What quarterback in the 2020 draft do you want to lead this team

[Coffeedrinker 7,075]

48 minutes ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

As it currently stands, he isn't sliding out of the Top 1. He's a lock to go first, he's put enough on film against several defenses loaded with NFL talent. Google it, scouts are drooling over this kid, so much so that he's supplanted Tua as the QB1 in the class, which is no easy feat. 

Glaser did a section on Fox NFL Sunday after the game and he said he spoke with 4 GMs and they were still on the Tua bandwagon and did not feel Burrow's performance did anything to change that.

 

That is only 4 out of 32.  But that holds a bit more weight than scouts.

[Colts_Fan12 5,384]

21 hours ago, Stephen said:

Why are you so high on love. He has a 11 tds and 12 ints

dude he has already explained it to you. did you just ignore his posts explaining why he likes him? 

[Cynjin 2,883]

20 hours ago, Mr.NotSoCreative said:

There are a few schools you dont draft QBs from USC, Ohio St, Florida. I like Hurts, Love, Burrow (Purdue transfer n PU has put out some great NFL qbs). Also, some of the really bad teams took qbs last year. Deep class and not the usual high need, we could get one. 

 

Burrow transferred from Ohio State.

[Mr.NotSoCreative 259]

1 hour ago, Cynjin said:

 

Burrow transferred from Ohio State.

Ah that was Etling, thx. 

[Thunderbolt 58]

Keeping this trend, we'll probably end up with a blue chip QB. 

 

 

[MFT5 408]

2 hours ago, MikeCurtis said:

Jordan Love needs another year in the college system

 

He has tried to be everything to his team, and has failed this year

 

If he comes out......  he is doing it prematurely

 

But.......

 

I would ABSOLUTELY take the kid (If he comes out) if he is still available for our 2nd round pick in the 2nd

 

He has a TON of talent... needs some more time "in the oven"

 

He could sit behind JB next year and maybe be the franchise player the year following

 

 

thats why i’m taking him he’s perfect for our situation. Personally i’ll take him w our mid 1st but that’s me if we can get him w the Redskins 2nd even better. He might be the most talented QB en the draft and w Brissett under contract for a year i dnt see the downside en letting our nxt QB learn behind the scenes. Jordan Love almost makes too much sense.

[Kenzicocapontas 23]

2 minutes ago, MFT5 said:

 

thats why i’m taking him he’s perfect for our situation. Personally i’ll take him w our mid 1st but that’s me if we can get him w the Redskins 2nd even better. He might be the most talented QB en the draft and w Brissett under contract for a year i dnt see the downside en letting our nxt QB learn behind the scenes. Jordan Love almost makes too much sense.

To follow along with this train of thought, Im down to pick him up in the second, and get a playmaker in the first round like WR. I do think love might slip to the second round. Him having a bad year could seriously have landed him in our hand. Ballard was high on him before the season. No matter what the choices be though, I hope we keep our first rounder this year. We need some more first round talent.

[SouthernIndianaNDFan 643]

7 hours ago, Kenzicocapontas said:

To follow along with this train of thought, Im down to pick him up in the second, and get a playmaker in the first round like WR. I do think love might slip to the second round. Him having a bad year could seriously have landed him in our hand. Ballard was high on him before the season. No matter what the choices be though, I hope we keep our first rounder this year. We need some more first round talent.

Dude, can you imagine if Lamb were to slip to Indy? Or Ruggs? Or if we end up sh*ttanking rest the way out we may get up into Jerry Jeudy range. They need another playmaker or 2 on offense, and I hate to say it but Marlon Mack hasn't looked good, which is saying something running behind that line. I wouldn't at all be surprised to see them take a RB on Day 2 in a loaded 2020 class, maybe a guy like Cam Akers or JK Dobbins, guys that are dual threats ala Lev Bell. 

[bertjones7 108]

On 11/11/2019 at 5:15 PM, stitches said:

I posted earlier in the thread about it. I like his traits and physical attributes. The kid has a lot of talent. He's not played great this year, but there are a lot of things that go into it. He does a lot of the things he needs to do really well. He has great arm, he has amazing playmaking on the move(I see why NFL execs compare him to Mahomes), he has really good pocket presence and he moves in the pocket well, steps into his throws fearlessly. And for a player with such a strong arm, you have to see his touch passes, they are a thing of beauty, he can put air under the ball, he has variety of passes and the ball looks beautiful leaving his arm on most of them. He has the bullet passes, he has the lob passes, his "drop in the bucket" passes to the boundary are awesome, he has sidearm passes.

