Qb for next year/QB class of 2021 (merge)

[danlhart87 8,687]

3 hours ago, LionsFan2021 said:

What's up Colts fans. I'm a huge Lions fan and an even bigger Stafford fan. I pray that they get a deal done sending him to the Colts. The Lions wasted his early years but he's a straight up baller with a cannon. Stafford was nothing but amazing in the community and the locker room loves him. The Lions got the best QB that they've ever had and wasted him with head coaches like Jim Schwartz (a defensive coach) aka Jim Shorts as we call him, Jim Caldwell (need I digress?) and Matt Patricia (I would say that he's a defensive coach but he's garbage).

 

Stafford had to deal with garbage ever changing OC's, terrible HC's and a non existent running game. We didn't have a 100 yard rusher for a game that spanned almost 5 seasons. FIVE SEASONS!

 

Stafford is a perfect fit for Reich and I pray it gets done. He deserves a ring. Either way the Colts have put together a nice team and I wish you guys the best either way.

Caldwell was actually decent for yall. I would be happy with Stafford too. 

[pgt_rob 737]

Man, I have this weird feeling for this off season. It's going to be super interesting. With the potential suiters for Stafford, who all knows who is involved. But, the more you look at it, we're most likely drafting lower in the draft compared to other potential suiters. So as a trade aspect, we're going to have to sweeten the pot to land Stafford. I see most are saying give up 1st round #21, and possibly a 3rd. However, with the other suiters, I'm kinda feeling like the Colts could potentially give up more.... Not saying I'm right, but could be 1st round #21 plus future #1st round pick. I know what you're probably thinking... TWO first round picks for 33 year old QB? Hell no! I'm glad I'm not in Ballard's position but I'm anxious to see what happens if he's going to be serious about getting Stafford. We know how Stafford is as a QB, but moving up in the draft for a rookie QB could be potentially fatal to Ballards career (possibly hot seat) if the QB doesn't pan out. Just my thoughts.

[LionsFan2021 8]

36 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

Caldwell was actually decent for yall. I would be happy with Stafford too. 

 

The Caldwell hire was a complete waste of time. He was the OC for one of the worst offenses in the league when we hired him. Yes he had a calming impact on the team from the nonsense that we had with Schwartz but he wasn't going to take that team anywhere. 

 

Of course he's lightyears better than Patricia was.

[Wentzszn 10,034]

Take this with a grain of salt. Just fun speculation and rumor.

 

 

[The Fish 1,184]

8 minutes ago, LionsFan2021 said:

 

The Caldwell hire was a complete waste of time. He was the OC for one of the worst offenses in the league when we hired him. Yes he had a calming impact on the team from the nonsense that we had with Schwartz but he wasn't going to take that team anywhere. 

 

Of course he's lightyears better than Patricia was.

Hey, that's the best coach you guys have ever had or something..

[The Fish 1,184]

34 minutes ago, pgt_rob said:

Man, I have this weird feeling for this off season. It's going to be super interesting. With the potential suiters for Stafford, who all knows who is involved. But, the more you look at it, we're most likely drafting lower in the draft compared to other potential suiters. So as a trade aspect, we're going to have to sweeten the pot to land Stafford. I see most are saying give up 1st round #21, and possibly a 3rd. However, with the other suiters, I'm kinda feeling like the Colts could potentially give up more.... Not saying I'm right, but could be 1st round #21 plus future #1st round pick. I know what you're probably thinking... TWO first round picks for 33 year old QB? Hell no! I'm glad I'm not in Ballard's position but I'm anxious to see what happens if he's going to be serious about getting Stafford. We know how Stafford is as a QB, but moving up in the draft for a rookie QB could be potentially fatal to Ballards career (possibly hot seat) if the QB doesn't pan out. Just my thoughts.

 

He took this job because Andrew Luck was here..

He can't get it wrong, everyone knows it. I don't care how you spin it, cynically or pragmatically, but yes, he's buying himself time to build the roster.

[The Fish 1,184]

7 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

Take this with a grain of salt. Just fun speculation and rumor.

