Guest viewing is limited

Welcome To The HFBM Boards
Hockey, Football, Baseball & MMA

Status
Not open for further replies.
I duno, I reckon 'you win some you lose some' is a fair way to summarise this.

Some weeks as a QB you'll throw perfectly timed passes setup for massive YAC, or a 50 yard dime to an open receiver, but the spud WR will drop it for no reason.

Then other weeks you'll throw a pretty basic 2-yard screen pass and the RB will take it 75 yards to the house.

Only giving MM 75 air yards is an unfair thing to do. Sometimes a good pass is the difference between 1-2 YAC and 10+.
 
HurrayTitans! said:
I didn’t see anyone “complain”about not throwing far enough down the field. I think you’re mistaking conversation for complaining and it started with 1 saying MM “stretched the field”, the other disagreed.

So if he can’t win for losing, it has more to do with this type of comment inaccurately depicting a conversation.
Click to expand...
Then why was it even brought up? Your QB threw 3 td passes in a win, but he didnt "stretch" the field. Doesn't matter how you get the win, a win is a win. Think the Saints cared Brees was being a Charlie check down with Kamara Monday night?
 
Tewa Titan said:
Then why was it even brought up? Your QB threw 3 td passes in a win, but he didnt "stretch" the field. Doesn't matter how you get the win, a win is a win. Think the Saints cared Brees was being a Charlie check down with Kamara Monday night?
Click to expand...
It's fair for us as fans to have concerns and project those forward regardless of a win. Winning doesn't mean there aren't places to be better.

One of the big knocks on Marcus the past two years has been him not pushing the ball down the field. Everyone wrote off 2018 because of the nerve injury. But now he came out and still had only about 1 pass beyond 20 yards in the first game.

But we don't have to look at this entirely negatively. The positive point though is that he actually has some playmakers around. Some games he can just dump the ball off to Henry, Brown, and Davis and let them create big plays. Goff isn't actually a stud with a canon arm, he just has great players around him that he distributes to. That can work if we have good play makers and a good play caller!
 
Dman5TX said:
NFL contracts are all about the guaranteed money. A short term deal with low guarantees.

That’s my entire point. I don’t think we are going to have many other teams bidding against us. We aren’t low balling him. We just aren’t offering a long term deal. Not many other places he can go unless some people retire. Loaded QB class coming out and teams are going to want a cheap rookie deal to help rebuild over paying a QB tons of money.

If he leaves we can sign Tannehill to be our starter.
Click to expand...

I don't understand your point. You say you're not low balling him by offering less annual value, but you want to give him a short contract and little guaranteed money. That IS lowballing him. If he plays well, SOMEONE is gonna pay him! If he doesn't, we won't pay him.

So this is only worth talking about IF he plays well. So under that circumstance, you want to lowball him so we don't sign him, and then HOPE to sign Tannehill? Assuming Mariota plays better than Tannehill, WHY would we do that? Tannehill is on a 1 year contract. He wants to start and get paid starter money too! You're looking at this the wrong way. There are too few good QB's...not too many!

The last two guys you probably want to compare him too...Dalton and Tannehill signed contract EXTENSIONS in 2014 and 2015 respectively. Dalton got 17mill in guaranteed money and Tannehill got like 21mil. But even Tannehill's contract was 4 years ago and just as importantly, these were contract extensions. Usually extensions are less than if the player waited til free agency since they are getting paid earlier and the team has the leverage.

Probably a closer comparison is Garropolo who has played so little, he doesn't have a good amount of stats to know how good he really is. And yet he signed a 5 year 137.5mil contract with 48+ fully guaranteed and 70+ mil in injury guarantees. The Niners wanted to be able to get out if they didn't like what they saw, but to do that required some creative maneuvering. They basically put $28mil of his guarantee as a roster bonus instead of a signing bonus so they'd take the cap hit all in the first year and a smaller amount in year 2...so they could get out in year 3. But he got essentially $48mil the first day he was on the roster. This is as team friendly a deal as you'll see in a newish contract. And it's a good deal if you can absorb a $37mil cap hit in year 1. A lot of the new contracts are getting front loaded to be more manageable during the length of the contract.