 

That's not to say he is amazing at everything(if he was, we wouldn't be talking about him dropping to the second round). He needs work on his footwork, he needs work on his decisionmaking, because he has been making a lot of wth throws this year... throws where you sit there and wonder why did he think he can fit the ball in that window, or why didn't he see the lurking defender, etc. IMO a lot of it has to do with him being forced to do too much because of how horrible the rest of his roster is. Just feels like he's trying to compensate because he knows if he doesn't score 35-40 they aren't winning. 

 

He's raw and he needs work, but his traits and talent are very high level... I'd draft him and sit him to learn behind Brissett for the first year and I would let Frank develop him over the duration of the season. 

Your post pretty much summarizes my thoughts. Love stood out to me last year and I have made a point to watch several Utah St games this year. 
 

His talent and upside just jump off the screen. Love looked terrific this weekend. 
 

He still makes ill advised throws but keep in mind he is working with a new coaching staff and skill players.  It is easy to focus on his mistakes, but if they can be corrected he might have the most talent in the draft. 
 

Regarding Burrow, he is without a doubt having a terrific year. Prior to drafting him, I think you need really need to understand why he struggled so much in 2018 and has exploded this year. I know the old LSU offense was bad, but is this current scheme so good and the Wrs so talented that he is looking better than he actually is. 
 

Two of the reasons cfb prospects are so hard to evaluate (especially at Qb), are the big talent discrepancies between teams and the diverse offensive systems.  

[Colt Overseas 534]

3 hours ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

Dude, can you imagine if Lamb were to slip to Indy? Or Ruggs? Or if we end up sh*ttanking rest the way out we may get up into Jerry Jeudy range. They need another playmaker or 2 on offense, and I hate to say it but Marlon Mack hasn't looked good, which is saying something running behind that line. I wouldn't at all be surprised to see them take a RB on Day 2 in a loaded 2020 class, maybe a guy like Cam Akers or JK Dobbins, guys that are dual threats ala Lev Bell. 

 

CeeDee Lamb would be the dream pick imo. Reminds me a lot of Hopkins/Thomas, good size, great route runner and hands. Means he could take on a high volume of targets in the short/intermediate range, something I think Frank Reich badly needs (that's why he was high on signing Funchess). Put him on the boundary opposite Hilton and Campbell in the slot and we have serious options. Not as high on Ruggs when we already have Hilton.

 

I like Mack as a lead back, but not 25 carries a game. I would prefer a legit RB2 to take some of that load off him, preferably a RB to compliments his game, so a heavier, more physical, north/south RB. This draft has options in the mid round.

[DEFENSE 95]

dont see any game changers, no nfl ready qb, who could start, dont waste a high pick on any of them

[Imgrandojji 979]

I remain extremely satisfied with Brissett's performance.  As flaws and holes appear on the roster it becomes more and more clear that Brissett is doing things with this team that not very many other QBs could do. 

 

JB may or may not be elite but the man's a leader who makes good decisions on the field and he won't cost you points out there with boneheaded errors.  .  That's a valuable skillset whether or not he ever develops into an elite thrower. 

 

He's been good for 2-3 wins this year that we might not have gotten without him.  He's more than pulling his weight out there, just not in the way we're used to.  And I wish that fans would be quicker to recognize that.

 

  Now that we've seen some of the things we took for granted with Brissett not happening on the field without him (turnovers, lack of focus, etc) IMHO it should become pretty obvious that he's our QB for the time being.  Replacing that skillset is not going to be easy.

[aaron11 2,344]

We could find an upgrade outside of the first round in this class, but they may not be a day one starter

 

lots of potential here, but no absolute locks

[Matthew Gilbert 339]

On 11/11/2019 at 10:43 AM, Jared Cisneros said:

Who would you take in the 2nd round? Fromm is looking horrible, and there's not a lot of talent outside the big 3.

You're just looking at Fromm's stats then and not his film. Fromm is doing exactly what is asked of him. UGA's scheme is too pound the ball and beat you with defense.

[DEFENSE 95]

36 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

I remain extremely satisfied with Brissett's performance.  As flaws and holes appear on the roster it becomes more and more clear that Brissett is doing things with this team that not very many other QBs could do. 

