Kyler Murray drama

[Mike FF Today 607]

Translation: I want more $. 

 

[TBayXXXVII 2,108]

8-2 with Hopkins, 3-4 without.  Murray needs to prove that he can carry his team.  He lost home games to Carolina, Seattle, and Indy... lost in Detroit, without Hopkins.  At worst, AZ should've been 2-2, 3-1 more aptly, not 0-4 on those games.

[Ray_T 588]

On 2/28/2022 at 11:00 AM, TBayXXXVII said:

8-2 with Hopkins, 3-4 without.  Murray needs to prove that he can carry his team.  He lost home games to Carolina, Seattle, and Indy... lost in Detroit, without Hopkins.  At worst, AZ should've been 2-2, 3-1 more aptly, not 0-4 on those games.

good point.

and I agree.  though some of those losses came at a time when the team had more or less clinched and when that happens there is sometimes a bit of a letdown in the team.

he lost those games, but so did the team.  I wouldnt go placing all the blame at his feet.

in reality is was a lot of things that led to those losses.   one might be underestimating the ability of the opponent.

either way, if this thing is about money the situation will likely resolve itself at some point or they will trade him for a Ton of Assets before they lose him.

[TBayXXXVII 2,108]

1 hour ago, Ray_T said:

good point.

and I agree.  though some of those losses came at a time when the team had more or less clinched and when that happens there is sometimes a bit of a letdown in the team.

he lost those games, but so did the team.  I wouldnt go placing all the blame at his feet.

in reality is was a lot of things that led to those losses.   one might be underestimating the ability of the opponent.

either way, if this thing is about money the situation will likely resolve itself at some point or they will trade him for a Ton of Assets before they lose him.

You're trying to give them an excuse they haven't earned.  They didn't have anything clinched when they lost those games.  They still had something to play for. They were 8-1 when they lost to Carolina.  They were 10-2 when they lost 3 games in a row... to the Rams, then the Lions, then the Colts.  Going into the last game of the season against Seattle, they still had a chance to win the division and have a home game.  Instead of being the 5-seed and going to LA, they'd have been the 3-seed and got to play, San Francisco.  Yeah, the Niners were playing better towards the end of the season while the Cardinals were struggling, but they beat the Niners twice in the regular season already.  Sure, they'd have had to go to Tampa in the second round which would've been tough, but it's a lot better than getting bumped in the first round, on the road.

You are right to an extent. All of those losses aren't on him.  The Carolina game, he didn't play.  I can't give him credit for one of those San Fran wins and the win vs Seattle.  Those 3 were played by Colt McCoy.  Yet still, he lost the 3 in a row to LA, Detroit, and Seattle.  He wins ONE of those, they win the division.  Beat the Lions.  Everyone else did.

[Ray_T 588]

1 hour ago, TBayXXXVII said:

You're trying to give them an excuse they haven't earned.  They didn't have anything clinched when they lost those games.  They still had something to play for. They were 8-1 when they lost to Carolina.  They were 10-2 when they lost 3 games in a row... to the Rams, then the Lions, then the Colts.  Going into the last game of the season against Seattle, they still had a chance to win the division and have a home game.  Instead of being the 5-seed and going to LA, they'd have been the 3-seed and got to play, San Francisco.  Yeah, the Niners were playing better towards the end of the season while the Cardinals were struggling, but they beat the Niners twice in the regular season already.  Sure, they'd have had to go to Tampa in the second round which would've been tough, but it's a lot better than getting bumped in the first round, on the road.

You are right to an extent. All of those losses aren't on him.  The Carolina game, he didn't play.  I can't give him credit for one of those San Fran wins and the win vs Seattle.  Those 3 were played by Colt McCoy.  Yet still, he lost the 3 in a row to LA, Detroit, and Seattle.  He wins ONE of those, they win the division.  Beat the Lions.  Everyone else did.

agreed.   the loss to LA is understandable.  they were a pretty good team

Even Seattle.... they are a non playoff team but have beaten a couple really good teams.    they are well coached so even being inferior doesnt mean they cant beat you.

but Detroit?   no excuse for  that one.

but thats the one where I refuse to admit it was all on him.

a backup QB who hands the ball off on first and 2nd downs and only throws on third and long should have been able to beat that team if the rest of the roster performed reasonably.

so this could well have been one where we blame everybody cuz I dont know if detroit is the kind of team that can beat you if one player underperforms (even if it is the QB)  he wasnt great (245 yards passing I think) but he also didnt even throw a pick.  against detroit, that should have been enough if the rest of the team did their jobs so I am inclined to think something else was going on there.

either way, your point is well made.   if only one of those games is a win, their playoff path would have been way different.

that said, I remember saying the same things about Cousins when he was grinding the Redskins down for big cash.  the redskins wouldnt pay and lost him in the end.

is it possible he turns into the next Cousins?  (good statistically but cant get it done come playoff time?)    very possible.

some players want to leave their teams because the team isnt competitive.   some only care about the money.

he is clearly motivated by money.  but does he care about winning?

That makes me concerned for his character as well.

the things that concern you may well be things to be worried about.   or they are one offs?

like the cousins thing a few years back, I guess it is interesting speculation.  gives us something to talk about too.

anyhow, take care and enjoy the offseason.

