Report: rivers to return to Colts or retire

[The Fish]

21 minutes ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

I'm not sure that's necessary as long as Ballard can keep a decent QB and a good team around him.   I mean we beat the Pack this year.

 

Our defense has to improve that is for certain.  

 

Yes it's worrisome but honestly the game is bigger than one person.  

 

What's not necessary? Moving Rivers? Drafting a QB? I think I get your drift, but just double checking.

 

To the last point. The game is bigger than the QB, but only kinda. There's a reason Peyton kept winning 12 games every regular season, or Tom played in every SB in the last 20 years or something, Pat in KC has lost once in the last 25 games or some crazy stat like that. 

[Valpo2004]

39 minutes ago, NorthernColt said:

Theres definitely no right answer, just a matter of opinion. Heres my reasoning. 

 

1. Darnold is much younger

 

2. Wentz has worked with a super bowl winning roster and coaching staff. Darnold has worked with Adam Gase...

 

3. I'm not saying Darnold has had good statistical seasons, but he was drafted 2nd overall, cause he has potential. 

 

4. Id argue Wentz has only had one really good season, 2 average, the rest poor imo.

 

5. Contracts factor in huge obviously. 

 

6. Wentz scares the hell out of me, due to injuries and turnovers, all of which are mainly self inflicted.

 

1. By about 4 years.  That doesn't make a difference to me when he hasn't shown anything.

 

2. They became a SB winning roster and staff partially on the back of Wentz's play during the regular season.

 

3. So was Ryan Leaf.  For that matter so was Carson Wentz.  They were all #2 overall picks.  

 

4. Wentz passer ratings: 2016: 79.3 2017: 101.9, 2018: 102.2, 2019: 93.1, 2020: 72.8 - I would argue any passer rating over 100 is usually a great season.   Luck never posted a passer rating over 100 on the season in his entire career.  Meanwhile Sam Darnold never even hit a passer rating of 90.  His passer ratings have been 77.6, 84.3, and 72.7

 

5. Fair enough, Darnold is cheaper.

 

6. Wentz's turnover issues only started this season and to me this season looks much like Luck's 2015 season.  Wentz has had a few injuries in the past, but he's been fully available and un-injured for 2 seasons straight now.  

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, Mel Kiper's Hair said:

I really do not understand why we would want to get rid of Rivers. His stats are very comparable to Andrew Luck's in his final year with the team. If my memory serves me correctly no one was calling for the Colts to dump Luck after the 2018 season. Now Luck did throw for more touchdowns that Rivers but he also had almost 100 more attempts. We are more balanced now than we were then and Rivers still averaged more yds/completion than Luckand had more plays of 20+yds than Andrew. Just because Philip didn't throw for 5,000 yds and 40 td's doesn't mean he is a bum. I would much rather take my chances with Rivers next year than Darnold or Wentz. The lone exception may be Matt Stafford if he becomes available but other than that why not stick to the guy who led us to an 11-5 record and a playoff berth in a season in which he really had no off season workouts or preseason to build chemistry with his new team. I think based on what took place in 2020 Philip Rivers did an amazing job and should be given a shot to come back for another season with the Colts.

 

Andrew Luck's Career Stats

 

Philip River's Career Stats

It's because Luck was only 30, Rivers will be 39 but I would bring back Rivers for 1 more year, no reason not too. I want no part of Wentz, Stafford, or Dak. 

[Bolts2Colts]

9 hours ago, AustinnKaine said:

Our defense won us quite a few games. 

Which games did the defense win in your opinion? I think Bears and that’s it. 

[DontEverGiveUp]

2 hours ago, John Hammonds said:

Totally agree.  And even though I understand Kevin Bowen's admonition that finding the franchise QB is not just the most important thing, it's the only thing, and you just keep trying to draft one until you get one, I say that for right now, Phillip Rivers is our best option.  You bring him back one more year, do your best to fill the gaps in the rest of the team (LT, CB, DE, WR), and make your superbowl run next year.

Yes, it is possible to go to, and even win, a superbowl with a non-franchise QB.  Carolina did it with Jake Del Homme.  The Bucs did it with Brad Johnson.  The Ravens did it with Trent Dilfer.  It can be done.

The Ravens did it with Flacco.  The Giants did it twice with Eli.  The Broncos did it with a washed up Peyton.

