Darnold is sitting Vs the Dolphins. Should the Colts make an offer for him now?

[richard pallo 2,788]

I would be open to trading for Darnold.  Wait until the deadline then trade for him for a 3rd.  I think that is what it would take.  Then we could place him on IR and not have him on the active roster.  

[RollerColt 2,669]

27 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

that makes Rivers' win percentage 54.6%.  Dan Marino had a bunch of gaudy stats but only 60.1% win percentage, just barely better than Rivers.  Should Marino come out of the hall of fame?  Or can we finally admit that win/loss record is the dumbest way to judge a QB?

I think the Hall of Fame should be reserved for those who change or influence the game. Under those credentials, would Rivers get in? 

[MPStack 3,447]

[Mel Kiper's Hair 2,359]

1 minute ago, RollerColt said:

I think the Hall of Fame should be reserved for those who change or influence the game. Under those credentials, would Rivers get in? 

 

 

I agree with this. I am of the mindset that there are probably too many players in the Hall of Fame. When I called Rivers a potential Hall of Famer I was basing it on what I've heard from announcers and read in articles. It also doesn't hurt that he is top 10 all time in most statistical categories for QB's. I know a lot of that has to do with the fact that the rules today favor the offense, but you can only play in your generation. Although it is fun to imagine what a guy like Johnny Unitas would have accomplished had the rules been the same in his day as they are now. I will give Rivers this, he is a tough son of a gun. This guy played with torn knee ligaments in the playoffs. I think he would have been able to play in any generation. 

[Mr.Debonair 1,722]

Can some please explain why we gave Rivers a no trade clause? This signing just continues to get more baffling smh

[MPStack 3,447]

10 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

I think the Hall of Fame should be reserved for those who change or influence the game. Under those credentials, would Rivers get in? 

Based off his numbers, it would be hypocritical not to put him in the HOF.

 

See Warren Moon. A first year of eligibility HOFer. 
 

 

[chad72 7,377]

10 hours ago, Sumo63 said:

Darnold may be broken mentally.  I'd be wary of assuming hes the same player they drafted.  Guy "sees ghosts"......

 

I can live with "once a game ghost sack" like the 1 false start penalty from Tarik Glenn as long as the QB part works out.  

[shasta519 2,952]

5 hours ago, Two_pound said:

What has Darnold done in his career as a jet that makes anyone think he can be an nfl qb? I haven't seen anything. I'll bet the Colts aren't even considering acquiring Darnold as that would be completely pathetic.

 

Pathetic? I mean...this is the same group that wanted to commit to JB...Darnold is much more talented...so I doubt they are above grabbing a talented 23 year-old QB...especially from an organization they have a great relationship with. 

 

Darnold has been stuck with Adam Gase the past two years...on a really bad team with a really bad OL. The Gase disadvantage cannot be overstated...and the NYJ this season are one of the worst in recent NFL history. 

 

But as for Darnold specifically...last season he was the most pressured QB in the NFL. In the second half of the season (Weeks 10-17)...he faced pressure on ~42% of dropbacks (vs. 34% average)... but was still ranked 10th in passer rating (93.3)...and 11th in yards per attempt (7.3) over that span.

 

In (the only) eight career games in which he was pressured <34% (average or below average), he completed 69% of his passes for 2,039 yards (8.9 per attempt with 254.9 per game), 16 touchdowns (7.0% rate), and six interceptions (2.6% rate)...which equates to a 108.3 passer rating. That is a very good QB.

 

And it just so happens that the Colts have invested in building a great OL that can protect a QB. 

 

He also is mobile...which opens up the playbook. And he's only 23. For reference...he is 4 months older than Eason...whom they just drafted. 

 

Darnold could be a godsend to this organization...given that a 4th round rookie is the only QB on the roster after this year.

[J@son 912]

24 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

I think the Hall of Fame should be reserved for those who change or influence the game. Under those credentials, would Rivers get in? 

 

Well this is not what you originally said.  You mentioned his gaudy stats but then pointed to his win/loss record as why he shouldn't get in. 

