Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Teddy Bridgewater- Future Jag?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Jacksonville Jaguars
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
JagsFanInNY


Joined: 25 Feb 2013
Posts: 1389
Location: Brooklyn, NY
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2013 5:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wiseman101 wrote:
JagsFanInNY wrote:
Vino wrote:

The things we're missing on offense is a running game, QB, and reliable O-Line. With Blackmon, we easily have the best receiving core in the AFC South. We can fix all of those problems in the draft if we get Bridgewater and hit on a RB in the third or fourth round. Our secondary is decent and if the defense weren't put out on the field every 2 minutes the front 7 would probably do a little better. I see no reason why we couldn't go 8-8 next year if we were to get Bridgewater, drafted a C and OG, and hit on a RB.

And I'm pretty confident Bridgewater will have no learning curve. He's just as ready for the NFL as Luck was. His games literally translates directly to the NFL and our system which isn't the case for most QBs out of college.
If this was 2 or 3 years ago, I would swear I was the one who said this. Over those years I have come to realize that success in the NFL is a lot harder to achieve than you might think. First of all, this might sound crazy, but hitting on the 3rd-4th round RB to the point that this running game is 'fixed' is not going to be easy. Throw in the fact that next year, the OL for the most part will be working together for the first time ('rookie LT, likely a new C, maybe a new RT and even perhaps a new OG somewhere) and you have to sense it might take a few weeks to really get this running game remotely started, and it could take even longer. Then you have to note, at least these last two games, it was more of the defense not being able to stop the run and get off the field that made the offense sputter and struggle as much as it did. Unless the run stopping improves next year, this team could be loaded on offense, it won't have the ball all that often.


You'll be surprised what good qb can do for a team.
With this roster, he isn't getting this team to .500 in his rookie year
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tugboat


Joined: 30 Mar 2011
Posts: 3316
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2013 7:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JagsFanInNY wrote:
Vino wrote:

The things we're missing on offense is a running game, QB, and reliable O-Line. With Blackmon, we easily have the best receiving core in the AFC South. We can fix all of those problems in the draft if we get Bridgewater and hit on a RB in the third or fourth round. Our secondary is decent and if the defense weren't put out on the field every 2 minutes the front 7 would probably do a little better. I see no reason why we couldn't go 8-8 next year if we were to get Bridgewater, drafted a C and OG, and hit on a RB.

And I'm pretty confident Bridgewater will have no learning curve. He's just as ready for the NFL as Luck was. His games literally translates directly to the NFL and our system which isn't the case for most QBs out of college.
If this was 2 or 3 years ago, I would swear I was the one who said this. Over those years I have come to realize that success in the NFL is a lot harder to achieve than you might think. First of all, this might sound crazy, but hitting on the 3rd-4th round RB to the point that this running game is 'fixed' is not going to be easy. Throw in the fact that next year, the OL for the most part will be working together for the first time ('rookie LT, likely a new C, maybe a new RT and even perhaps a new OG somewhere) and you have to sense it might take a few weeks to really get this running game remotely started, and it could take even longer. Then you have to note, at least these last two games, it was more of the defense not being able to stop the run and get off the field that made the offense sputter and struggle as much as it did. Unless the run stopping improves next year, this team could be loaded on offense, it won't have the ball all that often.


Yeah, getting the 'running game going' isn't necessarily just going to be a matter of plunking in a new RB and some new O-Linemen and watching it flourish. It could very reasonably take some time for what really needs to be an almost entirely rebuilt offensive line to come together, and a rookie RB to find their way in the NFL and adjust to the speed of the game, pursuit and tackling ability of NFL defenses, etc.

You have to remember, this team right now isn't just losing games...they're getting blown out. Not even competitive in most games. Closing that gulf from 'not competitive' to at least 'putting up a fight' is as much as i'm realistically expecting next year, even with a great new QB in the fold. We've got a lot of ground to make up before i think we're talking about a .500 team.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wiseman101


Joined: 28 Oct 2013
Posts: 739
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2013 10:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tugboat wrote:
JagsFanInNY wrote:
Vino wrote:

The things we're missing on offense is a running game, QB, and reliable O-Line. With Blackmon, we easily have the best receiving core in the AFC South. We can fix all of those problems in the draft if we get Bridgewater and hit on a RB in the third or fourth round. Our secondary is decent and if the defense weren't put out on the field every 2 minutes the front 7 would probably do a little better. I see no reason why we couldn't go 8-8 next year if we were to get Bridgewater, drafted a C and OG, and hit on a RB.