 

JB may or may not be elite but the man's a leader who makes good decisions on the field and he won't cost you points out there with boneheaded errors.  .  That's a valuable skillset whether or not he ever develops into an elite thrower. 

 

He's been good for 2-3 wins this year that we might not have gotten without him.  He's more than pulling his weight out there, just not in the way we're used to.  And I wish that fans would be quicker to recognize that.

 

  Now that we've seen some of the things we took for granted with Brissett not happening on the field without him (turnovers, lack of focus, etc) IMHO it should become pretty obvious that he's our QB for the time being.  Replacing that skillset is not going to be easy.

i agree we can win with him

[Valpo2004 3,646]

On 11/11/2019 at 4:35 PM, Colts1919 said:

Soooo .. no discussion of putting Newton behind a good offensive line - getting another receiver, adding more D in the draft and Winning a Super Bowl??? 

 

No thanks.  Newton has some talent, although I think injuries are starting to take their toll on him.

 

But him not falling on the fumble in the Super bowl speaks a lot about him.

 

On 11/11/2019 at 5:15 PM, stitches said:

I posted earlier in the thread about it. I like his traits and physical attributes. The kid has a lot of talent. He's not played great this year, but there are a lot of things that go into it. He does a lot of the things he needs to do really well. He has great arm, he has amazing playmaking on the move(I see why NFL execs compare him to Mahomes), he has really good pocket presence and he moves in the pocket well, steps into his throws fearlessly. And for a player with such a strong arm, you have to see his touch passes, they are a thing of beauty, he can put air under the ball, he has variety of passes and the ball looks beautiful leaving his arm on most of them. He has the bullet passes, he has the lob passes, his "drop in the bucket" passes to the boundary are awesome, he has sidearm passes.

 

That's not to say he is amazing at everything(if he was, we wouldn't be talking about him dropping to the second round). He needs work on his footwork, he needs work on his decisionmaking, because he has been making a lot of wth throws this year... throws where you sit there and wonder why did he think he can fit the ball in that window, or why didn't he see the lurking defender, etc. IMO a lot of it has to do with him being forced to do too much because of how horrible the rest of his roster is. Just feels like he's trying to compensate because he knows if he doesn't score 35-40 they aren't winning. 

 

He's raw and he needs work, but his traits and talent are very high level... I'd draft him and sit him to learn behind Brissett for the first year and I would let Frank develop him over the duration of the season. 

 

The thing that I don't like is that it feels to me that a crap ton of quarterbacks bust because GM's drafted them chasing their ceiling because they had all those physical tools and their massive faults where just flat out ignored.  

 

The other thing with Love is that given his bad season this year, I would think he likely chooses to return for his senior year

 

[Valpo2004 3,646]

1 hour ago, Matthew Gilbert said:

You're just looking at Fromm's stats then and not his film. Fromm is doing exactly what is asked of him. UGA's scheme is too pound the ball and beat you with defense.

 

Stat wise I think Fromm actually only had one bad game.

 

The concern with Fromm is that he always had great help around him and his upside is all between the ears.  In terms of arm strength and athleticism he's limited.  

 

High floor I suppose but low ceiling.  Feels like his ceiling could be Tom Brady today in his 40's.  

[bertjones7 108]

1 hour ago, Matthew Gilbert said:

You're just looking at Fromm's stats then and not his film. Fromm is doing exactly what is asked of him. UGA's scheme is too pound the ball and beat you with defense.

This goes back to the point I tried to make earlier in this thread about two of the reasons cfb prospects are so hard to evaluate (especially at Qb), are the big talent discrepancies between teams and the diverse offensive systems. 
 

If Fromm or Love were playing in LSU’s new scheme with that talent at WR, how would they look?  Conversely, how would Burrow look in UGA’s very slow paced old school offense?  
 

Keep in mind Burrow really struggled in that type of offense in 2018 and had a 57.8% completion %. This years he is at 78.9%. 

[SouthernIndianaNDFan 643]

1 hour ago, Matthew Gilbert said:

You're just looking at Fromm's stats then and not his film. Fromm is doing exactly what is asked of him. UGA's scheme is too pound the ball and beat you with defense.

Fromm is basically an upgraded Jacoby Brissett, a high-end game manager that won't turn the ball over and makes enough plays to win you some games. I'd take Fromm over JB. 

 

I'd say take a guy like Jordan Love or Jacob Eason with the Redskins pick and develop them for a year under JB. End of next year, stick with whichever guy you're more confident will take you where you wanna go. 