 

Seattle also made it to the SB with Hasslebeck, the Rams with Goff, and the 49ers with Garoppolo.

 

Teams win Super Bowls, not quarterbacks.  Unfortunately, most fans have bought into the media's narrative that only some QBs can win, while ignoring that QB play is a small piece of the larger puzzle.

 

To add to that, Rodgers and Brees have been in the league for 30+ combined seasons and only have two rings to show for it (coincidentally when their defenses were playing lights out).  If it was all about the QB, then shouldn't both of those guys have more hardware?

[Valpo2004]

4 minutes ago, Bolts2Colts said:

Which games did the defense win in your opinion? I think Bears and that’s it. 

 

Meh you could possibly throw up both Texans games in there even though there was some luck involved.  Texans had supposedly one of the worst running defenses in the NFL and the Colts offense put up 26 and 27 points in both contests.  You would hope for more when the opposing defense is suppose to be bad against the run and our offense is suppose to be able to run the ball well.

 

That's especially true when you know that the defense is facing against Watson who again even though his line sucks, is impossible to stop for an entire game.

 

 

 

[stitches]

I don't mind it either way... as long as we actually pick our QB of the future in the draft(or Ballard and Reich think Eason is the guy). 

[The Fish]

6 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

It's because Luck was only 30, Rivers will be 39 but I would bring back Rivers for 1 more year, no reason not too. I want no part of Wentz, Stafford, or Dak. 

Change your mind about one of those guys on that list.

(not that it's overly important)

[TimetobringDfence!]

If Rivers does retire or we decide not to bring him back, we have some big decisions to make. We may need a new LT, or is Veldheer able to fill the gap for next year. If he can start, we could use our first pick to get a QB to compete with Eason. Then we just draft DE CB and a TE to beef up our weak spots. Then go for Oline depth and defensive back depth.

[NorthernColt]

16 minutes ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

1. By about 4 years.  That doesn't make a difference to me when he hasn't shown anything.

 

2. They became a SB winning roster and staff partially on the back of Wentz's play during the regular season.

 

3. So was Ryan Leaf.  For that matter so was Carson Wentz.  They were all #2 overall picks.  

 

4. Wentz passer ratings: 2016: 79.3 2017: 101.9, 2018: 102.2, 2019: 93.1, 2020: 72.8 - I would argue any passer rating over 100 is usually a great season.   Luck never posted a passer rating over 100 on the season in his entire career.  Meanwhile Sam Darnold never even hit a passer rating of 90.  His passer ratings have been 77.6, 84.3, and 72.7

 

5. Fair enough, Darnold is cheaper.

 

6. Wentz's turnover issues only started this season and to me this season looks much like Luck's 2015 season.  Wentz has had a few injuries in the past, but he's been fully available and un-injured for 2 seasons straight now.  

Differing of opinions here is obvious, I'm not even saying im all in on Darnold, I'm just saying id much prefer him over Wentz.

 

Everything you listed seems like a whole lot of excuses for a guy making 30+m per year. Ill pass.

[Indyfan4life]

9 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Personally, I'd take him back in a heartbeat. Unless someone else that is clearly better presents themselves, it's a no brainer to me. 

 

No preseason, covid camp, musical chairs at WR and TE most of the year.... And he still was top 10 in yards and completion %. Don't think he was outside of the top half in any meaningful stat. ...

 

And folks that want to harp on INTs... Brady, Willson, Wentz, Goff, Murray, Ryan, and Cousins all had more. Big Ben, and Herbert had the same... Luck only had one year with a lower INT%.  I might be harder on him if he wasn't a new QB to the team, with no preseason, and musical chairs at pass catcher.

 

And for those that harp on Ws/Ls... Luck never had more wins in a regular season.

I have to agree with all of this. Hilton and Taylor didn’t come on until the last half of the season and that’s when Rivers was putting up better numbers. Most of this board seems to think if our QB isn’t putting up 5,000 yards, 40 TD and less than 5 INT, then he’s trash and we should move onto Eason. My only gripe with Rivers is his mobility being basically non-existent. I also am aware from time to time he can move out of the pocket and extend a play, but it’s few and far between. Everyone is infatuated with running QBs, but the truth is guys like Mahomes and Jackson are few and far between. Just because we may move to a more mobile QB doesn’t mean anything. Rivers has been more than serviceable for this team. 

