+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Cincinnati-Bengals-NFL)
+--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-JUNGLE-NOISE)
+--- Thread: Driskel should be starter next year (/Thread-Driskel-should-be-starter-next-year)
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - BengalChris - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 12:08 PM)mon4078 Wrote: The people who want Driskel so bad really just want anyone besides Andy. Its just like with McCarron, Andy takes all the blame people don't care if his O-line is trash or if his receivers drop the ball. Heck even AJ has had some bad fumbles and drops that has cost us games. Personally I don't care who is the QB as long as they give us the best chance to win.
Baltimore fans going through the same issue with Flacco the last few years and Flacco has a SB ring.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Millhouse - 12-17-2018
Drickell's opportunity to show he can be an NFL starter is closing pretty fast, which is usually the case with almost all backups. At this point for him to get any considerations, he will have to light it the frontdoor up the last two games while also winning. Even then I doubt it matters. Heck the Eagles benched their Super Bowl MVP qb to go back to Wentz, and no one went after Foles. Both of which is a bit crazy imo.
So no, as much as I wanted to see what he has, I saw and he hasn't done enough even with the difficult position he was thrust into. And the worst part is, we will have Marvin back with happy go Andy as well, because there is no other choice.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Nicomo Cosca - 12-17-2018
The man’s name is DRISKEL!!!
Lmao
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - BengalChris - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 01:15 PM)Millhouse Wrote: Drickell's opportunity to show he can be an NFL starter is closing pretty fast, which is usually the case with almost all backups. At this point for him to get any considerations, he will have to light it the frontdoor up the last two games while also winning. Even then I doubt it matters. Heck the Eagles benched their Super Bowl MVP qb to go back to Wentz, and no one went after Foles. Both of which is a bit crazy imo.
So no, as much as I wanted to see what he has, I saw and he hasn't done enough even with the difficult position he was thrust into. And the worst part is, we will have Marvin back with happy go Andy as well, because there is no other choice.
Yeah, it's looking like he's not the guy to take the Bengals to a SB. Then again, neither is Dalton. We need to hope that Mike Brown approves a QB in the draft, which is doubtful this year.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Atomic Orange - 12-17-2018
These coaches couldn't take ANYBODY to the SB.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Au165 - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 11:40 AM)bengalfan74 Wrote: I seriously doubt Driskel is even the backup next season. In fact I doubt Driskel is a backup anywhere next season. He's horribly inaccurate !
Mark Sanchez has started games this season. He will have a job in the NFL for a long time. People dramatically over estimate what a back up QB in the NFL looks like.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Wyche'sWarrior - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 01:28 PM)Atomic Orange Wrote: These coaches couldn't take ANYBODY to the SB.
Truth.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - BengalChris - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 01:28 PM)Atomic Orange Wrote: These coaches couldn't take ANYBODY to the SB.
True, true!
We won't sniff a SB until after Mikey boy kicks the bucket.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - bengalfan74 - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 01:33 PM)Au165 Wrote: Mark Sanchez has started games this season. He will have a job in the NFL for a long time. People dramatically over estimate what a back up QB in the NFL looks like.
I agree with your over estimation of what a backup is but Driskel just isn't that good.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Au165 - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 01:44 PM)bengalfan74 Wrote: I agree with your over estimation of what a backup is but Driskel just isn't that good.
Most back ups aren't, the NFL has a QB problem. I'll give people a little concession with starting caliber weapons like Green and a solid TE he probably is slightly better but not starting caliber level. The issue there aren't starting level QB's as back ups in the NFL really because if they were they'd be starting somewhere else. There aren't even 32 good starting QB's in the NFL to begin with.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - wolverine515151 - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 06:42 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: He’s thrown for over 200 yds once in his 4 starts (and never more than 1 TD). Missing AJ or not, that’s extremely mediocre in the modern pass happy NFL. He has Lamar Jackson type passing numbers, but without the big running plays. He’s not very good.
He hasn't thrown for a lot of yards because were feeding the ball to Mixon. He's put up better numbers this year than Dalton did without Green or Eifert.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - wolverine515151 - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 10:16 AM)KillerGoose Wrote: He has had 1 miserable game, two bad games and one mediocre game.