[Imgrandojji 979]

On 11/11/2019 at 4:35 PM, Colts1919 said:

Soooo .. no discussion of putting Newton behind a good offensive line - getting another receiver, adding more D in the draft and Winning a Super Bowl??? 

Because Cam Newton has won so many Superbowls.

 

This myth that elite QBs win Superbowls needs to die.  See sig for the truth.

 

I'd have some interest in signing Newton is he was willing to move to RB.  But that shoulder is cooked.  It is a dead shoulder.

 

  

[Chloe6124 5,675]

Cam Newton is done. He doesn’t even fit Reichs system.

[Chloe6124 5,675]

3 hours ago, bertjones7 said:

This goes back to the point I tried to make earlier in this thread about two of the reasons cfb prospects are so hard to evaluate (especially at Qb), are the big talent discrepancies between teams and the diverse offensive systems. 
 

If Fromm or Love were playing in LSU’s new scheme with that talent at WR, how would they look?  Conversely, how would Burrow look in UGA’s very slow paced old school offense?  
 

Keep in mind Burrow really struggled in that type of offense in 2018 and had a 57.8% completion %. This years he is at 78.9%. 

This is why you have to be careful taking guys from from big schools with a lot of talent. Your scouts have to be able sift through the weeds and really be able to evaluate. It’s also why some great nfl QB go later in the draft and scouts miss the potential.

[Chloe6124 5,675]

Right now the right thing to do is continue to build around Jacoby. Use those draft picks and make this team stronger.  JB hasn’t done anything yet to lose the job. Let’s see what happens building with JB. He has to many intangibles to not keep going with him. 

[Myles 2,615]

Lots of variables with the Colts QB situation of the future.   I think Brissett is the starter next year.

Do they feel Kelly can start?

Do they keep Hoyer?   They already paid him $9 million of his $12 contract so it would be "financially sound" to keep him.  But he isn't great and he may be blocking a future developing QB.   The cap hit is done anyway, so without the money issue, they could just cut him.   

Do they draft a QB in the 1st or 2nd round to work behind Brissett for a year and they can evaluate what they have at that time?

Do they sign a free agent QB?    I think this is least likely.  

[jameszeigler834 1,574]

On 11/10/2019 at 9:29 PM, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

If they kept playing Hoyer we'd probably have our pick of the litter lol. 

 

In all seriousness, if they're picking in the 15-20 range they could take Herbert, Love, Fromm, or Hurts. If they wait til the 2nd then that list probably shrinks considerably. Idk that they take anyone, a lot will depend on how JB finishes the season, but up to this point he's been fairly impressive. 

Love is a project that probably wont ever be the answer I would take Hurts over him.

[horseshoecrabs 635]

There is no one out there,  via FA or the upcoming draft, that I would give up more years that  I can see right now over a healthy Jacoby that knows the current system. When the time comes, It will be right, but not out desperation. I would rather try to progress, for now, than take a back step for a few years waiting for the perfect QB to develop. 

[Chloe6124 5,675]

1 hour ago, horseshoecrabs said:

There is no one out there,  via FA or the upcoming draft, that I would give up more years that  I can see right now over a healthy Jacoby that knows the current system. When the time comes, It will be right, but not out desperation. I would rather try to progress, for now, than take a back step for a few years waiting for the perfect QB to develop. 

YEP. Why take a chance of going backwards if you don’t have to. Jacoby has enough talent and intangibles to keep building around him. There is no need to make a change just to change. 

[The Fish 2,002]

The offense is supposed to be built, by in large and when circumstances are good (going against average D's) JB can operate, but the question is what's his ceiling and will that facilitate winning a title or hinder it. It's still sort of up in the air, and it's not clear cut that he should just be penciled in. Honestly, I think the Jag's D is going to give him hell and I can't shake the feeling. 

[Imgrandojji 979]

5 hours ago, jameszeigler834 said:

Love is a project that probably wont ever be the answer I would take Hurts over him.

There isn't a single QB in this draft that I want to see starting over JB next year.  That being the case this is something of a moot point.

 

Honestly think we need to spend the first round pick on either a top RB or some help up the middle defensively. 

 

Getting starry eyes for a QB at this point is probably putting the cart before the horse.  We are not Jameis Winston, Josh Rosen or Ryan Leaf away from winning anything.

