What is funnier in this Panthers 1st day of mini camp article?

[Jet Nut]

On 6/16/2021 at 11:21 AM, jetspenguin said:

lol I think this is the shortest post I have ever seen you make

You got Gooched!!

Congrats

[Jet Nut]

On 6/16/2021 at 8:43 PM, Matt39 said:

He didnt extend him. Hard to say theyre hitching their wagons to him.

They traded for him and passed on a QB in the draft.

Sure seems like theyre hitching their wagons to him.

[Jet Nut]

19 hours ago, Albaniajet said:

Sam was never in a bad situation here.  We had an elite roster and one of the best offensive minds in the league

SAR opened a new account?

[Dunnie]

SAR opened a new account?

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[jgb]

1 hour ago, Jet Nut said:

They traded for him and passed on a QB in the draft.

Sure seems like theyre hitching their wagons to him.

And picked up 5th year — guaranteed ~$20M

[jgb]

1 hour ago, FidelioJet said:

Somewhere between 15 and 20. 

By week 5 panther fans will be blaming their lack of a “true #1 WR” on Sam’s failure to launch.

[genot]

This is what I have to say about Sam. Ah, fu.. it.

[FidelioJet]

1 hour ago, jgb said:

By week 5 panther fans will be blaming their lack of a “true #1 WR” on Sam’s failure to launch.

We will see, but I think Sam is better than most are giving him credit for.  I really do not think we can underestimate the sh*tty situation he was put in.

Look, to be honest I really don't give a sh*t about Sam anymore, have no stake in his success.  I also have little doubt that ZW is and was a far better prospect than Sam ever was....

But it's just my observation that he'll be better.  He clearly regressed as a Jet - given a better surrounding cast and coaching he's likely to be back on the upswing. 

[jgb]

4 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

We will see, but I think Sam is better than most are giving him credit for.  I really do not think we can underestimate the sh*tty situation he was put in.

Look, to be honest I really don't give a sh*t about Sam anymore, have no stake in his success.  I also have little doubt that ZW is and was a far better prospect than Sam ever was....

But it's just my observation that he'll be better.  He clearly regressed as a Jet - given a better surrounding cast and coaching he's likely to be back on the upswing. 

I hear ya and entitled to hold that opinion. Disagreements are what make messageboards fun. For once though, I'd like to hear a case for Darnold made that is actually about him and not stating the obvious--that the Jets sucked while he was here. There are a lot of miles to walk between the starting point (situation bad) and the conclusion (QB therefore actually secret good).

I'll tell you the vast majoriy of CAR fans agree with you. It's very entertaining checking out Carolina Huddle now.

[slats]

11 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

What's that look like though?  QB29 instead of QB34?

Having Christian McCaffrey as a security blanket is really nice, so that'll certainly help inflate his numbers a bit.  Then again, Darnold is even inaccurate on throws to RBs, so we'll see.

I feel like you’re just regurgitating all your Josh Allen snark and now applying it to Darnold. I also think if the Jets drafted Allen and the Bills drafted Darnold, Sam would be a franchise QB right now and you’d’ve been right about Josh. 
 
I don’t know how he’s gonna do at this stage of his career, and I’m really not a fan of Rhule, but we will see. Panthers are certainly giving him a much better situation than he ever had with the Jets. 

[jgb]

12 minutes ago, slats said:

I feel like you’re just regurgitating all your Josh Allen snark and now applying it to Darnold. I also think if the Jets drafted Allen and the Bills drafted Darnold, Sam would be a franchise QB right now and you’d’ve been right about Josh. 
 
I don’t know how he’s gonna do at this stage of his career, and I’m really not a fan of Rhule, but we will see. Panthers are certainly giving him a much better situation than he ever had with the Jets. 

Playing the odds does lead to missing the odd call on a guy like Josh Allen but it allows you to correctly identify dozens (hundreds?) of QBs that suck in the beginning of their careers and then suck forever.

[rex-n-effect]

34 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

We will see, but I think Sam is better than most are giving him credit for.  I really do not think we can underestimate the sh*tty situation he was put in.