 

 

How do you take a grain of salt? Drink it? Eat it? Other!?

 

Anyway, I hope that's correct. 

[life long 218]

I have seen many people from all over the spectrum weigh in... I personally would give up 2 #1's and not a penny more. Maybe try to get them to pick up a portion more of the contract than obligated. 

[Wentzszn 10,034]

Irsay is talking to the media at 2pm today. I am sure there will be some QB questions.

[richard pallo 2,815]

2 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

Irsay is talking to the media at 2pm today. I am sure there will be some QB questions.

Could this be the announcement?  

[indykmj 82]

25 minutes ago, The Fish said:

 

He took this job because Andrew Luck was here..

He can't get it wrong, everyone knows it. I don't care how you spin it, cynically or pragmatically, but yes, he's buying himself time to build the roster.

 

  The 'roster' has been built. Now comes the much harder part; finding elite players or 

   prospects to be fill the marquee spots (QB, L-OT, Edge rusher and with a bit less

   urgency, WR-1 and CB-1).

 

   Wether via trade, FA or the Draft, he needs to fill at least 2 of those 5 in the next 3

   months.

[#12. 1,095]

Don't get me wrong, I'm hoping Stafford becomes a Colt and I believe you can compete with him, but people have been calling him underrated for so long that now I think he's a little overrated.  He's not Manning or Luck.  He won't carry a flawed or bad team.  Where Stafford truly lands on the spectrum, I don't know.  I'm not sure what would be a good comp for him, but you should certainly be able to get what you had in Rivers out of him, or better.

[The Fish 1,184]

1 minute ago, indykmj said:

 

  The 'roster' has been built. Now comes the much harder part; finding elite players or 

   prospects to be fill the marquee spots (QB, L-OT, Edge rusher and with a bit less

   urgency, WR-1 and CB-1).

 

   Wether via trade, FA or the Draft, he needs to fill at least 2 of those 5 in the next 3

   months.

The roster can't be built when the list of needs is as long as it is..

[Wentzszn 10,034]

Irsay always talks to the media so nothing out of the ordinary.

 

1/3 of the nfl teams have called about Stafford. Wow

 

 

[Wentzszn 10,034]

So about ten teams have called about Stafford. 

[HoosierHero 60]

43 minutes ago, The Fish said:

How do you take a grain of salt? Drink it? Eat it? Other!?

I usually just inject it right into the blood stream. Don’t knock it till you try it. One day I wish to be able to breathe under the sea. Maybe in an octopus’ garden. 

[The Fish 1,184]

1 minute ago, HoosierHero said:

I usually just inject it right into the blood stream. Don’t knock it till you try it. One day I wish to be able to breathe under the sea. Maybe in an octopus’ garden. 

That's the other, other and anything is possible if you set your mind to it (I think?)

 

 

[life long 218]

1 hour ago, #12. said:

Don't get me wrong, I'm hoping Stafford becomes a Colt and I believe you can compete with him, but people have been calling him underrated for so long that now I think he's a little overrated.  He's not Manning or Luck.  He won't carry a flawed or bad team.  Where Stafford truly lands on the spectrum, I don't know.  I'm not sure what would be a good comp for him, but you should certainly be able to get what you had in Rivers out of him, or better.

Id value wise compare him to Carson Palmer. JMO

[danlhart87 8,687]

 

[shasta519 2,960]

16 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

 

 

That's an easy question...no. Stafford alone does not put them over the top.

 

But that's not the question to be asking. The question is that "IF you trade draft capital AND give Stafford a big contract...are you still able and willing to do what it takes to build a top 5 offense?" That means bringing in an alpha WR1...and perhaps a TE as well.

 

If they are willing to go all in on the offense to build a top 5 offense...then yes I think they can compete for a SB.

[Wentzszn 10,034]

This might sound crazy but I wonder what the chances are of Eason being done trade bait for the lions. Not that he isnt proven but maybe insurance or a backup plan. 

[shasta519 2,960]

4 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

This might sound crazy but I wonder what the chances are of Eason being done trade bait for the lions. Not that he isnt proven but maybe insurance or a backup plan. 

