Brissett feels he’s still starter material.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, AwesomeAustin said:

Jacoby is not a bad QB.  If Herbert puts up the same stats his second year starting the media will anoint him the next Aaron Rogers. My issue is he doesn’t push the ball down the field.  I think this is bc he struggles reading a NFL defense and anticipating a receiver separating in a route.   If we had stud receivers this wouldn’t be as big of an issue, but this team is built on depth not star power. I think he is more than capable of being a bridge QB on a rebuilding team for 3yrs.  

JB is definitely not bad I agree. I don't think he is a franchise QB either but not many are in reality. JB is a QB that at least takes care of the ball which is important. We are just used to having guys like Peyton and Luck so then we see JB play and most aren't used to average play. I doubt Rivers will play great again but I do think he still has a couple of good years left in him. So I am happy with the upgrade.

[2006Coltsbestever]

There is even a big difference between below average and bad. Bad was Curtis Painter for example. 

[EastStreet]

20 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

You and I must be eating the same breakfast because I agree with you again. I see Rivers playing well and leading us into the playoffs. Coming back for 1 more year because Ballard will know that is our best option (unless we win the SB, he may retire then). I also am not high on Eason. He has a cannon for an arm but so does JB, it doesn't mean much if you can't read defenses. IMO, I am not even sure Eason has the traits that JB has as in leadership and work ethic? Only time will tell.

I'm not high on Eason, but I do think he has potential. Just looking at college results from both Eason and JB, I'd definitely go with Eason. Eason did show nice improvement last year compared to his only other year starting at UGA. Improved his completion % by almost 10pts. That's a huge jump. While he still needs to improve on progressions and struggles at times when pressured, he does pretty darn good when given time (which he will have good protection in Indy). 

 

Also, if you look at Washington's schedule/results last year, all their Ls but one (@Stanford) were by 7pts or less. And his supporting cast at Washington wasn't the greatest. OL play stunk it up at times,  Outside of Eason, I think only one other Washington player was taken in the draft, and that was later rounds. And really don't envision any of the current players mocked early for 2021. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

6 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

I'm not high on Eason, but I do think he has potential. Just looking at college results from both Eason and JB, I'd definitely go with Eason. Eason did show nice improvement last year compared to his only other year starting at UGA. Improved his completion % by almost 10pts. That's a huge jump. While he still needs to improve on progressions and struggles at times when pressured, he does pretty darn good when given time (which he will have good protection in Indy). 

 

Also, if you look at Washington's schedule/results last year, all their Ls but one (@Stanford) were by 7pts or less. And his supporting cast at Washington wasn't the greatest. OL play stunk it up at times,  Outside of Eason, I think only one other Washington player was taken in the draft, and that was later rounds. And really don't envision any of the current players mocked early for 2021. 

Yeah I am just skeptical because many teams passed on him and he was still there in the 4th. His arm strength is incredible. Same with Chad, we really do not know what we have with him either.

[EastStreet]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah I am just skeptical because many teams passed on him and he was still there in the 4th. His arm strength is incredible. Same with Chad, we really do not know what we have with him either.

If we're purely looking at college performance from all three, Kelly hands down is the best. The stats and level of competition aren't even remotely comparable. What's crazy to me is he beat Bama twice, averaging 3 TDs, 350+ yards, and 60% completion rate in those games. I don't know any other QB in the last decade that has done that against Bama's D.

 

Back to Eason.... UGAs offense while Eason was there was pretty unflattering for QBs. Moving to WA was a huge scheme change, and for Eason to improve that much deserves some praise. That said, he's got a lot to work on. Working through progressions is one of those things that's not the easiest to improve. I'll give Eason some slack though as it's hard improving when your OL stinks. If things slow down for him, I can see him improving. I don't see him sniffing the field this year, so pretty irrelevant. 

 

My biggest hope though, is that the competition for #3 is truly fair and open. If there is a clear cut winner, I'm good with them moving on from Kelly, or dumping Eason altogether. I'd also be fine with them carrying 3 on the 53, and protecting another on the PS though too if Kelly plays well, and Eason looks like he walk the walk. 