Look, to be honest I really don't give a sh*t about Sam anymore, have no stake in his success.  I also have little doubt that ZW is and was a far better prospect than Sam ever was....

But it's just my observation that he'll be better.  He clearly regressed as a Jet - given a better surrounding cast and coaching he's likely to be back on the upswing. 

You would generally expect that any player would be better with better coaching and staff--the real question is how much better can Darnold get surrounded by better than embarrassing. If he's still throwing clunkers after some time to get his footing then he's just not a good QB. Only time will tell. 

The only reason to care about Darnold anymore than any other QB on another team is if he substantially improves with Carolina then it lends credibility to an argument that JD made a poor talent evaluation and burned a first round pick that could have been used elsewhere--especially if Wilson also does not meet the value of his draft pick. 

[Jetsfan80]

52 minutes ago, slats said:

I feel like you’re just regurgitating all your Josh Allen snark and now applying it to Darnold. I also think if the Jets drafted Allen and the Bills drafted Darnold, Sam would be a franchise QB right now and you’d’ve been right about Josh. 
 
I don’t know how he’s gonna do at this stage of his career, and I’m really not a fan of Rhule, but we will see. Panthers are certainly giving him a much better situation than he ever had with the Jets. 

And I feel like you're using any reason to try to compare Josh Allen to Sam Darnold when they are not remotely comparable.  Josh Allen has athleticism Sam Darnold could only dream of, and also seems to have a drive/work ethic that far, far exceeds Darnolds's.  It isn't circumstances that played the biggest role in what Allen is now.  It's Allen himself. 

Remember, again, Allen did suck for 2 years in great circumstances.  So why did the lightbulb suddenly go on for him Year 3?  The addition of Stefon Diggs?  Helped, absolutely.  But not the top reason.  Meanwhile, Darnold's traits are the biggest reason he's failed for 3 years, not his circumstances.  Circumstances play a role, just not the BIGGEST role. 

Me being wrong about Josh Allen, like many others were after 6 years of inaccuracy at the collegiate and pro levels, does not make you right about Sam Darnold.  There's very, very few Josh Allen's in league history (if any).  But there are a lot of DeShone Kizer's, Jimmy Clausen's, Mark Sanchez's, and Geno Smith's.  The odds are significantly in my favor that Darnold isn't going to "figure things out" in Year 4, especially since he completely lacks the traits that Allen has going for  him. 

Some QB's just suck.  It happens.  A lot, actually.  Darnold is one of them.

[Jimmy 2 Times]

I was all in on Sam, but quickly pivoted to Wilson.

Sam failing is better for the Jets future than Sam doing well so now I'm rooting for him to continue to suck.  

 

 

In 2022 he can be a good quarterback.  

[Jetsfan80]

1 hour ago, FidelioJet said:

We will see, but I think Sam is better than most are giving him credit for.  I really do not think we can underestimate the sh*tty situation he was put in.

We also can't underestimate how overrated a prospect Darnold was coming out.  Some of it is hindsight, sure.  But its undeniable to point out that in his final year in college he led all of FBS in turnovers.  One scout called him a "cow on skates" when it came to his footwork, and he was one of vocal minority who didn't like him at all as a prospect.

Maccagnan (you know, the guy that also drafted Hackenberg in the 2nd round because of his freshman year performance while discounting the other 3 years) and most of us ignored the red flags, because of that one Rose Bowl performance.  Just like many would like to think Darnold is actually good because of that 1 Packers game while he was a Jet.  

[jgb]

13 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

And I feel like you're using any reason to try to compare Josh Allen to Sam Darnold when they are not remotely comparable.  Josh Allen has athleticism Sam Darnold could only dream of, and also seems to have a drive/work ethic that far, far exceeds Darnolds's.  It isn't circumstances that played the biggest role in what Allen is now.  It's Allen himself. 

Remember, again, Allen did suck for 2 years in great circumstances.  So why did the lightbulb suddenly go on for him Year 3?  The addition of Stefon Diggs?  Helped, absolutely.  But not the top reason.  Meanwhile, Darnold's traits are the biggest reason he's failed for 3 years, not his circumstances.  Circumstances play a role, just not the BIGGEST role. 