[Bolts2Colts]

21 minutes ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

Meh you could possibly throw up both Texans games in there even though there was some luck involved.  Texans had supposedly one of the worst running defenses in the NFL and the Colts offense put up 26 and 27 points in both contests.  You would hope for more when the opposing defense is suppose to be bad against the run and our offense is suppose to be able to run the ball well.

 

That's especially true when you know that the defense is facing against Watson who again even though his line sucks, is impossible to stop for an entire game.

 

 

 

Disagree that defense won the Texans games. Both times the Texans drove right down the field for game-winning score and it was due to luck that we didn’t lose. 
 

Actually, it was Rivers’ 40 yard completion to TY on 2nd and freaking 20 yards that won the second game. Majority of people would pick offense over defense there. 
 

First Texans game was pure luck that defense didn’t lose it. 

[John Hammonds]

22 minutes ago, DontEverGiveUp said:

The Ravens did it with Flacco.  The Giants did it twice with Eli.  The Broncos did it with a washed up Peyton.

 

Seattle also made it to the SB with Hasslebeck, the Rams with Goff, and the 49ers with Garoppolo.

 

Teams win Super Bowls, not quarterbacks.  Unfortunately, most fans have bought into the media's narrative that only some QBs can win, while ignoring that QB play is a small piece of the larger puzzle.

 

To add to that, Rodgers and Brees have been in the league for 30+ combined seasons and only have two rings to show for it (coincidentally when their defenses were playing lights out).  If it was all about the QB, then shouldn't both of those guys have more hardware?

I agree with you.

I think the narrative got cast that way because of recent history.  If you're name wasn't Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, or Eli Manning, then you just simply didn't qualify.  Those are the only people that won superbowls, thus, in order for teams to do it, they needed a franchise QB.

[coming on strong]

2 hours ago, Stephen said:

Darnold  would throw alot of ints

Rivers does too so did luck .

[Bolts2Colts]

5 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Philip Rivers stats this year:

4,169 Yards

68% completions

24 TD's

only 11 INTS's

7.7 per completion

11-5 + playoffs

To me that says an easy good on a scale of average, above average, good, very good, or great. He was good this year so to the people that don't like him, too bad because when you put him down you look foolish at this point. Nobody is buying what the haters are spewing.

Do people realize that these stats are better than Peyton Manning’s 2008 MVP season? QB rating is also better. 

[Myles]

17 minutes ago, John Hammonds said:

I agree with you.

I think the narrative got cast that way because of recent history.  If you're name wasn't Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, or Eli Manning, then you just simply didn't qualify.  Those are the only people that won superbowls, thus, in order for teams to do it, they needed a franchise QB.

That would beg the question of - What is a franchise QB?   

Is it someone who consistently puts up good numbers?  That would disqualify Eli.   Career 84 rating.

Is it someone who consistently wins games? - That would disqualify Eli.  Career 117-117 record.  

 

[richard pallo]

We just fell further down in the draft order.  In the 20's.  The price just went up to move up for a rookie so it makes even less sense now.  Darnold again finished as one of most pressured QB in the league.  He has been running for his life ever since he became a Jet.  First choice is Stafford and if not possible I could support Rivers coming back with Darnold as his backup.  Eason was only on the roster because of Covid.  In a normal year he would be on the practice squad as long as we had Brissett.  I personally think Darnold has more upside with a good line and coaching.  He could step in easily after Rivers retires.  We shall see but I'm really hoping for Stafford.  

[Rally5]

4 hours ago, NorthernColt said:

Depends really. Hes shown both good and bad. Put it this way, I'd prefer:

 

Stafford, Darnold >> Rivers

 

Rivers > Wentz, Ryan, Garoppalo etc

So Darnold who has done nothing but lose over Garoppalo who took a team to a Super Bowl and Wentz who had an MVP type season and helped lead a team to a SB before injury?  That's an interesting take, tell me more, is it just because he's young and was drafted high or do you see something special?  I'd be all for Stafford but I think that may be a bidding war...

[John Hammonds]

13 minutes ago, Myles said:

That would beg the question of - What is a franchise QB?   

Is it someone who consistently puts up good numbers?  That would disqualify Eli.   Career 84 rating.

Is it someone who consistently wins games? - That would disqualify Eli.  Career 117-117 record.  

 

That's a very good question, Myles.  How do you define a "franchise quarterback"?

