Re: Swing and a Miss
 

[quote=Scalper;1279494]C- grade signing. He is a 38 year old QB with a career losing record and a very low career QB rating. I understand the logic, better than trading draft picks or signing a similar above average but not great QB to a long term deal, and conventional but incorrect thinking is you need a dependable guy to bridge until you find a long-term answer. So we now have two stopgaps on roster, Fitz and Allen, who are NOT long term answers. If we draft a QB and cut Allen, this move looks a lot better, but we should be looking for long-term solutions. If we go into season with Heinecke, Fitz, and Allen at QB that is atrocious as only one QB is potential long term answer. What keeps this grade from being a D or F is that there are very limited options in free agency. Fitz is not leading us to a SB, [B]we should be looking for QBs with potential to be long-term franchise SB winners.[/B] The proper move is to draft 1 QB and go with Heinecke, Allen, rookie, or ideally 2 rookies and Heinecke, and use $10M to resign Allen and others long term. Is our goal to win the participation trophy of an early playoff exit, or find a franchise QB that can win the big one? This is the problem with coach as GM, short term thinking. [B]This is NOT the move Smith would have made if still GM. He would have drafted QBs. [/B]

[B]So we have now spent $28M on Scherff and Fitz, while Allen isn't extended.[/B] F-ing brilliant. A competent FO would have locked up Allen first.

[B]The single most important thing a GM or FO can do is get QB right. Our FO has not as of yet.[/B] We also read that Fitz is now the de facto starter. Sure there will be competition, but we need to be favoring younger players who could be long-term answer. I would much rather go 7-9 with Heinecke and know he isn't the answer, or go 7-9 with Heinecke and know he is the answer, than waste a year with a 38 year old QB who has never won a SB and is never going to win one for us. What may happen is that we start Fitz and never get a good enough look at Heinecke to see if he is the future, meaning next year we're right back in the exact same spot. This is a case study in why you don't give coach GM powers. All we are doing is sacrificing long-term for the short. [B]It would actually be smarter to start Heinecke all year[/B] and if he isn't the answer you draft top 5 and get a franchise QB.[/quote]

There are no QBs available at the moment with the potential to be long-term franchise SB winners. RR and team have the obligation to upgrade the position, and they can only do that with what is available. There is no guarantee they are able to get a QB they like in the draft.

There will be competition at QB, which is a good thing. After said competition, you start the QB that gives you the best chance to win, not the one you want to evaluate for 17 games to see if he can eventually / hopefully take you to the promise land.

The front office has been together for about 1.5 months. How about we give them some time to find a franchise QB.

Allen has another year on his contract, plenty of time to get a deal done yet.

Re: Fitzmagic Thread
 

Funny meme alert 👇🏻 IDK why but I can’t ever get an image from the internet to show up in this forum correctly.

[url]https://ibb.co/svQNgQT[/url]

Re: Swing and a Miss
 

[quote=Scalper;1279494]C- grade signing. He is a 38 year old QB with a career losing record and a very low career QB rating. I understand the logic, better than trading draft picks or signing a similar above average but not great QB to a long term deal, and conventional but incorrect thinking is you need a dependable guy to bridge until you find a long-term answer. So we now have two stopgaps on roster, Fitz and Allen, who are NOT long term answers. If we draft a QB and cut Allen, this move looks a lot better, but we should be looking for long-term solutions. If we go into season with Heinecke, Fitz, and Allen at QB that is atrocious as only one QB is potential long term answer. What keeps this grade from being a D or F is that there are very limited options in free agency. Fitz is not leading us to a SB, we should be looking for QBs with potential to be long-term franchise SB winners. The proper move is to draft 1 QB and go with Heinecke, Allen, rookie, or ideally 2 rookies and Heinecke, and use $10M to resign Allen and others long term. Is our goal to win the participation trophy of an early playoff exit, or find a franchise QB that can win the big one? This is the problem with coach as GM, short term thinking. This is NOT the move Smith would have made if still GM. He would have drafted QBs.

So we have now spent $28M on Scherff and Fitz, while Allen isn't extended. F-ing brilliant. A competent FO would have locked up Allen first.

The single most important thing a GM or FO can do is get QB right. Our FO has not as of yet. We also read that Fitz is now the de facto starter. Sure there will be competition, but we need to be favoring younger players who could be long-term answer. I would much rather go 7-9 with Heinecke and know he isn't the answer, or go 7-9 with Heinecke and know he is the answer, than waste a year with a 38 year old QB who has never won a SB and is never going to win one for us. What may happen is that we start Fitz and never get a good enough look at Heinecke to see if he is the future, meaning next year we're right back in the exact same spot. This is a case study in why you don't give coach GM powers. All we are doing is sacrificing long-term for the short. It would actually be smarter to start Heinecke all year and if he isn't the answer you draft top 5 and get a franchise QB.[/quote]

If Heinicke is the guy then he will beat out Fitz. If he can't beat out Fitz then he clearly isn't the guy.

Also we still may be in play for drafting someone. I think this move just adds another durable guy w/ experience who can be a backup or starter. Obviously he isn't the long term solution.

The off season isn't over yet as we will see what happens in the draft.

Really not sure why anyone dislikes this move.