Let's not kid ourselves, you're not signing any good starting QB, who is a free agent, to a Dalton extension type deal. Not any more. The top guys are getting guarantees over $100mil...just in guarantees. And the top annual rate is $35mil. Once Prescott signs his new deal, Mariota or any other solid-good starters ask will go up as Prescott wants close to top level money without being a top 3 QB.

You want Tannehill after you lowball Mariota? Take at Carr's 5 year contract extension from 2 years ago...worth $25mil/yr, $12.5mil SB and $40mil fully guaranteed. If Mariota plays well, hard to see how his annual value isn't closer to $30mil/yr...especially if Prescott signs the kind of deal expected. His SB may be lower but he'll want higher guarantees or vice versa. But let's say Tannehill takes over on a one year contract and then plays well...then what? You lowball him to and have no starting QB and no high draft pick?

Doesn't make sense. And do you really want to send the message to other players that if you play well we are going to low ball you? Also, IF Mariota plays well and now you're risking the franchise not having a QB over money? That would be bad and would send a message to free agents (Cam Wake types) to not come here because we don't know what we're doing and they won't know if we're tanking for a year or what. After Miami just got blown out, several of their older players don't want to hang around for a rebuild and supposedly want out...after one game.

What would the fans think of our GM and ownership if we lowballed Mariota and Tannehill signed elsewhere and we picked in the high 20's and didn't have enough ammo to move up for a QB? Who's our QB then? Flacco? What will that say to our fan base? Great run in 2019, now let's go backwards at QB instead of moving forward!
 
Dman5TX said:
Potential QB Class:

Tua
Herbert
Fromm
Eason
Hurts
Ehlinger
Burrows
Click to expand...

Which of these guys do you think is going in round 1? Top 10?

Plenty of QB's get hyped as First Round picks and then fall off or become swiss cheese as teams find holes in their game or personality or both. Start with 7...end up with 2-3.
 
Riverman said:
I definitely think the Browns will be better than what they were today and we caught them at a good time when they haven't gelled as a team. They were MASSIVELY undisciplined. The refs were not calling a lot of holding on them their first drive- they just kept on and then they got real chippy and undisciplined. And then the refs started calling a good game. The only bad call I saw was the early whistle on a sack that Mayfield had escaped. Other than that- the Browns were sloppy and undisciplined. That should get a bit better.

Kitchens is a gooballf- I don't know if he can reel that talent in and get all those egos dialed in. That team definitely crumbled under the pressure of they hype. Vrabel is a MASSIVELY better HC. That dude is for real.

And I think we still have a some issues with our OL that weren't obvious because of the Browns gifting us so many penalties. I'm hoping that gets cleaned up this week and when Lewan returns or we won't be able to put away teams that have been playing together for longer than the Browns.

But the Browns aren't better than us nor will they be at the end of season.
Click to expand...
in case you havent noticed, most teams are better than the Titans to begin with.. and yes the Browns will do and be better for the rest of the season. When the starting QB has 4 commercials going already, it means the league will make damn sure they dont lose. Same goes for OGJ. A team has 2 players with god knows how many endorsements between them. That equals wins.
the titans are never going to have any form of a dynasty. They might get lucky one year and have a Raptors type one shot wonder happen to them, years from now. As long as they are wearing these crappy unifoems and dont have nationally popular players. No Super bowl is coming. Youre just watching for the pure enjoyment of football
 
Tewa Titan said:
Then why was it even brought up? Your QB threw 3 td passes in a win, but he didnt "stretch" the field. Doesn't matter how you get the win, a win is a win. Think the Saints cared Brees was being a Charlie check down with Kamara Monday night?
Click to expand...
To the stretching the field point only, someone brought it up as a positive that MM did in the game. Someone else countered with disagreement and stated his point.

No one “complained” about not stretching the field. That was what you said:
Tewa Titan said:
Wow people complaining Mariota didn't throw far enough down the field after throwing 3 TDs, dude can't win for lose. Brees only had one pass that went further than 20 yards vs Texans.
Click to expand...

