NFL - NEWS & NOTES

Unfortunately, Jimmy can’t stay healthy. I doubt he ever gets to his ceiling at this point.

The upside is his contract. If the Vikings want to get out from under Kirk and have a bridge QB for a couple seasons this deal makes some sense. The biggest difference being they can offset money on this deal because of the trade totals for each player and could cut Jimmy post June 1 if they desired.

They can only move on from Cousins via trade this off-season. It’s even more beneficial if they wait till June.

 

It seems like you are better off drafting a QB. Unless you have a strong team to win without any draft picks.

 

Ive heard Zack Wilsons name pop up a couple times.

 

For who? I’ve heard enough about him lately that if you weren’t picking in the top five you can pretty much give up.

 

This year’s draft is going to be more of a crapshoot than normal when it comes to the draft. There are players who barely played any games and the ones that did don’t have anywhere near the film that they would normally have.

 

Yep. I vote we coin this year the NBA style NFL draft

 

Actually what will happen is the teams that are really good at drafting will still be good at it (because they are usually going off moremthanjust 1 year). Teams that were average at drafting will slip to poor and and teams that suck at drafting well look for them to take a kicker/punter in round 1.

 

Vikings could trade up from #14 to snag a QB... Maybe with Atlanta. Wilsons name has been mentioned along with Justin Fields. Some are thinking as many as 4 or 5 QB's go in the top 20.

 

Falcons wouldn't do it. They'd need a cheaper QB and just draft one. Miami might be interested in trading back for a haul but they might want that impact player since they already have 2 1sts.

 

The Vikings need a franchise QB Jimmy G ain't it! so far it's just a dumb azz rumor maybe they find one in the draft

 

Just read this...

In the weeks since the Colts season ended, Eason has taken some time away from the field to spend with friends and family. But the downtime is soon coming to an end. The Washington state native plans to head back west to Huntington Beach, Calif., to continue refining his game at the famed 3DQB training facility with the throwing experts Tom House and Adam Dedeaux, among others. Colts fans might remember that ex-Colts quarterback Andrew Luck worked extensively with House while recovering from a shoulder injury. Other famous 3DQB clients include Tom Brady, Matthew Stafford and Jared Goff.

The same source (ColtsWire) eluded to the case may not be to even name Eason as the backup. I dont know what Chris Ballard is waiting for. He (Ballard) kicked the tires on Stafford and lost that and why draft a QB when you already have a drafted QB waiting in the wings?

I think Ballard better really give Eason a shot or at least evaluate him extensively to see what he's got... who knows, Eason could be another stud just sitting there getting dusty.

Anyway, just thought it was interesting to see Eason getting in some work with a pretty good and reputable program.

 

Did Eason play at all last season? Maybe a few kneeldowns that dont even count? Its guys like this who prob suffered most when preseason was completely wiped out last year. So what do the Colts actually have to go oh here? Seems like very little. I mean the guy would have to be lighting it up in practise on a regular basis and even then, it seems like a heck of a risk for the Colts to take to make Eason the plan.

The Colts have a good team. To me they look far too close to being a contender to not go with someone safer and more established, at least at this point *insert vet FA name here*

He could be, but mathematically its more likely he will not become the guy. And how are they gonna evaluate him extensively? There isnt the time to find out really, a move of some kind needs to happen in March/April. The Colts cant afford to make Eason plan A imo. By all means give him plenty of reps in TC and preseason etc, but really thats more done to make a developmental case for 2022(unless he really was incredible during the week in 2020 or lights it up in PS this year).

The Colts have no choice but to add someone else who can legit start. The draft, as far as this season is concerned, doesnt look much help unless they are prepared to take a big swing at a trade up. The Cols actually look in a very similar situation to the Bears, only they have a good team heh.

May not be flashy or exciting, but another vet of some kind may have to be the play.

 

It would really suck for the Colts if Eason was another, Herbert and they didnt even know it. But, on the other hand, the Colts arnt in a rebuild and a vet stepping in would be ideal to keep them in the mix as a contender.

 

If you are a good team already without a QB you definitely don’t want a vet that hasn’t done anything in the post season. Take the Colts for example, Rivers has great stats but hasn’t done anything to write home about in the post season. As soon as he signed with the Colts I knew that the best they would do would be a quick exit from the playoffs. Not many teams find a true championship QB in free agency. Old aging QBs are about it, but it has to be one who has been there before. Brady, Manning not a loser like Rivers.

 

Not sure I follow you. Are You saying there isnt a decent QB on an average team that can come in and take the Colts over the top? Seems to me there must be a few that would fit.

For example - Watson would be intriguing on the Colts, lol.

 

Is he a Free Agent? Teams get good QBs via trade but I was talking about Free Agency. Teams just don't let QBs good enough to take you to a SB walk unless they are around 40 years old.

 

Clark Hunt thinks Competition Committee will look at end zone fumble rule



The worst rule in football reared its ugly head in the divisional round of the playoffs, robbing the Browns of possession near the goal line and giving the ball to the Chiefs on their own 20. Will the rule, hiding in plain sight for decades, now change?

“I do think the Competition Committee will look at that rule this year,” Chiefs owner Clark Hunt told Chris “Mad Dog” Russo of SiriusXM Mad Dog Radio. “A lot of times it takes a catalyst play in an important game for the Competition Committee to dig in and think about changing a rule that’s been around for a long time. And certainly that play hurt the Browns, helped the Chiefs, had an impact on the course of the game so I do think there’s a good chance it’ll be looked at. I don’t know where the Committee will come down but I can see arguments on both sides.”

I don’t see an argument on both sides. Some do. Those who do will be disinclined to get rid of the rule.

Also disinclined to get rid of the rule likely will be, surprisingly, the Browns. When it comes to screwy rules like this, there’s a weird mindset among most teams that, after getting burned by it, it makes sense to keep it in place because the next time that team will benefit from it. (Maybe that’s why the Chiefs would be willing to consider dumping it now.)

Hunt is right that a “catalyst play in an important game” compels change. However, the latest example likely wasn’t enough of a catalyst in a game that wasn’t sufficiently important. Critical mass won’t be achieved until this rule gets applied in a Super Bowl, when millions of casual fans start asking questions about why the team that nearly scored a touchdown lost possession to the other team, when the other team didn’t actually recover a fumble.

The solution remains simple and clear: If a player fumbles the ball into and out of the end zone before anyone recovers it, the offense gets the ball at the spot of the fumble. That’s exactly where the offense would have gotten the ball if it has bounced out of bounds one inch short of the goal line.

NBC/PFT

 

I dont know what their rambling about in that PFT article, but the rule is silly and should never have been introduced in the first place. That rule is as costly and important in game one of a 16 game season as it is in a Playoff game, after all there are just 16 games in a season, each is crucial and a game can hang in the balance on this one simply stupid rule.

It needs changed ASAP, not 'after' there is more controversy... and ive seen enough controversy over this rule, over the years to know its not good for the game. Why the powers that be cant see this now is beyond me.

Just my 2 cents...

 

EXCELLENT Post Will.........your 2 cents should be 2 Million $

That was BS and cost the Cleveland Browns.

 

I like the rule as an offset to the rule where a player can fumble after they've broken the plane. One keeps the other in check. Worse in my mind is when someone like Brees sticks the ball over the goal line, loses it but it's still a TD.