IF Bridgewater is healthy I would much rather trade Mccown,,,,,he had a good season and his trade value is not getting any higher than right now. We were lucky that he did not miss significant time due to injury as thats what he has done in the past----again if Teddy is healthy he could be the best QB on the team right now !
no i woudn't and teddy has been in the league long enough that we know what he can do already and while it's better then the trash pile we had at QB the past few years, it's nothing special. I'd rather get a draft pick and use the money we would have to pay teddy to improve other holes and have the cheap QB in darnold. that's how the eagles just won the SB. theydidn't have to shell out big money to a QB because wentz is on a rookie deal and they stacked the team elsewhere and didn't even need wentz to win but instead won with a career back-up QB.
I understood and don't believe the bolded part, no way ever ever ever is Teddy Bridgewater going to be worth franchising at 30m and certainly not within a season. He would have to lead us to the superbowl and win it to even consider that kind of figure, so like I said in my earlier post what contract is Superbowl MVP Foles getting this season ? Not 30m I bet.
Big difference between eagles situation where they know they have an mvp caliber qb coming off an injury,control of the backup in the form of another year in the contract and the goodwill of coming off a super bowl win and the situation we are in. Kind of like comparing apples and submarines
I wouldn't rather see Darnold win the starting job. For one, the staff & front office both wants him to win the starting job, so I don't think it would be a truly objective decision, whether they say so or not. But also, he's not ready. He has some bad habits, especially in his footwork and delivery, that would get worse if he's back there running for his life and/or trying to give a quick fix in the short term. I want long term success with Darnold. I don't care about this season. He needs to be eased in. If they start him week 1, I believe anyway, they are doing him a disservice. Putting their own short term interests (bowles wants to return, etc) over what is better for Darnold, the player, long term.
I don't understand your point tbh? He ultimately was wanting to franchise Teddy for 30m if needed, if he showed enough potential, the apple and submarine comment is odd, as a superbowl mvp in comparison to teddy is not getting 30m so why would we ever pay that for Teddy (that is the point of my mentioning Foles in comparison) even if he showed a good level of competence nevermind potential. I am not hating on Teddy either, I hope he does well here if he gets a chance or elsewhere if we trade him, I just wouldn't be rushing to franchise the kid for 30m any time soon
Also, I could or should have said the big difference is they know and are still not paying a Superbowl MVP QB 30m, so why would anybody do the same for Teddy even if he has a really good season next year, still the apples and submarines comment has me perplexed, it is comparing a like for like back up, one you would be happy to franchise on the back of a mythical good season and one who has just unbelievably had a very good season and not getting the kind of cash a franchised QB pulls in. Not sure If I said it or explained it any better this time either tbh but I thought it worth a go, as I like your posts.
I'm not opposed to keeping Teddy. I'm eager to see what Darnold can actually do before potentially trading Teddy away. I know the majority of the fan base has anointed Darnold the GOAT, but I personally prefer the wait and see approach.
Not sure how long t Lions/Fish/Browns/Jaguars. 1 tough game, two games we should win, 1 brutal game If Darnold wins the job outright then you start the guy. I feel he is far more emotionally mature and more intelligent than Geno/Sanchez. He's not getting "ruined" by early struggles. The only struggle now is actually getting him on the damn field
The tough thing about the first 3 games is that they come in a 10 day span. Tough to get a rookie ready on a short week, and back to back short weeks would be even tougher.
Good point Though for the rest of the team I'm glad that this stretch is early enough in the season so they should be relatively fresh. Still shame on this wretched league. That it would ever allow any team to play 3 games in a 10 day span. And they say they care about injuries?
It's not really that big a deal; every team is going to have a short week going into the Thursday game so three games in 11 days (not 10) or three games in 12 days is pretty insignificant. We all agree that Thursday football just plain sucks but that's not going away any time soon when Roger Goodell can make forty million plus every year for keeping it going. Not necessarily the best setup for a rookie but I don't think many knowledgeable fans expect Darnold to be the starter in week one anyway. That's going to be the time to test the cripple.
