Bridgewater to Broncos

[AxeElf 787]

Looks like the Broncos are acquiring Bridgewater.  That's a pretty good move for them, as they can't seem to make up their mind about Lock.  Now they can have a healthy QB competition, and if Lock can't step up, they have a quality option without having to sell the farm for a young QB prospect.

[IGotWorms 3,300]

Definite trade down target if one of the top 5 QBs falls to 9.

[polecatt 399]

Is Bridgewater really a quality option?

He's a good back up but the Panthers tried him as the starter last season, and he's just simply not good enough.

I don't know if Lock is quality starting material in the NFL, but I know Bridgewater isn't.

[TBayXXXVII 2,106]

18 minutes ago, polecatt said:

Is Bridgewater really a quality option?

He's a good back up but the Panthers tried him as the starter last season, and he's just simply not good enough.

I don't know if Lock is quality starting material in the NFL, but I know Bridgewater isn't.

He's a "Just in case" guy... that's why it only took a 6th rounder to get him.  If they're not able to move up and/or draft a QB in the first round, they have someone to at least push Locke or be there if necessary.  I don't think their intention is to make him their franchise QB.

[cmh6476 748]

[jrokh 567]

This probably rules out a trade up but if one of those Fields/Lance/Mac Jones guys is there at 9 I’d bet they snag him...

[weepaws 2,452]

They’ll clearly take one of those qbs if they fall to them. 

Bridgewater is a good back up option, but Lock is no lock. 

 

[AxeElf 787]

2 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

He's a "Just in case" guy... that's why it only took a 6th rounder to get him.  If they're not able to move up and/or draft a QB in the first round, they have someone to at least push Locke or be there if necessary.  I don't think their intention is to make him their franchise QB.

He IS a "just in case" guy, but I think this rules out them drafting a QB prospect entirely--Bridgewater is the "just in case" Lock doesn't work out.  'Cause they kind of want him to work out, but they didn't have much of a backup plan, as demonstrated last season.  So now they can give Lock a legitimate shot to win the job, and still have a proven and competent veteran QB on standby instead of hoping that a rookie prospect pans out or leaning on Rypien and Driskell again.

If one of those name QB prospects DOES drop in the draft, they're in a position to field offers from teams delighted to have a shot at one.  But it doesn't really make sense for them to draft one at this point, when they could turn that draft capital into several needed position players.

[weepaws 2,452]

Disagree, if one those top Qbs fall to them at nine they will without question take that Qb.  

 

[TBayXXXVII 2,106]

3 minutes ago, AxeElf said:

He IS a "just in case" guy, but I think this rules out them drafting a QB prospect entirely--Bridgewater is the "just in case" Lock doesn't work out.  'Cause they kind of want him to work out, but they didn't have much of a backup plan, as demonstrated last season.  So now they can give Lock a legitimate shot to win the job, and still have a proven and competent veteran QB on standby instead of hoping that a rookie prospect pans out or leaning on Rypien and Driskell again.

If one of those name QB prospects DOES drop in the draft, they're in a position to field offers from teams delighted to have a shot at one.  But it doesn't really make sense for them to draft one at this point, when they could turn that draft capital into several needed position players.

I don't really follow the Broncos, I just react to their moves. You could be right that they want Locke to pan out, but if the rumors are true that they wanted to move up, then I don't think they're all that convinced about his future.  I think they traded for Bridgewater because the asking price to move into the top 5 was too expensive.  I think that if for some reason the asking price comes down, I can see them making a move to take a QB.  I can also see them taking one at #9.  They, like pretty much everyone else has holes they need to fill.  They might be better off though dropping back a few picks if a QB falls to them.

[jrokh 567]

As always the evidence is there if you look closer. All Denver gave up was a 6th round pick and the Panthers are paying 70% of the 2021 guaranteed money. so a 6th round pick and 3 million guaranteed is peanuts. They know Lock stinks and are hoping Teddy B lights a fire under his arse, but Justin Fields and Trey Lance are superior players to either of those mediocre options...

[AxeElf 787]

7 minutes ago, jrokh said:

Justin Fields and Trey Lance are superior players to either of those mediocre options...

You don't know that.

The Broncos are smart enough to know that they don't know that too.

[jrokh 567]

7 minutes ago, AxeElf said:

You don't know that.

The Broncos are smart enough to know that they don't know that too.

