JohnnyU

Patriots looking for a 1st and 4th for Garoppolo

1,559 posts in this topic

10 minutes ago, tombonneau said:

Its funny how people say it's too much for Jimmy G who "hasn't shown enough yet" but people don't blink about a team paying twice as much to draft a rookie. 

People blink all the time, and line up to knock big draft trades, which rarely work out. 

You notice that the post you quoted didn't use Carson Wentz as an example.  Because the Eagles and their fans are happy with that trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bronco Billy said:

 

Worked out great for the Broncos. Good call. 

That's unfair. You can't judge McDaniels on his HC abilities when he had to deal with the Tebow disaster in Denver. He was basically forced to play him. I would love McDaniels in GB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, JohnnyU said:

Not good enough to spend a top 5 pick on.

We'll see.

I have no clue myself, I don't watch college ball, and when I do, I am bad at guessing which QBs are good and bad.  

But the order in which the QBs are going to be ranked, and whether or not one or more is considerd a franchise guy is far from decided.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, FUBAR said:

I might agree with that, but there's a real good chance 2 go top 5.

I think one of the biggest reason certain teams are always bringing up the rear is because they reach for QBs.  Most do not turn out to be studs, so to me it stands to reason to plug other holes unless there is someone with Andrew Luck hype available. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JohnnyU said:

I think one of the biggest reason certain teams are always bringing up the rear is because they reach for QBs.  Most do not turn out to be studs, so to me it stands to reason to plug other holes unless there is someone with Andrew Luck hype available. 

This is such a great statement from a Colts fan.  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, massraider said:

We'll see.

I have no clue myself, I don't watch college ball, and when I do, I am bad at guessing which QBs are good and bad.  

But the order in which the QBs are going to be ranked, and whether or not one or more is considerd a franchise guy is far from decided.  

So are pro GMs.  All the more reason to draft safer options unless a big time talent is available.  You can set your franchise back a decade by screwing up 1st rd picks, especially top 5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's seems almost too obvious to say, but here it goes anyhow:

 

If Garoppolo were a franchise QB, NE would not put him on the block. With Brady's age, they do what GB did with Rodgers - keep the much younger franchise stud. 

 

If he is not a franchise QB, there is no way you part with a 1st rounder for him, much less a 1st and a 4th  Then you are trading for either a game manager, a place holder, or a backup  

 

NE knows him better than anyone. That NE is opting to put Garoppolo even remotely out there IMO means that they do not believe he is a franchise QB. 

 

If I can figure that out, so can every GM in the league. Sportswriters should be able to also. So for them to even give the story a sniff they are either ignorantly or intentionally being used by BB.  Either way, it's pretty damning to their credibility. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dr. Brew said:

That's unfair. You can't judge McDaniels on his HC abilities when he had to deal with the Tebow disaster in Denver. He was basically forced to play him. I would love McDaniels in GB

I don't if this is sarcasm, but he picked Tebow to start over Orton and is widely credited with the disaster that was Tebow.  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JohnnyU said:

I think one of the biggest reason certain teams are always bringing up the rear is because they reach for QBs.  Most do not turn out to be studs, so to me it stands to reason to plug other holes unless there is someone with Andrew Luck hype available. 

Someone in here made a debatable point that you draft a QB 1st round every year until you find one that fits. I disagree with this to some extent but you can't be the Browns and keep trotting out nobodies and expect to win. The Browns HAVE to take a QB 1st or 2nd round. You have to have a central piece of your team to build around. Now, there is great value in some drafts to find a QB later, obviously we can all list off the number of examples.

I think the point is you have to have QB at a high priority until you have one. I agree with what you've said, too many reach too high and get hosed in the process. That's why they are picking top 5 every year it seems. 

Part of this also has to do with the much lower talent coming out of college these days

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, massraider said:

This is such a great statement from a Colts fan.  

The Colts giving up a 1st rd pick for Trent Richardson and Grigson's other draft pick flops have put the Colts in a very bad situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, rockaction said:

I don't if this is sarcasm, but he picked Tebow to start over Orton and is widely credited with the disaster that was Tebow.  

McDaniel's will be a great HC if he goes to a team where he is given the talent to succeed. I honestly think Jacksonville or Buffalo would be a great destination. Probably more so Jacksonville

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dr. Brew said:

Someone in here made a debatable point that you draft a QB 1st round every year until you find one that fits. I disagree with this to some extent but you can't be the Browns and keep trotting out nobodies and expect to win. The Browns HAVE to take a QB 1st or 2nd round. You have to have a central piece of your team to build around. Now, there is great value in some drafts to find a QB later, obviously we can all list off the number of examples.

