NFL 2019 Season: It's Tricky!

Dak frustrates the hell out of me. I swear, he thinks people catch with their feet, not their hands. But... I never feel like the team, the game, or the season is utterly hopeless with him. I always feel like there is a chance he can/will get the job done.

I will take that over the years where 3-4 QB's were being rotated through. There is something to be said for consistency and I feel Dak is still getting better.

Ameraves said:

Sure, which is why you don't pay him $30+M a year because you need that money to bring in better players elsewhere.

Click to expand...

Still, a record-breaking contract is a significant investment in a player with just seven career starts and 12 touchdowns over four years.

Click to expand...

Has Dak accomplished more?

Brahma said:

Cincy I give you that. They just can't figure shit out at all, and will be willing (more than likely) to start over. But lets say they even play"OK"...

Click to expand...

It depends what kind of money we're talking about. If you're talking Cousins or higher ($28M a year) I think you're crazy. Dalton won't get that. Winston is a weird case. Like 3 years in a row people have him as a breakout candidate, mostly for fantasy but for actual win/loss as well...and he mostly hasn't lived up. He has stretches though where he looks great, although a lot of that is Tampa has been behind by a ton for large portions of their games, and he can chuck it downfield to Mike Evans a couple times a game for massive plays. I think there is a slim chance he could have a breakout season under Arians with the weapons they have around him down there (not so much RB's, but Evans/Godwin at WR, OJ Howard at TE...he has guys), and get a decent contract.

The reality is, though, is guys like Dalton, Winston, Mariota are basically playing for their right to still even be thought of as that mid level starter who can lead a playoff potential team.

Merrith said:

The reality is, though, is guys like Dalton, Winston, Mariota are basically playing for their right to still even be thought of as that mid level starter who can lead a playoff potential team.

Click to expand...

I'm not saying Dalton is a world-beater, but he's made playoffs in over half his seasons played. Just the only times he hasn't made playoffs has been the past three consecutive seasons.

zzeris said:

I'm going to go off script and say that you don't need a mid-level QB because you can always get one in the draft. Dak was a 4th rounder with massive holes in his game. He's still got those holes but has a strong supporting cast. Same with Lamar Jackson, Josh Allen, Mitch, Dalton, Goff, Darnold, and even Russel Wilson his first couple years. The game is set up to give QBs every advantage humanly possible to succeed since they are the engine. No one could have watched Trubisky, Goff, Bortles, and Flacco, and thought a good QB is needed to win big games. Or look at the lack of overall success for guys like Rodgers, Favre, Forehead Manning, Marino, etc who were amazing QBs....but couldn't get the right build around them.

I would love to see one brave FO make the QB position replaceable every 5 years like the rookie wage scale promoted.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure I fully am reading this right, are you saying that Josh Allen and Darnold had the same kind of supporting cast that Dak or Lamar Jackson had? Or Goff after they got rid of old 7-9?

Your 2nd group has guys who had strong to great defenses (Trubisky/Bortles/Flacco) when they were most successful, and Goff year 1 to year 2 was night and day (also helps they have a decent defense there, with the biggest D stud in the league in Donald...not to mention their WR's and Gurley). We've all seen what happens when those QB's don't live up to playing decently (Flacco since the Super Bowl year, Bortles basically forever save that stretch 2 years ago when he was decent and D did the rest, Trubinsky has never won a playoff game yet.)

I'm not sure how much of a lack of overall success we are talking about with Rodgers, Farve, and Manning (4 Super Bowl wins, 6 Super Bowl appearances between them), either. I think most agree they could have had more success, but Rodgers was suck with MM at head coach, and Manning kept running into the Patriots.

QB drafting seems to have been a little more successful lately, but I think it's a little soon to say you can always get one in the draft. The year Dak was a 4th rounder, Goff and Wentz went #1 and #2, respectively, and 5 other QB's were drafted before Dak that have done virtually jack shit in the league.

Alex said:

I'm not saying Dalton is a world-beater, but he's made playoffs in over half his seasons played. Just the only times he hasn't made playoffs has been the past three consecutive seasons.

Click to expand...

1 and done playoff teams isn't equal to "leading a potential playoff team" for me. I mean teams that can actually take the next possible step and make some noise once they get to the playoffs. 0-4 in playoff games with 1 TD and 6 picks combined in those games. If he's "not a world-beater" in the regular season, he's a step or 4 below that come playoff time.

Another reason he made it so often is the Bengals quietly did a decent job of building a halfway decent team around him for a couple years, but have lost some guys in free agency or due to those contributors aging a little to where now they're pretty much everyone's lock to finish 4th in the division. Aside from Green/Boyd/Mixon's value in fantasy leagues, no one expects much of anything out of Cincy.

