You're the Cards GM

OP
OP
G

GimmedaBall

Hall of Famer
Joined
Dec 2, 2013
Posts
1,626
Reaction score
1,110
Kudos to the great posts regarding proposed GM moves. Lots of effort and evaluation.

Have to come back to this thread after FA and the draft to see who MB needs to hire.
 

BillsCarnage

ASFN Addict
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Posts
5,827
Reaction score
1,197
Location
The Flip Side
Cap space is one of our biggest issues coming into this season. I know fitz means a lot to the franchise, but if he’s about winning he could take less money. His cap hit is over $16m placing him 3rd in the league. I’m not saying he isn’t worth it, but he’s not what he was 5 years ago.
Cutting Veldheer, Gresham, Dawson and AP would free up an additional $11mil.

Getting rid of the Williams duo would save 700k. I'm not including Mathieu, since he's under contract.

Oh and #31 is due a decent raise soon.
 
Last edited:

AZfaninMN

ASFN Addict
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Posts
8,082
Reaction score
6,492
Location
Minnesota
Cutting Veldheer, Gresham, Dawson and AP would free up an additional $11mil.

Getting rid of the Williams duo would save 700k. I'm not including Mathieu, since he's under contract.

I’m not for cutting Veldheer because I think he’ll help our oline in his last season and I think he’ll do it cheaper than he’s getting paid now. Gresham cut would leave us with a bunch of dead cap so we might as well use him. He doesn’t really hurt us minus some bonehead penalties. AP is said to already be cut so I didn’t include him. Lastly, we need a kicker and I didn’t look into any replacements, but would be all for a cheaper replacement because they can’t be any worse than he was last year.
 

WisconsinCard

Herfin BIg Time
Joined
Apr 1, 2003
Posts
15,964
Reaction score
7,796
Location
In A Cigar Bar Near You
I’m not for cutting Veldheer because I think he’ll help our oline in his last season and I think he’ll do it cheaper than he’s getting paid now. Gresham cut would leave us with a bunch of dead cap so we might as well use him. He doesn’t really hurt us minus some bonehead penalties. AP is said to already be cut so I didn’t include him. Lastly, we need a kicker and I didn’t look into any replacements, but would be all for a cheaper replacement because they can’t be any worse than he was last year.

You know I'm going to whoop your behind next weekend for even thinking about cutting my boy #20. :clapping::moon:
 

BillsCarnage

ASFN Addict
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Posts
5,827
Reaction score
1,197
Location
The Flip Side
I’m not for cutting Veldheer because I think he’ll help our oline in his last season and I think he’ll do it cheaper than he’s getting paid now. Gresham cut would leave us with a bunch of dead cap so we might as well use him. He doesn’t really hurt us minus some bonehead penalties. AP is said to already be cut so I didn’t include him. Lastly, we need a kicker and I didn’t look into any replacements, but would be all for a cheaper replacement because they can’t be any worse than he was last year.
I'm not necessarily for cutting Veldheer either, but if they need to free up some space, those are players who could be under consideration.

I've seen enough with Gresham and would be fine cutting. Move on to Momah and Seals-Jones and find more TE help in FA or the draft.
 

oaken1

Stone Cold
Supporting Member
Banned from P+R
Joined
Mar 13, 2004
Posts
18,193
Reaction score
16,293
Location
Modesto, California
What if he bombs at the combine; then who are you drafting at #1 in this scenario? He might have the highest ceiling of the group, but that doesn't necessarily make him the clear #1. Most mocks have a combo of Darnold/Rosen/Allen at the #1. They all have their flaws and hopefully the combine will sort things out.

dont care if he bombs at the combine... I have watched the kids play. For me, Darnold is the clear cut first QB off the board.

... now...if he bombs at the combine and somehow manages to slide to 15... be ecstatic, because we just scored big time.
 

