Quote: @StickyBun said:
@ kmillard said:
The NFL desperately needs some kind of developmental league again. Obvious on every Sunday.
The NFL ratings are off the charts, best since 2015 so far this year. They aren't going to spend any money on a new developmental league.
I actually agree with both of you. The NFL needs to figure out how to get better
QB play, but the economics don’t make sense, since it’s probably as popular of
a league as it can be. I really think
there needs to be some sort of middle ground between being on the active roster
and the practice squad, at least for QBs. I think the problem with trying to
develop a QB on the practice squad is that they’re subject to getting poached
at any time, and the problem with trying to develop a QB on the active roster
is that they’re one of the few players who doesn’t contribute at all until the
starter is broken and they need to play every snap, and a lot of teams don’t
want to “waste” a roster spot on guys who aren’t contributing. I think ideally, each team should have 4 or 5
QBs: A starter, a veteran backup, and 2 or 3 guys developing. Somehow you have to create some space for
those developing guys that doesn’t compete with guys that actually contribute
on the gameday roster, but is also protected from being poached on the practice
squad.
Quote: @greediron said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ greediron said:
Just wanted to say, it looks like the Vikes got Purdy last night. Or at least got to him.
Perhaps the shine is starting to rub off?
unless you are a butt fumble, or you knock yourself you head butting what you thing is a padded wall, one game will not define a players career, Purdy will have a lot more chances to rub his shine off, or get it buffed up.
It wasn't one game. They have now lost 2 straight.
ok, they should cut his ass.
Quote: @medaille said:
@ StickyBun said:
@ kmillard said:
The NFL desperately needs some kind of developmental league again. Obvious on every Sunday.
The NFL ratings are off the charts, best since 2015 so far this year. They aren't going to spend any money on a new developmental league.
I actually agree with both of you. The NFL needs to figure out how to get better
QB play, but the economics don’t make sense, since it’s probably as popular of
a league as it can be. I really think
there needs to be some sort of middle ground between being on the active roster
and the practice squad, at least for QBs. I think the problem with trying to
develop a QB on the practice squad is that they’re subject to getting poached
at any time, and the problem with trying to develop a QB on the active roster
is that they’re one of the few players who doesn’t contribute at all until the
starter is broken and they need to play every snap, and a lot of teams don’t
want to “waste” a roster spot on guys who aren’t contributing. I think ideally, each team should have 4 or 5
QBs: A starter, a veteran backup, and 2 or 3 guys developing. Somehow you have to create some space for
those developing guys that doesn’t compete with guys that actually contribute
on the gameday roster, but is also protected from being poached on the practice
squad.
like restricted free agents, teams can poach them from a developmental squad, but the current team would have the right to match the offer and the opposing team has to compensate the current team. However, this shouldnt be a prison for players, they should only be locked in for 1 year contracts if they are on a practice squad, that way their whole careers arent wasted behind some guy that isnt going anywhere, and it should also be limited to x players per position group.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ greediron said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ greediron said:
Just wanted to say, it looks like the Vikes got Purdy last night. Or at least got to him.
Perhaps the shine is starting to rub off?
unless you are a butt fumble, or you knock yourself you head butting what you thing is a padded wall, one game will not define a players career, Purdy will have a lot more chances to rub his shine off, or get it buffed up.
It wasn't one game. They have now lost 2 straight.
ok, they should cut his ass.
Speaking of being dramatic...
Dude, I just asked if the shine is starting to wear off? Perhaps Purdy was available for a reason and being on a stacked team that never trails has left him looking better than he is. He is a starter in the NFL so obviously better than 99.9% of the people out there, but can he take a bit of criticism? Without gaslighting that I said he should be cut.
Quote: @greediron said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ greediron said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ greediron said:
Just wanted to say, it looks like the Vikes got Purdy last night. Or at least got to him.
Perhaps the shine is starting to rub off?
unless you are a butt fumble, or you knock yourself you head butting what you thing is a padded wall, one game will not define a players career, Purdy will have a lot more chances to rub his shine off, or get it buffed up.
It wasn't one game. They have now lost 2 straight.
ok, they should cut his ass.
Speaking of being dramatic...
Dude, I just asked if the shine is starting to wear off? Perhaps Purdy was available for a reason and being on a stacked team that never trails has left him looking better than he is. He is a starter in the NFL so obviously better than 99.9% of the people out there, but can he take a bit of criticism? Without gaslighting that I said he should be cut.
I didnt say you said he should be cut, I am saying you convinced me that he isnt what he was professed to be, by taking my statement so literally. 
|