That's true, either one could suck equally to Lock...

[AxeElf 787]

17 minutes ago, jrokh said:

That's true, either one could suck equally to Lock...

Lock missed 4 games to injuries, but he had 4 pretty solid games too (1180 combined yards, 11 TDs, 2 INTs)--and his top 2 WRs were rookies.  Heck, he was essentially a rookie himself.  Now that they all have a little more experience under their belts, and Sutton is back, Lock is bit of a sleeper this year.  The signing of Bridgewater pretty much "locks" in his chance to shine this season.

[weepaws 2,452]

He also had weeks 6-11. 

He completed 54% of his passes and threw 6 tds while also tossing 11 ints. 

Thats not very good like . 

Thanks. 

[AxeElf 787]

I was wrong about one thing, though (hey, my genius pertains to FANTASY football, not the NFL)--I assumed that Darnold would be backing up Bridgewater in Carolina, at least at first.  Now it seems like the Panthers have kind of painted themselves in a corner at QB; all-in on Darnold--OR, they've put themselves back in the QB derby picking at #8 (right before the Broncos).

[weepaws 2,452]

I think the Panthers have made the mistake imo of being all in on Darnold. 

I also thought he would be backing up Bridgewater, who I think is the better Qb. 

Plus having Mccaffery back and if he can stay healthy that’s a bonus that Bridgewater didn’t have last season.  

 

[DrG 94]

So the Broncos will be paying their backup qb about 3m a year. Elway seems to believe he can find that diamond in the rough qb. We shall see.

[Gepetto 979]

I think Lock can be a long term starter in the NFL.  I've seen flashes I really like from Lock.  Broncos are dumb if they don't have confidence in him and screw up his career with them.

[Gepetto 979]

2 hours ago, weepaws said:

I think the Panthers have made the mistake imo of being all in on Darnold. 

I also thought he would be backing up Bridgewater, who I think is the better Qb. 

Plus having Mccaffery back and if he can stay healthy that’s a bonus that Bridgewater didn’t have last season.  

 

I agree with all of what you posted there.

[Ray_T 587]

4 hours ago, weepaws said:

I think the Panthers have made the mistake imo of being all in on Darnold. 

I also thought he would be backing up Bridgewater, who I think is the better Qb. 

Plus having Mccaffery back and if he can stay healthy that’s a bonus that Bridgewater didn’t have last season.  

 

no.   They paid too much for him to be a backup.

 

a 2nd, a 4th is almost as good as a first round pick.   when you pay that much for a player, I think the writing is on the wall.  Maybe they have a QB competition, but you already know they want the new guy to win said competition.

I think if it doesnt work out, they likely get a top 5 pick in the next draft.   Top 3 if Darnold is really bad.

if he turns it around and achieves his potential they got a starter for a reasonable price.

considering how bad the Jets organization as a whole has been over the last number of years, it is reasonable to assume it is possible that the problem may not have actually been Darnold.  it could have been the organization.

I think it was a fair risk to take.  we all know Teddy and how good HE is.  I think he will never be better than a low end starting QB or a top end backup.  At his age, I have my doubts he will ever progress further in his career.    Surely it is possible.  but he had some pretty good offensive weapons to work with last year and only put up mediocre numbers at best.

Darnold was on a team that was all around bad.  Defense couldnt stop anyone.  Offense was disfunctional.   They dropped Bell, their starting RB partway through the year.  when you see this sort of thing happen, its hard not to suspect he may have been part of the disfunction.  You dont normally drop your starter who you paid big money to get in midseason.

I have my doubts whether the coaching there was any good either.  

I think that would be a tough situation for any young QB to succeed in.

So if you ask yourself if he was put into a position to succeed my answer has to be No.  He was not.

If the panthers people liked Darnold prior to the time the Jets drafted him and if their people feel he was never put into a position to take full advantage of his strengths in New York,(as I just suggested) why wouldnt they roll the dice to see if they can turn him around. 

I think its at least a fair gamble.   I dont think his floor is much lower than Bridgewaters is.  but his ceiling is potentially higher and he is a number of years younger so there is still the chance the kid gets better.  

The talent in the offense is better here than it was in New York.   If the coaching is also better than what he got in New York I cant see him doing worse. 

Maybe he will have a nice season. 