[Imgrandojji 979]

1 hour ago, The Fish said:

The offense is supposed to be built, by in large and when circumstances are good (going against average D's) JB can operate, but the question is what's his ceiling and will that facilitate winning a title or hinder it. It's still sort of up in the air, and it's not clear cut that he should just be penciled in. Honestly, I think the Jag's D is going to give him hell and I can't shake the feeling. 

I disagree that the offense is built.  If Ballard actually thinks that this offense is built and that this is what a complete offense looks like I'd like to take the good look at the inside of his head sometime.

 

Our OL is the only part of the offense that I would honestly call top of the line.  Everything else has the air of an emergency field repair,, duct tape and baling wire and praying it will hold for 1 game at a time.  That's not a "built" offense.  The phrase I'd use for that kind of offense is "barely adequate."

 

Our running game?  Average.  Maybe a little above average.  No consistency from week to week and very limited ability to impose its will against high level defenses.   This was supposed to be our top offensive weapon.  Honestly it really hasn't been.  With a little luck on a good day our run game might be top 15.  I can't rate it better than that.  I certainly wouldn't consider Mack and company to be capable of leading an assault against a playoff team.

 

As for the throwing game, it's one of those things that insurance would write off an act of God.  The plan was good.  A bit optimistic, but good.  you just can't plan around that magnitude of attrition very easily.  

 

But at the same time, the optimism at the core of the thinking around assembling the receiving corps is alarming.   Everywhere after TY there are guys who you have to qualify their skillsets.  "on a good day, he can..." "if he can stay healthy, he will..."  "One year he..." having a few guys like that on the periphery of the offense is fine, building an offense out of them is not, an Ballard is guilty of the latter.

 

Quite frankly I've become concerned about Ballard that he might have a tendency to overthink things try too hard to be perfect.  To hit home runs on the cheap every time.  Gambling on broken pieces and average guys with upside is a decent way to supplement a strong core but you can't build a football team like that.  Not even Belichick would go to war with Edelman and a bunch of spare parts and expect to win anything.  Thats more or less what Ballard tried to do this year.

 

Perfect is the enemy of good, and if you ignore good decisions to chase perfect ones the usual result is mediocricy.  A little concerned here that Ballard may wind up learning that the hard way at our expense.

[The Fish 2,002]

26 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

I disagree that the offense is built.  If Ballard actually thinks that this offense is built and that this is what a complete offense looks like I'd like to take the good look at the inside of his head sometime.

 

Our OL is the only part of the offense that I would honestly call top of the line.  Everything else has the air of an emergency field repair,, duct tape and baling wire and praying it will hold for 1 game at a time.  That's not a "built" offense.  The phrase I'd use for that kind of offense is "barely adequate."

 

Our running game?  Average.  Maybe a little above average.  No consistency from week to week and very limited ability to impose its will against high level defenses.   This was supposed to be our top offensive weapon.  Honestly it really hasn't been.  With a little luck on a good day our run game might be top 15.  I can't rate it better than that.  I certainly wouldn't consider Mack and company to be capable of leading an assault against a playoff team.

 

As for the throwing game, it's one of those things that insurance would write off an act of God.  The plan was good.  A bit optimistic, but good.  you just can't plan around that magnitude of attrition very easily.  

 

But at the same time, the optimism at the core of the thinking around assembling the receiving corps is alarming.   Everywhere after TY there are guys who you have to qualify their skillsets.  "on a good day, he can..." "if he can stay healthy, he will..."  "One year he..." having a few guys like that on the periphery of the offense is fine, building an offense out of them is not, an Ballard is guilty of the latter.

 

Quite frankly I've become concerned about Ballard that he might have a tendency to overthink things try too hard to be perfect.  To hit home runs on the cheap every time.  Gambling on broken pieces and average guys with upside is a decent way to supplement a strong core but you can't build a football team like that.  Not even Belichick would go to war with Edelman and a bunch of spare parts and expect to win anything.  Thats more or less what Ballard tried to do this year.

 

Perfect is the enemy of good, and if you ignore good decisions to chase perfect ones the usual result is mediocricy.  A little concerned here that Ballard may wind up learning that the hard way at our expense.

You've got a stable of backs, a few good TE's, a few WR's not named TY who's a blue chip and a high draft pick in Campbell, then there's what should be a top offensive line. The talent is there. I'm not saying there aren't tweeks to be made, but this iteration of the offense is for lack of a better way of putting, "built",  the QB drama withstanding. There's a reason this team was pegged as a Super Bowl contender before the start of the season, and it's not because the D was supposed to be an all time unit.