Driskel is not a good QB. Dalton is better than him in nearly every single facet of the game, and he is significantly better at that.
It is time to move on from Dalton. It will never be time to move on to Driskel because he flat out sucks.
He's had 3 solid games and one bad game. He hasn't thrown for a lot of yards because we're leaning on Mixon a lot. Dalton is known to have extremely bad games. He sails the ball high as well. Driskel has the stronger arm and is much faster. He can only get better.
It's time to send Dalton packing and draft a qb in the first round. The first round qb can battle it out with Driskel for the starting position.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - wolverine515151 - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 12:28 PM)Wyche Wrote: Sounds like a lot of excuse making to me.
I'm not saying Driskel is the next Brady, but he's not horrible like some claim he is, and its not as if Dalton was lighting it up without his weapons.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - fredtoast - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:03 PM)wolverine515151 Wrote: It's time to send Dalton packing and draft a qb in the first round. The first round qb can battle it out with Driskel for the starting position.
No it isn't. We have too many other holes to waste a first round pick on QB.
Since we drafted Dalton in 2011 there have ben 25 QBs taken in the first round. Only FIVE of them have a higher career passer rating than Dalton, and close to half (11 of 25) have passer ratings in the 60's and 70's.
Drafting a QB is a crap shoot, and you don't take that kind of gamble when you have a solid starter like Dalton.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - SladeX - 12-17-2018
Yeah, and besides, there's a tiny chance we may get to see how much Marv & Co have been holding Andy back all these years, next year.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - wolverine515151 - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:11 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No it isn't. We have to many other holes t waste a first round pick on QB.
Since we drafted Dalton in 2011 there have ben 25 QBs taken in the first round. Only FIVE of them have a higher career passer rating than Dalton, and close to half (11 of 25) have passer ratings in the 60's and 70's.
Drafting a QB is a crap shoot, and you don't take that kind of gamble when you have a solid starter like Dalton.
With a good defense, solid special teams, and a competent game manager as a qb, you can win a lot of games in the nfl. Cutting Dalton and Burfict would save 22 million. That could be used to bolster the offensive line with a solid right tackle, a good guard, and a linebacker in free agency. Then we lean on Mixon and the ground game a lot more to win games.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - KillerGoose - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:03 PM)wolverine515151 Wrote: He's had 3 solid games and one bad game. He hasn't thrown for a lot of yards because we're leaning on Mixon a lot. Dalton is known to have extremely bad games. He sails the ball high as well. Driskel has the stronger arm and is much faster. He can only get better.
It's time to send Dalton packing and draft a qb in the first round. The first round qb can battle it out with Driskel for the starting position.
He has not had three solid games. They are leaning on Mixon because Driskel sucks. Ratings of 84, 82 and 51 are pretty laughable. His 96 rating game was close to textbook average.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Nicomo Cosca - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:16 PM)wolverine515151 Wrote: With a good defense, solid special teams, and a competent game manager as a qb, you can win a lot of games in the nfl. Cutting Dalton and Burfict would save 22 million. That could be used to bolster the offensive line with a solid right tackle, a good guard, and a linebacker in free agency. Then we lean on Mixon and the ground game a lot more to win games.
Since when do you not have to pay players you cut? Dalton and Burfict are both under contract next year.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - wolverine515151 - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:17 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: He has not had three solid games. They are leaning on Mixon because Driskel sucks. Ratings of 84, 82 and 51 are pretty laughable. His 96 rating game was close to textbook average.
His qb ratings are 84.7 , 82.7 , 96.2 and 51.3 when he's started. That's three solid games above an 80 qb rating. Dalton put up 61 , 89 and 70.7 . That's 2 bad games and 1 solid game.
Driskel is batting 75% without a lot of weapons and Dalton is batting 33%.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - wolverine515151 - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:19 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Since when do you not have to pay players you cut? Dalton and Burfict are both under contract next year.
What point are you even making. I'm saying to cut two under performing players who make a lot of money to bolster other parts of the team.