Thurman#1

Mahomes has thrown the second-most passes in the league this year, 77 more than Allen, 588 to 511. That's 13% more. More, you're comparing this year and last year, which really isn't fair. Things have been very different this year, in many aspects. Mahomes played 14 games last year. This year when he'd played 14, he'd already thrown 60 more passes than he did last year. You've got to compare Mahomes' stats this year with everyone else's stats this year. 2019 was very different. Comparing across years can tell you some things but it shouldn't be used as your only data points.

Oh, it's revisionist history? Gotcha. Well then you'll have no problem whatsoever finding the link to where Mayock said he loved JaMarcus Russell. Not that he loved his arm or his pro day. That he loved JaMarcus. I'll be waiting with interest, because in the little fifteen minutes of research I did I found nobody saying Mayock had been wrong about JaMarcus and a bunch saying he'd been exactly right. Mayock had him as the #1 QB in his class ... because his class sucked. The best in that class look to have been JaMarcus, Brady Quinn, Kevin Kolb, Drew Stanton, Troy Smith or Tyler Thigpen. Or of course, Trent Edwards. Jordan Palmer at least became a good QB coach. Only thing I found with the quick look was a Football Outsiders article that collected contemporary takes on JaMarcus from just before he was drafted. The article is gone, but the comments aren't, and a number of folks pointed out that Mayock had been right on with work ethic problems. But you're so totally sure that you were right when you said that Mayock loved JaMarcus that when someone points out that you're wrong ... you double down and call it revisionist history. With such a strong comeback, you must have a ton of evidence. Even though you didn't produce the slightest iota of any in either post. I'll be waiting for the link. And again, more nonsense. Yes, they all miss terribly. Same as the greatest poker players in the world don't win every hand. GMs miss terribly because what they do is extremely difficult. And yet some GMs clearly do it better than others. How many GMs passed on Brady, Wilson, Brees and Rodgers? And how many didn't on Andrew Luck and Peyton Manning? You said Ozzie was better than the others. You're right about that, though there are about five to seven others who are also better. But Ozzie was among those who passed on Brady, Wilson, Brees and Rodgers. Yes, they all make mistakes, including the good ones. No, there will never be a perfect drafter or anywhere close, it's far far too complex and uncertain. And yet the Steelers draft better year after year, despite nearly always drafting from the last ten spots. There are a bunch of GMs who do it better. A few who do it worse and most in the middle, pretty average. The bell curve, in other words. Which is what should be expected.

We don't have the money next year for an expensive backup.

That's flat out nonsense. There are plenty of GMs who are obviously better than others, and on a long-term basis. And the whole "lottery" thing is butt-stupid on the face of it. If it were a lottery we'd see as many 7th round starters as we do 1st rounders, and we don't. Is there some luck involved, particularly in terms of who's there when you draft? Sure. But that doesn't mean it's not a system that it's perfectly possible to do better on if you do it well. It is. Even the best will make mistakes. But they'll make fewer of them than average and they'll do other things to improve their chances, such as making intelligent trades for picks and doing more and smarter homework on the guys they pick than many do. Nonsense also on your idea that "Mayock loved JaMarcus Russell." He didn't. He liked his arm and his pro day. From a 2010 Florio Interview: “Let me give you an example of the other side of it,” Mayock said this morning on The Dan Patrick Show. “The best Pro Day I ever saw as a quarterback was JaMarcus Russell. . . . I’ve never seen a quarterback throw the football like that in my life, but I still couldn’t take him in the first round — the guy doesn’t care about football. He doesn’t have the passion for the game, doesn’t have the work ethic, I don’t want him. But by the way, it was a pretty impressive Pro Day.” https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/30/mayock-jamarcus-russells-pro-day-a-cautionary-tale/

He's knowledgeable, smart and hard-working. He's made a lot of good calls through the years. But he's 60. That's about enough right there, but there's more. He's always been happier as an outsider rather than a builder. He's never addressed team-building, never run a group of scouts, never had to deal with too much bureaucracy, never had to deal with a head coach. Never showed much interest in anything but the draft and broadcasting. Wildly unlikely.

Jalen Hurts. Richard Todd, Ken Stabler, Joe Namath. And Bart Starr. Which amounts to four Super Bowl championship starters and two very promising young guns. But that's the wrong question. Name an Alabama QB between Tua and those early guys who built up enough expectations to be drafted as high. There aren't many. What school you come from has far less to do in terms of predicting QB success than do the skills you showed there. For Tua specifically, it's too early to tell. Far too early. Allen looked pretty bad his first year too. Plenty of QBs who later turned out to be very very good looked bad as rooks.

Certainly possible, but I doubt it. Last year having nothing to play for in week, 17, Allen threw 5 passes before being replaced by Barkley.