My post is not arguing for or against the ”stretching the field” comment. Mine was to point out you think MM is getting crapped on regardless of how good his performance is, and while sometimes that’s true(more like some posters do it), you picked a bad example. No one was “complaining” about that and if anything, the point you said that someone was, has only made it worse in the “can’t win for losing” argument.

This is honestly a microcosm of the way many conversations go awry over almost any topic.

Sorry all, way off point for the stats thread.

Back to the stats........1-0, first place.
 
Hey, I've been on team hater for a long while now.

That said, I have zero complaints of Sundays performance from mariota. Of course he didn't stretch the field. He had guys jailbreak running at him all game long. Hard to stretch the field in that situation.

The increased play action, shot deep to brown early, were all great signs. Let's keep in mind that it was his first game with this new, apparently competent hopefully, coordinator.

Keep it coming. Nice balanced, mistake free, efficient football. If he puts up games like that every week, with our defense, there will be home playoff games in our future.
 
DanPastorini said:
in case you havent noticed, most teams are better than the Titans to begin with.. and yes the Browns will do and be better for the rest of the season. When the starting QB has 4 commercials going already, it means the league will make damn sure they dont lose. Same goes for OGJ. A team has 2 players with god knows how many endorsements between them. That equals wins.
the titans are never going to have any form of a dynasty. They might get lucky one year and have a Raptors type one shot wonder happen to them, years from now. As long as they are wearing these crappy unifoems and dont have nationally popular players. No Super bowl is coming. Youre just watching for the pure enjoyment of football
Click to expand...

I rarely if ever use the BS button- but dude what you're spewing is just straight out aluminum foil hat fodder. The reason the titans haven't had anything yet is because we've been POORLY managed since Floyd Reese left. Until now. For the first time in the past 15 years I think our arrow is up. And I think good things are going to come in the next 3 years. I've gone on record saying that if we stick with Vrabel- we'll be running deep in the playoffs by 2024. By that time the Brady/BB juggernaut will be gone (hopefully). We'll have a shot at it all by then.

The Browns are a similar franchise to what we were. They had a good draft and off season so that revved up the hype machine. They'll be better IF they gel. That is yet to be determined. They definitely have proven talent. But their big question mark is Freddie Kitchens. I don't think he has what it takes to corral all that talent and ego in one direction.
 
Gut said:
I don't understand your point. You say you're not low balling him by offering less annual value, but you want to give him a short contract and little guaranteed money. That IS lowballing him. If he plays well, SOMEONE is gonna pay him! If he doesn't, we won't pay him.

So this is only worth talking about IF he plays well. So under that circumstance, you want to lowball him so we don't sign him, and then HOPE to sign Tannehill? Assuming Mariota plays better than Tannehill, WHY would we do that? Tannehill is on a 1 year contract. He wants to start and get paid starter money too! You're looking at this the wrong way. There are too few good QB's...not too many!

The last two guys you probably want to compare him too...Dalton and Tannehill signed contract EXTENSIONS in 2014 and 2015 respectively. Dalton got 17mill in guaranteed money and Tannehill got like 21mil. But even Tannehill's contract was 4 years ago and just as importantly, these were contract extensions. Usually extensions are less than if the player waited til free agency since they are getting paid earlier and the team has the leverage.

Probably a closer comparison is Garropolo who has played so little, he doesn't have a good amount of stats to know how good he really is. And yet he signed a 5 year 137.5mil contract with 48+ fully guaranteed and 70+ mil in injury guarantees. The Niners wanted to be able to get out if they didn't like what they saw, but to do that required some creative maneuvering. They basically put $28mil of his guarantee as a roster bonus instead of a signing bonus so they'd take the cap hit all in the first year and a smaller amount in year 2...so they could get out in year 3. But he got essentially $48mil the first day he was on the roster. This is as team friendly a deal as you'll see in a newish contract. And it's a good deal if you can absorb a $37mil cap hit in year 1. A lot of the new contracts are getting front loaded to be more manageable during the length of the contract.