Is it defined by being drafted early?  Then Akili Smith and JaMarcus Russell would be franchise QB's, and Russell Wilson and Tom Brady would not.

Is it defined by being in the superbowl?  Then Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer would be franchise QB's, and Dan Fouts and Warren Moon would not.

I would propose that a Franchise Quarterback be defined as someone with immense talent, that the team designs its offense around, and is relied on for both performance and leadership, regardless of where they were drafted.  Thus, Detroit's Matthew Stafford and Atlanta's Matt Ryan are included in the list.  As well as Phillip Rivers, during his career with the Chargers.  And even Eli, with his non-HOF numbers, may also be included, since they definitely ran the offense through him.

What do you think?

[NorthernColt]

13 minutes ago, Rally5 said:

So Darnold who has done nothing but lose over Garoppalo who took a team to a Super Bowl and Wentz who had an MVP type season and helped lead a team to a SB before injury?  That's an interesting take, tell me more, is it just because he's young and was drafted high or do you see something special?  I'd be all for Stafford but I think that may be a bidding war...

Yeah its not because of his production so far, more so age and potential. Personally I don't see it in wentz along with his contract. Same with Garoppalo.

 

But I could definitely see us taking another step if we had Stafford.

[Myles]

10 minutes ago, John Hammonds said:

That's a very good question, Myles.  How do you define a "franchise quarterback"?

Is it defined by being drafted early?  Then Akili Smith and JaMarcus Russell would be franchise QB's, and Russell Wilson and Tom Brady would not.

Is it defined by being in the superbowl?  Then Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer would be franchise QB's, and Dan Fouts and Warren Moon would not.

I would propose that a Franchise Quarterback be defined as someone with immense talent, that the team designs its offense around, and is relied on for both performance and leadership, regardless of where they were drafted.  Thus, Detroit's Matthew Stafford and Atlanta's Matt Ryan are included in the list.  As well as Phillip Rivers, during his career with the Chargers.  And even Eli, with his non-HOF numbers, may also be included, since they definitely ran the offense through him.

What do you think?

Not that this is correct, but I define "franchise QB" as:

A very talented QB who can consistently win games and get the team to the playoffs most seasons.  What happens in the playoffs is usually down to how the other parts of the team can perform.  Playing in the playoffs means playing great teams each week.  Odds of winning it all are low but if the team can make the playoffs each year, they have a chance.  

 

I suppose a "franchise QB" can also be:

A QB who plays well enough so that the team does not seek a replacement QB.  Stafford would fall under this.  

[DontEverGiveUp]

56 minutes ago, Bolts2Colts said:

Do people realize that these stats are better than Peyton Manning’s 2008 MVP season? QB rating is also better. 

And Philip Rivers should have won MVP in 2008.  Led the league in TDs, Y/A, and passer rating while carrying his team to the playoffs where they knocked off Peyton's Colts.

 

Didn't even get voted to the pro-bowl.

[Myles]

42 minutes ago, DontEverGiveUp said:

And Philip Rivers should have won MVP in 2008.  Led the league in TDs, Y/A, and passer rating while carrying his team to the playoffs where they knocked off Peyton's Colts.

 

Didn't even get voted to the pro-bowl.

They don't usually give the MVP to a QB on a team with an 8-8 record.   

 

[King Colt]

The overrated Colts defense and play calling are a bigger problem than  Rivers. They are consistently hot one quarter and cold the next. Much like the Steelers game the Colts start off strong the then fall on the faces. Fortunately they picked themselves up in the second half after three 3 N outs and a missed FG yesterday. 14 unanswered points in the second half. Taylor saved this team Sunday. He has twelve 200 yard games and one 300 yard game at Wisconsin. Next week is their last week.

[eaglerockdude]

As a Rivers fan I would prefer to not see him jumping around lots of teams...and if he wants to play pretty sure it will be with the Colts.

[Nadine]

7 hours ago, Luck is Good said:

I can’t stand the word “haters” with a passion

Me too

It's right up there with HOMERS for me

It's just bait for fans to fight amongst themselves without having to make an actual point

 

Some crow eating is fine and people or ok with it.  But the nonstop calling out 'haters' for being negative is just as much of a problem as general negativity

 

https://forums.colts.com/search/?q=haters&quick=1

[Bolts2Colts]

It seems obvious that Rivers will be back next year.