Kaines said:

49ers make Jimmy Garoppolo the highest-paid player in NFL

Jimmy Garoppolo’s $27.5 million per year is the highest yearly average in league history.

www.sbnation.com

Has Dak accomplished more?

Click to expand...

Yes, although Garoppolo's situation was pretty unique. Not like Dak came into a 1-10 team and went 5-0 to finish out a season, coming from the Patriot system where we was considered Belichick's presumed heir apparent once Brady finally retired. They also signed that deal knowing that Cousins/Rodgers/Wilson/Luck would all quickly surpass that number. If Dak is really asking for $40, that's far crazier then Niners deal for Garo.

Merrith said:

Yes, although Garoppolo's situation was pretty unique. Not like Dak came into a 1-10 team and went 5-0 to finish out a season, coming from the Patriot system where we was considered Belichick's presumed heir apparent once Brady finally retired. They also signed that deal knowing that Cousins/Rodgers/Wilson/Luck would all quickly surpass that number. If Dak is really asking for $40, that's far crazier then Niners deal for Garo.

Click to expand...

And the next set of contracts will quickly exceed Dak no matter what his number ends up being. So your point is irrelevant

Kaines said:

And the next set of contracts will quickly exceed Dak no matter what his number ends up being. So your point is irrelevant

Click to expand...

Will they though? Maybe they will if the league keeps going towards stupidity on that level. But Rodgers, Wilson, Luck coming up...I know certain people like to hate on each of these guys for various reasons, but they are among the elite guys in the league. Brady/Roethlisberger/Brees are old enough that they aren't going to have the banks broken for them (Brady ends up taking less anyways). Maybe once guys like Watson and Mahomes come up for their next deals after their rookie contracts are over, and they have continued success to the level they have so far.

zzeris said:

Yes, I am saying team building is obviously superior to QB building. It's always been this way and there's a massive amount of evidence behind it. While Montana was great, his teams were loaded on both sides. He had great coaching too. Flacco, Dilfer, Johnson, Gannon, Kaepernick, Goff, etc are a long list of average QBs to get in the Superbowl and sometimes win it. Team talent matters far more. Rodgers one ring, Favre one, Marino zero, Rivers zero, Fouts zero, Moon zero, etc. Team talent means far more. Why does Brady have 6 and Manning just 2? Far better coach. He has the best coach in history and the Belichick system brings results even if a 6th rounder runs it.

It's one reason the Jets brought in Bell. It's the better way to run a team. Get a cheap draft QB, load up, and make a run to the Superbowl. It's exactly what the Rams did. It's exactly what the Bears tried to do. As Brahma said, there's maybe 6-8 QBs you build around. You have 5 years to see if your dude is worth building around like Wilson was, and if not...draft another. Dak isn't worth 20 million a year. He's on a loaded team. Draft another dude, reload, try again. Don't waste big money on JAGs. Jerrah is a retard and that's why he has as many Superbowl rings as I do without Jimmy doing all of the work.

Click to expand...

It's funny enough that Manning ended up 3-2 v. Brady in the playoffs (just weird to know that stat is legit). Also i think you really can't use Belichick/Brady as an example here because they are the true outlier.

Your first set of Flacco, Dilfer, Johnson, Gannon, Kaepernick, Goff is interesting in that each of them only has the 1 Super Bowl appearance. Also the only ones that won it of that groups had for most/parts of their careers historic defenses.

Flacco ironically won it once his team wasn't as good around him, but had a once in a lifetime run throwing 11 TD's and 0 picks in 4 games. Good bit of luck went his way that year, too, but it happens. What happened to the Ravens when his level of play dropped after that year? Gannon actually had a huge year offensively the year he made it towards the end of his career, and was beat by Johnson and that Tampa D which was crazy good. Kaepernick's situation is a little weird compared to the rest b/c I've never seen a team explode the way Harbaugh's 49ers did in just like a year or two. He also actually had to do quite a bit offensively the year he made the Super Bowl (lol Green Bay) because his defense all but disappeared in the playoffs that season.

Goff is still super early in his career compared to the rest, but you keep calling him an average QB when he's been anything but under McVay. He was basically top 10 in everything last year, and yes that team is stacked around him but Goff the past 2 years compared to Goff under Fisher are just not the same player at all.

Bell isn't going to thrive with the Jets like he did in Pittsburgh. Part of that will be coaching/scheme related imo, part will be the Jets aren't anywhere near as put together as the Steelers have been (even if not elite) the last X amount of years...and a big part was Darnold is no Big Ben, at least not yet. I agree that it is a strategy if you DO manage to hit on a guy in the draft, take advantage of their cheap years. The Chiefs should absolutely be doing that with Mahomes, but Mahomes himself shows the difference between what even an average QB in Alex Smith can do and a potentially elite QB and Mahomes can do. When you say the Bears tried to do, they're still in that window, and Trubinsky is much better than I think you're giving him credit for (like Goff).