I think the point is you have to have QB at a high priority until you have one. I agree with what you've said, too many reach too high and get hosed in the process. That's why they are picking top 5 every year it seems. 

Part of this also has to do with the much lower talent coming out of college these days

You don't if the QB quality in the draft doesn't dictate it.  Forcing it is never good for your franchise. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have heard the argument that teams should draft a QB every year but it doesn't have to be in round 1.  Heck, if I were a Browns fan I wouldn't mind seeing RGIII given one more year due to injury and draft someone at some point but I wouldn't feel like I had to burn a top pick on a QB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JohnnyU said:

The Colts giving up a 1st rd pick for Trent Richardson and Grigson's other draft pick flops have put the Colts in a very bad situation.

That was crippling to IND

1 minute ago, JohnnyU said:

You don't if the QB quality in the draft doesn't dictate it.  Forcing it is never good for your franchise. 

Right, but waiting until the later rounds just increases the chances of another Kessler. Not saying it's 100% true, but for the most part. I think Cleveland has to at this point, being without any kind of stability at QB since I can remember.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bronco Billy said:

It's seems almost too obvious to say, but here it goes anyhow:

 

If Garoppolo were a franchise QB, NE would not put him on the block. With Brady's age, they do what GB did with Rodgers - keep the much younger franchise stud. 

 

If he is not a franchise QB, there is no way you part with a 1st rounder for him, much less a 1st and a 4th  Then you are trading for either a game manager, a place holder, or a backup  

 

NE knows him better than anyone. That NE is opting to put Garoppolo even remotely out there IMO means that they do not believe he is a franchise QB. 

 

If I can figure that out, so can every GM in the league. Sportswriters should be able to also. So for them to even give the story a sniff they are either ignorantly or intentionally being used by BB.  Either way, it's pretty damning to their credibility. 

The other issue is financial. You pay him good money to backup Brady just so in a few years he can take over?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dr. Brew said:

That's unfair. You can't judge McDaniels on his HC abilities when he had to deal with the Tebow disaster in Denver. He was basically forced to play him. I would love McDaniels in GB

I can absolutely judge McDaniels on his behavior in Denver, which was substandard for a high school coach, much less an NFL coach. He was literally clueless, immature, petty, and arrogant.  As a GB fan myself, I seriously cannot fathom why anyone would want McDaniels over McCarthy.  Perhaps you could flesh your opinion out for me a bit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dr. Brew said:

That was crippling to IND

Right, but waiting until the later rounds just increases the chances of another Kessler. Not saying it's 100% true, but for the most part. I think Cleveland has to at this point, being without any kind of stability at QB since I can remember.  

Cleveland shouldn't reach for a QB in the 1st rd unless that QB is 1st rd worthy and if it's a stud from the draft they are looking for, then they will just have to wait until there is one in the draft.  They could be building other parts of their team with high draft picks and if they continue to be bad, perhaps they will be able to draft a stud QB in the draft when there IS ONE in the draft.  Or they could trade for a proven QB and build other parts of their team via the draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, JohnnyU said:

The Colts giving up a 1st rd pick for Trent Richardson and Grigson's other draft pick flops have put the Colts in a very bad situation.

My point is, a Colts fan saying a team should just wait until there's an all-time prospect available is hilarious.  Comes off a little Marie Antoinette, ya know?  Colts have been extremely lucky to suck out loud when all-time QB prospects were available.  

 

Quote

So are pro GMs.  All the more reason to draft safer options unless a big time talent is available.  You can set your franchise back a decade by screwing up 1st rd picks, especially top 5.

We might be talking past each other a bit, as I am not sure we are arguing the same points.  I am not advocating taking a QB with a top pick no matter what.  And I am not in favor of massive trade-ups.

I am advocating going and getting a QB until you have one.  The Raiders didn't have one.  They traded for Matt Flynn, drafted Tyler Wilson, got Matt Shaub, then drafted Derek Carr.  Those earlier moves were mistakes.  But with a different philosophy, the Raiders might still be wating around for a QB.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, King of the Jungle said:

The other issue is financial. You pay him good money to backup Brady just so in a few years he can take over?

 

No. no team can survive paying 2 franchise QBs. If Garoppolo is a franchise QB you keep him and put him in place of Brady in 2018 and damn the consequences. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, King of the Jungle said:

The other issue is financial. You pay him good money to backup Brady just so in a few years he can take over?

Not for nothing, but Brady is so affordable, the Pats could give Jimmy 10 mill a year two years from now, and it would still be less than Brees made this year.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, massraider said:

My point is, a Colts fan saying a team should just wait until there's an all-time prospect available is hilarious.  Comes off a little Marie Antoinette, ya know?  Colts have been extremely lucky to suck out loud when all-time QB prospects were available.  