 

 

[TBayXXXVII 2,108]

Cousins could be a good comparison.  I don't know what the reason is, but his team can't seem to win.  Everyone wants to bash him, and I see some valid points, but I also think there's too much piling on.  I could be doing the same to Murray.  I haven't watched many of their games, so I don't really know how they lost.  It's my initial reaction, but it just seems that he can't win without Hopkins on the field.  By win, I mean "have a winning record".

[weepaws 2,456]

1 hour ago, TBayXXXVII said:

You're trying to give them an excuse they haven't earned.  They didn't have anything clinched when they lost those games.  They still had something to play for. They were 8-1 when they lost to Carolina.  They were 10-2 when they lost 3 games in a row... to the Rams, then the Lions, then the Colts.  Going into the last game of the season against Seattle, they still had a chance to win the division and have a home game.  Instead of being the 5-seed and going to LA, they'd have been the 3-seed and got to play, San Francisco.  Yeah, the Niners were playing better towards the end of the season while the Cardinals were struggling, but they beat the Niners twice in the regular season already.  Sure, they'd have had to go to Tampa in the second round which would've been tough, but it's a lot better than getting bumped in the first round, on the road.

You are right to an extent. All of those losses aren't on him.  The Carolina game, he didn't play.  I can't give him credit for one of those San Fran wins and the win vs Seattle.  Those 3 were played by Colt McCoy.  Yet still, he lost the 3 in a row to LA, Detroit, and Seattle.  He wins ONE of those, they win the division.  Beat the Lions.  Everyone else did.

Steelers didn’t beat the Lions, so not everyone else did  

 

[weepaws 2,456]

On 2/28/2022 at 10:00 AM, TBayXXXVII said:

8-2 with Hopkins, 3-4 without.  Murray needs to prove that he can carry his team.  He lost home games to Carolina, Seattle, and Indy... lost in Detroit, without Hopkins.  At worst, AZ should've been 2-2, 3-1 more aptly, not 0-4 on those games.

He lost a home game here to the Panthers. 

2 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

You're trying to give them an excuse they haven't earned.  They didn't have anything clinched when they lost those games.  They still had something to play for. They were 8-1 when they lost to Carolina.  They were 10-2 when they lost 3 games in a row... to the Rams, then the Lions, then the Colts.  Going into the last game of the season against Seattle, they still had a chance to win the division and have a home game.  Instead of being the 5-seed and going to LA, they'd have been the 3-seed and got to play, San Francisco.  Yeah, the Niners were playing better towards the end of the season while the Cardinals were struggling, but they beat the Niners twice in the regular season already.  Sure, they'd have had to go to Tampa in the second round which would've been tough, but it's a lot better than getting bumped in the first round, on the road.

You are right to an extent. All of those losses aren't on him.  The Carolina game, he didn't play.  I can't give him credit for one of those San Fran wins and the win vs Seattle.  Those 3 were played by Colt McCoy.  Yet still, he lost the 3 in a row to LA, Detroit, and Seattle.  He wins ONE of those, they win the division.  Beat the Lions.  Everyone else did.

But here Murry didn’t play.  Mmm.  

[Ray_T 588]

49 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Cousins could be a good comparison.  I don't know what the reason is, but his team can't seem to win.  Everyone wants to bash him, and I see some valid points, but I also think there's too much piling on.  I could be doing the same to Murray.  I haven't watched many of their games, so I don't really know how they lost.  It's my initial reaction, but it just seems that he can't win without Hopkins on the field.  By win, I mean "have a winning record".

I think a part of it is certainly related to the theory suggesting teams paying top money to their starting QB have a hard time affording other talented players and have to jettison a certain amount of that talent at some point for cap reasons.

but there are other issues at play too.   like when cousins was in Washington, the way that club was being managed.... well, it was a train wreck to say the least.

that also does not help.   whether it was the cause is perhaps a matter for debate.

in Minny, he did quite well at first and the team moved more to a run based offense for a couple years with some success but then lost their OC (mcvay) who became coach of the rams and lost some good players to free agency.   to me, this is a symptom of the big money signing.  they had to let some players go when they came up to renew their rookie contracts.

either way, I dont think they will win a superbowl with cousins, but as a fantasy qB he has been pretty solid (yet not spectacular)

top 12 QB?  yep.   Top 5?  no way.

[weepaws 2,456]

1 hour ago, Ray_T said:

I think a part of it is certainly related to the theory suggesting teams paying top money to their starting QB have a hard time affording other talented players and have to jettison a certain amount of that talent at some point for cap reasons.

but there are other issues at play too.   like when cousins was in Washington, the way that club was being managed.... well, it was a train wreck to say the least.

that also does not help.   whether it was the cause is perhaps a matter for debate.

in Minny, he did quite well at first and the team moved more to a run based offense for a couple years with some success but then lost their OC (mcvay) who became coach of the rams and lost some good players to free agency.   to me, this is a symptom of the big money signing.  they had to let some players go when they came up to renew their rookie contracts.

either way, I dont think they will win a superbowl with cousins, but as a fantasy qB he has been pretty solid (yet not spectacular)

top 12 QB?  yep.   Top 5?  no way.

Vikings might not win a super bowl with Cousins, but I don’t think it’s all because of Cousins. 

[Ray_T 588]

5 hours ago, weepaws said:

Vikings might not win a super bowl with Cousins, but I don’t think it’s all because of Cousins. 

no. his play was good enough. 

they did lose some key players in free agency over the last couple years which didnt help.

[IGotWorms 3,309]

The more I hear about Murray, the less I like him

[weepaws 2,456]

He’ll have Ertz back, nice deal for him from Zona.