And I'm pretty confident Bridgewater will have no learning curve. He's just as ready for the NFL as Luck was. His games literally translates directly to the NFL and our system which isn't the case for most QBs out of college.
If this was 2 or 3 years ago, I would swear I was the one who said this. Over those years I have come to realize that success in the NFL is a lot harder to achieve than you might think. First of all, this might sound crazy, but hitting on the 3rd-4th round RB to the point that this running game is 'fixed' is not going to be easy. Throw in the fact that next year, the OL for the most part will be working together for the first time ('rookie LT, likely a new C, maybe a new RT and even perhaps a new OG somewhere) and you have to sense it might take a few weeks to really get this running game remotely started, and it could take even longer. Then you have to note, at least these last two games, it was more of the defense not being able to stop the run and get off the field that made the offense sputter and struggle as much as it did. Unless the run stopping improves next year, this team could be loaded on offense, it won't have the ball all that often.


Yeah, getting the 'running game going' isn't necessarily just going to be a matter of plunking in a new RB and some new O-Linemen and watching it flourish. It could very reasonably take some time for what really needs to be an almost entirely rebuilt offensive line to come together, and a rookie RB to find their way in the NFL and adjust to the speed of the game, pursuit and tackling ability of NFL defenses, etc.

You have to remember, this team right now isn't just losing games...they're getting blown out. Not even competitive in most games. Closing that gulf from 'not competitive' to at least 'putting up a fight' is as much as i'm realistically expecting next year, even with a great new QB in the fold. We've got a lot of ground to make up before i think we're talking about a .500 team.


Remember when the Colts were 2-14 with glaring holes everywhere? Remember the inept qb of Painter.

A good qb can go a long ways of closing a lot of those holes.

Defense plays harder, line blocks better, not to mention we have the receivers who can break games open
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
iPwn


Moderator
Joined: 10 Oct 2009
Posts: 45566
Location: Warbortles Nation
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2013 10:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Colts weren't that bad of a team, they were quite clearly tanking with how they handled the QB position. Painter had no business playing for that team, he wasn't even close to the best QB they had. And they did a lot to give that team a quick turn around with how they handled the offseason. This team is much worse off than that Colts team was, has a lot more to work on, and is focused on long term success, not selling out the future to get good quick. This team will not be that level next year unless a lot of things go right for us. Our growth is going to be closer to that of the Lions after drafting Stafford and the Panthers after drafting Cam.


This team isn't just losing games, this team is getting destroyed every single week. Our average game is a 22.6 point loss, which is one of the worst in NFL history through 8 games. A QB will not make this team start rattling off wins. It's going to take a QB, RB, G, C, LEO, 1-tech, 5-tech, and LB all at above average play before we're truly competitive to the point of winning games.
_________________

- Best since day one -
The road to success is always under construction - Gus Bradley
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JagsFanInNY


Joined: 25 Feb 2013
Posts: 1389
Location: Brooklyn, NY
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2013 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wiseman101 wrote:


Remember when the Colts were 2-14 with glaring holes everywhere? Remember the inept qb of Painter.

A good qb can go a long ways of closing a lot of those holes.

Defense plays harder, line blocks better, not to mention we have the receivers who can break games open



You want to interchange 'good QB' and 'Andrew Luck' which is just not do-able. Andrew Luck as a rookie played like a 5 year veteran on the league. That does not happen with every rookie 'good QB'. As for the WR group, they are still young and as talented as they are, none of them could match what Reggie Wayne gave Andrew Luck.

Then let's consider the Colts definitely had holes, but they still went into the 2012 season with a good core of veterans, some of which were really good players such as Freeney and Mathis.

In the end, everything considered, it was not even Andrew Luck alone that led to the turnaround. A lot of things all need to turn out right for a major turnaround in a given season. Given the youth of this team, and the real lack of core veterans, this turnaround will not happen simply because of a good QB, and will require some time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sack Exchange


Joined: 21 Oct 2013
Posts: 25
Location: NJ
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 4:52 pm    Post subject: Bridgewater Reply with quote

I know the Jags need a QB to make the offense go STAT, but I don't care for Bridgewater personally. I know I'll get heat for this but every year football fans get swept up in the moment for some college stud QB but his skills never really translate to the NFL. If I had my choice I'd go with Clowney who is an elite, difference maker; especially since Bradley is a defensive coach. There is a lot that goes into being a successful NFL quarterback and I just don't think Bridgewater has it all.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JagsFanInNY


Joined: 25 Feb 2013
Posts: 1389
Location: Brooklyn, NY
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 5:00 pm    Post subject: Re: Bridgewater Reply with quote

Sack Exchange wrote:
I know the Jags need a QB to make the offense go STAT, but I don't care for Bridgewater personally. I know I'll get heat for this but every year football fans get swept up in the moment for some college stud QB but his skills never really translate to the NFL. If I had my choice I'd go with Clowney who is an elite, difference maker; especially since Bradley is a defensive coach. There is a lot that goes into being a successful NFL quarterback and I just don't think Bridgewater has it all.
You can't just say this and not expect to be asked to explain yourself with specific examples. What about Bridgewater's skill-set makes you think his game won't translate? What is he lacking?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DjBuddaH