 

Probably not. They have Chase Daniel already locked in as the QB2. My guess is that he will be the de facto starter and they will draft a QB (who will take over at some point during the season).

[Wentzszn 10,034]

4 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

Probably not. They have Chase Daniel already locked in as the QB2. My guess is that he will be the de facto starter and they will draft a QB (who will take over at some point during the season).

Not saying they would want him as a starter. Maybe as a better backup. Chances are though they would want a veteran if they draft a young QB. I go back to what Ballard said about another team seeing Eason throw. Just a thought. I doubt that happens.

[shasta519 2,960]

Just now, Chloe6124 said:

Not saying they would want him as a starter. Maybe as a better backup. Chances are though they would want a veteran if they draft a young QB. I go back to what Ballard said about another team seeing Eason throw. Just a thought. I doubt that happens.

 

They would possibly take him...but he would be their QB3 (like he is on the Colts)...so he wouldn't add any value to the trade. Daniel is already under contract for next season. Since they will more than likely go for a rookie QB...that player will serve as the backup.

[IinD 2,146]

I could definitely see Denver landing him.

 

 

[Wentzszn 10,034]

Irsay is basically not giving anything away lol. He says this team is ready to win so ideally if you can find a vet who can come in that would be great. Then he says ideally if you can find the guy in the draft for the next 15 years that is the right path. So not giving anything away. It does sound though like they want a vet that can give them 3-5 years.

[Wentzszn 10,034]

 

[Wentzszn 10,034]

 

[danlhart87 8,687]

4 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

 

I think one of the reasons they are actively going after Stafford is because there are no guarantees any of the top 4 QBs fall to 21.

 

They could miss out on Stafford then top 4 QBs go before 21 then be totally unprepared. I would think from that standpoint Ballard would be aggressive and trade up.

 

I like Mac Jones who could easily be had in trade down scenario but who knows if Ballard even likes him.

 

I just don't want to roll out with JB again. I am fine with JB as a backup though. 

 

I would even throw a player in the deal to get Stafford. Even Leonard if that eliminated the threat of losing pick 21.

[Stephen 1,875]

8 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

I think one of the reasons they are actively going after Stafford is because there are no guarantees any of the top 4 QBs fall to 21.

 

They could miss out on Stafford then top 4 QBs go before 21 then be totally unprepared. I would think from that standpoint Ballard would be aggressive and trade up.

 

I like Mac Jones who could easily be had in trade down scenario but who knows if Ballard even likes him.

 

I just don't want to roll out with JB again. I am fine with JB as a backup though. 

 

I would even throw a player in the deal to get Stafford. Even Leonard if that eliminated the threat of losing pick 21.

Sure Lawrence, field, wilson, lance and jones could becgobe, but Trask and Newman  would probably  still be there

[Stephen 1,875]

1 hour ago, Chloe6124 said:

This might sound crazy but I wonder what the chances are of Eason being done trade bait for the lions. Not that he isnt proven but maybe insurance or a backup plan. 

Honestly  could happen,  but be better if we kept him

[TheNextGM 333]

For the millionth time.. the roster is way too good to waste a year with a rookie QB.

 

Trask, Neman, Jones, Wilson and Lance are not leading a team to the playoffs much less a Super Bowl.

 

Go get Stafford or Rodgers and let’s win the whole damn thing. 

[danlhart87 8,687]

1 minute ago, Stephen said:

Sure Lawrence, field, wilson, lance and jones could becgobe, but Trask and Newman  would probably  still be there

These next few months are gonna be important for Jones and Lance. Jones from his limited skills set and Lance because he only played 1 game.

 

Lawrence Fields and Wilson will all go top 12

[danlhart87 8,687]

1 minute ago, TheNextGM said:

For the millionth time.. the roster is way too good to waste a year with a rookie QB.

 

Trask, Neman, Jones, Wilson and Lance are not leading a team to the playoffs much less a Super Bowl.

 

Go get Stafford or Rodgers and let’s win the whole damn thing. 