Chris_Sanders

Not Always The Best Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
40,179
Reaction score
31,714
Location
Scottsdale, Az

Gandhi

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 17, 2007
Posts
2,024
Reaction score
2,878
Location
Denmark
1. How can you not think giving up three first round picks is not "selling the farm?" Even the top quarterbacks need a team around them to succeed. Rookies very often struggle. Not only are we putting our top pick in a situation where all of the pressure is on him to win, but if he does struggle, as many do, this team could end up in the top ten. That's where you get blue chip players that change the face of your franchise. (Fitz, PP21, could have had Adrian Peterson.) Then we're losing top ten picks, or second round picks that are where we can get players like Budda Baker.

Well, because I don’t believe three picks is that many if you hit on a franchise quarterback. I get that the first round is a very big deal to a lot of people, including me, but I think it might be more about how your first round rookie is this shining face of the franchise. Somewhat of a poster boy, if you will. I believe that you build your potential championship team in the other rounds, which makes them even more important. To me, those are just as exciting, if not more, than the first round, and keeping most of your picks on the second and third day is of the utmost importance to me. Multiple first round picks aren’t really if they are spent correctly.

2. History dictates that trading up for a QB is not successful at all. You're basically making this move and saying "I know better than everyone else," including the teams you're trying to trade with that are desperate for decent QB play.

I don’t know about that. If we are only going back to the last two drafts, the Rams traded up to get Jared Goff, the Eagles traded up to get Carson Wentz, the Bears traded up to get Mitch Trubisky, the Chiefs traded up to get Patrick Mahomes and the Texans traded up to get Deshaun Watson. I think all five teams are happy about their decision. I understand you wrote that it was in a historical context, but I just think the draft is a dynamic thing and a lot of factors concerning the draft and rookies often change, and thus I like to only look a couple of drafts back when analyzing anything related to it. That said, you are obviously right that there have been some huge misses not that long ago, but that goes into my overall premise that you have to gamble big when it comes to the quarterback-position if you want someone really good. No risk it, no biscuit.
 

POISON

Formerly known as Okieguy
Joined
Mar 24, 2003
Posts
1,268
Reaction score
380
Location
Norman, Ok.
Re-sign
Kareem Martin
Tyvon Branch
Kerwynn Williams
EFA's
RFA's

Cut
Tyrann Mathieu
Mike Iupati
Deone Bucannon
Josh Mauro

Sign
Jordan Matthews - WR
Albert Wilson - WR
Andrew Norwell - OG
Navarro Bowman - ILB
Malcolm Butler - CB

Trade 2018 1st, 2019 1st, 2020 1st round pick to Browns for #1
1-Draft Sam Darnold QB
2-James Daniels - C
3-Brian O'Neill - OT
Darnold isn't worth 2 #1 picks much less 3, that would be horrific......
 

POISON

Formerly known as Okieguy
Joined
Mar 24, 2003
Posts
1,268
Reaction score
380
Location
Norman, Ok.
I watch lots of USC football,..its on every week up here where I live.

anyone who thinks Sam Darnold is not the real deal...hasnt watched enough USC football.
The guy is a turnover machine. He needed another year in college at least. I watched him play and he has moments and then screws up....
 

BillsCarnage

ASFN Addict
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Posts
5,827
Reaction score
1,197
Location
The Flip Side

AZfaninMN

ASFN Addict
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Posts
8,082
Reaction score
6,492
Location
Minnesota
You know I'm going to whoop your behind next weekend for even thinking about cutting my boy #20. :clapping::moon:
They’re better FA that’ll take less than he’s going to make this year. If he’s willing to take less I’d be willing to keep him. He’s not very good in coverage and always trailing the play instead of making plays in the backfield. I’m gonna put u to work next weekend so the butt whooping will be worth it :mrgreen:
 

Solar7

Go Suns
Joined
May 18, 2002
Posts
11,172
Reaction score
12,108
Location
Las Vegas, NV
Well, because I don’t believe three picks is that many if you hit on a franchise quarterback. I get that the first round is a very big deal to a lot of people, including me, but I think it might be more about how your first round rookie is this shining face of the franchise. Somewhat of a poster boy, if you will. I believe that you build your potential championship team in the other rounds, which makes them even more important. To me, those are just as exciting, if not more, than the first round, and keeping most of your picks on the second and third day is of the utmost importance to me. Multiple first round picks aren’t really if they are spent correctly.