 

We might be talking past each other a bit, as I am not sure we are arguing the same points.  I am not advocating taking a QB with a top pick no matter what.  And I am not in favor of massive trade-ups.

I am advocating going and getting a QB until you have one.  The Raiders didn't have one.  They traded for Matt Flynn, drafted Tyler Wilson, got Matt Shaub, then drafted Derek Carr.  Those earlier moves were mistakes.  But with a different philosophy, the Raiders might still be wating around for a QB.  

Drafting a Derek Carr was great for the Raiders, but if you're the Browns and you keep flopping on QBs, perhaps a different strategy is in order, or hire the right GM.  I believe in trading for a veteran is a good thing until you can draft the "right guy" and in the meantime use those high picks to build the rest of your team.

Edited by JohnnyU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brady's contract is such that he will clearly be the starter through 2018.  2019 is possible.  22 mill cap number, 7 mill in dead cap, and 15 mill in savings if he's cut.

Jimmy's contract runs out after 2017.  

The Pats might like Jimmy, but the fact is even THEY don't really know what he's capable of as a starter.  I don't think they want to pay him a big contract either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 1st and a 4th?  Ha!  2 1sts, minimum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dedfin said:

A 1st and a 4th?  Ha!  2 1sts, minimum.

More like a conditional 5th.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

11 minutes ago, Warhogs said:

I have heard the argument that teams should draft a QB every year but it doesn't have to be in round 1.  Heck, if I were a Browns fan I wouldn't mind seeing RGIII given one more year due to injury and draft someone at some point but I wouldn't feel like I had to burn a top pick on a QB.

I think I'm the only person here who thinks Kessler could be good with protection. 

It's a chicken and egg argument imo - you need good coaching and a competent qb. I place more blame on the coaching than the individual qb, especially when certain franchises seem to never get it right while others win with matt cassel.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JohnnyU said:

Drafting a Derek Carr was great for the Raiders, but if you're the Browns and you keep flopping on QBs, perhaps a different strategy is in order, or hire the right GM.  I believe in trading for a veteran is a good thing until you can draft the "right guy" and in the meantime use those high picks to build the rest of your team.

If I was running the Browns, I would take Garrett from A+M, and re-evaluate after that.  If they need to trade up from the Eagles pick to grab someone, great.  If they can trade down a bit, and take a guy they like, great.  

But this team has enough draft capital that they can take the best player, then go and get a QB anywhere else in the draft.

I liked them going and getting RGIII, because why not?  I was disappointed in them taking Kessler.  Take a mid round flyer on a QB with tools, at least.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, massraider said:

He has not gotten a lot of practie reps, or game experience.

Um, hes probably gotten more practice reps since drafted than anyone on the team. Hes regularly touted as a champion on the practice field. Belichick talked about him at great lengths with the scout team in 2014, said he mimicked opposing QBs better than anyone hes seen.

Hes seasoned enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Run It Up said:

Um, hes probably gotten more practice reps since drafted than anyone on the team. Hes regularly touted as a champion on the practice field. Belichick talked about him at great lengths with the scout team in 2014, said he mimicked opposing QBs better than anyone hes seen.

Hes seasoned enough.

Say the Patriots, who are looking for a first for him. 

I'm telling you...Ricky Ledee.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, rockaction said:

Say the Patriots, who are looking for a first for him. 

I'm telling you...Ricky Ledee.  

Brady takes 3 of the 4 practice days off every week every year. Who do you think is throwing balls around?

Edited by Run It Up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, rockaction said:

Say the Patriots, who are looking for a first for him. 

I'm telling you...Ricky Ledee.  

Listen comrade, you can trust this propaganda.  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Run It Up said:

Brady takes 3 of the 4 practice days off every week every year. Who do you think throws the balls?

All I'm saying is your sourcing about his talent is self-interested and suspect. 

It's not even like Ledee. Scouts got to watch him.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, massraider said:

Listen comrade, you can trust this propaganda.  

The new edition of Pravda came?   

:excited:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This discussion is actually a lot more rational if you take the 1st and 4th talk out of it.  Just because Shefter guesses on the comp doesn't mean we have to take that as gospel.  What if it was a conditonal 3rd, with it becoming a 2nd if he starts 10 games, something like that?

 

Forgetting about the compensation, I am not against a team trading for JG.  Let's assume there's not a 1st rounder involved, which I don't believe is legit.  

If you liked him coming out of college, and can get him next season for a 3rd?  Sure.  You can have him for a year, and maybe offer him an interesting structure of a deal, or even franchise him.  You get two years to really evaluate, at least, and if he doesn't work out, then you aren't on the hook for a 1st.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bronco Billy said:

 

Worked out great for the Broncos. Good call. 

