WFT Quarterback Thread - Post SEASON 2021

[sevier2]

Originally Posted by Chief X_Phackter

In what aspect is Carr demonstrably worse than Stafford?

Demonstrably may not have been the best word to use there. And I’ll admit, Carr is a solid starter. If he came at a cheap price (or is even available?) I could get on board.

I would just much rather have Stafford. Carr seems like such a lame duck QB but after seeing some other posts with numbers I may have underestimated him... maybe.

[sevier2]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Think about 4 years from now not being able to keep the core line together and the last 4 year were spent trying to find an elite qb because you continually finished 8 and 8 and squandered the talent you had picked. There is a balance to spending for a known qb and contunually trying to find the aarron rodgers. Or are you saying that you want to endure seasons where we draft in the top 5 to "guarantee" we get a top QB prospect.

Or imagine signing a top QB for a 1st and 3rd this year and not having to risk wasting multiple first round picks in search of the right qb. In addition imagine having a FO that, with QB in place and a repeat division contender in hand, not worrying about the owner trying to replace the coach due to fan base outrage.

Sounds good to me. Not to mention that would make the team more attractive to future FA’s as well.

My hope is we brought in Mayhew, among other reasons, because of his ties to Stafford. Rivera might have already decided he wants to go after Stafford and brought in people he thinks can make that move work.

[SFREDSKIN]

I'm sorry, I've seen Carr play here since his rookie season and he'll never be a winner. If you want an average under achieving QB get Carr.

[Chief X_Phackter]

Originally Posted by SFREDSKIN

I'm sorry, I've seen Carr play here since his rookie season and he'll never be a winner. If you want an average under achieving QB get Carr.

He's solid. He's never had a lot of talent around him. A decent WR, no RB, a decent RB, no WR, a decent TE here and there. He's put up solid numbers - better than Stafford since he's been in the league.

Put him on a team that has talent on offense, a great defense, and good coaching, and he can win.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by Chief X_Phackter

He's solid. He's never had a lot of talent around him. A decent WR, no RB, a decent RB, no WR, a decent TE here and there. He's put up solid numbers - better than Stafford since he's been in the league.

Put him on a team that has talent on offense, a great defense, and good coaching, and he can win.

You would take Carr over Stafford?

I think Carr would be only a slight upgrade of Kyle Allen, so I wouldn’t pay him a lot if we are interested...

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

Are the Raiders shopping Carr? That would surprise me if they were.

Raiders shopping anybody is a red flag.

[Chief X_Phackter]

Originally Posted by Scalper

If your FO isn't clowns, the #19 is a 10 year starter at some position.
And it will take more than #19.
Our last (2) 3rd rounders have become solid starters.
I'm guessing the deal will be a 1st, a 3rd, a 5th, something like that. A 1st, a higher pick, and a lower pick.

So four years from now, do we have:

(2) solid long term starters at say WR,CB,LB,FS, etc. who are 25 and have half a decade left in the tank minimum. And also perhaps a solid role player such as a 3rd down RB, rotational corner, backup OL, etc.
Or a QB that retired.

Such short term thinking. People never learn.
Those first round picks are the backbone of our only elite unit, DL.
The thinking should be to make other parts of the team elite with young players in similar fashion, not squandering draft capital on retread QBs.
Imagine next four years we spend picks in 1st round on QB,LT,CB,WR.
Now you are starting to talk about an elite team.

You're right, it will take more than the #19 pick. I've said that all along. However, if it would only take the #19 pick (fantasy world), you'd be a straight up idiot not to do that.

Like rocnik said, at least with Stafford you know what you're getting.

[SFREDSKIN]

Originally Posted by Chief X_Phackter

He's solid. He's never had a lot of talent around him. A decent WR, no RB, a decent RB, no WR, a decent TE here and there. He's put up solid numbers - better than Stafford since he's been in the league.

Put him on a team that has talent on offense, a great defense, and good coaching, and he can win.

All I’m going to say is, if you hated Kirk Cousins, you are going detest Carr. I would take Cousins over him any day.

[Chief X_Phackter]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

You would take Carr over Stafford?

I think Carr would be only a slight upgrade of Kyle Allen, so I wouldn’t pay him a lot if we are interested...

Their current contracts are fairly equal at this point. Carr's due a few Mil less in 2022.

I'd probably lean towards Stafford, but I'm not even sure why. They are basically the same guy. If they are both traded this offseason, the Raiders and Lions will likely get comparable compensation.

I just don't see much separating them, do you?

[Chief X_Phackter]

Originally Posted by SFREDSKIN

All I’m going to say is, if you hated Kirk Cousins, you are going detest Carr. I would take Cousins over him any day.

Why?

[Chief X_Phackter]

I never hated Kirk. I wanted him to stay here.

[SFREDSKIN]

Originally Posted by Chief X_Phackter

Why?

INT's at critical times over and over, holds on to the ball and takes a lot of sacks. If Raiders fans say he sucks, believe it.

[Chief X_Phackter]

He throws less INTs and takes less sacks than Stafford.

[SFREDSKIN]

Originally Posted by Chief X_Phackter

I never hated Kirk. I wanted him to stay here.

I never said you did, that's for the people that didn't like Cousins and think Carr would be better.

[Chief X_Phackter]

Originally Posted by SFREDSKIN

I never said you did, that's for the people that didn't like Cousins and think Carr would be better.

Oh ok. I must have misunderstood you when you responded to my post with:

...if you hated Kirk Cousins, you are going detest Carr.