 

Just last week he said he wants to play another year. Now he only wants that with Colts. Reich recently said that Rivers has multiple good years left in him. 
 

TY said it would be dumb not to bring Rivers back. 
 

Odds are at least 90% that Rivers is a Colt next year. 
 

[Luck is Good]

7 minutes ago, Nadine said:

Me too

It's right up there with HOMERS for me

It's just bait for fans to fight amongst themselves without having to make an actual point

 

Some crow eating is fine and people or ok with it.  But the nonstop calling out 'haters' for being negative is just as much of a problem as general negativity

 

https://forums.colts.com/search/?q=haters&quick=1

There’s always positives and negatives with a game. Optimism and pessimism are necessary at certain points

[2006Coltsbestever]

16 minutes ago, Nadine said:

Me too

It's right up there with HOMERS for me

It's just bait for fans to fight amongst themselves without having to make an actual point

 

Some crow eating is fine and people or ok with it.  But the nonstop calling out 'haters' for being negative is just as much of a problem as general negativity

 

https://forums.colts.com/search/?q=haters&quick=1

That is all fine and dandy but when someone calls my QB trash that is being a hater and a troll, if that happens I will call them out. We are already discussed this, I will start to just ignore it but if we lose Saturday and people start calling him trash then they are going to get called out. Why defend someone that is super negative and calls people names? If that is the case I can do the same thing I guess if I wanted to without any posts being deleted. 

[Four2itus]

6 hours ago, NorthernColt said:

Darnold >> Rivers

13 hours ago, danlhart87 said:

I have 3 options if Rivers retires 

 

Mac Jones 

Jacob Eason 

Trey Lance 

 

I would be supremely surprised if one of those scenarios is the direction they choose. 

[zibby43]

11 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Eason has TWO-plus seasons of college tape.   One at Washington and one plus at Georgia.   He played in 32 games and STARTED 26.   Thats a good number of starts for a college QB. 
 

And respectfully, no, not many guys have Eason’s arm talent.   And the ones that do are signed long term.   His arm talent is likely top10 in the NFL right now.   It’s rare.  What isn’t top10 now is his head.   He needs top coaching.   The reason he fell in the draft isn’t his arm.  It’s how he handles the NFL. 
 

 

That’s fair.  I personally just tend to throw away the FR season and the year he was injured, holding neither of those seasons against him because of inexperience and lack of development at those stages.

But that’s just my preference, and I can understand wanting to include those.  But I get more concerned when I add that FR year back in, because of the lack of growth I see in some areas.

 

Brissett also has an absolute canon, and had the eighth-highest adjusted downfield (20+ yards) completion percentage in 2018.  Was top 4 in the NFL in completion percentage on deep balls despite throwing few.  Wasn’t trying to knock Eason’s arm or say it wasn’t special, just that it will only take you so far in the NFL.  
 

When I watched Eason’s final year of tape, I saw a lot of big boy NFL throws.  But I saw a lot of inconsistency in hitting the layup throws, getting lost in looking at the pass rush, a lack of mobility/athleticism.  Which is all fine considering his relative inexperience.  Just saying he’s much more of a project than some people think.  
 

 

 

[Tsarquise]

26 minutes ago, Bolts2Colts said:

It seems obvious that Rivers will be back next year.

 

Just last week he said he wants to play another year. Now he only wants that with Colts. Reich recently said that Rivers has multiple good years left in him. 
 

TY said it would be dumb not to bring Rivers back. 
 

Odds are at least 90% that Rivers is a Colt next year. 
 

Yet, no contract extension has been offered, and he was only signed to one year contract in the first place. Similar sentiments were expressed by Reich and players in regards to keeping Brissett as the starter last year. Anything can happen. 

[Shive]

18 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

That is all fine and dandy but when someone calls my QB trash that is being a hater and a troll, if that happens I will call them out. We are already discussed this, I will start to just ignore it but if we lose Saturday and people start calling him trash then they are going to get called out. Why defend someone that is super negative and calls people names? If that is the case I can do the same thing I guess if I wanted to without any posts being deleted. 

That trollish behavior is something we've been trying to cut down on as well. You may not notice it (since the posts disappear after the fact), but we've been taking down a lot of those types of posts, especially in the gameday thread. We definitely aren't trying to defend those posters, but at the same time, we have to make sure we don't also have posters calling those people names and perpetuating the same behavior. The whole "2 wrongs doing make a right" adage.