Personally I predict a similar or slightly better season than the one Bridgewater just put up but its hard to say for sure because the floor is lower and the ceiling is higher than it was with Bridgewater.  So the range of value is not exactly known.

in standard leagues starting only one QB, he has no value right now and will likely go undrafted.  I am not recommending you draft him in this format, but hes a player to watch.  if he shows signs that the game is slowing down for him, maybe you pick him up on waivers.

in my 2 QB league (auction) hes a guy I'd target  if I could get him for less than 5 bucks (which is the price low end starters or high end backups will go for in my league)

At that price if your QB starts for more than half the games and can cover bye weeks, your minimal investment is ok.

 

 

 

[weepaws 2,452]

I think Bridgewater had a ok ff season, he did avg 20 points per game. 

And the surrounding talent level with the Panthers is greater than what we see on the Jets. 

Darnold will also have another advantage that Bridgewater didn’t have last season, a healthy Mccaffery.  

I still think Bridgewater is the better Qb of the two.  

Thanks. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,106]

I think Bridgewater being traded ensures that Carolina finishes in 2nd place in the NFC South this year.  I think Darnold is a solid QB.  With the weapons the Panthers have, I think they'll be a .500 team, maybe better.  They'll have a fairly easy schedule, so 9 wins could be in store for them.  I think the Panthers draft the Northwestern OT at pick 8.

[weepaws 2,452]

Don’t think Darnold by himself is worthy of four more wins. 

I think the return of the Panthers best player Mccaffery would be the biggest reason for four more wins. 

I think a third place finish is the best they will do next season.  

[TBayXXXVII 2,106]

Bridgewater is a nice QB who you'd love to have if your starter gets hurt, nothing more.  He's not a starter.  I think Darnold is a starter in the NFL and I think the average starter is worth a minimum of 2+ wins over a great backup.  The rest, yes, it will come from McCaffrey.  To note, the better a starter Darnold is, the more likely they hit 10+ wins.  I don't think either Atlanta or New Orleans gets more than 6 wins.

[weepaws 2,452]

 

With a healthy Mccaffery the Panthers could have won another two plus games, that would have given them 7 or so wins. 

I think Darnold isn’t better than Bridgewater.  

Also think the Falcons will be better than four wins.  

[Ray_T 587]

4 hours ago, weepaws said:

I think Bridgewater had a ok ff season, he did avg 20 points per game. 

And the surrounding talent level with the Panthers is greater than what we see on the Jets. 

Darnold will also have another advantage that Bridgewater didn’t have last season, a healthy Mccaffery.  

I still think Bridgewater is the better Qb of the two.  

Thanks. 

he was mediocre and it was the best season of his career.

also, he was a better fantasy QB than he was an actual QB.  if he was a better actual QB the team may have won more games.

its tough to bet on another career year from a guy who I think will be 28 or 29 years old this season.   its not impossible.  but it is highly unlikely.

Darnold is still at a point in his career where hes learning and improving.     Thats the reason why the decision was made.   potential.

I fully agree he could even be the better QB today, but a year or  two from  now,  that may no longer be the case

[weepaws 2,452]

7 minutes ago, Ray_T said:

he was mediocre and it was the best season of his career.

also, he was a better fantasy QB than he was an actual QB.  if he was a better actual QB the team may have won more games.

its tough to bet on another career year from a guy who I think will be 28 or 29 years old this season.   its not impossible.  but it is highly unlikely.

Darnold is still at a point in his career where hes learning and improving.     Thats the reason why the decision was made.   potential.

I fully agree he could even be the better QB today, but a year or  two from  now,  that may no longer be the case

I think the Panthers would have won more games if Mccaffery had played in more games. 

I would give them at least two more wins with Mccaffery.  

How do you know that Darnold is at the point of his career that he’s improving? 

How do you know he won’t flop as the Qb of the Panthers? 

Until I see other wise, I’m saying Bridgewater is the better Qb right now  

 

[TimHauck 1,795]

17 hours ago, Ray_T said:

I think if it doesnt work out, they likely get a top 5 pick in the next draft.   Top 3 if Darnold is really bad.

if he turns it around and achieves his potential they got a starter for a reasonable price.

....

Personally I predict a similar or slightly better season than the one Bridgewater just put up but its hard to say for sure because the floor is lower and the ceiling is higher than it was with Bridgewater.  So the range of value is not exactly known.

