Derek Carr world tour thread (updated with combine visits) (2 Viewers)

[DaveXA]

Now you are "jumping into my conversation" with another poster to use your own words....and that's just fine, mainly because I realize this is a message board and posters can do as they please, and I find it really, really funny (and of course a bit annoying) when one poster chastises others about their position and actually responding to opposing viewpoints, because we are all repeating what we believe/think....all the time....

I understand and even respect your position to an extent, but there is a lot of a combination of fluff and denial around what DA has proven to be, and if I see it I'm going to point it out.....

Well, most of us didn't want Allen to stay on, but the decision has been made, so we hold our nose and hope we're wrong and he has a good season. I've complained about him my fair share. But I've put the criticism away for now because it doesn't do any good. I'm thinking more about how to keep the roster competitive and hopefully land Carr, or at least a better option than Dalton. We'll see.

 

[Saint Spud]

Now you are "jumping into my conversation" with another poster to use your own words....and that's just fine, mainly because I realize this is a message board and posters can do as they please, and I find it really, really funny (and of course a bit annoying) when one poster chastises others about their position and actually responding to opposing viewpoints, because we are all repeating what we believe/think....all the time....

I understand and even respect your position to an extent, but there is a lot of a combination of fluff and denial around what DA has proven to be, and if I see it I'm going to point it out.....

You’re characterizing it as “denial and fluff” when people are trying to show you why there is less than a 100% chance that we are completely doomed to failure as long as DA is the coach.

It isn’t. The “we’re doomed to fail with DA” crowd is no more enlightened or realistic than those of us who are looking for ways to improve the team and win in spite of what DA has shown to this point.

 

[Judge_Smails]

If I may.
Do you remember the Seattle Seahawks that won the division with a 7-9 record and eliminated the defending Super Bowl Champions in the playoffs? Yeah that happened against us. That year and playoff win was a huge moral victory for that team. It showed what they needed to do, in order to belong. Now granted that they ran idle and finished with another 7-9 record the following year, but then they rolled off a handful of 10+ winning seasons. Plus they won the Super Bowl 3 years after that playoff game against us. The point is, you have to accomplish something, even if it’s small, in order to get hungry for something bigger.

I get the sentiment, but the history of Seattle actually connects better with the idea of turning the page from one era to the next, rather than shooting for “continuity” when you are trending away from being good.

Why? Mike Holmgrem retired after a successful run as HC and de facto GM after a losing 2008 season. Even though their roster was in transition, with a defense that needed to be rebuilt, they first hired Jim Mora Jr. as HC and tried to keep most everything else in place because they thought the foundation for more success with the same core was still there.

Buuuut, Mora Jr. put together an ineffective, Dennis Allen type season (5-11), which led the new owner to reset everything and bring in Carroll (in hindsight, this is type of reset is what NO needed/needs).

Carroll was able to take that very flawed team but still talented in spots team, with an older (but relatively inexpensive) aging QB and a defense that was bad, but being rebuilt on the fly, and rally them to that 7-9 record and playoff upset over NO.

If Seattle had stuck with Mora Jr. and the remnants of Holmgren’s staff and F/O, they most likely would have kept trending downward. This is why Paul Allen totally changed the coaching staff, scouting, etc.

Carroll was able to reset the coaching and culture, build the Legion of Doom,
and find his unicorn 3rd rd franchise QB in short order.

Long story short, the saga of Seattle/Pete Carroll shows that trying to maintain continuity when the original architect of it (Holmgren) is gone is a fool’s errand and once they pulled the band-aid off and actually found a new “architect “ everything started falling into place.

 

[sfidc3]

You’re characterizing it as “denial and fluff” when people are trying to show you why there is less than a 100% chance that we are completely doomed to failure as long as DA is the coach.

It isn’t. The “we’re doomed to fail with DA” crowd is no more enlightened or realistic than those of us who are looking for ways to improve the team and win in spite of what DA has shown to this point.

Welp, I agree there is a less than 100% chance....I mean anything is possible....to me it's not about being enlightened or realistic or tanking or rebuilding, you are using these words....but if you are denying that some are not, lets say..."inflating" DA's record/coaching ability you are not paying attention.....

It's about watching the team you love make the same mistakes of the past, I fully admit not being able to look..... past...... that....very well.....

 

[SigFreudianSlip]

Don't know about denial, but the reality is....just because a division was really bad one year doesn't mean it will be again the next year....things change really fast in the NFL, it seems a lot of folks are forgetting that.....