They need each other. Neither will be quite as good without the other. It's harder to find an Allen than a Daboll, but Herbert or Watson are extremely good-looking young QBs. Daboll was considered smart and a good OC since he got here. He had a head coaching interview last year, so the argument he wasn't talked about positively till now is pure nonsense. He's damn smart. Doesn't guarantee he'll be a good HC, but he's without question an excellent OC. It's not a sure thing Daboll goes but that's the way to bet. If he does, who they get to replace him will be important.

4. They have a different view of life, the world and Kumerow than you do

That's not a claim, it's a guess.

It certainly could go that way, but I think in a good situation Wentz could be very good.

Fair enough. I don't know that they smoke them - the Titans are a good team and match up well with the Bills with the smashmouth run game behind Henry - but I sure like our chances over the Titans. Over anyone but the Chiefs, really, and I think they've got a really good shot there too.

I totally get why as a fan you'd want your team to lose more to bring in a guy like that. I was there for most of the second halves of the year during the drought. But blaming the players for trying to win? Completely nuts. It shouldn't have to be said for the eighteen millionth time, but there is no such thing as a tank in the NFL. It doesn't exist, and won't as long as there are no guaranteed contracts. Rebuilds? Yup. From the GM's perspective, this makes sense. But the players and coaches know they're competing for their careers on every play. Their film is their resume and the last thing you want to show is a resume with major recent regression.

Yup. 0-2 in playoffs and 1-6 against the Pats ... ... in the first three years of a near-complete rebuild. Being bad that early in a rebuild is and by anyone with any sense should be completely expected. Nice necro-bump. This. It's an old thread, but it was ridiculous the instant he posted it.

Yeah, I'm Ok with it too. Remember one of our TEs fighting for yards when surrounded and he literally got picked up in the air by four or five Steelers so he couldn't end the play by going down? And they just held him up and had their way with him till he fumbled? Happened five or ten years ago and I still remember it painfully. Plenty of times going down is smart. It's not as if he's not excellent at YAC. He is. He's great at it.

It'd be $24.85M in dead cap, but again, they'd also avoid paying his $9.5M salary, a $500K bonus and a $10M roster bonus, a total of $20M saved. Financially very doable. That's why Spotrac has 2021 listed as a potential out for Stafford. And you watch, if Stafford goes somewhere with a program that has a clue, he's going to unexplainably be better than he ever was when he was working in that dysfunctional Detroit environment. And if Stafford went to the Pats, he'd be going to a team that is going to have a sensational chance at picking up FAs to fill their many holes. The Pats optouts killed them this year but also put them in a much better situation for next year. They have the 4th most unused cap space this year ($25M), and they will roll it over into next year. In a year that looks like it will have very little money available for teams league-wide, the Pats will have plenty in a buyer's market. They'll be able to shore up receivers, TEs, and fill their holes about as well as anyone in the league.

That's what I was wondering about. In terms of skill, there's nothing to wonder about with Allen unless he gets injured or something.

Harbaugh certainly had a great record there. But they were in free-fall there before he left. IMO his record was more about great GMsmanship. He did a good job but also infuriated everyone around him. My team? Not interested. I don't know how you can make this determination without an interview and more info (who would be Frazier's OC?), but I'd lean towards Frazier. Some of that is not knowing enough about most of the other candidates, some is in believing he's an excellent leader who if he gets good players can coach an excellent team. I would want to know his OC before making final determination, though.

That's not good news in terms of keeping Daboll. It'll make it easier to wait to make a hire even if the coach is on a team that's still in the playoffs. Beane and McDermott (my guess) will likely give permission to Daboll for a 2-hour interview, and that could allow a hiring team to think "He really is as good as we thought, worth waiting for."

I'd argue that spending one 1st round pick on WRs (N'Keal Harry) in Belichick's 20 drafts has a major part of that bad record in drafting WRs, not to mention their tendency to want to rely on TEs rather than WRs.

Yeah, I'm with you on this. If they bring in Stafford, for example, they're not going to be a seven-win team. IMO they'll be good again, though not as good as they were for so long and with such consistency with Brady there. I thought Newton was a great choice when they brought him in. But I don't think he was even replacement-level.

Yeah, you're not being salty: So, what is this? This is you being not salty? Know what, never mind, don't bother explaining. I wasn't talking to you. You come in and reply to me and you tell me I'm wrong in saying something or other. But I'd never said that. If you're going to reply to a guy, reply to what he said. If you don't, expect people to wonder what the hell you're up to.

Fine, you're not worth having a conversation with. You still haven't disagreed with a single word I said, and yet you're still salty about ... I don't know, something. Thanks for letting me know who you are.

Holy crud, man. That is fantastic. I'm welling up a bit over here.