manxman2601
PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2011
- Messages
- 30,077
- Reaction score
- 25,532
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Interesting considering their need
Suggests they really are moving up for one of the top four.
Or they’re really trying to disquise their interest in LJ. Heard a story a few days back of Denver doing a similar strategy with cutler.
Interesting considering their need
Suggests they really are moving up for one of the top four.
Interesting considering their need
Suggests they really are moving up for one of the top four.
Well that’s open minded.I'm sure the Bills opinion of Lamar Jackson is exactly what fits with my opinion of the player so I'm going with smokescreen.
Well that’s open minded.
So the bills will draft the qb. of their future without ever speaking to him, because they want to trick others into thinking they dint like him? Because everyone has to evaluate him like you do.
I'm sorry but you are being a homer. Right now nearly every team in the league would take the 34 year old guy whose considered the best physical specimen to every play the position even if Brady is the GOAT. If they both were in their prime maybe it would be a little different.What the hell are you talking about? Not one team would take Rodgers over Brady. Even Cleveland would get that right.
But that's not even relevant to the general issue of run v. pocket. Exceptions aren't the rule, by definition.
There's nothing wrong with having a "pocket" QB who can run. But the list of successful NFL true quality QBs who aren't/weren't "pocket" QBs in their thoughts can be read off of one hand, and you'd still have fingers to spare.
I'm sorry but you are being a homer. Right now nearly every team in the league would take the 34 year old guy whose considered the best physical specimen to every play the position even if Brady is the GOAT. If they both were in their prime maybe it would be a little different.
But right now today, if Rodgers hit free agency, every team in the league would be making a run at him and would consider discarding their current QB. Even Belichick would think about it.
He's intriguing, but I just don't want a damn 1st round pick spent on a QB (let alone 2 packaged to trade up) especially when the team needs some major talent infusion on both sides of the ball. There's holes/aging players/question marks at LT, TE, WR, RB, LB, Safety (Chung and McCourty turn 31 soon).
QBs in the 1st round are the biggest gamble you can possibly take. Now factor in a guy like this with a low completion %, low football intellect, primarily familiar with running, and needs developing as a passer. No thanks.
Ride it out with Brady and go for #6. Build a young, strong, reliable defense that'll be there for Brady, who deserves it, and his future successor when the time comes.
Yeah that's not what it typically means. Right now you could try to make the case for a team to pick Brady over Rodgers, but the reality is you would only be trying to change minds. Most teams would easily go Rodgers with his age and physical tool set. He's the best QB in the league who isn't dangerously near the end.I wasn't being a homer, at all. You called for a re-draft. A re-draft typically means you go back to when players were drafted, armed with the information you have now, and you do the draft armed with that knowledge. Knowing what everyone knows now, Tom Brady would be the #1 pick chosen in any draft of all available players, and nobody would give a comparative damn about the #2 pick.
Now, if you want to talk about who you'd take over all other players as they are today, I could still make a case for Brady (3 SBs in his last 4 seasons is 2 more SBs than Rodgers has in his entire career, after all), and I could make a case for other QBs as well (Russell Wilson and Carson Wentz come quickly to mind), though I'd give a great deal of thought to going with Rodgers.
Yeah that's not what it typically means.
Right now you could try to make the case for a team to pick Brady over Rodgers, but the reality is you would only be trying to change minds. Most teams would easily go Rodgers with his age and physical tool set. He's the best QB in the league who isn't dangerously near the end.
You're confusing a redraft for a specific year and a redraft today. They are two different things.Yeah, it is what it typically means, and media outlets do that crap all the time as a means of filler and clicks. Here are a few quick examples, from more than just the NFL:
2010 NFL Re-Draft: Rams Get Suh, Jags Land Gronk
2010 NFL Re-Draft: Gronk to Seahawks, Chancellor to Patriots, Tebow Plunges
Re-Draft of the 2017 NBA Lottery Picks…How Far Down Does Markelle Fultz Fall?
2011 NFL Draft Do-Over: Buffalo Bills land J.J. Watt at No. 3
I don't buy your argument. Being 34 (will turn 35 during the season), missing about half a season in two of the last 5 years, and putting up a decidedly underwhelming career w/l record would have a lot of people thinking beyond Rodgers. Wentz, for example, would give teams an extra decade, and Wilson would give an extra 5 years. I'm a big Rodgers fan but, if you're going to play the "as they are now" game, I can see excellent arguments for several different players as the #1 selection.
You're confusing a redraft for a specific year and a redraft today. They are two different things.
I don't care if you buy the argument. The reality is across the league Rodgers is considered the most physically talented QB of this generation and possibly ever and there's alot of GM's who would take him over Brady outright without considering age just based off that. Add age and it becomes a no brainer. Oh he got injured and missed his 10th season as a starter? I seem to remember some other QB who got injured and missed his 8th season as a starter.
Wentz could be a flash in the pan like a dozen other first or 2nd year QB's. Also he's more of an injury liability. Wilson is the only other QB I'd consider.
I'm not confusing anything. You chose the wrong term and I responded appropriately to it. I've answered for both the re-draft and the "if you could choose one player from today" options. Let it go.
I don't care if you keep posting your weak argument, and you're out of your mind if you think GMs would pick Rodgers over Brady without the age factor. And calling Wentz more of an injury liability when both he and Rodgers just had lost seasons, but Rodgers' was his second in five years, is ridiculous.
Comments from Belichick, social media acknowledgement from Brady, the obligatory pics from Logan, “super secret” meetings, and having the story conveniently repeated again a few days ago were all very strong hints that you hit the nail on the head.Like I said... disinformation.
Captain you are off the rails.Not that I wanted him anyway - at all - but I still would've taken LJ than a ****ing RB...
...or, better still...
TRADE THE ****ING PICK TO THE RAVENS, BILL, YOU ****ING IDIOT.