A good point imo.

 

[Saint Spud]

Welp, I agree there is a less than 100% chance....I mean anything is possible....to me it's not about being enlightened or realistic or tanking or rebuilding, you are using these words....but if you are denying that some are not, lets say..."inflating" DA's record/coaching ability you are not paying attention.....

It's about watching the team you love make the same mistakes of the past, I fully admit not being able to look..... past...... that....very well.....

Honestly, I’d have to see an example of what you mean. Because the context in which I’ve seen people discussing Allen haven’t been “inflating” his coaching ability, but rather pointing out there are reasons beyond pure incompetence that might explain elements of what we’ve seen.

Hate to break it to you, but whatever “mistakes” (your word) you fear the team is making? They’ve already been made. Allen and PC are still here. And they’re trying to sign a big $ free agent QB to win now.

And some of us have accepted that’s the decision they’ve made and would rather discuss ways in which it COULD work as opposed to constantly crapping on the staff.

 

[nakadish]

I get the sentiment, but the history of Seattle actually connects better with the idea of turning the page from one era to the next, rather than shooting for “continuity” when you are trending away from being good.

Why? Mike Holmgrem retired after a successful run as HC and de facto GM after a losing 2008 season. Even though their roster was in transition, with a defense that needed to be rebuilt, they first hired Jim Mora Jr. as HC and tried to keep most everything else in place because they thought the foundation for more success with the same core was still there.

Buuuut, Mora Jr. put together an ineffective, Dennis Allen type season (5-11), which led the new owner to reset everything and bring in Carroll (in hindsight, this is type of reset is what NO needed/needs).

Carroll was able to take that very flawed team but still talented in spots team, with an older (but relatively inexpensive) aging QB and a defense that was bad, but being rebuilt on the fly, and rally them to that 7-9 record and playoff upset over NO.

If Seattle had stuck with Mora Jr. and the remnants of Holmgren’s staff and F/O, they most likely would have kept trending downward. This is why Paul Allen totally changed the coaching staff, scouting, etc.

Carroll was able to reset the coaching and culture, build the Legion of Doom,
and find his unicorn 3rd rd franchise QB in short order.

Long story short, the saga of Seattle/Pete Carroll shows that trying to maintain continuity when the original architect of it (Holmgren) is gone is a fool’s errand and once they pulled the band-aid off and actually found a new “architect “ everything started falling into place.

So, because that example failed, it's always doomed to fail? Going by that logic, we should definitely get Carr because the last FA QB worked out pretty well.

It's not rocket science. You take your best guess and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. It's still TDB with DA.

If it was just continuity for continuity's sake then, yes that was a bad decision. But, if you (I mean Loomis) think that DA is up to the challenge, not it's not a bad decision. We'll see how it works out.

 

[Judge_Smails]

So, because that example failed, it's always doomed to fail?

That is not what I said. But don’t let me stop you.

 

[Saint Spud]

That is not what I said. But don’t let me stop you.

The point is that there isn’t a “right” or “wrong” path.

The 90s 49ers and Cowboys each faced similar decisions. The 49ers stuck with continuity with Seifert while the Cowboys went against it and hired Switzer.

Each won Super Bowls, but the the Cowboys fizzled out quickly, whereas the 49ers remained strong for a couple years until Seifert retired.

Was one right and the other wrong? Or is it more likely that each situation is different and should be taken as such?

 

[Judge_Smails]

The point is that there isn’t a “right” or “wrong” path.

The 90s 49ers and Cowboys each faced similar decisions. The 49ers stuck with continuity with Seifert while the Cowboys went against it and hired Switzer.

Each won Super Bowls, but the the Cowboys fizzled out quickly, whereas the 49ers remained strong for a couple years until Seifert retired.

Was one right and the other wrong? Or is it more likely that each situation is different and should be taken as such?

Lol. I agree there is more than one way to skin a cat, buuuttt

Seifert went 14-2 his first year and he won a SB with Montana (and Young as QB2) and a team that had won a SB the year before and was peaking during what was then their second act of greatness. It was also before the new FA rules and salary cap, which made the idea of roster and coaching continuity much more realistic.

That “ancient” scenario bares only superficial relevance to what the Saints are experiencing now.