[hoosierhawk]

15 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

It  sure didn't take long for bash Brissett posters to come out of the woodwork. 

No one came out of the woodwork to bash Brissett. He came out of the woodwork and proclaimed to be and NL starter. I happen to disagree that he played at a high level last year depending on one definition of high. How anyone can bring up the name of Payton in any comparative way with JB is beyond me other than they both played QB for the Colts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Imgrandojji]

10 hours ago, WoolMagnet said:

Agreed.

And Reich’s offensive gameplan did him no favors either, imo.

  Did people expect Jacoby to be Luck?  Even with virtually NO receiving threats?   Did they expect JB to have success right away like Peyton?.....oh wait, scratch that thought.

  I really think JBs injury at Pittsburgh set him back in more ways than just the physical.

  JB is/will be good enough to be a successful QB in this league if given the tools necessary.  Just like every other “successful” QB in this league has needed.

  I’m soooooooo over the JB bashing.

Its childish.

Jacoby is roughly on the same level as other midtier starters, his performance range is Alex Smith on the top end and Tyrod Taylor on the lower end.

[Imgrandojji]

1 hour ago, dw49 said:

 

 

I'm confused as to what a "middle 10 QB is."

 

\Not in the top 10, not in the bottom 10.  Brissett when healthy is an average starter.  7-8 with a decimated WR unit is literally average.

 

Quote

Also why would you use the Bortles comparison to prove Brissett's performance warrants a starting job in the NFL ? How does being better than a failed QB who is a back up "prove Brissett is a competent NFL starter ? Not putting you down , I just need some clarification.

Because it demonstrates that Brissett is not a failed QB.  He took a team with severe flaws and more or less held serve.  Again, Brissett's run looks worse than it was because he took some losses in the second half.  If you pull back and look at the broader picture though, it's clear that Brissett has some things going for him.  He's a smart QB who can get buy in from his teammates.  He's a good clock manager.  he's good at managing the run game. 

 

Brissett's biggest flaw is that he's not pinpoint accurate in the short game, which is a problem given that he's a grindy game manager style QB, but he still completed about 60% of his passes which is decent.

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, hoosierhawk said:

No one came out of the woodwork to bash Brissett. He came out of the woodwork and proclaimed to be and NL starter. I happen to disagree that he played at a high level last year depending on one definition of high. How anyone can bring up the name of Payton in any comparative way with JB is beyond me other than they both played QB for the Colts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I never thought JB played at a high level either, he had some good moments in those 1st 7 games and some bad moments in his last 7 starts. Basically as a starter he was 7-7 which = average. Average doesn't cut it with the Colts, hence the Rivers signing. I just hope Rivers finds his youth because he has had a very good to great career.

[2006Coltsbestever]

14 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

If we're purely looking at college performance from all three, Kelly hands down is the best. The stats and level of competition aren't even remotely comparable. What's crazy to me is he beat Bama twice, averaging 3 TDs, 350+ yards, and 60% completion rate in those games. I don't know any other QB in the last decade that has done that against Bama's D.

 

Back to Eason.... UGAs offense while Eason was there was pretty unflattering for QBs. Moving to WA was a huge scheme change, and for Eason to improve that much deserves some praise. That said, he's got a lot to work on. Working through progressions is one of those things that's not the easiest to improve. I'll give Eason some slack though as it's hard improving when your OL stinks. If things slow down for him, I can see him improving. I don't see him sniffing the field this year, so pretty irrelevant. 

 

My biggest hope though, is that the competition for #3 is truly fair and open. If there is a clear cut winner, I'm good with them moving on from Kelly, or dumping Eason altogether. I'd also be fine with them carrying 3 on the 53, and protecting another on the PS though too if Kelly plays well, and Eason looks like he walk the walk. 

Chad was very good in college, I would like to see him get some NFL starts so we as a forum can put to rest whether he is good or not. He has a little Romo in him IMO.