[shasta519 2,952]

10 minutes ago, Mr.Debonair said:

Can some please explain why we gave Rivers a no trade clause? This signing just continues to get more baffling smh

 

If they did (I can't find anything definitive on it)...I assume it was more symbolic than anything. It's a one year deal...the Colts weren't going to trade him anyways. 

 

Brady has a no-trade clause...but he also has a two-year deal.

[RollerColt 2,669]

3 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

Well this is not what you originally said.  You mentioned his gaudy stats but then pointed to his win/loss record as why he shouldn't get in. 

I think you're responding to the wrong person my friend. I think Rivers should be in. He's unique. 

[AustinnKaine 342]

14 minutes ago, Mr.Debonair said:

Can some please explain why we gave Rivers a no trade clause? This signing just continues to get more baffling smh

probably because Rivers return to football was contingent upon what team he played for. 

 

People wanting to ship him off to the worst team in football might be a reason too. No QB wants to play for that, let alone a 37 yr old. 

[shasta519 2,952]

1 hour ago, AwesomeAustin said:

No way the Jets will trade Darnold until they know they have a shot at a replacement.  

 

The NYJ do goofy things...but you are right. I think they will get that shot...but it's not a done deal until ATL or the NYG start winning games.

 

And there is also a chance that they hire a HC who loves Darnold...and they decide to trade that pick for a haul and try accelerate a rebuild. That's not a likely scenario...but Darnold's age makes it more "plausible" than if he was older.

[Mel Kiper's Hair 2,359]

Bill Barnwell from ESPN seems to think it would be a good idea for the Colts to trade for Darnold before the deadline.

 

 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/30115789/nfl-trade-deadline-offers-13-proposals-players-get-dealt-2020-including-sam-darnold-dwayne-haskins-zach-ertz

[J@son 912]

7 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

I think you're responding to the wrong person my friend. I think Rivers should be in. He's unique. 

 

ah yes...I was in a bit of a rush so assumed you were the person I'd originally quoted.  Yes I know what happens when one assumes lol. That was my bad.

 

Personally, I don't care one way or another if Rivers gets in.  I just think the idea of using win/loss record as a measure to consider is really, really stupid.

[jbaron04 91]

11 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Earlier today, it was reported that Darnold is sitting Vs the Dolphins this Sunday. After the Bengals, we have a bye week, and Darnold could have plenty of time to learn the playbook. I'm guessing with the release of Bell as well, they have officially gone to tank mode. Is now the time to offer them a trade? I'd offer them Rivers (pay his entire contract) and a 3rd round pick for Darnold. Would it be enough? I believe so as there was another report by schefter a few days ago that said the Jets were unlikely to get a 1st rounder for Darnold. This allows us to dump Rivers to a team that needs a QB to finish the year, and we get our possible franchise QB of the future without breaking the bank. We can even start Brissett for one game Vs the Bengals and probably win if Darnold needs a few weeks to learn the playbook.

 

I think now is the perfect opportunity to get Darnold based on both ours and the Jets situation. What do you think below?

Rivers has a no trade clause 

[shasta519 2,952]

1 minute ago, Mel Kiper's Hair said:

Bill Barnwell from ESPN seems to think it would be a good idea for the Colts to trade for Darnold before the deadline.

 

 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/30115789/nfl-trade-deadline-offers-13-proposals-players-get-dealt-2020-including-sam-darnold-dwayne-haskins-zach-ertz

 

It's a fantastic idea to do it now. Get the deal done before they do secure the top pick...and then it opens up to all suitors. But that's why I can't imagine the NYJ doing it right now...because after the season there will be other teams with older QBs possibly looking to pick up Darnold at a discount. And with a handful of teams in the mix...some team might actually give up a 1st round pick.

 

Right now...the best they can hope for is probably something similar to what Barnwell posited. But with the relationship that Ballard has with the NYJ...maybe he could get it done. I would love to see the reaction of the fanbase if they made that deal.

[shasta519 2,952]

For those saying Rivers has a no-trade clause...do you have a source for this. I know he had one with LAC...but I can't find anything about his deal with IND.

