One last chance then FULL rebuild (Trade Watt)

sometimes QB's can win it with great teams around them. hurts. dilfer.

sometimes players can win it because they make the team around them great. mahomes, brady.

i'm not saying dilfer and hurts are bad but they are not just the guys that can raise a team by themselves. the latter two are. they are the factors that raised their teams up. hurts and dilfer were raised by their team. allen, burrow, daniels and jackson fall somewhere in between.

 

Don't compare Hurts with Dilfer again please...They are in a complete different tier

 

and yet they both won a super bowl with their teams.

first off i wasn't comparing those two to each other. that's what you got from what i wrote? Jesus. sometimes you are like talking to a rock.

 

they can't win with him or without him

what is your point?

he will sign and he will be here and he is GREAT.

the TEAM is not.

 

There is a box of them here

 

Sometimes?

 

Uhhhmmm. Vocabulary, and Grammar are two different things.....so again.... a dictionary can be Your friend.

 

It's not like talking to a rock, it's like he takes things he wants from what You say, even if you don't mean them.
For example: Hurts is an Outlier
Him, and others: So you think he sucks???LoL
Me: Uhhh ....No

 

TJ is a great player but honestly the Steelers should deal him. Hes on the decline wanting ridiculous money and is usually injured or worn out by the end of the year. He also takes himself out of games all the time in big spots because he’s too tired. Besides if we get lucky and draft a QB next year by the time he is good enough likely 2/3 years later at the earliest TJ will be done. Get with the times and use the money on offense.

 

You are being disingenuous. You told me to stop making things up and just say I hate MT. Well you must hate Hurts because you have made it clear you hate running QBs. Be true to yourself.

 

What???
1st....I don't actually hate anyone, Ravens would be as close as it comes, and I don't hate them.
2nd.... I don't hate running Qbs, I believe they are less than.....think about this a moment.....why would You choose to run 20, 30, or more yards as a Qb if You can , with a toss of your arm , without the punishment you can receive running, without penalty??? They do it because they don't see the field as well, the same exact reason even pocket Qbs run the most in the NFL their 1st few years , because everything is moving so fast , they cannot see the field correctly. The difference is the running Qb rarely evolves past that.....1st instinct when things are going bad.....run.
Now back to Hurts....if it makes you, and a few of You feel better to think I hate , well that's on yous guys, but I personally feel that if they had drafted Hurt as a backup to Ben in 2020, I would have not been against it, whether you, or any of the Miss Cleo cronies believe that or not. Would I prefer a Mahomes, a Burrow, or a CJ Stroud.....yes, but I prefer a lot of different players than what we get......so
Also before the question of........well why not Lamar Jackson in 2018, the answer is .....I didn't think Ben was done at that time, by 2020, I knew it was very close to the end, and I actually thought in college, that Hurts was a better Qb than Lamar Jackson....simple as that, but you , and the Miss Cleo crowed can believe what you want....no skin off my a$$.

 

They should only offer him a 3-4 year deal.

 

Commanders sign von miller so the window to trade watt is closing.

 

I think a lot of people are over estimating his trade value

IMO day two draft choice at best maybe day 3

Better off keeping him for this year then tag him if you wish for 2026

 

Amen Brother. We gonna do great if we win a playoff game once again mainly because who we still have leading the **** show!

 

You aint a true Steeler fan then! I am not going to hate on a person but I will hate, hate, hate, the ravens organization till the day I die. Right beside the dang Tarheels!

 

Poor Tarheels

 

Your "outlier" response was to a post that referenced "having an A+ Roster and a mediocre QB and winning the SB". There's context there that I was referencing. You later responded by saying that "Hurts is good and still an outlier", which is different than what you mentioned before but fine. When you say things like this, you are intentionally trivializing qb's who get to be featured in the running game because you personally do not like that style of play. Last year, you told me it was dumb to have a running QB because a running QB has never won the SB. Now that one has, you trivialize it by calling it an "outlier"... and now in order to be a relevant play style multiple (more than 5 according to the post I am responding to) running QB's have to win to not be trivialized. You moved the goalposts, which is fine.... But don't act like the statistic of 1/59 isn't skewed. NFL offenses haven't known what to do with a running QB until about 7 years ago. Before, running QB's would get in the game and teams would try to turn them into pocket passers. There have never been more than 1 or 2 running QB's at any given time until now either. We've had a much smaller sample size on the ability of the running QB to excel in the NFL than you are trying to lead us to believe. If a running QB won 10 years in a row, it would still be 11/69 and "not the most successful method to QB play based on stats", therefore, trivialized again. It doesn't take in to effect that there has been a good handful of running QB's have success in the NFL compared to the small amount of running QB's that have been given a chance to play in the NFL. That handful is an even higher percentage of the whole considering that running QB's pre 2015 were essentially handicapped by their teams (often intentionally) by trying to change them into something they are not, instead of building around their strengths. It is a viable way to play the game, and one that is going to continue to be successful in the NFL for the foreseeable future.

I understand you don't like the running style QB's. It is similar to your belief that passing game stats for RB's don't matter at all because the RB's job is to run, not be a receiver (which is factually false in the modern game). The game has changed (and will change again). You can (and will) continue to hold on to your antiquated opinion on the QB position (and the RB position as well) and feel justified because there is still a statistical factor that can be interpreted to fit your view. Just don't act like I don't understand "outlier" or what you're trying to say, when the posts are right there to read... You implied multiple different things throughout this thread (whether you believe me or not), and that is what shaped my post.

 

I said he was an outlier, everything else was fabricated in Your mind.
Unless you can actually show me where I said in that whole thread differently. Don't go guessing what people think, We have enough Miss Cleos on this board.
And You turn around and do the same for the RBs....when have I ever said that a catch by a Rb doesn't count???
Marshall Faulk is one of My all time favorite RBs. Guess why??? Stop trying to be psychic, and read what people say.
You wasted all that time writing all that stuff that isn't even remotely true. You either have me confused with someone else, or your esp talent sucks a$$

 

It’s a big box

 

It isn't fabricated. You responded to a message that said you can win a SB an A+ roster and a mediocre QB with "Hurts did it, but he's an outlier". What else does that mean? I got the part about the "running QB" stuff from our past conversations. Everyone that has participated on this board in the past year or so knows your stance on that....

You said it when I mentioned that Le'Veon Bell was the best RB in the league for a 4 year stretch. Your argument was that he was never the best RB in football because he never led the league in rushing. When I responded inquiring about his receiving yards and TD's and the match up issues he presented, you're response was that he was a RB and not a WR so you don't care about that. Running backs run the ball, and that was that.

I don't have to be psychic. If someone says "Ice cream is mediocre, but if you eat it with a good cookie you can still have a good dessert", and you respond "chocolate ice cream does, but that's an outlier".... then what you're saying is that you believe that chocolate ice cream is mediocre. You typed "outlier" but the context of your words when put in response to someone else's, the meaning changes... but you know that. I don't have to walk you through elementary school English class for you to understand that

None of what I said is untrue. Not one part of it.

 

well we at least have OLB covered for the next few years.