Underhill thinks Carr will be Saints starter [mod edit: Moore-Carr meeting went well; Saints plan is to keep Carr in 2025 & figure out contract] (32 Viewers)

[DSnfla]

I don't think this year has true franchise QB. Ward IMO has the best chance to turn into one and Sanders could end up developing into a top ten to top 15 guy just outside of the franchise level. (Much like Carr) Outside of those two, there are boom or bust types that seem more likely to bust like Millroe and Dart. IMO, you should always be taking lottery tickets on QBs in the draft because you never know when you get lucky and hit on one.

Also, you never know when a guy is going to take a big leap in one year in college and turn into an elite prospect so there could be one in the draft next year even though I think Manning does not enter the draft until he graduates. Guys like Burrow, Daniels, and Nix sometimes develop in their last year to become elite prospect in the draft out of nowhere. So, you never know which year that happens. It didn't appear to happen this year but it could happen next year with Nuss, Jr., Drew Allar, or any number of other guys we aren't even thinking about right now.

Anyway, the Saints should not let keeping Carr this year stop them from drafting a QB in the draft this year if they see one they like and they are in position to draft him with good value.

With Burrow , Daniels and and Nix somewhat, you could see lot's of flashes the yr before their breakout yr. Go watch the last drive that Daniels had against FSU in 22, you could see what was to come. Everyone knew about the potential of Williams , Maye and Penix before last yr.

I don't see anyone that will be in next yrs draft that will make the Burrow, Daniels , Nix kind of jump. So we may be in the same type of QB situation that we are this yr. A bigger crap-shoot than this yr

 

[DSnfla]

It appears that Loomis is still calling all the shots on personnel. Another wasted season coming.

I wish I had more than 1 clown emoji to use on this post

 

[Ghost]

Do you know how many HOF QBs there are that have losing records ???

Yes we do, but it looks like you don't. Almost all QBs in the HOF outside of 2-3 have winning records.

Wasn't true when you stated it incorrectly the first time:

Underhill thinks Carr will be Saints starter [mod edit: Moore-Carr meeting went well; Saints plan is to keep Carr in 2025 & figure out contract]

The problem is, who do we think is going to play QB if we don't have Carr.

saintsreport.com

W/L RECORD IS NOT AN ACCURATE JUDGE OF HOW GOOD A QB IS

Sure it is. In fact using your statement above (which you've tried twice) W/L is very much a accurate judge as quite a number of them in the HOF have a 2 to 1 ratio when it comes to W/L.

 

[DSnfla]

What about this makes you think it was Loomis' decision and not either solely Moore's decision or a joint decision between Moore and Loomis?

Loomis hate nothing more or less

 

[Mr.Blonde]

SMH there were 2 reasons we did not make the playoffs this past yr. A bad HC and INJURIES. I believe we have fixed the 1st one. The other is not totally under anyone's control. If you think there was any other reason then you are just delusional.
I'm not saying that DC is an elite , HOF QB but you people that think wins and loses are solely the responsibility of the QB are just clueless.
Do you know how many HOF QBs there are that have losing records ???
W/L RECORD IS NOT AN ACCURATE JUDGE OF HOW GOOD A QB IS

Yep. Excuses and excuses. Not Derek Carr's fault. Everyone injured. Derek Carr Amazing. Wins losses don't matter. Blah blah. Quarterbacks win some lose some. Quarterbacks either end up on amazing teams and win or losing teams and lose. Thanks for your insight.

 

[Ghost]

Yep. Excuses and excuses. Not Derek Carr's fault. Everyone injured. Derek Carr Amazing. Wins losses don't matter. Blah blah. Quarterbacks win some lose some. Quarterbacks either end up on amazing teams and win or losing teams and lose. Thanks for your insight.

Just for fun I went through and looked at every QB in the HOF and double checked their W/L records.

Lets just say the facts speak for themselves and they are not what is being stated.

 

[DSnfla]

As I have said many times since yesterday, Carr saying he won't take a pay cut doesn't mean that he won't take a pay cut. I'm not saying he will but if his agent looks around the league and sees that if he gets cut there won't be money anywhere close to what he would make with the Satins even with a pay cut, he might reconsider.

Is it likely? Probably not, but I do think it's still on the tabel.

And even with the restructure there are ways for them to get cap compliant without restructuring all of Carr's current salary so it's possible it won't be as bad as we fear even if all they do is the normal conversion of salary to bonus.

Nick wrote a very good article today saying kind of the same things, even though it feels like he's debating himself. He went into detail about how it could benefit DC to lower his salary. I agree with most of what he wrote, not all but most. It's worth the membership price just to read it

 

[StudioSaint]

Just for fun I went through and looked at every QB in the HOF and double checked their W/L records.

Lets just say the facts speak for themselves and they are not what is being stated.

That's because only QB's on winning teams even get considered for the Hall of Fame.

There have been some really good QB's that never played on a winning team. Archie Manning is one.

Kurt Warner couldn't even make a teams roster for his first several years and now he's in the Hall of Fame. Steve Young played poorly for the hapless Buccaneers before going to the 49'ers.

Warren Moon had to spend his first 6 seasons in the CFL before the NFL even gave him a chance.

The point is that NFL teams don't evaluate and grade QB's on their win-loss record. They evaluate them by watching how they play in every snap that they play. They look at how fast they process and make decisions, if they make good decisions, their release speed, their pocket awareness and elusiveness, and their ball placement. A QB can do all those things perfectly on a play and the play still fails. If the QB does their job perfectly, but a receiver pops up a perfectly placed ball and it goes for a pick six that causes the team to lose, that's not on the QB.

