How good was Darnold?

[MAD GAINZ]

Everybody keeps saying no, but unless he implodes I’m offering him 2-3 year contract

I still think JJM offers us more upside and playmaking ability and he's on a rookie QB deal.  That's the beauty of Darnold...  we're paying him well below his production.  If we pay him market rate on a 2-3 yr deal we're right back to where we were with Kirk.  Paying a good, but flawed QB big money and the rest of the roster suffers in the short and long-term unless we draft really well.

I'm confident KOC can get similar production out of JJM at a fraction of the cost and set this team up for a run for years.

[MaroonBells]

I still think JJM offers us more upside and playmaking ability and he's on a rookie QB deal.  That's the beauty of Darnold...  we're paying him well below his production.  If we pay him market rate on a 2-3 yr deal we're right back to where we were with Kirk.  Paying a good, but flawed QB big money and the rest of the roster suffers in the short and long-term unless we draft really well.

I'm confident KOC can get similar production out of JJM at a fraction of the cost and set this team up for a run for years.

As I've said elsewhere, I think there's less than a 20% we extend Darnold. Maybe even less than that. But I do think it's a conversation we need to have if he finishes the year strong and has a few more games like the Houston game. I just don't think you screw around with the QB position, no matter how good JJM looked in his one game. Bird in the hand and all that...

But as we've gone over several times, there are so many things that make it seem nearly impossible. The biggest of which is that he'll likely get a 4-year offer from someone and the Vikings would never offer him that with JJM waiting in the wings. We might offer him two years and see if he likes the purple sitch enough to take it. 

I don't really understand the tag and trade thing I keep hearing about, but if we could get him for two years (without a no-trade clause), we could feasibly trade him for some high-end draft capital in year two. But again, he WILL want a no-trade clause. It's problematic but a good problem to have I guess.

[medaille]

I think if we were to resign Darnold, it would only be for a year (unless we go to the super bowl or something). The situation would be like other teams are offering Darnold 3 years $40, and we offer him 1 year $45M to run it back and really maximize his ability to get a better FA deal in 2026.

At some point more money will just trump what we can offer, but you're probably going to get a very similar performance out of JJM and you don't have to sacrifice the rest of the roster to do it.

[Bullazin]

I think if we were to resign Darnold, it would only be for a year (unless we go to the super bowl or something).  The situation would be like other teams are offering Darnold 3 years $40, and we offer him 1 year $45M to run it back and really maximize his ability to get a better FA deal in 2026.

At some point more money will just trump what we can offer, but you're probably going to get a very similar performance out of JJM and you don't have to sacrifice the rest of the roster to do it.

Yeah one year would be ideal but I guess there’s not much chance of that being accepted.  I would offer 1/45 and 2/75 with an no trade and guarantee all of it.  based on the 12 games he’s played that is a pretty big discount. 

This gives JJ 2 more years to learn. He’s still only 3 years into his contract if Sammie takes the deal.  I think one thing we’ve learned through the fudge is that you give your young QB’s every chance to thrive. Their model works, and while we don’t have massive cap to work with it’s a big discount if continuity is attractive to Sammie.

[pattersaur]

The FO wouldn't be doing it's job if they haven't seriously considered and potentially even already offered Darnold a longer contract. Like, since week 6 or so this should have been on the table I think.

I'm over the moon about McCarthy too and think he'll do well, but would having two good QBs next year be the worst thing? If there's a structure where Sam is signed for multiple years but is a tradable asset if he plays well after Year 1 of his extension, that would be fantastic. If Sam would agree to it. Unfortunately, like MB, I think he'll be the top FA QB available by a wide margin, and someone is going to outbid us by a wide margin.

I know it's crazy but I started to get a strange feeling before the Bears game that this team might have what it takes to go all the way. First time I've felt that way at this point in the season in 15 years. If that happens of course Sam can have all of the money. Every cent. I'll chip in.

[MaroonBells]

I think if we were to resign Darnold, it would only be for a year (unless we go to the super bowl or something).  The situation would be like other teams are offering Darnold 3 years $40, and we offer him 1 year $45M to run it back and really maximize his ability to get a better FA deal in 2026.

At some point more money will just trump what we can offer, but you're probably going to get a very similar performance out of JJM and you don't have to sacrifice the rest of the roster to do it.

Probably....probably. That's the kicker.

[MAD GAINZ]

Probably....probably. That's the kicker.

Probably was the kicker with Darnold too before the season started and we've seen how that has turned out.  I actually don't have much anxiety about JJM being the starter next year.  I think the kid is in good hands with KOC and this supporting cast.

[Mattyman]

There was one blitz that was clearly Brandel's fault for not picking it up.  But there were plenty of instances of Darnold not identifying where there were extra rushers coming from and getting the ball out quick.  One example, the Cardinals had two extra guys on the right side of the line and you can count out they have one more guy than you can block.  Addison was in motion to the right, you gotta know that the ball needs to get thrown there quick but instead he looked left to JJ and got demolished from the right.

I don't think he reads defenses well and holds the ball too long at times.  We're gonna have to live with it because it's not changing.  He still has a tendency to bypass his checkdowns which can lead to some big plays downfield or a big scramble if he can avoid the rush but the offense would function better if we can stay in better down and distances more often.

Despite not playing that well in the first half, he played really well when it mattered and KOC did a nice job of getting the offense in a rhythm those last couple possessions.

https://youtu.be/BBAH-j8tiyw?t=168

Brandel didn't cause the sack or miss his assignment, it was Bradbury. 

Here's the video of the sack.