100% this.    The Panthers aren't really "all in" on Darnold, unless we're talking just this season then sure.   But if he stinks then they get a top 5-10 pick next year and probably take a QB.

The question, and possibly most likely scenario, will be what do they do if they win 7-9 games and pick in the 15ish range.    Do they still take a QB there?   Stick with Darnold another year?  Who knows.

[Ray_T 587]

4 minutes ago, weepaws said:

I think the Panthers would have won more games if Mccaffery had played in more games. 

I would give them at least two more wins with Mccaffery.  

How do you know that Darnold is at the point of his career that he’s improving? 

How do you know he won’t flop as the Qb of the Panthers? 

Until I see other wise, I’m saying Bridgewater is the better Qb right now  

 

We will have to agree to disagree.

I'm saying is if  last season is  as good as it gets for  Bridgewater (and  he  turns 29 in November) then I would  conclude  he  will never  take  any team  to the  superbowl. 

You can take that to the bank.

Darnold is still  a young man.   he  had interrupptions to each season. 2 due to injury one due to mono.   Hes been in a terrible organization with some disfunction (Leveon Bell) and some subpar coaching.  

I truly think he is the better talent.  but he was in a terrible situation.  put Teddy into his situation I dont honestly think he does better.

As of this moment they are pretty close but Darnold has the gift of youth.  Most of the time if a QB is going to breakout it will happen in the first 3-5 years of their career.  Darnold is still in this window so I would say Darnold is in this window and Bridgewater isnt.

My biggest concern with Darnold is his abillity to stay healthy.   granted Id say its too early to give the label, but if he gets hurt again I'd give it to him.   If I was the GM in Carolina I'd have made the same move.

The rationale:   if he improves significantly (as is often the case with a younger QB) you got a QB.   if he doesnt, you start him the whole year and pick top 5 and likely get the QB you need next year.

 

 

 

 

[weepaws 2,452]

I never thought Bridgewater was good enough to take the Panthers to the super bowl. 

But neither is Darnold, but Darnold does have one big advantage over Bridgewater this season, a healthy Mccaffery. 

So super bowl games aside, I still think Bridgewater is better than Darnold. 

I think they’ll win more games with Mccaffery back, they won’t have a top five draft pick. 

[TimHauck 1,795]

1 hour ago, weepaws said:

I think the Panthers would have won more games if Mccaffery had played in more games. 

I would give them at least two more wins with Mccaffery.  

How do you know that Darnold is at the point of his career that he’s improving? 

How do you know he won’t flop as the Qb of the Panthers? 

Until I see other wise, I’m saying Bridgewater is the better Qb right now  

 

Of course it's "until I see otherwise," that was the whole point of trading for Darnold and why they didn't have to give up a ton to get him - he has the potential to be good, he just hasn't shown it yet.

Sure, he may not end up being any better than Bridgewater, but that doesn't mean Bridgewater is good.  You literally just said earlier you think the Panthers could have won 7 games if McCaffrey was healthy.  Uh, 7 wins isn't that good.

Also, McCaffrey being healthy isn't a guarantee, and even if he is, he doesn't guarantee them 7 wins.  He played all 16 games in 2018 and 2019 - in 2018 they won 7 and they had Cam Newton, and in 2019 they only won 5 (they also of course still had Kuechly both of those years).   Hopefully Darnold is at least better than Kyle Allen, but if he stinks, 4-6 wins isn't unlikely even with McCaffrey.

If they win 7+ games, I think it's proof that Darnold is at least as good as Bridgewater.

 

[AxeElf 787]

2 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

If they win 7+ games, I think it's proof that Darnold is at least as good as Bridgewater.

Judging solely by win total is a pretty poor way to compare QBs.

[weepaws 2,452]

1 minute ago, TimHauck said:

Of course it's "until I see otherwise," that was the whole point of trading for Darnold and why they didn't have to give up a ton to get him - he has the potential to be good, he just hasn't shown it yet.

Sure, he may not end up being any better than Bridgewater, but that doesn't mean Bridgewater is good.  You literally just said earlier you think the Panthers could have won 7 games if McCaffrey was healthy.  Uh, 7 wins isn't that good.

Also, McCaffrey being healthy isn't a guarantee, and even if he is, he doesn't guarantee them 7 wins.  He played all 16 games in 2018 and 2019 - in 2018 they won 7 and they had Cam Newton, and in 2019 they only won 5 (they also of course still had Kuechly both of those years).   Hopefully Darnold is at least better than Kyle Allen, but if he stinks, 4-6 wins isn't unlikely even with McCaffrey.