[Imgrandojji]

Yeah there's nothing wrong with saying that an average QB isn't good enough for a team that's used to playoff runs.  What I object to is people going over the top and saying that Brissett sucks when that's simply untrue.  He took a team that most of us were expecting to lose more games than it won after Luck's retirement, and broke even. He was an asset last year in the possession style offense Reich ran.   He even brought us in range of the playoffs before the wheels fell off.  That's not terrible.

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

Yeah there's nothing wrong with saying that an average QB isn't good enough for a team that's used to playoff runs.  What I object to is people going over the top and saying that Brissett sucks when that's simply untrue.  He took a team that most of us were expecting to lose more games than it won after Luck's retirement, and broke even. He was an asset last year in the possession style offense Reich ran.   He even brought us in range of the playoffs before the wheels fell off.  That's not terrible.

I do agree with this, some do go over the top saying JB sucks. He isn't Curtis Painter that is for sure  . 

[The Fish]

He wouldn't have made it this far if he didn't think he could do it. Lot's of people still think he's got a legit future and it was the Colts doing something wrong- fancy how perceptions based on vibe can be so out of step with what actually happened. 

Career backup, who may or may not see more extended play time, but it won't be anyone's first choice.

[EastStreet]

6 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

Because it demonstrates that Brissett is not a failed QB.

The Bortles comparison demonstrates nothing. Bortles played on some horrible Jax teams. Mediocre OL,  WRs, and RBs until they drafted Fournette. Bortles was also asked to do a lot, where as JB was not. And nobody is even comparing the two, or suggesting Bortles is better than JB. Using your logic, Trubisky must be a middle 10 QB too.... It's apples to pineapples. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

4 minutes ago, The Fish said:

He wouldn't have made it this far if he didn't think he could do it. Lot's of people still think he's got a legit future and it was the Colts doing something wrong- fancy how perceptions based on vibe can be so out of step with what actually happened. 

Career backup, who may or may not see more extended play time, but it won't be anyone's first choice.

Over the years I have learned one important key in watching football, that is being on the right team for a scheme that fits you. Take Doug Williams for example, his stats were average for his career. Playing on a team like the 1987 Redskins was a perfect fit though playing under a HOFame coach in Gibbs. He had a great O.Line but also had great WR's, Monk is a HOFamer. He won a SB and to me he was an average QB. Jeff Hostetler for the Giants is another, HOFame coach, great O.Line but an exceptional defense to boot. He won a SB as well in 1990 with the Giants. Trent Dilfer was average too but the 2000 Ravens had the greatest defense ever IMO and a great O.Line to boot.

[EastStreet]

18 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Chad was very good in college, I would like to see him get some NFL starts so we as a forum can put to rest whether he is good or not. He has a little Romo in him IMO.

To bad he was a behavioral train wreck. All that stuff just clouds the picture. He won't sniff the field this year either short of a big QB injury or Covid bug, so the topic will live on lol... 

 

I've never really "enjoyed" the pre-season, but I miss it now. 

 

[Imgrandojji]

15 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

The Bortles comparison demonstrates nothing. Bortles played on some horrible Jax teams. Mediocre OL,  WRs, and RBs until they drafted Fournette. Bortles was also asked to do a lot, where as JB was not. And nobody is even comparing the two, or suggesting Bortles is better than JB. Using your logic, Trubisky must be a middle 10 QB too.... It's apples to pineapples. 

Trubiskey probably is a middle 10 QB, thrust into a situation that would challenge even an elite QB.

[The Fish]

27 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Over the years I have learned one important key in watching football, that is being on the right team for a scheme that fits you. Take Doug Williams for example, his stats were average for his career. Playing on a team like the 1987 Redskins was a perfect fit though playing under a HOFame coach in Gibbs. He had a great O.Line but also had great WR's, Monk is a HOFamer. He won a SB and to me he was an average QB. Jeff Hostetler for the Giants is another, HOFame coach, great O.Line but an exceptional defense to boot. He won a SB as well in 1990 with the Giants. Trent Dilfer was average too but the 2000 Ravens had the greatest defense ever IMO and a great O.Line to boot.

