I see in his scouting report reminds me a lot of what I read in Daks when he turned pro. Thats all I am saying.
it feels like hes a QB that need a line in front of him but he does scramble and that mitigates (but does not eliminate) this need somewhat.
maybe he didnt have a good line in front of him when he played and this likely is part of the reason hes given a bit of a pass on the scouting report.
I dont think hes the top QB in this draft, but I do think he is draftable and in the right situation, can be a player. but his ability to perform may be situational. (translation late first or 2nd round pick)
-
23 hours ago, Mufaletta said:In 2002, the NFL achieved it's current size of 32 teams, and re-aligned into 8 divisions of 4 teams. Since that time, the league has been dominated by 8 teams, which have shown consistency and the ability to get into their Conference Championship game.
Conference Championship Game appearances since 2002:
Patriots 12, Chiefs 7, Niners 7, Eagles 7, Packers 6, Steelers 5, Colts 4, Ravens 4.
20 other teams, including the vaunted Bills, have found their way into their Conference championship game at some point since then, but none of them consistently . The Cowboys, Dolphins, Texans and Browns haven't even achieved this once.
For as much run as the Bills and Cowboys receive in the national sports media, they are both trash.
well, this isnt entirely abnormal.
and most of those teams had franchise QB who could get them there.
I'm guessing if you look at the teams with no appearances, most of them havent a QB who can consistently play or they have a carousel of QB who may have been highly drafted, but who couldnt get it done at the pro level.
I guess my question to you is what is your point that you are trying to make?
-
hes a QB that needs a good line in front of him to perform.
his scouting report doesnt read all that different from that of Dak Prescott. he makes bad decisions when the pass rush is in his face (paraphrased)
he makes plays with his legs when there is nothing there just like Dak (but hes not as good a runner as dak is)
like Dak, hes a situational QB who can perform if the line in front of him is good. Dak just got lucky in that he was drafted by the team with the leagues best O line which covered up a lot of his weaknesses.
if drafted into a similar situation he might be ok. but the line in front of him NEEDS to be good. Otherwise the kid likely doesnt perform.
are there any teams out there with a top O line in need of a QB?
-
3 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:You could be right. Looking at their roster, of their OL's, only 4 players were drafted by the Giants... only 1 guy started all year. The other 3 had 16 starts among them.... one of which started 6 because he only played 6.
I cannot say for sure I'm 100% right but its still an educated guess with a couple cases that appear to fit the theory.
you never truly know unless you are in the room. but I have found the best coaches will tweak or even change the system they run to take advantage of the skillsets of their players.
the worst coaches will try to make a square peg fit into a round hole and make the player adapt to the system. sometimes the player can do it. Sometimes not. but typically in that scenario the GM NEEDS to draft players who fit the system to a T, otherwise you are churning through players at a pace thats not sustainable.
This is largely the difference between college coaches and pro level coaches. in college, you can easily recruit players that fit your system far easier than it is to draft them at the pro level where other teams running a similar system may draft those players ahead of you.
-
I actually see some similar comments compared to Dak Prescott's scouting report when he came out of school.
I seem to recall the scouting report on Dak was hes not that good when the pass rush is in his face. but then he landed in Dallas (who had what may have been the best O line in the NFL at that time) and proceeded to win the starting job once Romo got hurt.
I think Dak is a better runner than him but both of them could be a similar style of QB at the NFL level. The QB run will be used when the pass play breaks down but wont be a regular play call by the offense.
I do think in a similar environment behind a good O line this kid can be good. Might need a red shirt year to get to that point (especially if the O line is not doing a great job in pass protection)
-
On 3/31/2025 at 3:58 PM, TBayXXXVII said:https://corner.bigblueinteractive.com/index.php?mode=2&thread=653435
PFF rated 3 (2 starters), of their OL's among the worst 15 on the team. Their best OL in this group was Schmitz, with a 61.4 rating and was 35th among league Centers last year.
Eluemunor had a rating of 63.2 which was 65th among 141 Tackles rated.
Van Roten had a rating of 63.4, which was 61st among guards rated.
PFN ranked their OLine as 28th.
Sharp Football Analysis, had them ranked 32nd.
Need a password for PFF, but I heard on the Fantasy sports channel on Sirius/XM that they had the Giants at 23rd.
They apparently still have a pretty bad OLine and/or, really hope their players improve.the issue I think they have had in the past, is they would bring in players from a different scheme (ie. patriots) that dont necessarily fit the Giants blocking scheme.
so its possible that the issue could be scheme/fit related moreso than talent related. granted the player needs to take some of the responsibility, but so does the coaching staff. part of your job as a coach is putting your player in the best position to be successful. if the players dont fully fit the scheme, thats partly a gm problem but also the coach also needs to coach them up and/or tweak the scheme to take advantage of the individual player strengths while minimizing their weaknesses.
-
hey I went to click on the video tape examples that are broken out and it says video unavailable. not sure what that is about but thought you should be aware.
-
19 hours ago, Maximum Overkill said:You need a GM who can draft and a coach who can develop young players. The Giants can't do either.
I promise you that the Giants will ruin Nabers just like they ruined Barkley and every other player that's run through that organization.
well, Nabers looks like hes already fine.
yeah, player development is certainly part GM and part coach but the GM needs to take some responsibility. I'd say at this point they have struggled to get their young O linemen to play consistently well enough. this has contributed to other issues elsewhere in the offense.