I don’t know about that. If we are only going back to the last two drafts, the Rams traded up to get Jared Goff, the Eagles traded up to get Carson Wentz, the Bears traded up to get Mitch Trubisky, the Chiefs traded up to get Patrick Mahomes and the Texans traded up to get Deshaun Watson. I think all five teams are happy about their decision. I understand you wrote that it was in a historical context, but I just think the draft is a dynamic thing and a lot of factors concerning the draft and rookies often change, and thus I like to only look a couple of drafts back when analyzing anything related to it. That said, you are obviously right that there have been some huge misses not that long ago, but that goes into my overall premise that you have to gamble big when it comes to the quarterback-position if you want someone really good. No risk it, no biscuit.

The last two years have been an anomaly - and let's be honest, we can't say with 100% confidence that these drafted players are going to be stars. None these guys have played a full healthy two seasons yet. And injury does count as busting. The rest of the past 20 years have no good examples of someone trading up for a successful QB. Flacco is really the only example, and do you really want Flacco?
 

oaken1

Stone Cold
Supporting Member
Banned from P+R
Joined
Mar 13, 2004
Posts
18,193
Reaction score
16,293
Location
Modesto, California
The guy is a turnover machine. He needed another year in college at least. I watched him play and he has moments and then screws up....

I agree...he could have used another year in college. But when the draft experts tell you that your likely to be the top pick...you kinda gotta come out...too many things can happen in a season and one stroke of bad luck could cost the kid millions.
so if football is your business you have to sell while the market is hot.

lots of his success last year was because he had JuJu Smith-Schuster to throw to... but lots of his issues this year were because he was throwing to freshmen who didnt know the offense very well.
 

oaken1

Stone Cold
Supporting Member
Banned from P+R
Joined
Mar 13, 2004
Posts
18,193
Reaction score
16,293
Location
Modesto, California
Agreed that is why I want to extend him for two years
me too... I was thinking something like 3 yrs for $24mil with maybe 15 guaranteed... the increase in guaranteed money should motivate him to take a 2mil a yr pay cut.. the guy still balls with the best of them and is a mauler in the run game
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
91,459
Reaction score
68,706
The last two years have been an anomaly - and let's be honest, we can't say with 100% confidence that these drafted players are going to be stars. None these guys have played a full healthy two seasons yet. And injury does count as busting. The rest of the past 20 years have no good examples of someone trading up for a successful QB. Flacco is really the only example, and do you really want Flacco?

The Falcons traded up to get Vick who went on to take them to the playoffs 3 of 5 years, including the NFC Title game. Getting arrested doesn’t take away from the football move which worked out in the field.

The Giants traded up for Eli Manning. Hard to argue that wasn’t successful.
 

Solar7

Go Suns
Joined
May 18, 2002
Posts
11,172
Reaction score
12,108
Location
Las Vegas, NV
The Falcons traded up to get Vick who went on to take them to the playoffs 3 of 5 years, including the NFC Title game. Getting arrested doesn’t take away from the football move which worked out in the field.

The Giants traded up for Eli Manning. Hard to argue that wasn’t successful.

Except, it totally does matter. By having terrible character off the field, he left his team hamstrung and forced to pick a QB only six years after they traded up for him, plus deal with extreme public fallout organization wide. And he only took the Falcons to the playoffs twice out of six years. Two wins. One year he almost missed an entire season. And they only moved there from #5, not #15. You want to trade up for that? Two playoff wins, and then back at square one? That's not a "Franchise Quarterback" to me.

Also, technically, the Chargers drafted Eli Manning and traded him after. And we all know that's a completely different situation than what is being proposed for our team - Eli flat out said he would not play for the Chargers. Otherwise, he would have been wearing a Chargers jersey, as that's who they wanted. Even then, it was only a "jump" from 4-1.
 

Gandhi

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 17, 2007
Posts
2,024
Reaction score
2,878
Location
Denmark
The last two years have been an anomaly - and let's be honest, we can't say with 100% confidence that these drafted players are going to be stars. None these guys have played a full healthy two seasons yet. And injury does count as busting.