Me being wrong about Josh Allen, like many others were after 6 years of inaccuracy at the collegiate and pro levels, does not make you right about Sam Darnold.  There's very, very few Josh Allen's in league history (if any).  But there are a lot of DeShone Kizer's, Jimmy Clausen's, Mark Sanchez's, and Geno Smith's.  The odds are significantly in my favor that Darnold isn't going to "figure things out" in Year 4, especially since he completely lacks the traits that Allen has going for  him. 

Some QB's just suck.  It happens.  A lot, actually.  Darnold is one of them.

If you list all the pro bowl/canton-bound players Ozzie Newsome passed over in his HOF GM career you can even paint him as a schmuck.

[peebag]

17 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

I feel like you're using any reason to try to compare Josh Allen to Sam Darnold when they are not remotely comparable.  Josh Allen has athleticism Sam Darnold could only dream of, and also seems to have a drive/work ethic that far, far exceeds Darnolds's.  It isn't circumstances that played the biggest role in what Allen is now.  It's Allen himself.

Me being wrong about Josh Allen, like many others were after 6 years of inaccuracy at the collegiate and pro levels, does not make you right about Sam Darnold.  There's very, very few Josh Allen's in league history (if any).  But there are a lot of DeShone Kizer's, Jimmy Clausen's, Mark Sanchez's, and Geno Smith's.  The odds are significantly in my favor that Darnold isn't going to "figure things out" in Year 4, especially since he completely lacks the traits that Allen has going for  him.  

So if the Jets would have taken Josh Allen instead of Sam Darnold, they would have been far better off?

[jgb]

4 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

You got Gooched!!

Congrats

Oh man this reminds me of a story from my friend. He was at a party and after taking some shots saw his wife across the room. So he made his way over and discretely gooched her. His wife turned around and... not his wife. Just another blonde in a similar dress. Uncomfortable car ride home.

[slats]

1 hour ago, jgb said:

Playing the odds does lead to missing the odd call on a guy like Josh Allen but it allows you to correctly identify dozens (hundreds?) of QBs that suck in the beginning of their careers and then suck forever.

I dismiss out of hand this idea of yours that FQBs are born, not developed. Every football player is developed. QBs come out of college much further along than they did when I first started watching, but they still need development in the pros. Sam Darnold wasn’t developed, he was tortured. Some of the worst OL, WRs, and coaching for the duration of his brief Jets career. He never had a chance with the Jets, and neither would’ve Allen. 

50 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

And I feel like you're using any reason to try to compare Josh Allen to Sam Darnold when they are not remotely comparable.  Josh Allen has athleticism Sam Darnold could only dream of, and also seems to have a drive/work ethic that far, far exceeds Darnolds's.  It isn't circumstances that played the biggest role in what Allen is now.  It's Allen himself. 

Remember, again, Allen did suck for 2 years in great circumstances.  So why did the lightbulb suddenly go on for him Year 3?  The addition of Stefon Diggs?  Helped, absolutely.  But not the top reason.  Meanwhile, Darnold's traits are the biggest reason he's failed for 3 years, not his circumstances.  Circumstances play a role, just not the BIGGEST role. 

Me being wrong about Josh Allen, like many others were after 6 years of inaccuracy at the collegiate and pro levels, does not make you right about Sam Darnold.  There's very, very few Josh Allen's in league history (if any).  But there are a lot of DeShone Kizer's, Jimmy Clausen's, Mark Sanchez's, and Geno Smith's.  The odds are significantly in my favor that Darnold isn't going to "figure things out" in Year 4, especially since he completely lacks the traits that Allen has going for  him. 

Some QB's just suck.  It happens.  A lot, actually.  Darnold is one of them.

I just think after your definitive declarations about Allen sucking, and being so wrong about it, might lead you to soften your opinions rather than doubling down on the next man up.  
 
But yeah, as you say, Darnold was ahead of Allen for their first two years in the league. Sam was doing it without any support, and Allen was propped up. Allen’s rushing ability certainly helped him, but it was good coaching and building talent around him that led to the season he had last year. 
 
