Rodgers and Brady. Brees is nothing more than a system QB (Did he make the playoffs without Payton?)
Son, you fuming mad that no one is mentioning Brees. If Rodgers has 'consistently choked' in the playoffs, what that does make Brees? His Super Bounty-Bowl win was even less recent than Rodgers, and he gotten stomped by a 7-9 team and missed the playoffs. Lol son.
For the record, they're all overpaid.
That's the entire point of debate. Why is it the standard? Why do teams keep acting like it's hard to get competent QB play? When has paying whatever it takes to keep a quarterback led to a ring? Why does Cutler get so much when his team showed they can win without him?
People keep saying that Seattle and SanFran are going to fade when they have to give Wilson and Kaep big deals, and that may well be true. But then why pay them at all? Why not just draft another QB and keep the rest of the team together. It's easier to hit on a QB in the draft than it is to hit on an entire supporting cast cheaply. The Seahawks and 9ers are incredibly talented teams, but does that mean Wilson and Kaep are irreplaceable?
Obviously, there will be teams like Denver and Minny a few years ago that are a QB away. It makes sense to bring in one if they can afford it. The Bengals maybe. But a big-money quarterback seems like a poor foundation, especially if that QB lacks top-five talent or production like Flacco and Cutler do.
Last edited by Chinook; 01-19-2014 at 02:32 AM.
if you look at it, those contracts, they are all made with some sort of plan. Either it is the team locking up the qb with a period of tiness ahead (Baltimore, Green Bay), the team may be having a great cap situation in the current year (Chicago), maybe is just trying to find some stability after years of instability (Dallas, Houston) or just straight up had to buy the qb (Denver) .. My point being that teams were either too far to think about winning, or just trying to find some stability.
I don't get how that justifies it at all. The Ravens would only go through a period of badness because they are hamstrung by Flacco's deal. It only get worse as time goes on, so it's not like waiting helps the team grow. What's the point of locking him up just to suck?
I think stability comes from the top down and not through any one player. Both Manning and Brady have been stalwarts for more than a decade ... save one year. The Pats braintrust kept the team compe ive, while the Colts floundered due to their poor direction. NE had a plan in place in case Brady went down. The Colts didn't. What's so hard about having a plan?
Ravens fans want the team to sign Rex Grossman to back up Flacco or to replace Tyrod Taylor with a rookie sixth-rounder. Personally, I want the team to heavily invest in the position, a third-rounder or multi-million-dollar contract. Get someone who can start, not just in case Flacco goes down, but also to gain leverage with him for renegotiations in two years. The team needs a viable alternative instead of pretending that having crap behind him some how makes him too good to let walk.
the idea was to reload in the draft without having to worry about a qb.
Which is essentially having to rebuild an entire team instead of just one position. Doesn't make oodles of sense to me, especially if the player at the position is just above-average.
Cam is gonna get overpaid.. but I'll take it. In this league you NEED a franchise QB to be successful - and he proves to be one this year
what about having an oiled machine that knows what to do on the field, the oline that knows how the qb is gonna move, the weapons specifically drafted for the qb's talent etc etc..
Most expensive gimmick in NFL history
bigger ripoff than buying meow mix for your GF's sister's cats
That's why you draft and develop. Good teams can go from Smith to Kaep. Like perhaps if the Ravens had drafted Foles or Cousins last season, they would have had a better position against Flacco. It's not really about having a new QB every couple of years. It's about having a lower breaking point in conversations due to having viable alternatives. Increasing supply to lower demand, if you would.
i see your point, that is always good business, but it would have been enough for the ravens to resign flacco a year or even a few month before. They choosed to roll the dice and got burned (in a sweet way), would have been worse to sign him for long and then finding out he is not the answer.
Not really they would have overpaid Flacco no matter what. They just overpaid him by more than they would have. Instead of getting Brees money, he would have gotten Cutler money.
16M would have been good imho. i think he's worth that.
If CK7 wins this NFCCG but not the SB should he still get PAID..like $20M+ per?
"Colin Kaepernick is on the cusp of a second straight trip to the Super Bowl, and, a win in Seattle on Sunday is almost certain to catapult the youngster into one of the five biggest contracts in NFL history"
http://mweb.cbssports.com/nfl/writer...in-nfl-history
He deserves to get paid as much as anyone, and he'll only get better.. But no, he doesn't deserve the money. The 9ers are much bigger than him.
krapernick should get paid like a rb, not a qb.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
