This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
This is the heart of a Pats fan's view. JG really isn't good enough for us and a Patriots future, but you others who have a life goal of maybe a .500 record and little hope to ever make the playoffs should mortgage your future for him - because he may be able to get you that far.
To me, a "franchise QB" is a player that is worth his QB1 contract, that can lead his team to wins, and that can make the players around him better. It is the type of QB that can make a mediocre coaching staff look good and a good coaching staff look great. I think the NFC South is currently the only division where one could make a strong argument that all four teams have a franchise QB. Next closest might be the NFC East. Every other division has at least one or two teams that need a serious upgrade. While this drives up the asking price of players like JG for teams that are lacking, it also reinforces the fact that an actual franchise QB is priceless.
To me, a franchise QB is someone that is consistently a top performer, someone that can carry the team, someone that consistently makes the playoffs and comes through in the clutch, and someone that it's a no brainer that that guy is your QB and will be for a long time. Basically a HOF worthy QB. So going around the league at this juncture in time (IMO) . . .
Not sure I 100% agree with the Favre/Rodgers conclusion here. From what I remember, GB was tired of Favre retiring and un-retiring and opted to stick with Rodgers when he looked decent in camp. However, it wasn't exactly a foregone conclusion that he was a can't miss QB. GB went from 13-3 under Favre to 6-10 with Rodgers in his first year as a starter. Rodgers totals were a but lower than Favre's.
I disagree. I think he would be getting good money but he hasn't done anything to warrant that kind of money. People point to Osweiler, that's great, but Osweiler had starting experience last offseason. JG really doesn't. I don't think he'd get 18, but he would likely get a lot more than what I am projecting, I can concede to that.
So yeah... this is exactly what I'm saying his market value is... yet you've been throwing this 18 million/year number around. I'm probably a little underestimating the market value, but let's say it's 5 years 50 million. It's definitely not 5 year 90 million. That just seems insane for a guy who has literally stood on the sideline for 3 seasons.
I agree with this 100%
You named 3 players that, at the time they signed their contracts, they had done more for their team than JG ever has.
Regarding the bolded, I think teams look at players like Bradford and Cutler and they see a Quarterback that might not win you games but won't lose you games (alright maybe not Cutler, but still). I think teams look at that and say if they can build an exceptional team around an average QB then they have a shot at winning. History doesn't necessarily support that but you have to also look at this from the business side. If a team keeps going after QB QB QB until they get it right, they will lose their fan base and fall into a sea of mediocrity to plane sucking. Look at CLE. I think teams are willing to commit a large chunk of money to this level of QB in order to stabilize an important position. The hope would then to, at a later date, replace that average QB with a young talent or different FA to put them over the top. At least that's what it seems like to me. Maybe I'm wrong.
The Browns have $108 million in cap space. They have so much cap space, that they are in danger of not meeting the league payout minimum. The Niners are second with $82 million and the Bears are 9th with $59 million. In today's NFL, being a starting QB is a license to print money. I doubt the Browns at this point care what it costs for a decent QB. They want to win (as do all teams).
I'd say it's much worse as the 1st round QBs that "worked" out as the 1st round QBs that did work out fared way better than the 3 Matts (the traded guys, this is not a FA situation, since that requires no draft picks).
We could argue definitions. Imo your definition is way too limiting. Franchise qb is simply the guy the coaching staff is confident in to lead the team for multiple years. Rivers absolutely has been a franchise qb.
Some people were saying that if Garoppolo is really a franchise QB, then NE has to keep him because they are so hard to find. If there really are 20+ in the league, then it doesn't appear that franchise QB's are as hard to find as some people think. But if there are a small amount of franchise QB's and JG would be among them, then NE keeping him makes more sense.
So then what is the definition of a franchise QB? Not YOUR definition. What is THE definition?
That's kind of why it is being discussed. Everyone has a different set of criteria.
That's the point. Everyone has different criteria. None of us know what BB's criteria is, or what the criteria is for any of the teams about to make offers for JG.
No doubt but that shows just how hard it is to find one. Some guys need really great players around them on O or a great, top 5 D to go far in the playoffs. That is Dalton and Flacco and to a lesser extent Rivers.
other than the Patriots, every team would probably be "just fine with getting someone better."Let's say there are 20 franchise QBs. They have between 16 to 1 year of experience. So roughly speaking you might find 2 (closer to 1.25) new franchise QBs each year. Thats tough to find. Especially when the pats hoard three of them
So you're saying the Packers, Saints, Chargers, Steelers and Seahawks are all looking for better QBs? They may be looking for a back up or even a guy to take their place eventually but they are not saying to themselves that they need to find a better QB this year.
Let's say there are 20 franchise QBs. They have between 16 to 1 year of experience. So roughly speaking you might find 2 (closer to 1.25) new franchise QBs each year. Thats tough to find. Especially when the pats hoard three of them
I was actually kidding, but "would be fine with" doesn't equal "looking for" or "saying to themselves that they need to find..."
Yes but those guys are at the end of their franchise careers. They've already proved themselves to be franchise QBs. They will eventually need to be replaced.
With two caveats, I'll agree.
you are making no sense. That has nothing to do with your original, false statement. I took you to school with your 'I've never seen team with just one HOF caliber player win the SB'. I give you Drew Brees and you go off on a tangent talking about an INT and an onside kick. Fact is there may be another HOF player on the 2009 Saints as well probably HOF players on the 2017 Pats (more so on their D). It's way to early to say there isn't. Your statement was a weak attempt to proclaim Brady a one man show and the only reason they won. Really weak actually.Maybe. Lots of variables. He's low end of starting caliber QB's so I would have to already be built to win with a D like HOU or DEN. if I had OsWILDer, I would consider the move, especially if I had the pick they have. Otherwise you waste a SB caliber D and by the time you find a viable QB, your D is old and gone. It's a sell out to win it all basically. He would have to be the best available option by far.
