Mariota more than likely to be released per source.

[Gumby]

I did not word it well. That number is down to 25. When I did the research for my comment, the context was active players from last year's roster on game day. . . . . We need to add about 20+ starters at this point. People don't realize that. I don't count Bill Banjo the prospect from Screw U. who is camp fodder. I used the active roster for the January 3 vs the Jets who are not FA. It was 28 guys returning. Those who were inactive or on the PS are jags and expendable.

So, does that 28 include the 8 COVID opt-outs?

They weren’t on 3 Jan game day roster but can’t be counted as ‘camp fodder’ either. They just skipped a year.

 

[RIpats88]

I agree. I have been saying this the entire time since last offseason about him. He'd be a system fit and over the whole season somewhere between a "good" to "above average" QB.

He will have games where he looks like a potential solution, and other times he will be making dumb mistakes.

But with a competent defense and outstanding ST that is most likely enough for a playoff berth.

Any higher (or significantly lower) expectations with Mariota are to me not particularly reasonable.

Thats what a bridge guy is supposed to do.

Again anyone that rather wants to tank because they think this speeds the process up despite history telling us overwhelmingly otherwise is watching the wrong team with the wrong coaching staff.

How many times have we seen these teams who tank find "their guy" and still struggle because they are so decimated in other areas that it is still going to take years to rebuild.

Ravens never tanked, Chiefs never tanked,.....and those two teams are who we consider some of the most successful in the NFL right now. Chargers never tanked either and seem to have found "their guy." Cowboys never tanked, they were winning with Romo when they drafted Dak prescott. So this idea that you have to become a bottom of the barrel team to find a QB is just not based in reality. If anything you keep shooting your draft picks until one hits and you can have a guy step into a good situation. rather than having to build from the ground up.

now, I think of the teams who tank and think of a team like the Jets, picking a top QB every year. Or the colts who were so decimated in other areas they forced Andrew Luck into retirement.

 

[50-yard-line]

If anything you keep shooting your draft picks until one hits and you can have a guy step into a good situation. rather than having to build from the ground up.

Bingo.

Situation is everything for a QB. (I say this as someone who watched Jim Plunkett get buried on every drop-back.)

Andrew Luck could have had a 1st ballot HoF career if he had stepped into a better situation.

 

[Ross12]

This is exactly why we will not be spending on big time premium players, but instead signing a lot of released players on the cheap and maybe one or two, tier 2 or tier 3 free agent receivers!

Part of me expects to watch Bill ONLY sign cut players so he can still get a comp pick for departing players like Thuney while being a “buyer” instead of a “seller” for once.

 

[Ring 6]

Part of me expects to watch Bill ONLY sign cut players so he can still get a comp pick for departing players like Thuney while being a “buyer” instead of a “seller” for once.

You speak as if buyer or seller is a choice and not determined by the cap.
of course he is a buyer this year with at least 62 mill to spend.

 

[Ross12]

You speak as if buyer or seller is a choice and not determined by the cap.
of course he is a buyer this year with at least 62 mill to spend.

Not my intention there, what I was trying to say was that he is a buyer by virtue of having more cap space than usual plus having comparatively more than most other teams this year.

 

[venecol]

Not my intention there, what I was trying to say was that he is a buyer by virtue of having more cap space than usual plus having comparatively more than most other teams this year.

Your post was pretty clear to most people.

 

[RIpats88]

The latest buzz on the NFL quarterback market - The Boston Globe

About half the league is in the mix for a quarterback in one shape or form.

www.bostonglobe.com

I feel like we are being set up for cam newton to return.

Bill Belichick’s praise for Cam Newton throughout the 2020 season wasn’t an act. Multiple sources who have spoken with Belichick this offseason said he does nothing but rave about Newton and the effort the quarterback put forth in 2020. The only problem Belichick is concerned with is Newton’s arm strength, with Newton having suffered multiple shoulder injuries in the last five years. In 2019, Newton acknowledged on his YouTube channel that his injuries sapped his ability to throw downfield.

RELATED: Cam Newton opened up about his season with the Patriots on a podcast. Here’s what we learned
But Belichick did seem to genuinely enjoy coaching Newton, and multiple sources said they would not be surprised to see Newton back with the Patriots, especially if he’s willing to take another cheap contract (though probably not minimum salary again). But everyone also expects the Patriots to draft a quarterback in the first few rounds.

 

[Love The Drake]

The latest buzz on the NFL quarterback market - The Boston Globe

About half the league is in the mix for a quarterback in one shape or form.

www.bostonglobe.com

I feel like we are being set up for cam newton to return.

When has Bill ever talked bad about a player?
I’m sure the he greatly appreciates the effort the Care and the time Cam put in.
By all accounts he did that and was loved by the players. Bill isn’t stupid enough to say Cam can’t physically do it anymore to anywhere where things are going to come out.
How would Bill look to the players?
He would look Terrible.

 

[RIpats88]

When has Bill ever talked bad about a player?
I’m sure the he greatly appreciates the effort the Care and the time Cam put in.
By all accounts he did that and was loved by the players. Bill isn’t stupid enough to say Cam can’t physically do it anymore to anywhere where things are going to come out.
How would Bill look to the players?
He would look Terrible.

yeah, i guess the more telling part of the article is that bill is concerned about Newtons arm strength. Which would mean that was a part of his struggles last year as the season wore on.

 

[Scotty]

I am probably way wrong here but if Cam comes back does that raise the chances that the Pats are going to trade up in the draft for a QB ??