Let's not kid ourselves, you're not signing any good starting QB, who is a free agent, to a Dalton extension type deal. Not any more. The top guys are getting guarantees over $100mil...just in guarantees. And the top annual rate is $35mil. Once Prescott signs his new deal, Mariota or any other solid-good starters ask will go up as Prescott wants close to top level money without being a top 3 QB.

You want Tannehill after you lowball Mariota? Take at Carr's 5 year contract extension from 2 years ago...worth $25mil/yr, $12.5mil SB and $40mil fully guaranteed. If Mariota plays well, hard to see how his annual value isn't closer to $30mil/yr...especially if Prescott signs the kind of deal expected. His SB may be lower but he'll want higher guarantees or vice versa. But let's say Tannehill takes over on a one year contract and then plays well...then what? You lowball him to and have no starting QB and no high draft pick?

Doesn't make sense. And do you really want to send the message to other players that if you play well we are going to low ball you? Also, IF Mariota plays well and now you're risking the franchise not having a QB over money? That would be bad and would send a message to free agents (Cam Wake types) to not come here because we don't know what we're doing and they won't know if we're tanking for a year or what. After Miami just got blown out, several of their older players don't want to hang around for a rebuild and supposedly want out...after one game.

What would the fans think of our GM and ownership if we lowballed Mariota and Tannehill signed elsewhere and we picked in the high 20's and didn't have enough ammo to move up for a QB? Who's our QB then? Flacco? What will that say to our fan base? Great run in 2019, now let's go backwards at QB instead of moving forward!
Click to expand...

Gotta be honest Gut. I didn’t read all of this haha I’ve explained myself multiple times about this. Just read the rest of the thread and you should understand my stance. Sorry dude.

I’ll try to summarize since I know it can be hard to keep track of everything in this thread. Lots of messages.

There aren’t many teams that need a QB, and the ones that do - I don’t think are going to want to pay Mariota over drafting their own guy (because chances are they have a top 10 pick).

Most teams have a guy they recently drafted or a vet QB they have locked up. I’ve listed 4 teams that you could legitimately make an argument for but 3 of them will be picking in the top half of the draft IMO.

30 other teams had a chance to get Tannehill to come play for them for a 4th round pick and they wouldn’t have to pay all of his salary. Yet no one did it except for us... yet we are worried about him signing elsewhere for big money? Lol
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Gut said:
Which of these guys do you think is going in round 1? Top 10?

Plenty of QB's get hyped as First Round picks and then fall off or become swiss cheese as teams find holes in their game or personality or both. Start with 7...end up with 2-3.
Click to expand...

It doesn’t matter what I think. It matters what NFL execs think.

Once again, there are only so many QB openings in the NFL.. All of those dudes don’t have to be top 10 picks or even first rounders.
 
DanPastorini said:
in case you havent noticed, most teams are better than the Titans to begin with.. and yes the Browns will do and be better for the rest of the season. When the starting QB has 4 commercials going already, it means the league will make damn sure they dont lose. Same goes for OGJ. A team has 2 players with god knows how many endorsements between them. That equals wins.
the titans are never going to have any form of a dynasty. They might get lucky one year and have a Raptors type one shot wonder happen to them, years from now. As long as they are wearing these crappy unifoems and dont have nationally popular players. No Super bowl is coming. Youre just watching for the pure enjoyment of football
Click to expand...

Um ok...let's see if we can break thru your 'conspiracy theory' theory.

How are MOST teams better than the Titans???

So you think Baker will benefit from a conspiracy because he has commercials? How did that help Drew Brees last year in the playoffs?

Same goes for OGJ? Who's that? Did you mean OBJ? How did him having so much popularity help the Giants win? Eli has a bunch of commercials too...but no conspiracy theory for them? How did endorsements equals wins workout for Aaron Rodgers the last few years?

Ah, and now you've changed from commercials equals wins to Uniforms equals Super Bowls? Why?

So I guess you should start bombarding the front office with names of better fashion designers and commercial writers so we can have more wins and win some Super Bowls!
 
