NoSaint

I had wright lightly penciled in but probably nickel or dime 2 out of 3 plays anyway and that's the trio

Does this leave colt Anderson as literally the only member of the 2016 secondary? I can't recall a large unit like this being so completely overhauled so quickly offhand If this WR ends up taking tates spot, is that actually a 100% turnover there too?

I guess but different positions not the guy I'd be cautiously protecting or the place I'd be playing the numbers game

It's why we couldn't afford any of the young guys- obviously.

I do Not expect it if he makes week 1. In fact I'd be floored if he starts the season with us and is cut midyear

Today's one of those days you call the folks you know first- no big shock to see a trade with the panthers I assume slim to essentially none for the compensation

It's a required semi regular skill. What you are also forgetting is how many yards a 15-20 yarder outside the hashes flies and not just the ability for the ball to reach those guys but get there with zip. Can he whip in a laser between two zones or before a member of the secondary breaks on it? It's not a deal breaker but if you don't have the arm you have to be that much better than even the best at reading and accuracy and... to make up for it. Even that is simply to be a reliable long term starter, not up for a great qb discussion. There's been a lot of Chas Pennington references but even he was basically a .500 qb

Because unfortunately crossman needs it more than some

I think 5-8 wins this year. Then next year with rookie qb likely similar. Unfortunately being either the 3rd or 4th qb off the board or taking all our trade resources. Then hopefully a step up but probably not huge as we won't have near the infusion of young talent as expected by many. But it'll also be the end of the road for Brady (and who knows what the jets or dolphins will be rolling out at qb by then) so who knows what the division looks like.

Could IR him or an injury settlement-- They seem to want a vet that is familiar though, so I'm not sure why anyone is surprised the qb signed 3 days ago was cut.

I'd be curious to see how our roster stacks up in average age once all plays out-- we really let a lot of youth out the door which is backwards for what appears to be the plan from an outside perspective

I guess there's some degree of the coach knowing all these guys much better and knowing the expected roles... but it's always a little worrisome when the coaches guys beat out guys that looked better

He fit on the piece they had!

How about no evaluations of day 3 qbs in their first preseason that include essentially saying they are without flaw and make the right reads, are highly accurate, strong armed and athletic leaders? I didn't say he COULDNT succeed. I said he was a day 3 pick because 32 gms agreed he was a prospect with shortcomings - which stands to reason either he's changed as a player or all 32 whiffed incredibly bad. He could succeed - but is likely a project and certainly a long shot.

Blame the old regime! Ha! Honestly though, vlad starting week one would definitely be a MAJOR red flag about the credibility of "the process" When the entire foundation is "trust the process" then hits to its credibility are serious concerns

I keep trying to talk myself into alternate explanations on this one. If vlad starts week 1 there will be several spots that I've worried but given benefit of the doubt on that will come back up as major questions What scheme calls for vlads skill set? Frankly, what is vlads skill set? What does he do better that the coaches would be keying in on as a core trait they seek?

So if he has no noticeable downside why do you think he was a day 3 pick? Is he a different player than 6 months ago, or do you have a better eye than everyone in the NFL?

Or they could fire him in January and eat 4 months pay pretty easily

Perfect fit for schwartz terrible fit for McD Kind of underscores that we aren't just falling straight back into the scheme just because we are back to 43

You find them mentors, you hire someone to go wake them up, you encourage teammates to ride them.... you do pretty much anything to minimize the downside and enjoy the upside. It's very rare that their maximum value is being used as an example even if they frustrate you

In hindsight probably not shocking. You'd be hardpressed to find any stretch of a team so thoroughly dominating a division rival and he's, more or less, been the sole qb

if we do it next year (especially via trade to not eat the2018 salary guarantee) and split the hit over 2 we CAN but I'm not so sure that makes sense if trying to maximize talent housed inside the cap. We would lose a big talent and not be able to replace it.

Simmer down. I'll duck out after this (so have the last gripe if you want), but have maintained for years that it's not hard to quote a meaningful paragraph to frame the discussion. I make the point semi regularly and normally avoid doing it in your threads since posting tweets without added content is your claim to fame.... you still get conversation this way but if you quote a paragraph in which Gabriel states that the plan of attack is instead of his meandering intro without any real purpose statement, you get a little better discussion in my experience.

Meh. It's one of the only major changes I'd make- I think mods should "encourage" thread starters with a link to include an actually meaningful quote. It makes it easier to decide if you want to read, and almost always makes for better discussion since many don't click on blind links and just react to the headline/story title if there's no content

So close! You finally added a quote but not one that actually added anything.