2021-2022 NFL Thread

[Pendulous]

Niners are saying Jimmy G is still part of their plan or whatever, but when do we ever believe anything? Players say they're dedicated to a team days before they sign elsewhere.

[draynay]

Niners are saying Jimmy G is still part of their plan or whatever, but when do we ever believe anything? Players say they're dedicated to a team days before they sign elsewhere.

They might hang on to him for one more year, though he might be more valuable to trade now since he is only signed through 2022 and two years of control are better than one. I believe he has a no-trade clause and he isn't going to find a better situation than the one he's in, with his injury history no team is likely to commit to him as a starter, so there is little incentive for him to waive it unless he faces benching.

[Grube]

Based on his history, it won't matter if the 49ers keep him or not. He will be hurt anyway.

[Slowpoke is a Gamer]

Aaaaaaaand half of Patriots fan base is now speculating and hoping that the Patriots will now trade for Jimmy from the Niners.

I honestly just really prefer that they go young and draft a guy. Jimmy wasn't the answer in SF and I doubt he'd be any better in NE. Say what you want about Shanahan, but he made Nick Mullens and Beathardt work at QB. If Jimmy didn't show he could be THE guy with that kind of tutelage, he's probably just destined to be a future back up, a la Andy Dalton, who might get a starting chance here and there.

Give me a young QB instead that still has potential to be a franchise guy.

The talk out of the team and the reporters all seems to say they want to do the Patrick Mahomes thing where you sit your rookie behind an okay-but-entrenched starter for a year.

Which WOULD tie into the Cam Newton contract timeline.

[eschatological]

Are QBs gonna go 1-4 now?

I read a tweet from Chris Mortensen (who's an insider, but not like the mouthpiece of the teams like Schefter/Rapaport) who suggested SF wants to take fucking MAC JONES at 3. How is Justin Fields being passed over so much? Even the mocks I'm seeing is putting Trey Lance above Fields.

So it could go:
1) JAX - Lawrence
2) NYJ - Wilson
3) 49ers - Jones? Lance? Fields?
4) Atlanta - do they want a QB? Maybe?
5) Cincy - probably gonna get whoever they want since they don't want a QB. Burrow to Pitts for 20 years sounds like a fucking great thing.
6) Miami - probably JaMarr Chase?
7) Detroit - might want a QB but at this point hard to pass up on top 5 talent like Sewell
8) Carolina - def want a QB - whatever's left over of Jones/Lance/Fields
9) Denver - prob want a QB? Grab the last QB? If Fields drops to 9 I'd take him in a hearbeat. I'd be less sure on Mac Jones.
10-14) Dallas/NYG probably not picking QBs, Philly might, LAC no, Minnesota probably no.
15) Patriots - gonna be hard to even get one of these 5.

One thing I'm seeing is that "toolsy" QBs who may be "raw" are becoming favorites again. Mahomes was considered raw and toolsy, so was Allen, so was Herbert, and they all hit, same with Lamar, while the "pro ready" QBs like Rosen and Darnold have fallen flat on their face. I watched BYU's pro day today and Zach Wilson seems like some sort of Aryan super soldier, jesus. Blonde, blue eyes, giant, can throw the ball like 60 yards off platform. Dude was grown in a lab.

[Grube]

I would be very surprised if the Bengals take anyone but Sewell if the Falcons don't take him.

I think people are looking at Trey Lance throwing 28 TDs and 0 picks in his only year as a starter on a team that is extremely more talented than anyone else they face to put him over Fields (who threw 41 TDs and 3 picks against much better competition in the same year). Who knows which one will end up doing better, it's a crapshoot. I'd bet on whatever QB the 49ers taking looking the best of any of the 1st round picks though, that system is insanely QB friendly.

Simms saying Mac Jones is probably where they are getting the 49ers wanting him.

[Brubear]

Are QBs gonna go 1-4 now?

I read a tweet from Chris Mortensen (who's an insider, but not like the mouthpiece of the teams like Schefter/Rapaport) who suggested SF wants to take fucking MAC JONES at 3. How is Justin Fields being passed over so much? Even the mocks I'm seeing is putting Trey Lance above Fields.

So it could go:
1) JAX - Lawrence
2) NYJ - Wilson
3) 49ers - Jones? Lance? Fields?
4) Atlanta - do they want a QB? Maybe?
5) Cincy - probably gonna get whoever they want since they don't want a QB. Burrow to Pitts for 20 years sounds like a fucking great thing.
6) Miami - probably JaMarr Chase?
7) Detroit - might want a QB but at this point hard to pass up on top 5 talent like Sewell
8) Carolina - def want a QB - whatever's left over of Jones/Lance/Fields
9) Denver - prob want a QB? Grab the last QB? If Fields drops to 9 I'd take him in a hearbeat. I'd be less sure on Mac Jones.
10-14) Dallas/NYG probably not picking QBs, Philly might, LAC no, Minnesota probably no.
15) Patriots - gonna be hard to even get one of these 5.