That's the great football divide. Have a QB who's individually a superior and can will a team, or have a more complete team and a Trent Dilfer-esq game manger. Both designs can win a SB if thing break right, but I think over the course of time having the legit QB probably yeilds more consistency.  

[EastStreet]

15 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

Trubiskey probably is a middle 10 QB, thrust into a situation that would challenge even an elite QB.

I think Trubiskey has more upside than JB and I could see him in the lower middle ten.... but I wouldn't be surprised if he lost his job to Foles. He's highly inconsistent and is simply not the best fit for Chicago. He'd be better suited going to a team with clear spread O that allows him to be a full on dual threat guy. That said, his success in college had a lot to do with scheme, and frankly I'm not sure he'll ever translate to the NFL game.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, The Fish said:

That's the great football divide. Have a QB who's individually a superior and can will a team, or have a more complete team and a Trent Dilfer-esq game manger. Both designs can win a SB if thing break right, but I think over the course of time having the legit QB probably yeilds more consistency.  

Yeah I would rather have a very good to great QB than an average one no doubt but there are some examples where average one's have won the SB in the right scheme/fit. Brad Johnson is another one on the 2002 Bucs. I am not even saying JB could do what those other average QB's have done but it is possible and to me JB is average at best as a starter. 

Just now, EastStreet said:

I think Trubiskey has more upside than JB and I could see him in the lower middle ten.... but I wouldn't be surprised if he lost his job to Foles. He's highly inconsistent and is simply not the best fit for Chicago. He'd be better suited going to a team with clear spread O that allows him to be a full on dual threat guy. That said, his success in college had a lot to do with scheme, and frankly I'm not sure he'll ever translate to the NFL game.

Yeah Mitch is not in my top 20, he is in the JB range.

[EastStreet]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah Mitch is not in my top 20, he is in the JB range.

I think Mitch could be a 16-20 guy in the right system. His consistency would need to improve a bunch. My bet is on Foles taking the job this year, but pretty close to even odds. Mitch would do a lot better if he could run a pure spread, and work out of the shotgun most of the time like he did a NC. The Bears scheme is a big ? to me. I'm not sure if it's blah because of Mitch, or Mitch is blah because of the scheme. Either way, not a good fit IMO.

[AwesomeAustin]

Thought about this more and how the team is handling JB.  Look at Alex Smith, similar game manager but I feel a better QB than JB. He was twice let go by teams for a better option.   To win championships your QB needs to make plays.  Yes there are always exceptions but those are few and far between.  Colts don’t need a top 5 QB to compete but they need a top 15 for a realistic chance.  JB is not that guy and so they looked to improve. I don’t think Kelly or Eason are either.  Eason May turn out to be our replacement back up and they are still searching for a legitimate long term starter bc Rivers buys a little time.    

[2006Coltsbestever]

5 minutes ago, AwesomeAustin said:

Thought about this more and how the team is handling JB.  Look at Alex Smith, similar game manager but I feel a better QB than JB. He was twice let go by teams for a better option.   To win championships your QB needs to make plays.  Yes there are always exceptions but those are few and far between.  Colts don’t need a top 5 QB to compete but they need a top 15 for a realistic chance.  JB is not that guy and so they looked to improve. I don’t think Kelly or Eason are either.  Eason May turn out to be our replacement back up and they are still searching for a legitimate long term starter bc Rivers buys a little time.    

I have Rivers in my top 15 going into this year. Most do, that is probably why expectations are so high. Of course we have a great O.Line too and an improved D as well.

[AwesomeAustin]

6 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I have Rivers in my top 15 going into this year. Most do, that is probably why expectations are so high. Of course we have a great O.Line too and an improved D as well.

Rivers was the best QB available and a good upgrade considering the circumstances.  I think he is capable of winning 3-4 games this year for us. Hopefully some of those in the playoffs.  I’m taking a wait and see approach with the D.  All the pieces are there to be top 10 but they have to stay on the field. Veteran pass rusher, upcoming pash rusher, game changer in the middle, stud LB, solid to above average corners, potential for a top 10 safety duo.  A lot of IFs but it’s possible.  