[Chloe6124 5,675]

2 hours ago, The Fish said:

The offense is supposed to be built, by in large and when circumstances are good (going against average D's) JB can operate, but the question is what's his ceiling and will that facilitate winning a title or hinder it. It's still sort of up in the air, and it's not clear cut that he should just be penciled in. Honestly, I think the Jag's D is going to give him hell and I can't shake the feeling. 

I don’t think anyone thinks he should be penciled in. He still has to earn it and show he can improve and be the guy.  Some us just think there is enough there to build around to see what happens before just going out and picking up some other QB that is a totally unknown. There is no reason to panic. Like the above poster said we can let this play out. There is no need to rush. Now if they think there is another Mahomes maybe they take the risk. The way the oline has played I won’t be surprised if they give us problems. But he did get pressured a lot against the Texans and stood in the pocket and delivered. It’s all going to come down to if our offense can stay balanced Sunday.

[Chloe6124 5,675]

43 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

I disagree that the offense is built.  If Ballard actually thinks that this offense is built and that this is what a complete offense looks like I'd like to take the good look at the inside of his head sometime.

 

Our OL is the only part of the offense that I would honestly call top of the line.  Everything else has the air of an emergency field repair,, duct tape and baling wire and praying it will hold for 1 game at a time.  That's not a "built" offense.  The phrase I'd use for that kind of offense is "barely adequate."

 

Our running game?  Average.  Maybe a little above average.  No consistency from week to week and very limited ability to impose its will against high level defenses.   This was supposed to be our top offensive weapon.  Honestly it really hasn't been.  With a little luck on a good day our run game might be top 15.  I can't rate it better than that.  I certainly wouldn't consider Mack and company to be capable of leading an assault against a playoff team.

 

As for the throwing game, it's one of those things that insurance would write off an act of God.  The plan was good.  A bit optimistic, but good.  you just can't plan around that magnitude of attrition very easily.  

 

But at the same time, the optimism at the core of the thinking around assembling the receiving corps is alarming.   Everywhere after TY there are guys who you have to qualify their skillsets.  "on a good day, he can..." "if he can stay healthy, he will..."  "One year he..." having a few guys like that on the periphery of the offense is fine, building an offense out of them is not, an Ballard is guilty of the latter.

 

Quite frankly I've become concerned about Ballard that he might have a tendency to overthink things try too hard to be perfect.  To hit home runs on the cheap every time.  Gambling on broken pieces and average guys with upside is a decent way to supplement a strong core but you can't build a football team like that.  Not even Belichick would go to war with Edelman and a bunch of spare parts and expect to win anything.  Thats more or less what Ballard tried to do this year.

 

Perfect is the enemy of good, and if you ignore good decisions to chase perfect ones the usual result is mediocricy.  A little concerned here that Ballard may wind up learning that the hard way at our expense.

Fans are impatient. Campbell will get there as long his injuries are not a career thing. We had a really good WR group if injuries hadn’t happened. We need a couple pieces on the dline. We are probably going to need a new guard to replace glow. We need a LT to groom for AC. We probably could use another RB to compliment Mack better. You have to build the foundation first. Once he has a good foundation we might see a stud FA. I think we are close to the foundation being built but a little ways to being a SB contender.  

[Chloe6124 5,675]

59 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

There isn't a single QB in this draft that I want to see starting over JB next year.  That being the case this is something of a moot point.

 

Honestly think we need to spend the first round pick on either a top RB or some help up the middle defensively. 

 

Getting starry eyes for a QB at this point is probably putting the cart before the horse.  We are not Jameis Winston, Josh Rosen or Ryan Leaf away from winning anything.

This. A defensive stud or WR in the first round is going to improve thijs  team more then some QB.

[Imgrandojji 979]

13 minutes ago, The Fish said:

You've got a stable of backs,

 

You've got 2 backs, Mack and Hines, that have actual roles, and Wilkins that I'm not actually sure why he exists and I'm not sure he is either.

 

Mack and Wilkins have skillsets that are too similar.  You need a RB2 that can give you a different look to keep defenses guessing.  A good stable of backs would have Mack or Wilkins trying to run patiently  and a downhill runner to bum rush the gap and catch the defense napping if they get complacent, and would run some 2 back sets to allow the offense to create a shell game and force the D to hedge.