An anomaly or the new norm? Like I wrote, I see the draft as a dynamic thing that constantly change and evolve through the years, and because of that the approach, requirements and demands change as well.

If, for example, former Panthers offensive coordinator Rob Chudzinski hadn’t brought the zone read to the NFL from the college ranks as part of an effort to make their rookie, Cam Newton, succeed right away, then Newton – and others - probably wouldn’t have been that good so early in their career.

Marcus Mariota became a rookie sensation with the Titans in parts because their former offensive coordinator (and, by the way, reported new Cardinals tight end coach), Jason Michael, scaled back their pro style-offense and incorporated a lot of pre-determined packaged plays, quick routes from his wide receivers and simple reads – basically much of the stuff Mariota did as a spread offense-quarterback at Oregon. That was almost unthinkable with old school-coaches not that long ago.

In 2006 less than 20% of all plays were with the quarterback in a shotgun position. In 2011 that number was 40% of all plays, and in 2017 it had risen to 60%. The reason being that most quarterbacks primarily plays in a shotgun formation in college, so while it is important that they down the road learn more traditional methods like mastering a complex playbook, read the entire field and call lengthy plays in a huddle, that is not the most likely way to make them successful in the NFL as rookies.

The list goes on and on. Last year a major key to the relative success of Jared Goff was how the Rams lined up very quickly on offense so that head coach Sean McVay could get to read how the defense lined up. He would then call plays, formations and expected blitzes into Goff before the communication turned off with 15 seconds remaining of the play clock. That allowed Goff to give the information to his teammates, even though he probably didn’t completely understand what he told them. I am almost certain we will see more of that kind of coaching in the future, until there comes some sort of counter answer from the defense.

You are obviously right that we can’t tell if rookies or young quarterbacks will become successes throughout their career. We can, however, tell that coaches are adapting their coaching philosophies in order to ease in rookie quarterbacks to fit the systems.

Another point I want to make is how I am a firm believe that the situation matter. I don’t believe you can simply assume that a quarterback would be equally good with another team. An example could be how a lot of people are saying that the Browns should have drafted Carson Wentz or Deshaun Watson. Since I believe it matters how a quarterback relates with his teammates and his coaches, how good a quarterback’s personal live is and all of that stuff, I think it is way to easy to make the assumption that the two of them would definitely be as good in Cleveland or any other place. The same goes for any other quarterback, and thus maybe the outcome had been different and better if some other teams had traded up to draft some of the quarterbacks you are referring too. No one knows, and no one will ever find out, but it is certainly possible.

Flacco is really the only example, and do you really want Flacco?

That depends. Are we talking about the Joe Flacco who led his team to the playoffs five times, including two divisional round games, two AFC championship games and one Super Bowl triumph, in his first six seasons, or the struggling quarterback we have witnessed for the past two and a half seasons, ten years after being drafted? I understand that he has probably never been a great quarterback according to the eyeball test, but I can assure you that I would take him over Kevin Kolb, Ryan Lindley, Max Hall and whoever the Cardinals screwed up with for several years.
 

Solar7

Go Suns
Joined
May 18, 2002
Posts
11,172
Reaction score
12,108
Location
Las Vegas, NV
An anomaly or the new norm? Like I wrote, I see the draft as a dynamic thing that constantly change and evolve through the years, and because of that the approach, requirements and demands change as well.

If, for example, former Panthers offensive coordinator Rob Chudzinski hadn’t brought the zone read to the NFL from the college ranks as part of an effort to make their rookie, Cam Newton, succeed right away, then Newton – and others - probably wouldn’t have been that good so early in their career.

Marcus Mariota became a rookie sensation with the Titans in parts because their former offensive coordinator (and, by the way, reported new Cardinals tight end coach), Jason Michael, scaled back their pro style-offense and incorporated a lot of pre-determined packaged plays, quick routes from his wide receivers and simple reads – basically much of the stuff Mariota did as a spread offense-quarterback at Oregon. That was almost unthinkable with old school-coaches not that long ago.