Joined: 03 Feb 2006
Posts: 7978
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 5:15 pm    Post subject: Re: Bridgewater Reply with quote

Sack Exchange wrote:
I know the Jags need a QB to make the offense go STAT, but I don't care for Bridgewater personally. I know I'll get heat for this but every year football fans get swept up in the moment for some college stud QB but his skills never really translate to the NFL. If I had my choice I'd go with Clowney who is an elite, difference maker; especially since Bradley is a defensive coach. There is a lot that goes into being a successful NFL quarterback and I just don't think Bridgewater has it all.


Just because Bradley is a defensive minded coach doesn't mean Clowney will be the pick. If that's all you are basing your logic on...then Bradley should've stayed a defensive coordinator.

The NFL teams that regularly go to the playoffs have above-average to elite QBs. You can't pass up the opportunity to get even an above-average QB in this league because (us as Jags fans know) they don't come around all that often.

Not to mention you can miss on DL just as badly (see trading up 20 spots for Derrick Harvey).
_________________

http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=7978242#7978242
Esteban wrote:
If people would listen to my advice I would give it but until then I wont
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sack Exchange


Joined: 21 Oct 2013
Posts: 25
Location: NJ
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 5:46 pm    Post subject: Bridgewater Reply with quote

I agree I should have explained my thinking a bit more. First I must say I hated the Derrick Harvey pick, the guy did a big pile of nothing his whole college career and made his hype off one monster game at a Bowl. For all we know he was up against a OT with a severe hang over or something...As for Bridgewater I think the kid is really talented with his arm strength and mobility and toughness but I'm scared of his small hands which lead to fumbles (hence why he wears a glove on his throwing hand), his deep ball accuracy and another trait I've seen to look for in a NFL first round QB is dominating inferior competition. Let's face it he hasn't faced elite powerhouses and yet his stats a "pretty good" but not off the charts as I feel they should be. I mean Ohio, Eastern Kentucky, Florida International, etc? Tune up games where he should have put on clinics for NFL scouts. His stats were pretty darn good but not first overall pick good. In those types of games I feel an elite QB should appear as a man among boys, lighting up the scoreboard. I'm not trying to bash Bridgewater, as I said I feel the kid is really talented. I just feel the pick could be better spent on Clowney, a monster DE who opposing offenses are scheming to play away from. When you alter gameplans like this, I feel you are a truly elite talent. I know you need a QB to succeed in the NFL, but you also need a way to stop QB's as well. Clowney is the way to go in my opinion.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JagsFanInNY


Joined: 25 Feb 2013
Posts: 1389
Location: Brooklyn, NY
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:08 pm    Post subject: Re: Bridgewater Reply with quote

Sack Exchange wrote:
I agree I should have explained my thinking a bit more. First I must say I hated the Derrick Harvey pick, the guy did a big pile of nothing his whole college career and made his hype off one monster game at a Bowl. For all we know he was up against a OT with a severe hang over or something...As for Bridgewater I think the kid is really talented with his arm strength and mobility and toughness but I'm scared of his small hands which lead to fumbles (hence why he wears a glove on his throwing hand), his deep ball accuracy and another trait I've seen to look for in a NFL first round QB is dominating inferior competition. Let's face it he hasn't faced elite powerhouses and yet his stats a "pretty good" but not off the charts as I feel they should be. I mean Ohio, Eastern Kentucky, Florida International, etc? Tune up games where he should have put on clinics for NFL scouts. His stats were pretty darn good but not first overall pick good. In those types of games I feel an elite QB should appear as a man among boys, lighting up the scoreboard. I'm not trying to bash Bridgewater, as I said I feel the kid is really talented. I just feel the pick could be better spent on Clowney, a monster DE who opposing offenses are scheming to play away from. When you alter gameplans like this, I feel you are a truly elite talent. I know you need a QB to succeed in the NFL, but you also need a way to stop QB's as well. Clowney is the way to go in my opinion.
Oh i gotcha. You read http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/draft/2013/10/18/teddy-bridgewater-louisville-glove-hands-clean-up-2014-draft/3009249/ and are freaking out from what one anonymous scout said.