 

As a poster, if you see posts that you deem to be trolling or baiting, just report them. We're here to quash these issues before they inflame and keep this forum an enjoyable place to have civil discourse. We know there's always varying opinions on any given topic, and that's not a problem. Whether your opinion is critical of the team or in favor of it, it's all about how you say it. Calling someone a "hater" or a "homer" is just like someone calling Rivers trash, in that it only throws gasoline on a fire and we won't tolerate either.

[Nadine]

50 minutes ago, Luck is Good said:

There’s always positives and negatives with a game. Optimism and pessimism are necessary at certain points

Of course

But the name calling takes the focus off the team and puts it onto differences between fans

 

It's not an interesting discussion and doesn't contribute the the quality of the posting here.

[Bolts2Colts]

28 minutes ago, Tsarquise said:

Yet, no contract extension has been offered, and he was only signed to one year contract in the first place. Similar sentiments were expressed by Reich and players in regards to keeping Brissett as the starter last year. Anything can happen. 

Did Nick Sirianni say that Brisset was playing as well as anybody in the league over a 4-game stretch? That’s what Nick recently said in a conference call about Rivers. Added that he thought Rivers was the better QB in the Texans game, and he knows DW was on the other side. 
 

I agree anything can happen especially if Rivers is terrible in playoffs. 
 

Why would they offer an extension now when they know he isn’t going anywhere else? That would be illogical. 

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, zibby43 said:

That’s fair.  I personally just tend to throw away the FR season and the year he was injured, holding neither of those seasons against him because of inexperience and lack of development at those stages.

But that’s just my preference, and I can understand wanting to include those.  But I get more concerned when I add that FR year back in, because of the lack of growth I see in some areas.

 

Brissett also has an absolute canon, and had the eighth-highest adjusted downfield (20+ yards) completion percentage in 2018.  Was top 4 in the NFL in completion percentage on deep balls despite throwing few.  Wasn’t trying to knock Eason’s arm or say it wasn’t special, just that it will only take you so far in the NFL.  
 

When I watched Eason’s final year of tape, I saw a lot of big boy NFL throws.  But I saw a lot of inconsistency in hitting the layup throws, getting lost in looking at the pass rush, a lack of mobility/athleticism.  Which is all fine considering his relative inexperience.  Just saying he’s much more of a project than some people think.  
 

 

 

Good post.    Appreciate your thoughts.

 

Thank you. 

[Tsarquise]

19 minutes ago, Bolts2Colts said:

Did Nick Sirianni say that Brisset was playing as well as anybody in the league over a 4-game stretch? That’s what Nick recently said in a conference call about Rivers. Added that he thought Rivers was the better QB in the Texans game, and he knows DW was on the other side. 
 

I agree anything can happen especially if Rivers is terrible in playoffs. 
 

Why would they offer an extension now when they know he isn’t going anywhere else? That would be illogical. 

Idk. For assurance? To feel appreciated? So his mind doesn't wander to his coaching job that he has lined up? Why do teams offer extensions in the middle of seasons at all? Why lock up Brissett in the middle of a season?

 

All I am saying, though, is nothing is obvious (which you stated) until he is re-signed, and that the words of the coaches really mean nothing. 

 

 

[Luck is Good]

46 minutes ago, Nadine said:

Of course

But the name calling takes the focus off the team and puts it onto differences between fans

 

It's not an interesting discussion and doesn't contribute the the quality of the posting here.

Oh I agree. I’m just saying there’s positives and negatives with each game

[TheNextGM]

5 hours ago, stitches said:

I don't mind it either way... as long as we actually pick our QB of the future in the draft(or Ballard and Reich think Eason is the guy). 

I hate this idea. Hate it.

 

The team is too good to draft a QB in round 1, heck even round 2. You need those picks to ADD to the team - maybe an edge rusher, a big tackle, etc.

 

There are very few elite QBs drafted after the 2nd round, and I certainly don’t one one of those or Eason being the guy next year, you’re almost guaranteed to take a step back.

 

Phil returns or they acquire a guy. 

[Thebrashandthebold]

15 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Yup. And I'd be OK with JB coming back too for a million or so per year to be a short yardage specialist. But yeah, let Eason take over the mop up stuff and get some minutes. That is, if they are confident in his development. 

JB will get a good offer to be a first class backup with some team.