[csmopar 7,514]

I’m gonna invent a new drinking game called the Rivers of Trade. Everytime someone says trade Phillip Rivers, take a shot. Everytime someone points out his no trade clause, take two shots. Everytime someone says start Eason, down the remainder of the bottle.

[danlhart87 8,568]

25 minutes ago, Mel Kiper's Hair said:

Bill Barnwell from ESPN seems to think it would be a good idea for the Colts to trade for Darnold before the deadline.

 

 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/30115789/nfl-trade-deadline-offers-13-proposals-players-get-dealt-2020-including-sam-darnold-dwayne-haskins-zach-ertz

Too much here would be my offer

 

21' 3rd and Brissett

[aaron11 1,680]

he is injured, sprained throwing shoulder.  never should have finished that game, that turned a lot of heads  

[Mr.Debonair 1,722]

36 minutes ago, AustinnKaine said:

probably because Rivers return to football was contingent upon what team he played for. 

 

People wanting to ship him off to the worst team in football might be a reason too. No QB wants to play for that, let alone a 37 yr old. 

I Understand why he would want one! I am just so shocked that they believed in him this much to give him one.

[AustinnKaine 342]

Just now, Mr.Debonair said:

I Understand why he would want one! I am just so shocked that they believed in him this much to give him one.

no one is gonna trade for a 37yr old qb anyways

[RollerColt 2,669]

33 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

ah yes...I was in a bit of a rush so assumed you were the person I'd originally quoted.  Yes I know what happens when one assumes lol. That was my bad.

 

Personally, I don't care one way or another if Rivers gets in.  I just think the idea of using win/loss record as a measure to consider is really, really stupid.

All good. I agree with you. When it's a team game, you can't really go by wins and losses. Individual contribution should be the focus. 

[Mr.Debonair 1,722]

4 minutes ago, AustinnKaine said:

no one is gonna trade for a 37yr old qb anyways

No one should sign one that isn’t very good anymore. Especially on a team that isn’t just a QB away from a championship 

[ColtJax 396]

He moved his whole family to Indy, and that took 2 trips. It's no wonder he'd want to make sure he isn't shuffled out as soon as his bags were un-packed..

[aaron11 1,680]

i noticed something about sams contract but im not an expert on this stuff

 

his salary and dead cap hit are basically the same next year, doesn't this mean they wont save money by trading him?  

[Tsarquise 449]

10 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Well, for one, I have bipolar, that's just how I am. I'm either really optimistic or really pessimistic depending on how the team is doing.

 

Two, I didn't know the team would be like this 5 weeks ago. I was very optimistic at that point. I was looking forward to watching Rivers play. I wanted to see Mack and Taylor dominate. I thought we had a great offense. I thought our defense was going to get lots of pressure with Buckner up the middle. I was hoping we could avoid injuries to key players for a while this year. Most of that didn't happen. Now it's obvious by Reich's pressers a couple days ago that he hasn't learned from his mistakes from Brissett last year and is doing the same with Rivers. 

 

I invest time into this team, both during the season and in the offseason. When I can figure out what's going to happen in 5 weeks based on the personalities and tendencies of the coach and GM, that's not good. It's like we don't even care at this point. If we traded for Darnold, I would be the most excited Colts fan in the world. 

Honestly, you sound like you have anxiety, not bipolar. 

[chad72 7,377]

This thread belongs in the "potential free agent/trade" section until they become a Colts player. 

[jvan1973 5,476]

10 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Maybe so, but that's what a hardcore football fan does. Especially one who became a Colts fan in 1998 when he was 11 when Manning became QB. That's all I know, I have standards. I still feel robbed when Luck retired and I lost 10 years of elite QB play. As far as the NFL goes, as long as the coach and GM give effort and learn from their mistakes, they can string me along forever. However, besides Ballard's drafting, there is no effort anymore, and neither of these guys learn from their mistakes or admit them. Their is no personal responsibility on this team, and therefore, nothing has changed yet since Luck has retired.

Hard-core football fans know that no trade clauses are pretty common in the NFL 

[Four2itus 5,021]

This thread content is hilarious!