He never had a pro QB he had worked with and was familiar with. So not really same thing.

Unless you are arguing that a first-time HC who gets fired can never go on to be successful elsewhere. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bronco Billy said:

I can absolutely judge McDaniels on his behavior in Denver, which was substandard for a high school coach, much less an NFL coach. He was literally clueless, immature, petty, and arrogant.  

Yep.  It's true that he wouldn't be the first guy to not do well in his first head coaching job and then do well in his second, if it were to happen, but he #### the bed in his first stint, ending with him getting canned for cheating.  He was a failure on all levels in Denver, especially when you consider the history of the franchise. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, tombonneau said:

He never had a pro QB he had worked with and was familiar with. So not really same thing.

Unless you are arguing that a first-time HC who gets fired can never go on to be successful elsewhere. 

 

That still doesn't excuse his behavior, and that it looked at times like he wondered why a football isn't round

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Ghost Rider said:

Yep.  It's true that he wouldn't be the first guy to not do well in his first head coaching job and then do well in his second, if it were to happen, but he #### the bed in his first stint, ending with him getting canned for cheating.  He was a failure on all levels in Denver, especially when you consider the history of the franchise. 

He was also I think only 30 at the time and clearly wasn't ready to run the show. I know my Bronco buddy loved him then hated him. Either way what we think doesn't matter. He's likely the top candidate on just about every team's list and will be a HC again in 2017. So we'll get to see very soon whether or not he has learned from his mistakes and will succeed his second time around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bronco Billy said:

It's seems almost too obvious to say, but here it goes anyhow:

 

If Garoppolo were a franchise QB, NE would not put him on the block. With Brady's age, they do what GB did with Rodgers - keep the much younger franchise stud. 

 

If he is not a franchise QB, there is no way you part with a 1st rounder for him, much less a 1st and a 4th  Then you are trading for either a game manager, a place holder, or a backup  

 

NE knows him better than anyone. That NE is opting to put Garoppolo even remotely out there IMO means that they do not believe he is a franchise QB. 

 

If I can figure that out, so can every GM in the league. Sportswriters should be able to also. So for them to even give the story a sniff they are either ignorantly or intentionally being used by BB.  Either way, it's pretty damning to their credibility. 

Sorry, not buying this...Brady is showing zero signs of slipping right now...none...if Jimmy G was in the second year of his deal than this is all a moot point...you keep him...but the fact remains that he has a year left on his deal and there is no way they are keeping both him and Brady in 2018 if they are both making real money...that is not going to happen and that has zero to do with not having faith in him...i think Brady has at least three good years left in him and there is no reason to push him out the door until he shows that he is slipping...that is foolish...Jimmy G looks like he has a chance to be legit but right now the Pats window could not be more wide open with Brady at QB...no reason at all to be worrying about five or six years down the road...you have plenty of time to figure that out...Jimmy G is an intriguing prospect at the most important position in the NFL...he is a second round pick who has shown some flashes and right now is making nothing...in a year where the incoming rookies don't look to be anything special there will be a market for him...while I do believe a 1 and a 4 is wishful thinking I do think you can get something like a second and possibly another decent pick...for a team like Cleveland that is flush with picks a deal like that would allow you to use both your ones on non-Qbs while giving you a year to see if Jimmy G is worth a big contract...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Boston said:

Sorry, not buying this...Brady is showing zero signs of slipping right now...none...if Jimmy G was in the second year of his deal than this is all a moot point...you keep him...but the fact remains that he has a year left on his deal and there is no way they are keeping both him and Brady in 2018 if they are both making real money...that is not going to happen and that has zero to do with not having faith in him...i think Brady has at least three good years left in him and there is no reason to push him out the door until he shows that he is slipping...that is foolish...Jimmy G looks like he has a chance to be legit but right now the Pats window could not be more wide open with Brady at QB...no reason at all to be worrying about five or six years down the road...you have plenty of time to figure that out...Jimmy G is an intriguing prospect at the most important position in the NFL...he is a second round pick who has shown some flashes and right now is making nothing...in a year where the incoming rookies don't look to be anything special there will be a market for him...while I do believe a 1 and a 4 is wishful thinking I do think you can get something like a second and possibly another decent pick...for a team like Cleveland that is flush with picks a deal like that would allow you to use both your ones on non-Qbs while giving you a year to see if Jimmy G is worth a big contract...

Lol. No signs of slipping? Go look at Favre's and Peyton's 2nd to last years. They both showed 0 signs of slipping and had great years. Their last years? Big slip.

Go ahead and think that Brady is going to blow past both of them and have good seasons at 40-42 and maybe play till 45 like he says. History is not on his side and if he does last till 45 then at least you know the Pats were able to cheat again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.