Earl Campbell says hello.
NFL 2021
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
Earl Campbell says hello.
What was worse - Saints trading that bounty for one player OR the Bengals declining their offer so they could draft Akili Smith (who I said would flop )?
https://www.sbnation.com/2018/6/12/...ngals-trade-saints-ricky-williams-akili-smith
Interesting. I think this offseason is probably the last one they can get a decent return for him. But in today's NFL it's a massive strength to have two WRs like Julio and Ridley on your roster.
Just imagine if they do trade him and then draft Chase. The Bengals go Sewell, then what the feck are the Dolphins there for at 6? Could draft Fields or Lance if still available then, or trade back in that scenario.
I'd say the Bengals came out on the short end of that, since the Saints eventually recovered by bringing Brees in a few years later.
Absolutely.
God, was he fun to watch. I was young then, but Earl Campbell & ‘Alcoa Presents Fantastic Finishes / You Make The Call’ are still vivid memories of 1980s era NFL to me.
Presuming Pitts is 4th in your scenario, I'd probably entertain trading for a club wanting to draft a QB. Unless my scouts/staff are high on another player, like Smith or Waddle or other.
If we take Mac Jones the 49ers message boards will implode.
More than usual?
Slightly more, yes.
They will!
It's strange with Jones – especially since my favourite QB ever is Montana...and if anything, that's the player that Jones might be closest too (in terms of style) – extremely accurate, quick decision-making, not the strongest arm, not the most athletic (although Montana was an underrated scrambler).
However, having Fields or Lance would give the team an added threat that I really feel Shanahan would be able to leverage. Any defence would have to respect their running ability – which would help our overall running game, and in turn help our passing. Plus, they're more exciting!
I think Lance has the highest ceiling – and he would have a year behind Jimmy G to develop – but then that also makes him the biggest risk I guess. Whoever they choose, that player is going to define Shanahan's next few seasons – and ultimately determine if he keeps their job or not. And I do not think they would have traded up to the third pick if they wanted Jones – they could have gotten him lower than that.
Everyone is still saying Jones or Lance. Supposedly Shanny wants Jones and the rest of the room want Lance. I can’t make any sense of it, because Fields is like a combination of the best traits of the two.
Maybe he sees Jones as Matt Ryan, thinks he has a SB caliber squad, and thinks it is the plug-and-play option. I dunno...I just hope it means Denver can get Fields somehow.
It's almost like he wants Jones as validation that it is his system that wins games / the Super Bowl. But I can't believe he doesn't see the potential of Fields or Lance in his offense!
I would ignore the press, they know absolutely nothing. Not one of them had any idea at all we were trading up so there's no way they'll get any leak on the pick. It's all speculation.
Agree with your analysis & I'd say the pick will be Lance. Atlanta loves/loved Lance at four so we had to get above them to guarantee he would be there. Having Jimmy allows Lance to sit & learn ala Smith/Mahomes. An ideal scenario.
That said I think Fields will be immense in the right programme, possibly better than Lance ceiling wise.
I would be very happy with either, just not Jones.
Sure they had an idea. Everyone knew that 3rd spot was in play, but Carolina was the favorite ahead of the Niners and the rest. They just didn’t think anyone would outbid Carolina as aggressive as their management is.
They get a lot wrong, but some stuff right. Like when some of them were saying NY was going to take another Jones (Daniel) that high and people didn’t believe it. This sort of reminds me of that, actually.
My thoughts are that with a shanahan offence, we need a mobile QB. People knock is QB play, by CK was extremely good with his feet. I'm honestly not sure if I'd be OK with Jones or not
I agree - I just saw this on Twitter:
Pass attempts from under center in college:
Trey Lance - 97
Justin Fields - 40
Mac Jones - 10
This is encouraging!
I don't know if I agree. With the Shanahan/Kubiak offence, accuracy and timing seems to be key alongside a respectable rushing offence, that's why he did great with guys like Cousins and Ryan, Kubiak did great with Schaub, Cousins and Flacco. I would guess that CK would be a terrible fit, of course if you can combine mobility and accuracy like I believe Elway had then that's perfect.
Yeah, I don’t know where that idea comes from. If rumors are to be believed, Kyle wanted to get Cousins to SF until Minny paid him. RGIII was fun until he blew out his knee, but that was the exception not the rule.