Outside of freaking out because of a glove, you are really going to base so much on stats? Did you ever consider why his numbers might not be 'great'? Could it be that compared to other colleges, Louisville runs a more pro-style offense that does not have Teddy throwing the ball as much or as deep downfield? The crazy part is that in Division 1-A (among 'qualified' QBs with say at least 150 attempts this season), Teddy is tied for 11th in passing yards, 1st in completion percentage, tied for 3rd in INT, tied for 6th in TDs, 3rd in QB rating. Sure, he is not in the ACC of SEC, but that is damn impressive. Look at his QBR which accounts for defensive talent faced, and he is still 6th in the nation. So, yeah the stats are not bad at all when it comes to Teddy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wiseman101


Joined: 28 Oct 2013
Posts: 739
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:42 pm    Post subject: Re: Bridgewater Reply with quote

Sack Exchange wrote:
I agree I should have explained my thinking a bit more. First I must say I hated the Derrick Harvey pick, the guy did a big pile of nothing his whole college career and made his hype off one monster game at a Bowl. For all we know he was up against a OT with a severe hang over or something...As for Bridgewater I think the kid is really talented with his arm strength and mobility and toughness but I'm scared of his small hands which lead to fumbles (hence why he wears a glove on his throwing hand), his deep ball accuracy and another trait I've seen to look for in a NFL first round QB is dominating inferior competition. Let's face it he hasn't faced elite powerhouses and yet his stats a "pretty good" but not off the charts as I feel they should be. I mean Ohio, Eastern Kentucky, Florida International, etc? Tune up games where he should have put on clinics for NFL scouts. His stats were pretty darn good but not first overall pick good. In those types of games I feel an elite QB should appear as a man among boys, lighting up the scoreboard. I'm not trying to bash Bridgewater, as I said I feel the kid is really talented. I just feel the pick could be better spent on Clowney, a monster DE who opposing offenses are scheming to play away from. When you alter gameplans like this, I feel you are a truly elite talent. I know you need a QB to succeed in the NFL, but you also need a way to stop QB's as well. Clowney is the way to go in my opinion.


You need to watch Bridgewaters play on the field....

I am gonna get killed for this but the guy is Rodgers and Brady combined, count on it
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tugboat


Joined: 30 Mar 2011
Posts: 3316
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:48 pm    Post subject: Re: Bridgewater Reply with quote

JagsFanInNY wrote:
Sack Exchange wrote:
I agree I should have explained my thinking a bit more. First I must say I hated the Derrick Harvey pick, the guy did a big pile of nothing his whole college career and made his hype off one monster game at a Bowl. For all we know he was up against a OT with a severe hang over or something...As for Bridgewater I think the kid is really talented with his arm strength and mobility and toughness but I'm scared of his small hands which lead to fumbles (hence why he wears a glove on his throwing hand), his deep ball accuracy and another trait I've seen to look for in a NFL first round QB is dominating inferior competition. Let's face it he hasn't faced elite powerhouses and yet his stats a "pretty good" but not off the charts as I feel they should be. I mean Ohio, Eastern Kentucky, Florida International, etc? Tune up games where he should have put on clinics for NFL scouts. His stats were pretty darn good but not first overall pick good. In those types of games I feel an elite QB should appear as a man among boys, lighting up the scoreboard. I'm not trying to bash Bridgewater, as I said I feel the kid is really talented. I just feel the pick could be better spent on Clowney, a monster DE who opposing offenses are scheming to play away from. When you alter gameplans like this, I feel you are a truly elite talent. I know you need a QB to succeed in the NFL, but you also need a way to stop QB's as well. Clowney is the way to go in my opinion.
Oh i gotcha. You read http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/draft/2013/10/18/teddy-bridgewater-louisville-glove-hands-clean-up-2014-draft/3009249/ and are freaking out from what one anonymous scout said.

Outside of freaking out because of a glove, you are really going to base so much on stats? Did you ever consider why his numbers might not be 'great'? Could it be that compared to other colleges, Louisville runs a more pro-style offense that does not have Teddy throwing the ball as much or as deep downfield? The crazy part is that in Division 1-A (among 'qualified' QBs with say at least 150 attempts this season), Teddy is tied for 11th in passing yards, 1st in completion percentage, tied for 3rd in INT, tied for 6th in TDs, 3rd in QB rating. Sure, he is not in the ACC of SEC, but that is damn impressive. Look at his QBR which accounts for defensive talent faced, and he is still 6th in the nation. So, yeah the stats are not bad at all when it comes to Teddy.


The whole expectation that Teddy should be running up scores on 'inferior competition' to prove how good he is, doesn't really hold water for me. Not everyone is coming out of a wide open air raid offense. Teddy isn't, and imo that should be seen as a real positive, not a negative. He plays to the score, he plays to the situation, and he plays in a way that should translate to the NFL much more directly than someone coming out of a YOLO-spread college system that relies on the superior athleticism of the 'playmakers' to rack up #s and stats.

I'm far more inclined to judge a QB by how they play vs their stiffest competition, as opposed to by how much they can beat up on the metaphorical 'runt' of their schedules.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Jacksonville Jaguars All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
Page 8 of 8

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group