One thing I'm seeing is that "toolsy" QBs who may be "raw" are becoming favorites again. Mahomes was considered raw and toolsy, so was Allen, so was Herbert, and they all hit, same with Lamar, while the "pro ready" QBs like Rosen and Darnold have fallen flat on their face. I watched BYU's pro day today and Zach Wilson seems like some sort of Aryan super soldier, jesus. Blonde, blue eyes, giant, can throw the ball like 60 yards off platform. Dude was grown in a lab.

My guess is that it's because they're an OSU QB. Historically, their QBs have not done well in the NFL.

[draynay]

The Falcons cap situation with Matt Ryan is so absurd I'm not sure if it makes it impossible or imperative that a new QB is brought in. They've got $65mil in cap commitments that will need to be accounted for over the next 1-3 years.

[eschatological]

They surely gotta be thinking about Matty Ice's replacement. He's not as old as Rogers, but he must be well into his 30s now.

[Grube]

It depends if they want to take a QB in the top 5 that ends up sitting for 2 years or not. They can't really get rid of Matt Ryan until after 2022, he would have a 40 mill dead cap hit or something insane after this next season. It might make more sense for them to take Kyle Trask in the 2nd round.

The Ohio State QBs have not had success argument makes no sense at all for Fields. Not only has Ohio State not ran an offense that really translates to the NFL before Ryan Day, but they had not had a QB that was even considered a good NFL prospect since the early 80's (unless you count Terrelle Pryor) before Haskins. Even then, Haskins was an Urban Meyer guy, and isn't even close to the same player as Fields.

[Brubear]

It depends if they want to take a QB in the top 5 that ends up sitting for 2 years or not. They can't really get rid of Matt Ryan until after 2022, he would have a 40 mill dead cap hit or something insane after this next season. It might make more sense for them to take Kyle Trask in the 2nd round.

The Ohio State QBs have not had success argument makes no sense at all for Fields. Not only has Ohio State not ran an offense that really translates to the NFL before Ryan Day, but they had not had a QB that was even considered a good NFL prospect since the early 80's (unless you count Terrelle Pryor) before Haskins. Even then, Haskins was an Urban Meyer guy, and isn't even close to the same player as Fields.

The NFL is just as superstitious as they are logic/data driven. I'm not saying that's the only reason, or even the main reason, but I wouldn't be surprised if that isn't playing into it at least somewhat.

[xskarma]

Fields got exposed a little in the National Championship game. Just over 50% completion rate, against an admittedly good Alabama defense.

But that was more the kind of competion he's going to face in the NFL, so I think Teams might have seen that and had second thoughts, even though guys like Zach Wilson never even made it to the biggest stage or played against the kind of competition Fields did.

That's part of the crap shoot.

Do you think a guy like Fields can develop and overcome short comings he showed or do you think a guy like Wilson has hidden talent that never got a chance to shine.


I have no real opinions on the drafted guys this year, except that I think Trevor Lawrence will be special. We will see if the Patriots get in the mix for a QB or if there's a run on them and 5 go in the top 12.

[Kyanion]

if there's a run on them and 5 go in the top 12.

I mean past history has suggested that what is it, 50% of QBs in round 1 are flat out busts? Even more recent history has shown that round 1 QBs don't last with the team that has drafted them since 2009 up until 2016, the others still being on rookie deals. I think the teams that are risking their future by trading a ton of future 1st round picks are even more desperate and/or stupid because if they are wrong they can't fix it for years.

[Logwyn]

They surely gotta be thinking about Matty Ice's replacement. He's not as old as Rogers, but he must be well into his 30s now.

Matt Ryan is 35. He has I would say 3 more good years left barring injury. I do not think Ryan is as much as a problem as fans make him out to be.

- - - Updated - - -

Fields got exposed a little in the National Championship game. Just over 50% completion rate, against an admittedly good Alabama defense.

But that was more the kind of competion he's going to face in the NFL, so I think Teams might have seen that and had second thoughts, even though guys like Zach Wilson never even made it to the biggest stage or played against the kind of competition Fields did.

That's part of the crap shoot.

Do you think a guy like Fields can develop and overcome short comings he showed or do you think a guy like Wilson has hidden talent that never got a chance to shine.


I have no real opinions on the drafted guys this year, except that I think Trevor Lawrence will be special. We will see if the Patriots get in the mix for a QB or if there's a run on them and 5 go in the top 12.

I kinda on the fence about Fields. He couldn't win the job over Fromm at UGA. Just have this feeling he'll be a bust.

- - - Updated - - -

The Falcons cap situation with Matt Ryan is so absurd I'm not sure if it makes it impossible or imperative that a new QB is brought in. They've got $65mil in cap commitments that will need to be accounted for over the next 1-3 years.

The biggest problem is Julio Jones's contract. He gets paid all that money and never plays all the games in a season. I still haven't seen him live up to the money he makes honestly.