[Imgrandojji]

1 hour ago, The Fish said:

That's the great football divide. Have a QB who's individually a superior and can will a team, or have a more complete team and a Trent Dilfer-esq game manger. Both designs can win a SB if thing break right, but I think over the course of time having the legit QB probably yeilds more consistency.  

To a certain extent that's a false dilemma.  The only reason that dilemma bears out is because of the cap.  But it is possible to have both a great QB and a good supporting cast,but you have to be better than average at spotting talent and integrating it before it gets expensive.

 

Being a good enough head coach to adjust your scheme on the fly to the personnel you have is also an important asset.

[2006Coltsbestever]

17 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

To a certain extent that's a false dilemma.  The only reason that dilemma bears out is because of the cap.  But it is possible to have both a great QB and a good supporting cast,but you have to be better than average at spotting talent and integrating it before it gets expensive.

 

Being a good enough head coach to adjust your scheme on the fly to the personnel you have is also an important asset.

The 2 QB's that benefited the most from having super teams around them were Aikman and Bradshaw. Those QB's were great but not top 5 all-time IMO but because of the teams they were on they won a ton of SB's. I could make an argument that the 70's Steelers had the greatest defense of all-time and their WR's with Swann and Stallworth were deadly. The 90's Cowboys had the 2nd greatest RB of all-time in reality in Emmitt. I only put Jim Brown ahead of him out of respect which I have already discussed on this site. Those Cowboy teams also had the greatest O.Line ever from 1992-1996 IMO. Aikman had 5 seconds to throw  

[EastStreet]

11 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

The 2 QB's that benefited the most from having super teams around them were Aikman and Bradshaw. Those QB's were great but not top 5 all-time IMO but because of the teams they were on they won a ton of SB's. I could make an argument that the 70's Steelers had the greatest defense of all-time and their WR's with Swann and Stallworth were deadly. The 90's Cowboys had the 2nd greatest RB of all-time in reality in Emmitt. I only put Jim Brown ahead of him out of respect which I have already discussed on this site. Those Cowboy teams also had the greatest O.Line ever from 1992-1996 IMO. Aikman had 5 seconds to throw  

Peyton certainly benefited from a having a good team when he won SB50.

Bad stats that year, but was a great game manager when needed. 

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

4 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Peyton certainly benefited from a having a good team when he won SB50.

Bad stats that year, but was a great game manager when needed. 

 

I agree, the Denver D carried him a lot but his presence being out there still had teams fearing him at least. When I look at top 5 QB's ever, I see Peyton, Brady, Montana, Unitas, and Elway more than anyone else. Marino was probably the most talented but just never won the big one.

[EastStreet]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I agree, the Denver D carried him a lot but his presence being out there still had teams fearing him at least. When I look at top 5 QB's ever, I see Peyton, Brady, Montana, Unitas, and Elway more than anyone else. Marino was probably the most talented but just never won the big one.

If you have to pick a QB with diminishing skills to be a game manager, not sure there is a better choice than Peyton given his game smarts. I remember feeling badly for him given some of his performances that year, but he did just enough in the playoffs to keep the chains moving. Glad he got to go out on top.

[2006Coltsbestever]

7 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

If you have to pick a QB with diminishing skills to be a game manager, not sure there is a better choice than Peyton given his game smarts. I remember feeling badly for him given some of his performances that year, but he did just enough in the playoffs to keep the chains moving. Glad he got to go out on top.

Yeah that was pretty cool. He is the one guy even at 60-70% of what he was can pull that off because of his mind. I admit he was lucky to have a great defense like that but without Peyton they don't pull it off IMO. Brock would've crapped his pants against BB and Brady IMO. It was funny watching that AFC Title Game because BB kept going for it on 4th down instead of kicking FG's. That was the fear factor of Peyton still  . To many Brady will be known as the GOAT because of 6 rings but Peyton was a coach on the field and ran the offense. Peyton getting that 2nd ring was huge too, only a few have won 2 or more.