 

The fact that we don't seem to be capable of using a 2 back set, means that the skillset of our "stable" of backs is fairly limited, or it means that Reich and the OC are both extremely bankrupt for creativity in how to use running backs in an offense.  

 

So I question your first premise right off the bat, and posit that this lack of diversity and/or creativity in the run game is a big reason the running game disappears against disciplined defenses.

 

 

13 minutes ago, The Fish said:

a few good TE's,

 

Jack Doyle will be pleased to know he's been upgraded to "a few."  Ebron is inconsistent and Allie-Cox is a decent backup.  Doyle himself is solid but not a world-beater.

 

It's not a bad group, the whole group rounds up to an above average TE unit, but it's only as significant a part of the offense as it is for us this year more or less by default.

 

13 minutes ago, The Fish said:

 

a few WR's not named TY who's a blue chip and a high draft pick in Campbell,

Man I really applaud your effort there.  You really put in a good honest try at making our WR situation not look like a complete disaster.

 

The original plan required everyone to stay healthy and play at about the 75th percentile of their ability.  If you can't see why that's a bit overoptimistic -- to put it mildly -- then I'm afraid there's nothing more I can do to help you.  

 

We got lucky when Pascal came through.  you put these kinds of odds and ends together in the hope that 1 or 2 of them out of the whole group will stick and become solid contributors.  Expecting a stable of spare parts to play like a well oiled machine is an incredible exercise in magical thinking just this side of believing in Narnia.

 

13 minutes ago, The Fish said:

then there's what should be a top offensive line.

 

 

Agreed.  The offensive line should be a top offensive line and for the most part it is.

 

 

 

13 minutes ago, The Fish said:

The talent is there. 

 

The talent is there to not suck.  If not sucking is all you want to accomplish, then sure, the talent is there.  Not sure the talent is there to be a top team in the AFC.  But hey, if you're in on the not-sucking game, then go nuts, enjoy your 7-9 wins every year.  If not, then Ballard needs to do a better job building out the core of this offense -- fewer spare parts, more core components, and if he can't do it we need a better engineer.

[Chloe6124 5,675]

I actually think there was a lot of truth to the rumors the colts wanted josh Jacobs and would of took him. I actually think he would of been a good compliment to Mack.

[GoatBeard 694]

I think a guy like Jordan Love is exactly the type of QB we need. His stock has dropped a bit, but he certainly has the talent to develop behind Brissett and possibly provide some competition, without costing us a high pick. You can bring him along slowly and see what you have after next season. 

 

As far as the rest of the offense, I think people tend to think any performance issue is a talent issue, when that's hardly the case most of the time. I think we have a pretty good set of TEs. I would like to see them move on from Ebron and replace him with a young athletic pass catcher with a more reliable mental makeup. I would like to see them move Hines to the slot to replace Rogers. I would like to see them either give Jordan Wilkins more of an opportunity or find someone similar to share carries with Mack. But that's about it. A good offense to me is simply consistent. I don't care about being more explosive, not even a little bit. We have enough of that with Hilton and Ebron, when Ebron is on his game at least. If we can replace him with a more reliable target, I'm happy. 

 

Defensively, we need a top notch DL and maybe a corner. If we can do that, this defense will be elite. 

[Chloe6124 5,675]

8 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

 

You've got 2 backs, Mack and Hines, that have actual roles, and Wilkins that I'm not actually sure why he exists and I'm not sure he is either.

 

Mack and Wilkins have skillsets that are too similar.  You need a RB2 that can give you a different look to keep defenses guessing.  A good stable of backs would have Mack or Wilkins trying to run patiently  and a downhill runner to bum rush the gap and catch the defense napping if they get complacent, and would run some 2 back sets to allow the offense to create a shell game and force the D to hedge.

 

The fact that we don't seem to be capable of using a 2 back set, means that the skillset of our "stable" of backs is fairly limited, or it means that Reich and the OC are both extremely bankrupt for creativity in how to use running backs in an offense.  

 

So I question your first premise right off the bat, and posit that this lack of diversity and/or creativity in the run game is a big reason the running game disappears against disciplined defenses.

 

 

 

Jack Doyle will be pleased to know he's been upgraded to "a few."  Ebron is inconsistent and Allie-Cox is a decent backup.  Doyle himself is solid but not a world-beater.

 

It's not a bad group, the whole group rounds up to an above average TE unit, but it's only as significant a part of the offense as it is for us this year more or less by default.