I don’t know if Darnold has room to turn the corner left or not. Matt Rhule obviously thinks he does, and he’s in a much better situation now. I like the kid or, at least, have no animosity towards him and I’d be happy for him if he had a big jump this year, despite what happens to the second round pick they’re getting next year. Piling on you if it happens, though, will be fun. 

[jgb]

36 minutes ago, slats said:

I dismiss out of hand this idea of yours that FQBs are born, not developed. Every football player is developed. QBs come out of college much further along than they did when I first started watching, but they still need development in the pros. Sam Darnold wasn’t developed, he was tortured. Some of the worst OL, WRs, and coaching for the duration of his brief Jets career. He never had a chance with the Jets, and neither would’ve Allen. 

I just think after your definitive declarations about Allen sucking, and being so wrong about it, might lead you to soften your opinions rather than doubling down on the next man up.  
 
But yeah, as you say, Darnold was ahead of Allen for their first two years in the league. Sam was doing it without any support, and Allen was propped up. Allen’s rushing ability certainly helped him, but it was good coaching and building talent around him that led to the season he had last year. 
 
I don’t know if Darnold has room to turn the corner left or not. Matt Rhule obviously thinks he does, and he’s in a much better situation now. I like the kid or, at least, have no animosity towards him and I’d be happy for him if he had a big jump this year, despite what happens to the second round pick they’re getting next year. Piling on you if it happens, though, will be fun. 

Not the point I was making but I'll dance. First of all, consistent with your standard MO you grossly simplify my view. No one is arguing you could take Montana's DNA and raise his clone in a bubble for 20 years then throw him on a football field and he'll be able to play. Of course situation and development matters. This is a truism. The debate is what is the relative importance of it versus innate factors. No one on Earth argues 100% of either/or, as much as you wish they did so you could win an Internet debate.

It's funny I was just reading some of the old Geno debates on here last week from nostalgia. Sidenote: how does @Jetsfan80being wrong about Allen invalidate his opinion on Darnold while your spirited (to put it mildly) defense of Geno doesn't do the same? I'd argue neither is relevant and it's a pretty transparent shortcut to point out Allen to avoid debating the merits of opposing views on Sam lest you believe "but you defended Geno" is a mic drop response to any point you make about a QB forevermore.

It's incredibly simple to the point of undeniability just by counting the number or outliers from NFL history: QBs who suck will likely continue to suck and those that are good will likely continue to be good until Father Time wins his inevitable battle. People are way overcomplicating this because they want a certain result. An exercise that we as a fan base have -- with great relief -- passed onto our friends in and around Charlotte.

Darnold is a bad NFL QB. Magical thinking can't change that. Could he be one of those outliers? Absolutely. Show me the person willing to bet on that and I'll gladly put up on the other side. Just like I would Dwayne Haskins, Josh Rosen, Deshonne Kizer and any of the other QB flameouts still kicking around the league.

[slats]

9 minutes ago, jgb said:

Not the point I was making but I'll dance. I put my track record with QBs up against yours any day. Does this validate my method? Doesn't matter. Results do. I'm either incredibly lucky or onto something. Personally, I don't think any credit is needed. It's incredibly simple. QBs who suck will likely continue to suck and those that are good will likely continue to be good. People are way overcomplicating this because they want a certain result.

Darnold is a bad NFL QB. Magical thinking can't change that. Could he be an outlier, sure. Show me the person willing to bet on that and I'll gladly put up on the other side.

I don’t pretend to be an evaluator of QBs, I just understand that they -like every other position- are developed. That QBs in better situations do better than QBs in really bad ones. That’s a major reason why QBs drafted high bust: because they were drafted by bad football teams. Don’t mistake me rooting for and supporting Jets’ QBs as an endorsement, either, I support the guys on my favorite team as long as they’re here. That’s it. Should the player and team part ways, but the player was a good soldier during his time here, I’ll root for him in the future. That’s where I am with Darnold while also being of the opinion that Jamal Adams can go **** himself. I hope Darnold does well, I really do, but I’m neither predicting nor betting on it. 