Dman5TX said:
Gotta be honest Gut. I didn’t read all of this haha I’ve explained myself multiple times about this. Just read the rest of the thread and you should understand my stance. Sorry dude.

I’ll try to summarize since I know it can be hard to keep track of everything in this thread. Lots of messages.

There aren’t many teams that need a QB, and the ones that do - I don’t think are going to want to pay Mariota over drafting their own guy (because chances are they have a top 10 pick).

Most teams have a guy they recently drafted or a vet QB they have locked up. I’ve listed 4 teams that you could legitimately make an argument for but 3 of them will be picking in the top half of the draft IMO.

30 other teams had a chance to get Tannehill to come play for them for a 4th round pick and they wouldn’t have to pay all of his salary. Yet no one did it except for us... yet we are worried about him signing elsewhere for big money? Lol
Click to expand...

So let's keep this short and simple. Your view is that there is an over abundance of good starting qb's and I (and most of the NFL) thinks the opposite. How do we know who's right? The Law of Supply and Demand!

If you're right, then we will have seen this situation before...where a high pedigree qb has an above average season, goes into free agency, and is 'forced' to take a below average deal because there are too many good qb's. I can't find a single example of this. Can you?

If I'm right, then we will have seen below avg production qb's getting OVER paid. I have seen this A LOT!!! Haven't you?

Lastly, you haven't answered the most obvious question. If Mariota and Tannehill aren't our qb in 2020 and we don't have a high draft pick...who is?
 
Dman5TX said:
It doesn’t matter what I think. It matters what NFL execs think.

Once again, there are only so many QB openings in the NFL.. All of those dudes don’t have to be top 10 picks or even first rounders.
Click to expand...

So to be clear, you're advocating we lowball (lose) Mariota and think we're gonna draft a qb at the end of round 1 or 2 or 3 and they will come in as rookies and give us as good a chance to win in year 1? The odds are stacked HEAVILY against you!

NFL coaches and scouts look at a class in 2 ways...who are starters (or potential starters) and who are backup candidates. In general, 1st rounders are starters, 2nd rounders could be starters, 3rd rounders is where backups start or seriously undersized starters begin.

Which execs have you talked to that think this is a deep starting qb class? I don't care about deep backups since we are discussing who's gonna start next year on ostensibly a playoff team?
 
Dman5TX said:
Gotta be honest Gut. I didn’t read all of this haha I’ve explained myself multiple times about this. Just read the rest of the thread and you should understand my stance. Sorry dude.
Click to expand...

Thanks for being honest about not reading it...but I think you should so you understand where the league and where Mariota will likely fall into if he has a good season.

I understand your stance and your point of view (thanks for summarizing) but I just don't agree with it.

If there were too many good QB's, you wouldn't have Jared Goff (who is NOT the 4th best QB in the league) getting a huge contract extension that makes him the 4th highest paid QB. In an overabundant market, teams don't overpay, the players get less. In this market, the players are getting more...A LOT MORE!!! That's how you know there are too few good qb's...not too many!
 
It shouldn't have been this close. We were something like 2/9 on third down prior to the Browns' collapse. That really shouldn't happen with chain movers like Humphries, Walker, Davis, Henry, and now Brown.
 
Gut said:
So let's keep this short and simple. Your view is that there is an over abundance of good starting qb's and I (and most of the NFL) thinks the opposite. How do we know who's right? The Law of Supply and Demand!

If you're right, then we will have seen this situation before...where a high pedigree qb has an above average season, goes into free agency, and is 'forced' to take a below average deal because there are too many good qb's. I can't find a single example of this. Can you?

If I'm right, then we will have seen below avg production qb's getting OVER paid. I have seen this A LOT!!! Haven't you?

Lastly, you haven't answered the most obvious question. If Mariota and Tannehill aren't our qb in 2020 and we don't have a high draft pick...who is?
Click to expand...

I said nothing about an over abundance of good QB’s. I said most teams have a QB they are committed to for the next few years at least.

Yes I did answer the tannehill Q. Teams could have had him for cheap this year. He ain’t signing for big money.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top