In 2006 less than 20% of all plays were with the quarterback in a shotgun position. In 2011 that number was 40% of all plays, and in 2017 it had risen to 60%. The reason being that most quarterbacks primarily plays in a shotgun formation in college, so while it is important that they down the road learn more traditional methods like mastering a complex playbook, read the entire field and call lengthy plays in a huddle, that is not the most likely way to make them successful in the NFL as rookies.

The list goes on and on. Last year a major key to the relative success of Jared Goff was how the Rams lined up very quickly on offense so that head coach Sean McVay could get to read how the defense lined up. He would then call plays, formations and expected blitzes into Goff before the communication turned off with 15 seconds remaining of the play clock. That allowed Goff to give the information to his teammates, even though he probably didn’t completely understand what he told them. I am almost certain we will see more of that kind of coaching in the future, until there comes some sort of counter answer from the defense.

You are obviously right that we can’t tell if rookies or young quarterbacks will become successes throughout their career. We can, however, tell that coaches are adapting their coaching philosophies in order to ease in rookie quarterbacks to fit the systems.

Another point I want to make is how I am a firm believe that the situation matter. I don’t believe you can simply assume that a quarterback would be equally good with another team. An example could be how a lot of people are saying that the Browns should have drafted Carson Wentz or Deshaun Watson. Since I believe it matters how a quarterback relates with his teammates and his coaches, how good a quarterback’s personal live is and all of that stuff, I think it is way to easy to make the assumption that the two of them would definitely be as good in Cleveland or any other place. The same goes for any other quarterback, and thus maybe the outcome had been different and better if some other teams had traded up to draft some of the quarterbacks you are referring too. No one knows, and no one will ever find out, but it is certainly possible.



That depends. Are we talking about the Joe Flacco who led his team to the playoffs five times, including two divisional round games, two AFC championship games and one Super Bowl triumph, in his first six seasons, or the struggling quarterback we have witnessed for the past two and a half seasons, ten years after being drafted? I understand that he has probably never been a great quarterback according to the eyeball test, but I can assure you that I would take him over Kevin Kolb, Ryan Lindley, Max Hall and whoever the Cardinals screwed up with for several years.

I'm on an iPad so I can't break this out into chunks, my apologies.

But... "the new norm?" Why are we writing these QBs down as successful? Goff was considered a bust in year one, and people were very concerned about him. He plays one good season with Todd Gurley having an absolute beast of a year, and we're anointing him, even though according to you he can't even call plays at the line of scrimmage unless his coach does it for him from the sideline? Mitch Trubisky, who threw for as many INTs as TDs, for a quarterback rating of 77? DeShaun Watson, who of course played very well, but only went 3-3 in his record, before tearing a second ACL? Watson is a young mobile QB that has had two crucial knee injuries before the age of 23. You think that's gonna last into a second contract? It sure didn't work out for RG3. Then there's Mahomes, who played in one game, and threw for exactly zero touchdowns.

I'll give you Wentz, but even he tore his ACL and then his team went ahead to win a Super Bowl with a guy who has had stints with 3 (practically 4) teams. So that's still up in the air.

I don't see how any of that makes this "the new norm."

Regardless, with Flacco, he was still chosen outside of the top 15. I'd have no problem with drafting Flacco if he were available at #15. But I wouldn't trade into the top 5 for him. He was also the beneficiary of a pretty studly defense over the years.
 

vinnymac

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Mar 24, 2005
Posts
3,022
Reaction score
0
As Gm, I would like to create some excitement in the offseason.

I would try my best to sign Drew Brees. To me he would be the perfect bridge QB with a chance to compete in a super bowl and get one more year out of Fritzgerald.

I would sign Teddy Bridgewater. I would also kick the tires on Johnny Manziel. Not the biggest fan of his. But he did have some good moments when he started for the Cleveland Browns.

AJ Mccarren is still considered a RFA. I like to see what he could do.

I would try to sign Jarvis Landry and Darrel Revis. I believe we could get Revis at A bargain

I would like Adrian Peterson to play out his contract with the Cardinals.



I like Lamar Jackson potential so I would be content to stay at 15.

Keep ondrafting offensive lineman until one pans out.
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
553,889
Posts
5,412,462
Members
6,319
Latest member
route66
Top