[FidelioJet]

2 hours ago, jgb said:

I hear ya and entitled to hold that opinion. Disagreements are what make messageboards fun. For once though, I'd like to hear a case for Darnold made that is actually about him and not stating the obvious--that the Jets sucked while he was here. There are a lot of miles to walk between the starting point (situation bad) and the conclusion (QB therefore actually secret good).

I'll tell you the vast majoriy of CAR fans agree with you. It's very entertaining checking out Carolina Huddle now.

It's hard to separate Darnold's performance from the situation he was put in...but the case I'll make is a relatively simple one..

Particularly in his first two years - Darnold didn't make nearly as many mistakes, bad throws, inaccurate throws and INT's until the game was out of reach or when he simply got frustrated.   

I saw a guy that started out patient, trying to make the smart plays..trying to find open receivers....He made plenty of really nice throws into tight windows - when he had Robby he also threw a nice deep ball on occasion.

But with pretty much no one ever open and virtually no time, toward the end of losing games he seemingly got frustrated and forced the ball.  

Now, there were still plenty of overall clunkers in there - but as an overall rule, that's what I noticed.  

So put a team behind him where he has open receivers on occasion and gets some time - I expect you'll see a completely different player.

So while this doesn't completely remove Sam from the Jets situation I do think it's not solely based on the Jets sucked so he sucked.

[jgb]

12 minutes ago, slats said:

I don’t pretend to be an evaluator of QBs, I just understand that they -like every other position- are developed. That QBs in better situations do better than QBs in really bad ones. That’s a major reason why QBs drafted high bust: because they were drafted by bad football teams. Don’t mistake me rooting for and supporting Jets’ QBs as an endorsement, either, I support the guys on my favorite team as long as they’re here. That’s it. Should the player and team part ways, but the player was a good soldier during his time here, I’ll root for him in the future. That’s where I am with Darnold while also being of the opinion that Jamal Adams can go **** himself. I hope Darnold does well, I really do, but I’m neither predicting nor betting on it. 

Fair enough.

[jgb]

7 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

It's hard to separate Darnold's performance from the situation he was put in...but the case I'll make is a relatively simple one..

Particularly in his first two years - Darnold didn't make nearly as many mistakes, bad throws, inaccurate throws and INT's until the game was out of reach or when he simply got frustrated.   

I saw a guy that started out patient, trying to make the smart plays..trying to find open receivers....He made plenty of really nice throws into tight windows - when he had Robby he also threw a nice deep ball on occasion.

But with pretty much no one ever open and virtually no time, toward the end of losing games he seemingly got frustrated and forced the ball.  

Now, there were still plenty of overall clunkers in there - but as an overall rule, that's what I noticed.  

So put a team behind him where he has open receivers on occasion and gets some time - I expect you'll see a completely different player.

So while this doesn't completely remove Sam from the Jets situation I do think it's not solely based on the Jets sucked so he sucked.

Thank you for sharing. It's a nice change to see a view that isn't a cut and paste of the standard defenses of nearly every highly-drafted QB bust "still so young," "bad situation," etc.

[genot]

1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

And I feel like you're using any reason to try to compare Josh Allen to Sam Darnold when they are not remotely comparable.  Josh Allen has athleticism Sam Darnold could only dream of, and also seems to have a drive/work ethic that far, far exceeds Darnolds's.  It isn't circumstances that played the biggest role in what Allen is now.  It's Allen himself. 

Remember, again, Allen did suck for 2 years in great circumstances.  So why did the lightbulb suddenly go on for him Year 3?  The addition of Stefon Diggs?  Helped, absolutely.  But not the top reason.  Meanwhile, Darnold's traits are the biggest reason he's failed for 3 years, not his circumstances.  Circumstances play a role, just not the BIGGEST role. 

Me being wrong about Josh Allen, like many others were after 6 years of inaccuracy at the collegiate and pro levels, does not make you right about Sam Darnold.  There's very, very few Josh Allen's in league history (if any).  But there are a lot of DeShone Kizer's, Jimmy Clausen's, Mark Sanchez's, and Geno Smith's.  The odds are significantly in my favor that Darnold isn't going to "figure things out" in Year 4, especially since he completely lacks the traits that Allen has going for  him. 

Some QB's just suck.  It happens.  A lot, actually.  Darnold is one of them.