 

[BeanDiasucci 190]

Darnold doesn't seem like an immediate answer with his bad start to 2020 (4 picks, 3 TDs, rating of 70.7 in four games).  I'm not arguing for Brissett as a solution certainly, but Darnold, although younger, hasn't been notably better than Jacoby so far in his career. 

 

Career         G-Comp%-Y/A--TD-INT-Rating

Darnold      30--59%---6.7---39--32---79.5

Brissett       40--60%---6.6---31--13---84.5

[lollygagger8 3,353]

2 hours ago, J@son said:

 

that makes Rivers' win percentage 54.6%.  Dan Marino had a bunch of gaudy stats but only 60.1% win percentage, just barely better than Rivers.  Should Marino come out of the hall of fame?  Or can we finally admit that win/loss record is the dumbest way to judge a QB?

 

I agree with you 100%. 

 

BTW 

Dan Marino > Phillip Rivers ........... BY LIGHT YEARS 

 

I bet The Dolphins Mascot * throws a less awkward looking ball than Rivers 

[Chrisaaron1023 1,931]

Hahaha so the jets would just erase the trade 3 years ago??  what a slap in the face to them

[Valpo2004 1,616]

10 minutes ago, BeanDiasucci said:

Darnold doesn't seem like an immediate answer with his bad start to 2020 (4 picks, 3 TDs, rating of 46.7 in four games).  I'm not arguing for Brissett as a solution certainly, but Darnold, although younger, hasn't been notably better than Jacoby so far in his career. 

 

Career         G-Comp%-Y/A--TD-INT-Rating

Darnold      30--59%---6.7---39--32---79.5

Brissett       40--60%---6.6---31--13---84.5

 

So he's basically Jacoby Brissett but turns the ball over way more often.  That's the guy people want to pin their hopes on as our future franchise QB.  

[lollygagger8 3,353]

1 minute ago, lollygagger8 said:

 

I agree with you 100%. 

 

BTW 

Dan Marino > Phillip Rivers ........... BY LIGHT YEARS 

 

 

 

 

I bet * throws a less awkward looking ball than Rivers 

 

[Mitch Connors 314]

 

If you're a poster saying how dumb it is to consider Darnold because hes terrible, broken, etc, you need to ask yourself what exactly are you doing on this forum and in this thread?  

 

But since you're here and throwing your vast knowledge around will you link the times you were up-in-arms last year because the Colts didn't get washed-up/broken/terrible Ryan Tannehill last year? That sounds a lot like Darnold right now doesn't it? But you already knew that. And please quote me some college rhetoric while you conveniently ignore the college resumes of other guys that dont fit your narrative.

 

And dont even bring up Eason when you're the same people bashing others who wanted Kelly to play (not me but thats not the point). Do you remember saying these greatest hits: 'He's never played a down in the league?' If hes so good how come 31 other teams passed on him?' Well that sounds like a couple other guys I know too doesn't it?

 

You may not like it but dont discredit people thinking it should/could happen. Frankly the condescension is nauseating. 

 

[J@son 912]

16 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

 

 

Dan Marino > Phillip Rivers ........... BY LIGHT YEARS 

 

well....yeah lol

[hoosierhawk 825]

Let' be realistic and Trade Reich for Darnold!

[Myles 4,175]

2 hours ago, Mel Kiper's Hair said:

 

 

I agree with this. I am of the mindset that there are probably too many players in the Hall of Fame. When I called Rivers a potential Hall of Famer I was basing it on what I've heard from announcers and read in articles. It also doesn't hurt that he is top 10 all time in most statistical categories for QB's. I know a lot of that has to do with the fact that the rules today favor the offense, but you can only play in your generation. Although it is fun to imagine what a guy like Johnny Unitas would have accomplished had the rules been the same in his day as they are now. I will give Rivers this, he is a tough son of a gun. This guy played with torn knee ligaments in the playoffs. I think he would have been able to play in any generation. 

i wouldn't put Rivers in the HOF.   Mostly because he was never a top 5 QB in any of the seasons he played.  He's consistent and durable and I don't think that should get someone in the HOF.    Someone mentioned Marino.   Most people thought he was a top 3 QB in the league his entire career.