We're completely in agreement on Dak's value, but I disagree on the idea that it's a viable strategy to just get a nobody QB and magically build a great team around them and it's more likely to win a Super Bowl (if that is what you're saying).

Of the last 18 Super Bowls, the group of Brady, Roethlisberger, Manning, Rodgers, Wilson, and Brees have won 13 of those 18. Brady, Roethlisberger, Manning, and Wilson have been the losing QB in 7 of those years, as well (mostly beating up on each other save for Eli's two wins over Brady). Kurt Warner was the losing QB in 2 of those 18 years, too (and he lost to Brady and Roethlisberger).

zzeris said:

My strategy isn't just to get average QBs but to keeping looking for the elites you mentioned in the end. You look for the Wilsons, Daks, etc but you can also get lucky with the Mahomes, Roethlesbergers, Rodgers as well. Either way, you never pay top dollar for average QBs and you have FIVE years to discover what you have if you need that window. I'm not completely discounting Trubisky, Goff, Allen, etc because they are still in their 5 year window and still learning. Goff was UTTER SHIT in the playoffs and that team was loaded with massive talent. Goff actually reinforces my surround an average QB with enough talent and you get...Jared Goff.

I'm not saying Trubisky, Goff, etc can't become really good without having ridiculous amounts of support, but I am saying there is already a visible difference between them and Mahomes, who will be an elite talent his entire career. Maybe Goff gets there but I saw old Goff in this year's playoffs. He needs to get better because when that 5 year window closes, he will destroy the Rams salary cap and they won't have the ability to cover for his deficiencies anymore. Paying average QBs like Dak destroys the ability to keep the kind of team needed for their success. QBs eating over 10% of the salary cap is unsustainable in the long run.

Eidt- I think the owners should push in the new CBA for QBs to have 6 year options for their rookie contract to ensure teams know what they have and to help offset the massive costs QBs are incurring. It really is unsustainable.

Click to expand...

On Goff, I agree his played dipped in the playoffs, but while the overall stats weren't great, if you look at Total QBR he had an average game against Dallas, and a highly efficient game against the Saints. Nobody played well on either offense in the Super Bowl through 2-3 quarters so that's kind of a wash. He's also a guy who had all of 1 playoff game experience prior to this year, playing against 3 very good defenses. They also clearly focused on the run against Dallas, as CJ blew them up that day. You say he was UTTER SHIT but I mean, it wasn't like Goff went out there and played like Andy Dalton has in the playoffs (1 TD, 6 picks). You could easily make the case he was as good or better than Brees was in the NFC title game.

I'm not sure how "lucky" teams were with guys like Mahomes, the Chiefs traded up to get him in the 1st round after all. Roethlisberger was also a high 1st round pick. Rodgers ironically was the lowest 1st round pick of the 3 you mentioned there, and most people agree that McCarthy is the major reason the Packers with Rodgers only have 1 ring.

Like I said, we're in complete agreement on Dak and similar QB's value. Honestly if he took something like $25M a year, I wouldn't even blink, even if I think his real value in comparison to other QB's might be slightly lower than that, even.

zzeris said:

LMAO on your Dalton statement. Well played and I'm being a little rough on Goff. He has lots of potential and I expect him to get even better. I consider him average in this run specifically, but he should get beyond that point. I agree on all of the above especially about Dak. At some point the situation has to change with QBs but it's still manageable today. No player is worth 1/6-1/7 of the total pie. They just aren't. They don't provide as much as talking heads say they do. Just like college, it's who can bring the most talent to the fight and how they play that singular game. Like you mention, in the Superbowl the defenses(like always) brought the prize home. Brady was shit too overall. I like how Belichick builds his teams and wish more teams would follow suit. Everyone thinks they have Brees though. They don't

Click to expand...

I think QB's are worth a good bit of the total pie, and it's not like the salary cap is going down any time soon, either. When you look at which teams are able to compete each year, if you don't have at least an option at QB who COULD play like a top 10 QB at any given time...you really don't have a shot unless you have a historic level defense. Even then, you don't win it all or get close unless your QB at least plays decently well.

I was pointing out that those few Super Bowls where you had a one off QB going was usually decided by who had the better defense or because they were carried by a truly historic defense to where they were (Dilfer with that Ravens' D, Johnson with Tampa D...although at least Johnson was a decent QB...Flacco getting carried his first 4-5 years).

I think the reason why the "top D" usually beats the "top O" in the Super Bowl has more to do with how it's scheduled. Giving a guy like Belichick two full weeks to break down your offense/QB like they have between Conference Title games and the SB is just overkill. With 2 full weeks to prep he's going to throw all sorts of things at that offense that they wouldn't have thought of, and know basically any tendency they had over the course of the year.