-
2 hours ago, jrokh said:Not really true. They have invested heavily in the Oline already. Last Off-season they signed Runyan JR to be starting LG, and Jermaine Elemunor to be starting RT. These weren't bargain signings they were 10+million players. Their Center is a 2nd rd pick. When their starting 5 were all healthy they performed at an above average level, at least according to PFF. Their depth was the biggest problem, which is why they signed 2 swing Tackles this offseason. RG is the one spot to potentially upgrade, but OL is not their biggest need. QB, and DT are far bigger needs. Their OL is far from great but is it is serviceable enough....
fair enough. the sample size of games I saw was small, and the line was not good in those games. I just assumed the line was still bad.
Though in a cap world you still need to replace those 10 M players at some point. as signed free agents, Those guys are (I am guessing) a 2-3 year solution and because of their age, durability and good health wont be as good so depth is more important with guys like that starting. so drafting their eventual replacement should be a priority (just not an immediate one). but maybe you dont need to spend a first/second round pick. you can likely spend a 3rd or 4th rounder and develop them over a year or two while adding some depth to the mix.
and yeah I can see the DT being a priority. The D was not that scary
-
Just now, ICEMAN said:I think that the Pats are pretty much keeping all options open at this point. I think that right now it's #1 - Hunter, #2 - Carter and #3 - Drop back and take a Tackle, or Tet/Tyler Warren. Regardless of what happens, I firmly believe that they will trade back into the backend of round #1 and take the best available Tackle.
ICEMAN
well, if building a team this is what I like to see. you cant have your young QB operating without a good line. Ideally a great line. thing is, you can get by with a lower talent RB if your line is good. so many good things can happen in the offense when the line plays well and does what it needs to do. I'd argue its the most important area to win the battle on the field. If you control the LOS, you control the game (for the most part)
-
4 hours ago, Bills04 said:You can pretty much write IN INK - Pats take LSU OT Will Campbell.
well, I wouldnt argue with that If I was a pats fan (which I am not)
I assume the signing of Diggs was to give a weapon to Maye, and to allow them to address other needs in the draft. OT likely being one of those needs.
if this is the path they are taking.... I dont mind it.
-
7 hours ago, DocNiner said:There's no doubt Nabers is very talented and will go high.in fantasy drafts. I'm tempering my expectations for him slightly. For sure the Giants will be behind in games which should call for more passing. Thus Nabers targets should be pretty high as they dkn't have much else currently in the receiver room. If be some chance the first 2 picks in the NFL draft are QBs maybe the Giants should consider drafting Ashton Jeanty. If they do that may actually help Nabers production. They let Barkley walk to win a title and Tyron Tracy's ok but not on the level of Jeanty. So if they're not in live with Shadeur Sanders then they should take Jeanty and look for a QB later or in next years draft as they could have a high draft pick eligible for the Arch Manning sweepstakes.
On another note if the Giants continue to not get a franchise QB then could there be a possibility that Nabers walks after his rookie contract? Of course depends too on whether they franchise tag him. Still.thoigh could there be a possibility that Nabers looks to travel.south and hook up with QB Jayden Daniel's and the Commanders. Anything could happen but it'd be a shame if the Giants were to squander this Uber talented receiver.
I still think the O line is by far the most urgent need for this team
it is my belief that you need AT LEAST a passable O line for the offense to perform at anywhere close to a good level. look where Sequons production went when he left New York and went to Philly. Thats what a good O line gives you.
I dont know how realistic this is.....but if they can trade back 2 or 3 spots and get another high pick (maybe a 2nd) they could maybe target Jeanty and then use both of their seconds to draft interior O linemen (presumably guards) and provided those picks turn out, this team would likely be able to manage in that scenario. Might take up to a year to get those guards up to speed at the NFL level, but the team will be reasonably well equipped going forward.
UPDATE: New team for Mr. Rodgers - Pittsburgh
in FFToday Board
Posted
yeah but a CMC and his threat to run and in the short pass game significantly changes how a team plays you.
yeah rodgers is the one with more TD. I keep telling people his season wasnt THAT bad other than the yardage. and honestly I expected the first couple games hed be a bit rusty. tack on a couple hundred yards to account for that. are we having the same conversation if he has 4100 yards along with 28 TD and 11 INT? maybe. but maybe not. Jets lost a lot of one score games. that might have made their win loss record almost palatable.
and keep in mind Rodgers didnt have the weapons purdy had. and one of his weapons arrived mid season. it is a tough thing for a WR to change offenses in mid season
another drag on the offense to some extent.
personally, with numbers like what Rodgers had, the team should have been a .500 team. who really let them down was the defense. I thought the D was gonna be top 5 and they were nowhere close.
to that end, I can see why the rumour is there. but the reality is that Rodgers is still on the wrong side of the age 40. If you are San Fran the only reason you entertain this is if you truly think Purdy is not the QB of the future. and you cannot have Purdy stay if you bring in Rodgers. that would invite a QB controversy. you need to let him go if you sign Rodgers. but I suspect this is all speculation on a move that wont happen. But Shanny does see things many of us dont. so I wouldnt say its a lock not to happen. but I think its more likely he brings in a retread first round QB who didnt cut it and tries to rehab him. or if any of the top prospects at QB drop into round 2 maybe he takes one of them.
but I'd be surprised if this ends up being the move.