Billl

Why should it be based on positions at all? If you’re a “franchise player” ie. a player the franchise can’t do without, then you should be the highest paid player on the team. How can an organization call someone their franchise player and then say he’s not worth as much due to the position he plays? It makes no sense. If an organization doesn’t value Tight Ends, then don’t name a Tight End as the franchise player. Otherwise, it’s really just a license to screw one player on your team each year.

You think Gilmore can cover someone with 4 inches 60 pounds on him?

Some of us don’t retire after only working for 20 years.

808 loves to offer enormous bets knowing that nobody is stupid enough to make bets that large with some random on the internet they don’t even know so that he can spike the football and declare victory. It’s his schtick.

Were you crying about the optics when Jerry Jones was cruising around on his $250,000,000 yacht (with 2 helipads because obviously 3 would have been overkill) during the draft while everyone was cooped up in their houses? https://www.star-telegram.com/sports/nfl/dallas-cowboys/article239769263.html

For a stretch of a few years, fans of other teams playing the Bills were worried about Johnson and nobody else. If you could stop him, you were probably going to win easily.

I’d take it further and say it shouldn’t be broken out by position. If a team doesn’t value a certain position, then someone who plays that position can’t be a franchise player. If he’s the one guy your franchise can’t do without, he should be the highest paid player on the team.

He’s worth it. I’d take him over Amari Cooper even if the money was equal. Comparing him to Hooper and Henry is a joke. There are two great TEs in the league (3 if Gronkowski returns to his old self which I doubt). Everyone else is a huge step down. You could make a case that he is a top 10 player if you combine WRs and TEs. He’s easily the best offensive player on the 49ers.

deleted

Watch the Pittsburgh game and tell me Josh was even mediocre. Duck turned it over 5 times, and the Steelers had 51 rushing yards. This was one of those vaunted 4th quarter comebacks. Buffalo got over 100 yards rushing from their RBs, 5 turnovers from their defense and managed 17 points on 13 possessions. Did someone hack your account?

Explain again how he got less efficient, then. I’m confused.

You didn’t say he had a better second half. You said Minshew got less efficient and Josh got more efficient and specifically mentioned his last 3 games including that turd against Pittsburgh. I gave you both of their ratings for their last 3 games. Minshew didn’t get less efficient. His numbers dwarfed Josh’s during that same stretch.

So you think those teams laid down, but for some reason the Jags didn’t. It’s really amazing the contortion act people will go through in order to discount the fact that a late round rookie who was never groomed to be the starter threw for a higher completion percentage, more yards, more TDs, and fewer INTs than Allen. 1 yard TD runs define QB success. (Ever wonder if maybe the reason Daboll calls Josh’s number from the goal line so often when seemingly every other OC hands it to the RB is to pad the stats of the guy his bosses staked their careers on?)

Being an NFL player is first and foremost a career. Your teammates don’t pay your bills. “Next man up” sounds great until you’re the man who went down. I can’t blame anyone for getting theirs. Neither do their teammates 90% of the time. Hell, they’re usually being advised by the same agent. The Steelers lost too. They’d have made the playoffs with Bell and Brown.

This is patently untrue. Josh’s ratings in those games were 62.6, 65.2, and 102.7. Minshew’s ratings in his last 3 games were 102.8, 72.1, and 106.2.

Any truth to the rumors that he completed 59.9% of his passes for 299 yards (4 dropped passes)?

Brees isn’t in college. He was a senior 20 years ago. Talking about completion percentages 20 years ago as if they are analogous to completion percentages today is a dishonest comparison. Brees completed over 60% of his passes in college 20 years ago when the game was played differently. He was a very accurate passer in college, but comparing numbers from a guy who played in 1997 to a guy who played 2 years ago is a false equivalency.

Lot of posters here don’t want to admit it, but he was really good. Daniel Jones is another example. His team was horrible, but he showed a lot. Just to show how bad his team was, they went 1-2 in games were Jones put up these combined numbers: 13 TDs, 0 INTs, 982 yards passing. But he didn’t win enough games, so he sucks...

Using stats from a generation ago and comparing them to today’s numbers feels a little disingenuous to me. Does it get easier after a while once you get used to it?

Didn’t the Jaguars just get 21 TDs and 6 INTs from a rookie last season? How is that a mess? He’s locked in for 3 more years for about $2,000,000 total. Does he just have the wrong animal on his helmet?

Look at the Colts when Manning got hurt. They won the Suck for Luck sweepstakes and were a playoff team soon thereafter. Losing elite QBs sends teams into a tailspin. Losing elite WRs hurts, but Mahomes kept rolling when Tyreek was out. In his first ever game (week 17 at Denver in 2017), the Chiefs rested nearly all of their starters. Albert Wilson and Demetrius Harris combined for 13 catches and 220 yards against one of the best defenses in the league. WRs are gasoline, but QBs are the fire.

Like just about every other problem in the NFL, drafting a star QB and paying him a rookie contract is the solution. If Goff craters, the team will suck next season no matter what he’s being paid. If the Rams draft the next big thing to replace him, they can afford to keep him around on his contract for a while because their total outlay for the QB position will be manageable.

Clowney must be a lot smarter than he’s given credit for. I guess Nuk sucks too.

The returning QBs finished 28th, 29th, and 32nd last year in QBR. Unless you’re really high on Stidham, this group has the potential to be historically bad. (Yes I understand that people here are going to take issue with the rating system, but it’s widely used and removes subjectivity, so it’s good enough for this post.) https://www.foxsports.com/nfl/stats?season=2019&week=100&category=PASSING&opp=0&sort=10&qualified=1&sortOrder=0&page=1

I don’t think the current AFCE is exactly the pantheon of NFL QBs right now. Unless a couple guys make big jumps, it may be the worst collection of QB play a division has ever seen.