Brees had a whole bunch of late game winning drives that still resulted in losses, because the defense gave up a last second go ahead score to the other team. Carr has one of the highest 4th quarter come back wins in the league and had several other go ahead drives that his defense couldn't protect, just like what happened so often to Brees.

Moore and several other people who work for NFL teams grade Carr higher than most of the repeaters and fans do, because they grade their actual play by play performance and not win-loss record.

 

[Ghost]

That's because only QB's on winning teams even get considered for the Hall of Fame.

There have been some really good QB's that never played on a winning team. Archie Manning is one.

Kurt Warner couldn't even make a teams roster for his first several years and now he's in the Hall of Fame. Steve Young played poorly for the hapless Buccaneers before going to the 49'ers.

Warren Moon had to spend his first 6 seasons in the CFL before the NFL even gave him a chance.

The point is that NFL teams don't valuate QB's on their win-loss record. They evaluate them by watching how they play in every snap that they play. Moore and several other people who work for NFL teams grade Carr higher than most of the repeaters and fans do, because they grade their actual play by play performance and not win-loss record.

That's all well and good, but not the point I was refuting.

The claim was a selection of HOF QBs "...that have losing records ???" stated twice as fact, when it was not backed up by facts.

 

[DSnfla]

Given Mickey's willingness to trade future assets to move up in the draft, I'm not sure he values higher picks as much as fans do. Or at least he values being a competitive team over having higher draft picks.

And from his point of view he had lower draft picks for 15 years and they still managed to be a Super Bowl contender for most of those years.

I don't think we are in that spot now, mostly because we don't have the QB we need and we don't know if Moore can be another Payton, but I think that's how he sees it. And, if he can somehow find that QB without losing enough to get a top 5 pick, then it could end up working out.

Beyond that, tanking is no guarantee of future success. Lots of teams like Cleveland and the Jets (even the Lions) were in tank mode for 20 or 30 years. Sometimes it's better to stay mediocre and wait for a great draft like 2017 or get lucky drafting a great QB. It's kind of how it worked for K.C. and Philly. The Texans hit rock bottom and got lucky on a QB. But at this point they are really only back to mediocre. Who knows if they ever get beyond that.

Honestly, we picked the worst year to only win 5 games. If we did that in most years we might be picking in the top 5.

ML's willingness to trade up is all coming from the HC , either SP or DA saying " We need this" go get it. It's ML's double edged sword. If the HC is right, we all win, if he's wrong we all lose. I think it's also one of the main reasons we were able to land CKM.

I firmly believe that a big rebuild guarantees nothing, in fact the % are not in favor of it. Franchise QBs are not available in every draft even if you have the #1 pick . And WHEN you have that high pick is of a paramount importance. If The Bengals would have had the #1 pick in either 2019 or 2021 they would have not gotten their QB

 

[StudioSaint]

That's all well and good, but not the point I was refuting.

The claim was a selection of HOF QBs "...that have losing records ???" stated twice as fact, when it was not backed up by facts.

I get that, but aren't you making that point in support of the bigger point that a QB can be accurately graded by the win-loss record of their team?

That's not how the people who work for NFL teams evaluate QB's. A QB can play better or worse than their team's win-loss record. Brees played a whole lot better than the win-loss records of a lot of his seasons. A lot of QB's do. The opposite is also true at times.

 

[DSnfla]

Triplett and Underhill both took a lot of time and words to basically keep circling around "I understand it, but it's not what I would like to see them do." They seem stuck in the ambivalence of not loving or hating it.

It was interesting to me that Triplett said that Moore seems to genuinely want to roll with Carr.

Yeah and Nick wrote an article today that I told him he was debating with himself. It's a good article he just seems to argue for AND against his points

 

[DSnfla]

I get that, but aren't you making that point in support of the bigger point that a QB can be accurately graded by the win-loss record of their team?

That's not how the people who work for NFL teams evaluate QB's. A QB can play better or worse than their team's win-loss record. Brees played a whole lot better than the win-loss records of a lot of his seasons. A lot of QB's do. The opposite is also true at times.

But don't you know that the QB is responsible for every defensive snap every offensive snap and every ST snap in a football game. He's even responsible for the temperature of the gatorade , ohhhh and the color as well. Sarcasm Off

 

[DSnfla]

It's not a bullet the Saints have to bite. You and some others think it's a bullet they have to bite, but it isn't.


Even Triplett acknowledge that Moore genuinely wants to roll with Carr. Moore doesn't seem to see it as being stuck with Carr by inheritance. He seems genuinely excited to have Carr as his QB according to Moore and some of the beat reporters.

The people who share your opinion of Carr seem to be in denial about the fact that Moore is glad to have Carr as his QB.

Just as Kubiak was happy to have DC. What fools they are

 

[StudioSaint]

Yeah and Nick wrote an article today that I told him he was debating with himself. It's a good article he just seems to argue for AND against his points

I don't know what changed for Triplett and Underhill, but today is the first time that I've seen them seem to get that building a team is not the simple black and white process that sports talkers and fans think it is.

The video that Taker posted is the first time I've seen them genuinely grapple with the fact that no approach has any guarantees and every approach relies on uncontrollable things falling into place in order to succeed. They hit the nail on the head when they said that "the total rebuild and suck" approach needs as much luck to work as the "being as good as you can until you get lucky" approach does.

Luck is just the uncontrollable variables working out in your favor and to your advantage. No NFL team has complete control over winning and losing. All they can do is do the best they can to create a team and situations that maximizes the chances of things working out in their favor.

That's the one thing the game of football has most in common with life. None of us has complete control over what happens in our lives. The best we can do is put ourselves into the most favorable situations we can, but that doesn't guarantee we will get the results we work at getting and it doesn't mean we are failures when we don't get the results we work towards.