Fitzmagic Thread
 

[QUOTE=Scalper;1279491]Favre won one SB on stacked teams. He lost countless playoff games with horrible picks. The problem is Fitz isn't as talented as Favre.[/QUOTE]



There is Brady and then the rest when it comes to playoff wins. Favre is 6th all time with 13 wins. You make it sound like he was a failure in the postseason.
Also my man almost every super bowl winning quarterback ever had a stacked team. Bradshaw, Stauback, Aikman, all three of our super bowl winners, Kurt Warner, Russ, Brady, I mean the list goes on and on. It is pretty rare that a quarterback wins a superbowl without a stacked team. Extremely rare. Eli Manning, Payton Manning, i could just copy and paste the entire list of super bowl winners actually.

Fitzmagic Thread
 

Fitz is clearly the best option out there at the moment and the best stop gap quarterback we could get. Over the last two years he has actually been pretty damn good. It is a one year deal and we wasted no picks and did not break the bank. It might not be a splashy move but it was smart and puts us in contention in the nfc east for another year while we try and get a long term solution at quarterback. All the arm chair GM’s need to stop complaining about his age as if we signed him to a long term deal and realize he was the best option when you consider we are in year two of a three year rebuild.
He is better than kyle fuckin allen and there is no long term answer free agent out there. We tried for Stafford. We didn’t get him. So we get Fitz on a one year deal. He is better than anyone on our roster by a mile. If we can go 7-9 with a bust, a statue, and Kyle fuckin Allen than Fitz can win at least nine. Couple that with the draft , players coming back from injury, and year two in the same offensive and defensive schemes and things should be better. We can worry about 2022 down the road.

Re: Fitzmagic Thread
 

I don't get the hate for this move either. There is no rookie I would trust to come in to be immediate starter and Allen and Henicke haven't shown they can stay healthy for a season.

I also don't understand the hate of trying to make the playoffs even it is a one and done. I guess we have been spoiled with all our playoff success the last two decades to appreciate bonus football.

Re: Fitzmagic Thread
 

[IMG]https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210317/f2216d199de265120cac567626513d07.jpg[/IMG]

Re: Fitzmagic Thread
 

[IMG]https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210317/6d8074e1944f51b3675ade84a3be0b9a.jpg[/IMG]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Fitzmagic Thread
 

[quote=MTK;1279515][IMG]https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210317/6d8074e1944f51b3675ade84a3be0b9a.jpg[/IMG]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]

Love it! Very high tech. 😄😄😄

Re: Fitzmagic Thread
 

[quote=MTK;1279515][IMG]https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210317/6d8074e1944f51b3675ade84a3be0b9a.jpg[/IMG]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]

:laughing2

Re: Fitzmagic Thread
 

Lol love the internet


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Swing and a Miss
 

[quote=skinsfan69;1279499]If Heinicke is the guy then he will beat out Fitz. If he can't beat out Fitz then he clearly isn't the guy.

Also we still may be in play for drafting someone. I think this move just adds another durable guy w/ experience who can be a backup or starter. Obviously he isn't the long term solution.

The off season isn't over yet as we will see what happens in the draft.

Really not sure why anyone dislikes this move.[/quote]

Concur on competition. Hope so on drafting. It is a decent amount of money that could be spent better elsewhere that does nothing to address the long term need at the position. Did you see the Packers signing stopgaps after Favre retired? No, they drafted until they found their guy. As observed in original post, we should be adding players with long-term potential. When you look at long term potential at the position, we may have the worst QB situation in the NFL. The proper approach would have been to not sign Fitz and draft 1-2 QBs and let them compete.

Re: Fitzmagic Thread
 

I must admit my first reaction was to vote "meh", didn't hate it but wasn't that impressed either, but now am coming around to it a bit. I didn't like the interceptions he makes but in hindsite that is because he is pushing the ball further down the field.... Alex Smith on the other hand hardly ever threw interceptions because he wouldn't push the ball downfield. With AS in there I had little confidence that WFT could mount a scoring drive when it was really required. Whether you don't like his age or reputation I don't think you can argue that Fitzgerald isn't better than the QBs we have lined up for the last two years, I think WFT would have had a winning record last year if he was playing

Re: Fitzmagic Thread
 

[QUOTE=SkinzWin;1279498]Funny meme alert 👇🏻 IDK why but I can’t ever get an image from the internet to show up in this forum correctly.

[url]https://ibb.co/svQNgQT[/url][/QUOTE]

Has Fitz ever played on Christmas Eve? Kudos to him for doing that AND getting around all those houses later the same night.

Re: Fitzmagic Thread
 

[QUOTE=Scalper;1279520]Concur on competition. Hope so on drafting. It is a decent amount of money that could be spent better elsewhere that does nothing to address the long term need at the position. Did you see the Packers signing stopgaps after Favre retired? No, they drafted until they found their guy. As observed in original post, we should be adding players with long-term potential. When you look at long term potential at the position, we may have the worst QB situation in the NFL. The proper approach would have been to not sign Fitz and draft 1-2 QBs and let them compete.[/QUOTE]

Err, the Packers already had Rodgers on the roster before Favre retired?

Not thinking about the Jests are you? I mean, it's not like their QB search has gone any better than ours since then...