Big C

Just wait and see what the new staff can do with him.

Great game. CJ was running all over them. We even got a Leodis return TD in that one.

I made a thread about this a while ago, got mixed feedback. I think it could happen.

I really don't want to go through a full rebuild. Draft a QB, roll with a vet this year and see where that gets us.

I've even seen some mocks (or at least 1, hard to keep track) have us with this guy with our pick at 42. I would rather take a premier talent at 10 if we have a guy there and trade up a few spots in the early second/late first if we have to.

The only connection with Dennison and TT is that the Broncos wanted to bring in TT two years ago. Don't know how much of a fit it is. I watched a few Broncos games last year and the offense seemed fairly simple but the Broncos had stellar pass catchers which must have helped a little. Courtesy of a great defense, they went 9-7 with a carousel of running backs and a 6th round QB in his second season with the team. I think TT is at least as good as Siemian was (in different ways of course), but then the question is will the defense improve enough to get us the extra wins, or does TT improve?

I think all can agree with that.

When we look back at the group of teams that have "tanked" for QBs, none of them have become a consistent force. Starting at 2009: Lions, Rams, Panthers, Colts, Bucs, Titans... You're looking at a combined 1 Super Bowl and 2 championship games. Too soon to tell on the Bucs and Titans maybe, but still. Gotta be more to it than just the QBs they picked. So I can agree with this assessment.

But I think the question is do we keep TT and work on a seamless transition to a draftee in the next couple years, find a different vet instead or draft a guy to be week 1 starter. As it stands I don't really see the tanking option as a real option right now.

I get all that. But it also comes down to cost. I don't think that going with McCown is a better choice, and I would worry about Romo's health on top of potential trade costs. The draft is a possible answer but we would have a period between cutting TT and drafting his replacement where we have a gaping hole that may not even get filled by the guy they want. What happens then? I'm fine with letting TT go, but I'd rather pick up his option until we know we have something better.

True. I've seen articles on both sides now and it's hard to know which way is truly best.

Yeah, I think it also needs to be said that there is a difference between talent and performance. Good way of putting it.

I agree. They do play favorites.

Here is how the teams stack up: NE: 5 Atl: 4 GB: 6 Pitt: 5 Dal: 6 KC: 4 Sea: 8 Hou: 3 NYG: 6 Oak: 5 Mia: 3 Det: 1 ---- Ari: 5 Phi: 5 Den: 4 Bal: 3 Car: 3 Cin: 3 NO: 3 SD: 3 TB: 3 Tenn: 3 Indy: 2 Chi: 1 Cle: 1 Jax: 1 LA: 1 Minn: 1 NYJ: 1 Wash: 1 SF: 0

There was a supplemental article with noteworthy names that didn't make the cut. They said Shady didn't make it because of his pass protection.

Right. He was doing just fine until he took a massive cheap shot. Very different from what happened the year before and doesn't say anything about his reliability. He took time to rest and reflect and if he feels like he still has it in him to play, he plays. We draft another guy to start alongside him (Graham gets cut or restructures and becomes the backup) and voila.

DC

I hope Brady rides out into the sunset now.

Awful plays there

Of course

Yup

AWHAT

Omg Julio

Hey was that a lineman dropping to throw off the read?