Besides, it’s not like Jones is some Brady-esque 5.0 40 guy. He didn’t run because he didn’t have to playing behind a semi-pro OL at Bama.
Mac Jones wouldn't make sense at all. It'd be mortgaging your entire future to draft another Jimmy G, because that's what he would be.
Lance would make sense, and Fields would be my preferred pick for them.
Lance would make sense, and Fields would be my preferred pick for them.
Cousins would have been a very good pick up for them and honestly if it wasn't for his albatross of a contract I could live with the idea of having Cousins as the starting QB for the Vikings.
How many times did our QB get eaten up due to the injuries in the OL last season though? You're right about the offensive calling, but if the play doesn't come off due to the OL getting breached, a mobile QB might pick up extra yardage.
If your OL doesn't/can't do its job then it doesn't matter who is your QB and what traits he has, that's not how you determine who is ideal for your system. And I'm not suggesting that being mobile isn't useful because it obviously is but it's not the main traits that Shanahan is going to look for and it shouldn't be.
Yeah fair enough and I agree to an extent, maybe it's just my personal preference to have a mobile QB. It probably stems from watching us get ripped apart by MQBs last year
So they are *probably* okay with Lawrence, Wilson, Fields, Lance or Jones. And most believe that it will be Jones now. Still can't believe it myself.
9ers will draft Fields, journos know shit.
Fields is an accurate passer and mobile. So I agree with you they will or at least should go after him.
In fairness, we don't know how any of these QBs will pan out until they play a season or two. The NFL is full of mediocre high school QBs who improved a bit in college, then became very good once they hit the pros.
Exactly . Just go back to what people thought of Sam Darnold , Rosen and Allen before that draft
Yeah the draft has been a toss up on selecting a first round QB over the past 20 years. Most Super Bowls have been won by QBs selected outside the 1st round during that period.
Last edited:
That metric is skewed by Tom Brady and the evil empire so it’s mostly useless. You’re still more likely to have success with a first round QB.
Ok, so look at preceding 20 years pre-Brady - 11 SB winners were 1st rounders, 9 were outside the first round (including Warner who was at one point bagging groceries and playing Arena ball). That's pretty much a 50/50 toss up and certainly not a sure thing by any rational measure.
It’s a knockout competition, there is no such thing as a sure thing. Were the Bills and Dolphins wrong because they drafted Kelly and Marino respectively but never won a SB with them?
Across the spectrum players do better on average the higher they’re drafted. If QB is your most important position, you allow a greater tolerance to take a chance because the odds favor you. The math (or maths so as not to annoy anyone here) is easy.
At the end of the day its still a coin flip. Yes, QB is more important so its easier to rationalize drafting one in the first round, but the results - at least in terms of Super Bowl wins - don't make it a particularly bankable gamble.
Last edited:
Can totally see Jerry Jones doing it if he's that in love with Pitts.
Also completely disagree that QBs are a lottery. Looking at the Super Bowl winners (with or without Brady) doesn't paint the full picture. The best QBs in the NFL are consistently chosen in the first round (Rodgers, Mahomes, Watson, Allen, Murray, Lamar, Tannehill, Ryan, Stafford, Mayfield, ...).
It's no sure thing of course but the hit rate is way higher for first-round QBs than QBs outside of it. Out of the 5 projected in the first round there obviously can be 2 busts (or even 3) but if you take the next tier of QBs (Trask, Mond, Newman, Mills) it's not even sure that one will make it as an NFL starter whereas that's almost guaranteed out of the first 5 projected ones. Yeah one of them can be the next Wilson or Prescott but much more unlikely and much more uncertainty with your pick in that case.
It's no sure thing of course but the hit rate is way higher for first-round QBs than QBs outside of it. Out of the 5 projected in the first round there obviously can be 2 busts (or even 3) but if you take the next tier of QBs (Trask, Mond, Newman, Mills) it's not even sure that one will make it as an NFL starter whereas that's almost guaranteed out of the first 5 projected ones. Yeah one of them can be the next Wilson or Prescott but much more unlikely and much more uncertainty with your pick in that case.
Just don't believe they would trade so much away for someone who there was 0 talk about going until maybe 10th at best. Trading up with 1 guy in mind to me screams Fields, and the rest has been loads of noise. At least it's what would make the most sense. Could be that somebody has swayed him though.
- Status