[EastStreet]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah that was pretty cool. He is the one guy even at 60-70% of what he was can pull that off because of his mind. I admit he was lucky to have a great defense like that but without Peyton they don't pull it off IMO. Brock would've crapped his pants against BB and Brady IMO. It was funny watching that AFC Title Game because BB kept going for it on 4th down instead of kicking FG's. That was the fear factor of Peyton still  . Too many Brady will be known as the GOAT because of 6 rings but Peyton was a coach on the field and ran the offense. Peyton getting that 2nd ring was huge too, only a few have won 2 or more.

You're spot on about BB going for it on 4th.

 

I'm so happy BB and TB parted ways. We'll now get to see perhaps who was the driving force. TBay has a great surrounding cast, so Brady has no excuse. The Buc's OL is better than NEs, and the TBay receiving group is far superior to the Pats. If BB makes lemonade with Stidham or Cam, and Brady struggles in TBay, I'll laugh my backside off. Personally, I hope both crash and burn lol... 

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

You're spot on about BB going for it on 4th.

 

I'm so happy BB and TB parted ways. We'll now get to see perhaps who was the driving force. TBay has a great surrounding cast, so Brady has no excuse. The Buc's OL is better than NEs, and the TBay receiving group is far superior to the Pats. If BB makes lemonade with Stidham or Cam, and Brady struggles in TBay, I'll laugh my backside off. Personally, I hope both crash and burn lol... 

Yeah even though Tom is getting old, I have a funny feeling Tampa will at least make the playoffs. I like their roster. Patriots have their work cut out for them but BB is a great coach. 

[EastStreet]

19 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah even though Tom is getting old, I have a funny feeling Tampa will at least make the playoffs. I like their roster. Patriots have their work cut out for them but BB is a great coach. 

If I had to bet, both TB and NE will make the playoffs. I think Cam will end up looking good with BB. Sunu is good, and if Harry is back healthy, it'll be a big boost to go along with Edleman. The TE they took (Asiasi) was a guy I really liked in the draft.

[Rackeen305]

16 hours ago, AlanNC said:

Good backup but not a starter.

I remember when the Colts coaching staff/org was saying JB was a top 20 QB in the league when AL was here. I'm just saying, just as the Colts org have overhyped certain players, as a thinking person I have to be cautious as well when it comes to available players. Don't always fall for the popular narrative.

 

With that said, JB served as a valuable piece to this team and did admirably.  He didn't show that he is a top 20 QB, but as a leader at the most important position, he served well. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

20 minutes ago, Rackeen305 said:

I remember when the Colts coaching staff/org was saying JB was a top 20 QB in the league when AL was here. I'm just saying, just as the Colts org have overhyped certain players, as a thinking person I have to be cautious as well when it comes to available players. Don't always fall for the popular narrative.

 

With that said, JB served as a valuable piece to this team and did admirably.  He didn't show that he is a top 20 QB, but as a leader at the most important position, he served well. 

Yeah I jumped the gun after the 1st 7 games and said he was 15th (top 15) but as the season went on that wasn't the case. I can buy top 25 (25th) if someone wanted to debate that. He had some really good moments in those 1st 7 games but had some really bad moments the last month of the season.

[fawnlebowitz]

17 hours ago, WoolMagnet said:

Agreed.

And Reich’s offensive gameplan did him no favors either, imo.

  Did people expect Jacoby to be Luck?  Even with virtually NO receiving threats?   Did they expect JB to have success right away like Peyton?.....oh wait, scratch that thought.

  I really think JBs injury at Pittsburgh set him back in more ways than just the physical.

  JB is/will be good enough to be a successful QB in this league if given the tools necessary.  Just like every other “successful” QB in this league has needed.

  I’m soooooooo over the JB bashing.

Its childish.

What's childish about pointing out that Jacoby is a backup qb?  

[Imgrandojji]

6 hours ago, EastStreet said:

I think Trubiskey has more upside than JB and I could see him in the lower middle ten.... but I wouldn't be surprised if he lost his job to Foles. He's highly inconsistent and is simply not the best fit for Chicago. He'd be better suited going to a team with clear spread O that allows him to be a full on dual threat guy. That said, his success in college had a lot to do with scheme, and frankly I'm not sure he'll ever translate to the NFL game.