The season hasn't started yet. We'll find out soon enough if your right.

[Jetsfan80]

23 minutes ago, slats said:

I don’t pretend to be an evaluator of QBs, I just understand that they -like every other position- are developed. That QBs in better situations do better than QBs in really bad ones. That’s a major reason why QBs drafted high bust: because they were drafted by bad football teams. Don’t mistake me rooting for and supporting Jets’ QBs as an endorsement, either, I support the guys on my favorite team as long as they’re here. That’s it. Should the player and team part ways, but the player was a good soldier during his time here, I’ll root for him in the future. That’s where I am with Darnold while also being of the opinion that Jamal Adams can go **** himself. I hope Darnold does well, I really do, but I’m neither predicting nor betting on it. 

 

Yet if great situations  are the biggest reason for a QB's success, it fails to explain how someone like Mark Sanchez failed so miserably after being placed in a great situation.  The answer is he sucked, regardless of circumstances.  And you can only develop bad QB's so much.  Development really only helps good QB's become very good or possibly great.  Development attempts are completely ineffective if the QB simply doesn't have it.

DNA is about 60 % of who we are as human beings.  Why is it so disagreeable for you to think that around 60 % of a QB's success (maybe more, maybe a little less) also has to do with the QB himself, with the lesser factor being his surroundings?  

And even I'm admitting Darnold will do better in Carolina than he did in New York.  Circumstances DO matter and I'm not arguing otherwise.  But my argument is it won't be a significant increase in productivity.  Going from QB36 to QB29 or so, like I suspect will be the case, isn't a big leap.  

[jgb]

12 minutes ago, genot said:

The season hasn't started yet. We'll find out soon enough if your right.

That's the thing though... we're not talking about a rookie here. Sam has 40 games under his belt. He might be the worst QB to get 40 starts in recent league history stats-wise. It is unbelievable really that Darnold is being handed another starting position without having to do "the Tannehill" and rehabilitate himself a bit as a backup and work his way back up -- Hell it might actually be the best thing for him. There is no rational universe where Darnold is handed another starting role while Trubisky needs to prove himself all over again.

The issue I have with the pro-Darnold set is that is just never seems to be the right time to evaluate him. We need to see him under a real coach, with a dedicated QB coach, when his receivers get healthy then you'll see, no one can be evaluated behind that OL, etc., etc. I humbly submit that the burden of proof is now on the pro-Darnold crowd if they want to continue the debate. "Wait and see" doesn't cut it anymore.  We have waited and we have seen and the verdict is in.

[ZachEY]

48 minutes ago, slats said:

But yeah, as you say, Darnold was ahead of Allen for their first two years in the league.

Was he?

[Jetsfan80]

1 hour ago, peebag said:

So if the Jets would have taken Josh Allen instead of Sam Darnold, they would have been far better off?

Absolutely.  I never would have endorsed this at the time (Darnold was my # 1 guy in 2018 and Allen was the weakest of the available prospects in my mind), but Allen's freakish athleticism, with hindsight as a guide, at least gave him Cam Newton-like potential even if he never improved his accuracy.  And while I fully admit Allen would certainly not have reached the heights we've saw out of him last season if he was in NY rather than Buffalo, he at least would have been a lot of fun to watch and would have ended up a far better pick than Darnold, despite the awful circumstances.  Maybe we wouldn't have extended his contract here but he'd have accomplished more on his rookie deal in NY than Darnold did.  

Darnold's complete inability to play the position is just an enormous hindrance.  I never would have thought at the time that he'd be as lost as a QB as he ended up being.  He can't make a pre-snap read to save his life and may be an even slower processor than Mark Sanchez was.  Maybe that's a good reason why you don't draft QB's who didn't play QB in HS and only started for 2 seasons in college.  Again, I didn't feel that way at the time, but I'm also not an NFL GM paid big money to make decisions like these.

[Jetsfan80]

1 hour ago, slats said:

I just think after your definitive declarations about Allen sucking, and being so wrong about it, might lead you to soften your opinions rather than doubling down on the next man up.  