 

[mgteich]

Part of me expects to watch Bill ONLY sign cut players so he can still get a comp pick for departing players like Thuney while being a “buyer” instead of a “seller” for once.

We will likely get nothing for Thuney, not even a comp pick.

 

[Deus Irae]

How many times have we seen these teams who tank find "their guy" and still struggle because they are so decimated in other areas that it is still going to take years to rebuild.

Ravens never tanked, Chiefs never tanked,.....and those two teams are who we consider some of the most successful in the NFL right now. Chargers never tanked either and seem to have found "their guy." Cowboys never tanked, they were winning with Romo when they drafted Dak prescott. So this idea that you have to become a bottom of the barrel team to find a QB is just not based in reality. If anything you keep shooting your draft picks until one hits and you can have a guy step into a good situation. rather than having to build from the ground up.

now, I think of the teams who tank and think of a team like the Jets, picking a top QB every year. Or the colts who were so decimated in other areas they forced Andrew Luck into retirement.

The Chiefs had been nothing since Montana. Their 2007 - 2012 stretch featured seasons with 4,2,4 and 2 wins. They got "their guy" when they moved up in the draft (2 firsts and a 3rd to go from 27 to 10) to get him.

The Colts problem wasn't the tanking, obviously.


That's two, so I'll leave it there.

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

We will likely get nothing for Thuney, not even a comp pick.

Lots of good players being released who don't count against the formula. I am very confident Bill will get his #3 comp pick for Thuney while watching the formula and signing released players.

 

[Ross12]

We will likely get nothing for Thuney, not even a comp pick.

Lots of good players being released who don't count against the formula. I am very confident Bill will get his #3 comp pick for Thuney while watching the formula and signing released players.

It’s certainly possible they will get nothing but as said above, theoretically they could target mostly released players that don’t count against the formula.

 

[Sciz]

The Chargers executed this perfectly last year. They canceled out a $8.5M addition with a $3M loss (Adrian Phillips, by the way) and still kept the 3rd round comp pick for Rivers.

Nick Korte projects the 3rd/4th round cutoff to be just over $14M. Hypothetically, losing Thuney, Wise, and Butler (while keeping Andrews and Guy) would allow them to sign two $14M qualifying free agents without canceling out Thuney’s comp pick. Maybe Newton and White leave and qualify too. Add in the cut free agents that can be freely signed, and I expect them to get that Thuney pick.

 

[RIpats88]

The Chiefs had been nothing since Montana. Their 2007 - 2012 stretch featured seasons with 4,2,4 and 2 wins. They got "their guy" when they moved up in the draft (2 firsts and a 3rd to go from 27 to 10) to get him.

The Colts problem wasn't the tanking, obviously.


That's two, so I'll leave it there.

The chiefs were a playoff team with Alex Smith when they drafted Mahomes. Are we forgetting that? And as you said, traded up to get their guy. They didn't tank to draft Mahomes.

They already had tyreek hill and kelce in place. It's pure revisionist history to ignore that to make the case that they tanked to get mahomes.

The colts tanked to get luck. Then it took them years to put a competent roster around him. By then he retired.

Both are not good examples of teams who "tanked" to get their QB being successful.

 

[lancerman]

The chiefs were a playoff team with Alex Smith when they drafted Mahomes. Are we forgetting that? And as you said, traded up to get their guy. They didn't tank to draft Mahomes.

They already had tyreek hill and kelce in place. It's pure revisionist history to ignore that to make the case that they tanked to get mahomes.

The colts tanked to get luck. Then it took them years to put a competent roster around him. By then he retired.

Both are not good examples of teams who "tanked" to get their QB being successful.

This is true. The Chiefs since 2013 have had a winning season every year and made the playoffs all but once (2014, ironically the year they whipped us). In fact, all those years but 2014, were double digit win seasons. And three of three of those years they had the Manning Broncos in their way.

Mahomes just took them from being consistently in the playoffs to being actual Super Bowl contenders.

They also traded up to get Mahomes. They were actually slated to pick 27th the year they got him.

I don't even know if the Colts tanked tbh. They were already falling apart around 2010 with Peyton and it was clear that team was in decline. Then they had Painter who was probably the worst starting QB of the last decade because they got caught with their pants down. Maybe at the end they stopped putting their best foot forward, but they were bad. Luck fixed alot of problems, but it took until 2018 for them to really build back up.

 

[Deus Irae]

The chiefs were a playoff team with Alex Smith when they drafted Mahomes. Are we forgetting that? And as you said, traded up to get their guy. They didn't tank to draft Mahomes.

They already had tyreek hill and kelce in place. It's pure revisionist history to ignore that to make the case that they tanked to get mahomes.

The colts tanked to get luck. Then it took them years to put a competent roster around him. By then he retired.

Both are not good examples of teams who "tanked" to get their QB being successful.

You're wrong about the Colts. It was a one year tank, for a team that went 10-6, 2-14. 11-5, and then proceeded to get into the playoffs and improve there one game per year before Luck's injuries started to hit.

As for the Chiefs, the whole point was that, while they didn't "tank", they had been put into the position they were in because of years of struggles. Instead of tanking, they chose to mortgage a piece of their future. They were able to do that because of, for example, Fisher and Kelce in 2013 (both products of having the top picks in the rounds), and because they were in a position where they were willing to gamble on some really sketchy prospects, several of which panned out at least fairly well for them. In short, the Chiefs are where they are in large part because of earlier struggles, a willingness to take in shady characters, a willingness to gamble a bit of their future for a QB, and a really bad decision by the Chicago Bears.

 

[stinkypete]

Sign the beast?