Foles is another guy in that group.  So is Teddy Bridgewater.  Generally speaking there's a pool of quarterbacks that are adequate at their jobs but if they're starting it probably means some other plan has failed because no one deliberately breaks camp with an average quarterback as a starter, given the choice.   

 

You want a guy under center that brings some excitement and hype and Joe average doesn't do that.  that doesn't mean that Joe Average is a terrible QB.  Just that he's not the flashy money-making option for a team to break camp with.

 

This is also the reason there's still a loud minority clamoring for Chad Kelly even though he's, like, 4 QBs deep on the depth chart right now.  Because he does have that flashy hype to him, regardless of the fact that he's proven exactly nothing in live action while Brissett at least broke even against a rather tough schedule.

[Dark_Indy]

22 hours ago, Imgrandojji said:

He is a middle 10 QB.  He can win games with a strong team around him but won't carry the team to an undeserved win all that often.  

 

So does anyone actually think Brissett is worse than, say, Blake Bortles?  Because if you do you're just wrong and if not you agree with Brissett

 

Btw lest we forget Brissett was a .500 quarterback.  Remember 2 of those losses were on the Destroyer, take those out of the picture and Brissett is 7-7.

 

A guy who can go .500 despite missing most of his receiving talent is probably a starter in this league.

 

and let's be honest here, when we first heard about Luck retiring any of us would have taken 7-7 with a smile, the only reason he gets this kind of grief is the losses came on the back end after he got our hopes up

 

 

 

Also, had Vinatieri not been a liability, Week 1 is ours. Even the dismal Destroyer still got Vinatieri'd at Pittsburgh and Miami. (As ugly as the Miami game was, Vinny  missing that XP means we have to go for 

a TD instead of a FG at the end of the game. 

 

Brissett is better than a lot of people on this forum give him credit for. Not to mention losing Ebron, Mack, Hilton and even his own knee injury derailed the season. Through week four or five of last year, Brissett was tied for the league lead in TD passes too. 

 

 

[EastStreet]

1 hour ago, Imgrandojji said:

Foles is another guy in that group.  So is Teddy Bridgewater.  Generally speaking there's a pool of quarterbacks that are adequate at their jobs but if they're starting it probably means some other plan has failed because no one deliberately breaks camp with an average quarterback as a starter, given the choice.   

 

You want a guy under center that brings some excitement and hype and Joe average doesn't do that.  that doesn't mean that Joe Average is a terrible QB.  Just that he's not the flashy money-making option for a team to break camp with.

 

This is also the reason there's still a loud minority clamoring for Chad Kelly even though he's, like, 4 QBs deep on the depth chart right now.  Because he does have that flashy hype to him, regardless of the fact that he's proven exactly nothing in live action while Brissett at least broke even against a rather tough schedule.

There's below average, and above average. Teams with a QB that's below the mid point, are looking to improve unless they have a rookie they're confident in who simply needs time, or have a guy that reads, progressives, and throws well but has a horrible supporting cast. QBs cycle in, and QBs cycle out. That's just the way it is.

 

Ws/Ls, or breaking even is only a portion of the story. Ws/Ls are a team thing, more than a QB thing. You have high performing QBs who are top 10 in both QBR and yards or YPG like Carr and Stafford who are on bad teams. Their Ws/Ls don't tell the whole story. Neither of those QBs broke even, but played well, and played consistent.

 

Very few folks, if any, are clamoring for Kelly over Rivers. And if there are a few, they won't be clamoring if Rivers does well. Nobody will care. I only see Kelly mentioned when folks are bashing Kelly, or comparing him to JB or perhaps Eason. It's easily understandable though why folks would want to see Kelly (last season) given our passing game performance. The unknowns are always the most popular when the starting QB struggles. That too, is just the way it is. 

[CanuckColt]

9 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Chad was very good in college, I would like to see him get some NFL starts so we as a forum can put to rest whether he is good or not. He has a little Romo in him IMO.

Chad's time will come. He will probably be 1/2 or 2/1 with Eason in a couple of years.