Why?  There was little to learn from Josh Allen except to suggest that drafting a guy with freakish athleticism isn't the worst idea.  It's a big reason why I was pretty high on Trey Lance out of the most recent draft class.  Sadly, Darnold lacked this trait, and pretty much all other traits necessary to become a successful NFL QB.

Josh Allen having basically a historically unprecedented turnaround doesn't do much at all to impact the overall data, which suggests that a QB who sucks for 2 or 3 years will very likely continue to suck.  We have nearly 40 games of data on Darnold.  We know what he is....and isn't.  He's not turning his career around in Carolina like you so hope he does, and you won't be able to rub anything in my face on that. 

When Darnold does suck this year, just don't come back here with a list of excuses, please.  I doubt you will, but I know for sure some others might do just that.  Resist the temptation.

[jgb]

I missed Lamar Ja

1 minute ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Why?  There was little to learn from Josh Allen except to suggest that drafting a guy with freakish athleticism isn't the worst idea.  It's a big reason why I was pretty high on Trey Lance out of the most recent draft class.  Sadly, Darnold lacked this trait, and pretty much all other traits necessary to become a successful NFL QB.

Josh Allen having basically a historically unprecedented turnaround doesn't do much at all to impact the overall data, which suggests that a QB who sucks for 2 or 3 years will very likely continue to suck.  We have nearly 40 games of data on Darnold.  We know what he is....and isn't.  He's not turning his career around in Carolina like you so hope he does, and you won't be able to rub anything in my face on that. 

When Darnold does suck this year, just don't come back here with a list of excuses, please.  I doubt you will, but I know for sure some others might do just that.  Resist the temptation.

We are all idiots we all missed Lamar Jackson. Might as well just ban ourselves.

[Jetsfan80]

Just now, jgb said:

I missed Lamar Ja

We are all idiots we all missed Lamar Jackson. Might as well just ban ourselves.

I had Lamar as my # 3 prospect from the class, if I recall correctly.  I had Darnold # 1, Rosen # 2, Jackson # 3, Mayfield # 4 and Allen # 5.  

[genot]

26 minutes ago, jgb said:

That's the thing though... we're not talking about a rookie here. Sam has 40 games under his belt. He might be the worst QB to get 40 starts in recent league history stats-wise. It is unbelievable really that Darnold is being handed another starting position without having to do "the Tannehill" and rehabilitate himself a bit as a backup and work his way back up -- Hell it might actually be the best thing for him. There is no rational universe where Darnold is handed another starting role while Trubisky needs to prove himself all over again.

The issue I have with the pro-Darnold set is that is just never seems to be the right time to evaluate him. We need to see him under a real coach, with a dedicated QB coach, when his receivers get healthy then you'll see, no one can be evaluated behind that OL, etc., etc. I humbly submit that the burden of proof is now on the pro-Darnold crowd if they want to continue the debate. "Wait and see" doesn't cut it anymore.  We have waited and we have seen and the verdict is in.

But you and JetsFan80, and others acknowledge that the last two years we're a disaster from the coaching down to the oline. It's reasonable to take a wait and see atitude. 

[slats]

36 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

Yet if great situations  are the biggest reason for a QB's success, it fails to explain how someone like Mark Sanchez failed so miserably after being placed in a great situation.  The answer is he sucked, regardless of circumstances.  And you can only develop bad QB's so much.  Development really only helps good QB's become very good or possibly great.  Development attempts are completely ineffective if the QB simply doesn't have it.

DNA is about 60 % of who we are as human beings.  Why is it so disagreeable for you to think that around 60 % of a QB's success (maybe more, maybe a little less) also has to do with the QB himself, with the lesser factor being his surroundings?  

And even I'm admitting Darnold will do better in Carolina than he did in New York.  Circumstances DO matter and I'm not arguing otherwise.  But my argument is it won't be a significant increase in productivity.  Going from QB36 to QB29 or so, like I suspect will be the case, isn't a big leap.  

Mark Sanchez was a lousy prospect who went to the AFCCG his first two years in the league but, yeah, good example. 

[The Crusher]

17 hours ago, FidelioJet said:

Sam's going to better this year than most of you think.

Absolutely, but that leaves a lot of room to just mediocre.