No thanks to Rodgers 

I'm ok with Stafford as long as we don't give up too much 

 

And getting a solid rookie to build around would be a very smart decision especially from a financial standpoint 

[Mr.NotSoCreative 273]

5 hours ago, #12. said:

Don't get me wrong, I'm hoping Stafford becomes a Colt and I believe you can compete with him, but people have been calling him underrated for so long that now I think he's a little overrated.  He's not Manning or Luck.  He won't carry a flawed or bad team.  Where Stafford truly lands on the spectrum, I don't know.  I'm not sure what would be a good comp for him, but you should certainly be able to get what you had in Rivers out of him, or better.

This whole thing is definitely getting extremely hyped, giving me that feeling as well. I do think that Stafford is an upgrade over Rivers in most areas. Rivers was really heady and his anticipation elite due to lack of mobility. He had to be both. Wish we could just get Stafford for the same $25 mil Rivers got lol.

[csmopar 7,514]

@NewColtsFanto answer your question, again, I don't know.  But I do know that trading, signing or otherwise acquiring another aged Vet at QB, one who's been beaten to hell by a crap team isn't a good solution, long term or short term.  Signing one would be one thing, but trading for one is giving up way too much, even a 7th for Wentz would be dumb. Stafford, not much better. 

 

If Eason isn't the guy, and I have no idea if he is or isn't, then trade up in the draft and lets take a swing that way. 

[Superman 9,408]

9 minutes ago, TheNextGM said:

For the millionth time.. the roster is way too good to waste a year with a rookie QB.

 

I'm not sure the roster is that good. There are parts of the roster that are really good, some depth at others, but we're deficient (IMO) at edge and corner, and probably WR. Improving those areas of the team and adding a "right now" QB might not be attainable in 2021.

[colts89 61]

With the amount of teams interested and how stupid/desperate most GMs are, I can see teams giving up multiple first rounders for Stafford. Ballard isn't going to overpay for any player, even if the hype train behind the person is at a high amongst the fanbase

[chad72 7,448]

7 minutes ago, Mr.NotSoCreative said:

This whole thing is definitely getting extremely hyped, giving me that feeling as well. I do think that Stafford is an upgrade over Rivers in most areas. Rivers was really heady and his anticipation elite due to lack of mobility. He had to be both. Wish we could just get Stafford for the same $25 mil Rivers got lol.

 

I somewhat brought this up early on.

 

Stafford, historically with Ebron (who dropped a lot of passes, surprise?? ) or Hockenson that were first round draft picks, has not looked to his TEs as much (only after several injuries to his WRs did he look to Hockenson), though he does throw enough to his RBs. There is still some gunslinger in him, you like it sometimes but sometimes you wonder if it can be contained like with Favre. Rivers played within his limitations and doubled down on his strengths of mind and anticipation while Stafford never felt like he could trust his run game. Rivers has had the benefit of LT, Michael Turner etc. in his heyday that his tendencey to cede to the run came automatically.

 

Will Stafford bring over any bad habits of not trusting his run and TEs? How much baggage will we be inheriting with this new QB? We had the same doubts with Rivers after a bad 2019 as well, and it turned out fine, a turnaround from his 5-11 year to 11-5 with the Colts. You have to go in with the glass half full at this point if we go the Stafford route, IMO, and trust in Frank's offensive system and our OL. 

 

 

[Superman 9,408]

1 minute ago, csmopar said:

@NewColtsFanto answer your question, again, I don't know.  But I do know that trading, signing or otherwise acquiring another aged Vet at QB, one who's been beaten to hell by a crap team isn't a good solution, long term or short term.  Signing one would be one thing, but trading for one is giving up way too much, even a 7th for Wentz would be dumb. Stafford, not much better. 

 

If Eason isn't the guy, and I have no idea if he is or isn't, then trade up in the draft and lets take a swing that way. 

 

Why is drafting an unknown entity considered so much better than trading for a known performer?

 

I've seen a lot of research the last couple of days that confirmed what we already know: it's really hard to find a good QB in the draft, including in the first round.