 

It doesn’t mean Bridgewater is good, didn’t say he is good, but he’s better than Darnold. 

Didn’t say 7 wins is good, but it’s more than the five they won last season. 

I know the point of them trading for Darnold, younger player, doesn’t mean he’s going to be the better player, now does it? 

 

 

[TimHauck 1,795]

1 minute ago, weepaws said:

It doesn’t mean Bridgewater is good, didn’t say he is good, but he’s better than Darnold. 

Didn’t say 7 wins is good, but it’s more than the five they won last season. 

I know the point of them trading for Darnold, younger player, doesn’t mean he’s going to be the better player, now does it? 

 

 

No it doesn't, but if you know the point of trading for Darnold, why do you keep repeatedly saying that Bridgewater is better?   Yes, he's better...as of now.   But Darnold has a chance to be better than what Bridgewater has shown.   Bridgewater most likely doesn't.    We know what Bridgewater is...there's not really any point in keeping him around any longer.   Might as well take a chance on guy like Darnold, if it doesn't work out then draft a QB next year.

[weepaws 2,452]

Because I think he’s better, and you said yes he is better as of now. So we agree. 

Darnold does have a chance to be better, doesn’t mean he will be, I say he won’t.  

And I do agree that Bridgewater doesn’t have a chance to prove he’s better than himself. 

Right now we know what Darnold is also right? As of right now he’s not as good as Bridgewater, it’s what you even said.  

Good reason to keep him around, what if Darnold goes down and goes down hard, what if Darnold flops , some good reasons to keep around Bridgewater that you even agree with is better right now. 

It might not be so easy to draft a Qb, Don’t know how it will all play out. 

Also I was having what I thought was a another very good conversation with Ray, in which usually ends with he agree to disagree. 

Thanks  

 

[TimHauck 1,795]

6 hours ago, weepaws said:

Because I think he’s better, and you said yes he is better as of now. So we agree. 

Darnold does have a chance to be better, doesn’t mean he will be, I say he won’t.  

And I do agree that Bridgewater doesn’t have a chance to prove he’s better than himself. 

Right now we know what Darnold is also right? As of right now he’s not as good as Bridgewater, it’s what you even said.  

Good reason to keep him around, what if Darnold goes down and goes down hard, what if Darnold flops , some good reasons to keep around Bridgewater that you even agree with is better right now. 

It might not be so easy to draft a Qb, Don’t know how it will all play out. 

Also I was having what I thought was a another very good conversation with Ray, in which usually ends with he agree to disagree. 

Thanks  

 

I think we don't really know what Darnold is.   He's not even 24 yet and has spent 3 seasons with a horrible organization.   He may not prove to be much better than he's shown, but most seem to agree that there's a lot better chance of that than Bridgewater all the sudden doing the same.

For that reason, there's no reason to keep Bridgewater IMO (I and many Panthers fans weren't happy when they got him in the first place).   Either try to find someone else at QB (which they did), or tank and go for a higher pick.  Which is basically what I bet will happen if Darnold either sucks or gets hurt.   

Of course draft picks aren't a sure thing.   My guess is they were hoping to trade for Watson before the legal issues...

[weepaws 2,452]

I’m glad for you. 

But my opinion, and yours, is right now, Bridgewater is the better Qb. 

And that’s why I keep saying he is, because he is.  

But glad that you and the entire Panthers nation are sleeping better .  

Thanks. 

[TimHauck 1,795]

3 hours ago, weepaws said:

I’m glad for you. 

But my opinion, and yours, is right now, Bridgewater is the better Qb. 

And that’s why I keep saying he is, because he is.  

But glad that you and the entire Panthers nation are sleeping better .  

Thanks. 

The goal in trading for Darnold wasn't just him being "better than Bridgewater."  It was to see if they could potentially have a long-term answer at QB.   No one knows the answer to if he will be.

[weepaws 2,452]

I think they wanted to find a long term answer, and they gave up on Bridgewater in hops that Darnold is the answer, and hoping this season he is better than Bridgewater in which we both know by your own testimony he is not. 

Yeap I get it, but you asked me why I keep saying Bridgewater is better, we both think right now he is.  

Now enough said. 

Thank you for the chat, it’s always a pleasure