 

Man I really applaud your effort there.  You really put in a good honest try at making our WR situation not look like a complete disaster.

 

The original plan required everyone to stay healthy and play at about the 75th percentile of their ability.  If you can't see why that's a bit overoptimistic -- to put it mildly -- then I'm afraid there's nothing more I can do to help you.  

 

We got lucky when Pascal came through.  you put these kinds of odds and ends together in the hope that 1 or 2 of them out of the whole group will stick and become solid contributors.  Expecting a stable of spare parts to play like a well oiled machine is an incredible exercise in magical thinking just this side of believing in Narnia.

 

 

Agreed.  The offensive line should be a top offensive line and for the most part it is.

 

 

 

 

The talent is there to not suck.  If not sucking is all you want to accomplish, then sure, the talent is there.  Not sure the talent is there to be a top team in the AFC.  But hey, if you're in on the not-sucking game, then go nuts, enjoy your 7-9 wins every year.  If not, then Ballard needs to do a better job building out the core of this offense -- fewer spare parts, more core components, and if he can't do it we need a better engineer.

I think he over estimated what he thought Cain could do right seaway. Campbell is a good upgrade and will be a core piece. As fans we just need to be patient. Campbell can do a lot and he is going to be very dangerous. If he learns the outside game he can be dangerous. He can even run the ball. 

[Imgrandojji 979]

13 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

Fans are impatient.

We just watched 5-2 slip through our fingers and Ballard seem to be content to sit there and watch it happen.  Patience is going to be in short supply at the moment, and it's not hard to see why.

 

It was not hard to figure out that this team needed a rental wideout.  to this day I'm not sure there's any rumor that Ballard even picked up the phone and talked to a single NFL GM about acquiring one. 

 

It wasn't until hours before the deadline that there was any rumors about any activity at all by Ballard.  If he was visibly scouring the phone lines for help with his 5-2 team trying to mend the team's worst flaws and try to nurse a contending year out of them despite some obvious issues, and just couldn't get anything done, that might be one thing.  But that's not what I saw and I doubt I'm unique here.  I saw a white flag go up with the bare minimum of due diligence done, and the team go from division favorites to bubble team in a hurry afterward

 

 

13 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

Campbell will get there as long his injuries are not a career thing.

 

 

Even with Campbell, we still would have needed help at WR.  Even if you give us a perfectly healthy Campbell that's been effective all year and on pace for 500-700 yards receiving we would have been a bit light at WR. 

 

Zach Pascal should never have been put in a position where he's 2 injuries away from trying to carry this offense.  And yet that's the position Pascal found himself in largely as a result of Ballard's actions/inaction

 

13 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

We had a really good WR group if injuries hadn’t happened.

 

Our WR group, if everyone stayed healthy, had a distinct chance to be non-mediocre.  "really good" is a huge stretch, Chloe, even for you. 

 

And expecting to go through a year of NFL football without any injuries at all to the entire wideout corps is such a delusional thought that I honestly hope Ballard isn't high, drunk, and/or insane enough to consider it a serious possibility

 

13 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

We need a couple pieces on the dline. We are probably going to need a new guard to replace glow. We need a LT to groom for AC. We probably could use another RB to compliment Mack better. You have to build the foundation first. Once he has a good foundation we might see a stud FA. I think we are close to the foundation being built but a little ways to being a SB contender.  

 

We need all those things, but more importantly than all of them we need enough talent at WR to sustain 2 injuries and still field 3 credible threats to beat NFL defenses to the ball.  We haven't been even close to that at any point this season.

[Imgrandojji 979]

To build a good receiving corps you need a WR4 and WR5 that can each fill in as a WR3.  That's when you have the depth you need to take the kind of attrition an NFL season can throw your way and still compete

 

The original plan had that built in, but in a kind of sketchy way. 

 

It depended on Funchess to play a bigger role in the offense than he had in any year other than 2016. 

 

It relied on a WR who's pushing the wrong side of 30 and had injury issues all last year to stay healthy all this year. 

 

And it relied far too much on young players developing according to a standard logarithm instead of in the way they actually do, in fits and starts and not on your schedule.

 

I think that's the core of Ballard's issue with his WR.  His plan wasn't bad, but it was too optimistic.  It was built around a WR corps that Luck had allowed to elevate their game beyond their ability, and was based on that elevated performance rather than a frank assessment of their actual ability.  An understandable issue especially with an inexperienced HC and GM in power.  I don't think the mistake will be repeated