 

[Saint Spud]

Lol. I agree there is more than one way to skin a cat, buuuttt

Seifert went 14-2 his first year and he won a SB with Montana (and Young as QB2) and a team that had won a SB the year before and was peaking during what was then their second act of greatness. It was also before the new FA rules and salary cap, which made the idea of roster and coaching continuity much more realistic.

That “ancient” scenario bares only superficial relevance to what the Saints are experiencing now.

That’s the problem, though. There isn’t any meaningful sample size with the nfl in its current state to show what’s right or wrong.

You could argue that things have changed so much so quickly that your Seahawks example is also outdated.

So, anyway, back to the topic. I’d like to see us get Carr or another good QB so Allen has every chance to succeed this year. If we win? Awesome. If we don’t? Loomis will see he has no choice.

 

[Judge_Smails]

That’s the problem, though. There isn’t any meaningful sample size with the nfl in its current state to show what’s right or wrong.

You could argue that things have changed so much so quickly that your Seahawks example is also outdated.

So, anyway, back to the topic. I’d like to see us get Carr or another good QB so Allen has every chance to succeed this year. If we win? Awesome. If we don’t? Loomis will see he has no choice.

I understand your opinion here and would love to see everything work out, but if I had to bet I’d say that Carr, even if signed, will not be enough to right the DA ship. And sinking $35-40 mil a year (when it’s all averaged out) could also make the inevitable transition to the next era a longer and more difficult process.

It will be great if the hope gods grant your wishes, but everything I have seen since the DA era started makes it seem unlikely.

 

[DaveXA]

I understand your opinion here and would love to see everything work out, but if I had to bet I’d say that Carr, even if signed, will not be enough to right the DA ship. And sinking $35-40 mil a year (when it’s all averaged out) could also make the inevitable transition to the next era a longer and more difficult process.

It will be great if the hope gods grant your wishes, but everything I have seen since the DA era started makes it seem unlikely.

Well, even if it doesn't work out with Allen, you still have Carr, if he's signed, and hiring a coaching staff who can get the most out of him would be the way to go. They'll have time to work with Carr and build around him. So it's not all bad either way.

 

[SweetT]

I get the sentiment, but the history of Seattle actually connects better with the idea of turning the page from one era to the next, rather than shooting for “continuity” when you are trending away from being good.

Why? Mike Holmgrem retired after a successful run as HC and de facto GM after a losing 2008 season. Even though their roster was in transition, with a defense that needed to be rebuilt, they first hired Jim Mora Jr. as HC and tried to keep most everything else in place because they thought the foundation for more success with the same core was still there.

Buuuut, Mora Jr. put together an ineffective, Dennis Allen type season (5-11), which led the new owner to reset everything and bring in Carroll (in hindsight, this is type of reset is what NO needed/needs).

Carroll was able to take that very flawed team but still talented in spots team, with an older (but relatively inexpensive) aging QB and a defense that was bad, but being rebuilt on the fly, and rally them to that 7-9 record and playoff upset over NO.

If Seattle had stuck with Mora Jr. and the remnants of Holmgren’s staff and F/O, they most likely would have kept trending downward. This is why Paul Allen totally changed the coaching staff, scouting, etc.

Carroll was able to reset the coaching and culture, build the Legion of Doom,
and find his unicorn 3rd rd franchise QB in short order.

Long story short, the saga of Seattle/Pete Carroll shows that trying to maintain continuity when the original architect of it (Holmgren) is gone is a fool’s errand and once they pulled the band-aid off and actually found a new “architect “ everything started falling into place.

But you can also correlate the now absence of SP (de facto GM as well), transition to DA…..the same as Holmgrem/Carroll?
Look, I am no DA fan, but the FO is sticking with him, so the least I can do is give that man 1 more chance IF he gets a viable good QB. I always said that if we had a viable QB last year, then we would’ve won 10 games, 9 minimum. I do not want to see Andy freaking Dalton taking starter snaps again. If he is, then I have already given up on the season before it even started

 

[Saint Spud]

But you can also correlate the now absence of SP (de facto GM as well), transition to DA…..the same as Holmgrem/Carroll?
Look, I am no DA fan, but the FO is sticking with him, so the least I can do is give that man 1 more chance IF he gets a viable good QB. I always said that if we had a viable QB last year, then we would’ve won 10 games, 9 minimum. I do not want to see Andy freaking Dalton taking starter snaps again. If he is, then I have already given up on the season before it even started

Exactly.

Accepting that he’s our coach and hoping to build the best team to give him a shot to succeed is much different than agreeing with the original decision to keep him.