- - - Updated - - -

4) Atlanta - do they want a QB? Maybe?
.

I want either to trade back and get more picks or Sewell or maybe Rousseau

[Grube]

He couldn't win the job over Fromm at UGA. Just have this feeling he'll be a bust.

Players transfer all the time, doesn't necessarily mean much for their playing ability. Joe Burrow didn't beat out Haskins and had to transfer to start too.

[Espo]

The Ohio State QBs have not had success argument makes no sense at all for Fields.

I tend to think this argument doesn't make sense for any QB. The whole notion of "X college isn't a good QB school" is certainly correct, except not in the way most people think. The reality is every college is a bad QB school. There isn't some college that is an all-pro QB factory. If it exists and I missed it--please correct me.

Plenty of schools have a track record of producing OK or simply pro level QBs (USC, Purdue, etc), but not good/great ones. The best QB school is what? Stanford? With Luck and Elway? (that's best alumni I can think of from one school). There isn't a QB school like an Alabama for defense (maybe WR if this keeps up) or a USC for RBs (historically, at least).

I'm not sure why the whole school argument comes into play with QBs so much--it's so unreliable as a means to predict what everyone wants: an All-Pro Super Bowl capable QB (by capable I mean a net plus, not someone getting carried along).

The best QBs in the NFL are from all over the map--Michigan, Texas-Tech, Clemson, Cal, Wisconsin, Wyoming.

[Crissi]

I tend to think this argument doesn't make sense for any QB. The whole notion of "X college isn't a good QB school" is certainly correct, except not in the way most people think. The reality is every college is a bad QB school. There isn't some college that is an all-pro QB factory. If it exists and I missed it--please correct me.

Plenty of schools have a track record of producing OK or simply pro level QBs (USC, Purdue, etc), but not good/great ones. The best QB school is what? Stanford? With Luck and Elway? (that's best alumni I can think of from one school). There isn't a QB school like an Alabama for defense (maybe WR if this keeps up) or a USC for RBs (historically, at least).

I'm not sure why the whole school argument comes into play with QBs so much--it's so unreliable as a means to predict what everyone wants: an All-Pro Super Bowl capable QB (by capable I mean a net plus, not someone getting carried along).

The best QBs in the NFL are from all over the map--Michigan, Texas-Tech, Clemson, Cal, Wisconsin, Wyoming.

I think its because Ohio State has been elite for so long, that people confuse eliteness with NFL caliber QB play when that's often not the case. Having talent at every other position can cover up a lot of deficiencies.

[Brubear]

I think its because Ohio State has been elite for so long, that people confuse eliteness with NFL caliber QB play when that's often not the case. Having talent at every other position can cover up a lot of deficiencies.

This is how I sort of see it playing out.

Take Alabama, for example. With the dearth of talent they always have at WR, RB, and OL, you don't have to be a Josh Allen, Alex Smith, or Patrick Mahomes to shine. Half the time you just have to throw the ball up, which you'll have plenty of time to do because you have a bunch of 5-star players blocking for you, and your 5-star WRs will catch it as long as it's remotely close. DBs shutting down your WR? Hand it off to one of your 3 5-star RBs and they'll run through the giant holes that big OL will make. Meanwhile you have a stacked defense shutting down the other team.

You don't have to be an NFL-caliber QB to shine on those sorts of teams. You don't have to work as hard as a player from Vandy, Wyoming, or North Texas to get national recognition, because you'll get that just by being a half-competent team playing for a perennial favorite. That could lead you to not being as ready for the NFL as a QB from a lesser school who has to work a lot harder to get the attention of NFL scouts.

I'm not saying that this is the case often enough for it to actually be the cause of OSU QBs struggling to excel in the NFL. I'd imagine even after looking at it deeper it'd be inconclusive at best just by nature of there being far more players at the collegiate level than the NFL can support, never mind the regular turnover in coaching staffs at most schools. But it could be a way to explain it. Call it the Collegiate Trent Dilfer Theory.

[Grube]

There are also very few top schools running NFL style offenses. Playing under center is a big adjustment, let alone making adjustments at the line. Some schools don't even huddle. The ones that run offenses closest to the NFL just tend to not get the best recruits. Those schools as a whole are somewhat consistent at producing backups that stick around a while though. For example, Michigan State by themselves had Drew Stanton, Hoyer the Destroyer and Kirk Cousins all in a row. While none of them are amazing starters, Cousins is solid and Hoyer/Stanton have stuck around for a long time as basically extra QB coaches.

[draynay]

Its pretty common for NFL teams to sour on certain schools or coaches for not producing successful NFL players. Part of the reason Aaron Rodgers fell in the draft was because of that perception regarding Coach Tedford and some unremarkable QBs.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/draft05/col...len&id=2039797

I remembered it coming up in the typical draft leadup talk so I went and found an old article on the subject.