+- 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 - bengaloo - 12-17-2018
I dont think Dalton is a problem on the team. He is solid and at times really good. Are there a handful of QBs around the NFL I'd trade him for? Of course, but not a bunch of them and Driskel wouldt even be on the radar lol. I'd never trade him for a newly drafted QB because so many of them end up total busts. Dalton wasnt a bust in fact some would say he's outplayed his 2nd round status. Is he an all pro QB? Nope, but he's a dang good QB in the overall scheme of things. Put Dalton on the right team with right coaches, and he could very well be a SB QB if you ask me. He wont be a HOF QB, but you dont need one of those to win the SB. Dilfer and Flacco have proven that among others.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Nicomo Cosca - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:26 PM)wolverine515151 Wrote: 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.
Not sure what their actual deals are, but if they have guaranteed money on their contracts it will still have to be paid even if they’re cut. Hence you’re not saving money to be used elsewhere.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Nicomo Cosca - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:27 PM)bengaloo Wrote: I dont think Dalton is a problem on the team. He is solid and at times really good. Are there a handful of QBs around the NFL I'd trade him for? Of course, but not a bunch of them and Driskel wouldt even be on the radar lol. I'd never trade him for a newly drafted QB because so many of them end up total busts. Dalton wasnt a bust in fact some would say he's outplayed his 2nd round status. Is he an all pro QB? Nope, but he's a dang good QB in the overall scheme of things. Put Dalton on the right team with right coaches, and he could very well be a SB QB if you ask me. He wont be a HOF QB, but you dont need one of those to win the SB. Dilfer and Flacco have proven that among others.
Dilfer is such a bad example. That was probably the GOAT defense.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - KillerGoose - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:23 PM)wolverine515151 Wrote: 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%.
Those are not solid ratings. The “average” passer rating this year is nearly 96. An 80 QB rating isn’t good anymore, it’s well below average, borderline bad.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - wolverine515151 - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:37 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: Those are not solid ratings. The “average” passer rating this year is nearly 96. An 80 QB rating isn’t good anymore, it’s well below average, borderline bad.
Above 80 is solid, enough to win games, 96 is well above average even in todays game.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - wolverine515151 - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:32 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Not sure what their actual deals are, but if they have guaranteed money on their contracts it will still have to be paid even if they’re cut. Hence you’re not saving money to be used elsewhere.
Dalton has zero guaranteed money and Burfict 1.8 million guaranteed. Dalton is due 16.2 million and Burfict 7.8 million. That's 24 - 1.8 million, which is 22 million.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Synric - 12-17-2018
This is the first game Lazor gave Driskel a chance to really throw the ball more than 5 yards down field. We all noticed the high balls but he also underthrew guys and threw the wrong route a few times.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - KillerGoose - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:38 PM)wolverine515151 Wrote: Above 80 is solid, enough to win games, 96 is well above average even in todays game.
You are factually incorrect. There are 9 QBs that have passer ratings in the 80’s or lower. They are the bottom 9 QBs in the league. Andy is the highest at 25th, with 89.6.
The average passer rating in today’s game is mid-90’s. This isn’t 2005 anymore.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Nicomo Cosca - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:41 PM)wolverine515151 Wrote: Dalton has zero guaranteed money and Burfict 1.8 million guaranteed. Dalton is due 16.2 million and Burfict 7.8 million. That's 24 - 1.8 million, which is 22 million.
Cutting Dalton and getting nothing for him also seems like a waste. Trade him to Washington or Jacksonville and get something out of it.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - bengaloo - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:33 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Dilfer is such a bad example. That was probably the GOAT defense.
I think it was the GOAT defense. I wish that wasnt Baltimore actually. I hate Baltimore but love defense lol. It would be easier to feel good about respecting that defense if it were another team besides them or the Stealers.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Nicomo Cosca - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:46 PM)bengaloo Wrote: I think it was the GOAT defense. I wish that wasnt Baltimore actually. I hate Baltimore but love defense lol. It would be easier to feel good about respecting that defense if it were another team besides them of the Stealers.
I’m probably in the minority but I’ve never really hated Baltimore. Not like Pitt and Cleveland anyway.
I used to like Ed Reed a lot. When he wasn’t playing us ofc.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - wolverine515151 - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:44 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: You are factually incorrect. There are 9 QBs that have passer ratings in the 80’s or lower. They are the bottom 9 QBs in the league. Andy is the highest at 25th, with 89.6.
The average passer rating in today’s game is mid-90’s. This isn’t 2005 anymore.
Solid is in the 80 - 90 range. Above 90 would be a good game. When I say solid I mean at least mediocre enough to win a game, I don't mean above average. Obviously the rankings have increased, but what's the difference between an 84 or a 92 rating, a couple missed throws .
Those ratings are good enough to win with a good run game. Keep in mind he's been without Glenn at left tackle for a couple games, no Green and no Eifert. Any qb would struggle somewhat without major weapons at his disposal.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - wolverine515151 - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:45 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Cutting Dalton and getting nothing for him also seems like a waste. Trade him to Washington or Jacksonville and get something out of it.
I've discussed this in previous posts, Dalton would be hard to trade with his contract amount and how old he is, cutting him would be the most likely scenario.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - fredtoast - 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.
But you can't win a lot of games with a QB who has a passer rating in the 60's or 70's, and that is where 11 of the last 25 QBs taken in the first round sit right now.
And THAT is exactly why teams don't gamble on a first round pick when they have a solid starter like Andy Dalton.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Luvnit2 - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:54 PM)wolverine515151 Wrote: Solid is in the 80 - 90 range. Above 90 would be a good game. When I say solid I mean at least mediocre enough to win a game, I don't mean above average. Obviously the rankings have increased, but what the difference between an 84 or a 92 rating, a couple throws missed.
Those ratings are good enough to win with a good run game. Keep in mind he's been without Glenn at left tackle for a couple games, no Green and no Eifert. Any qb would struggle somewhat without major weapons at his disposal.
I agree. My issue is not with his ratings as no WR or TE weapons contribute negatively, no doubt. My issue is he was not missing completions by a little, he was missing open receivers by a lot. The good news he missed them 10 to 15 feet high so no chance passes were intercepted.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - KillerGoose - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:54 PM)wolverine515151 Wrote: Solid is in the 80 - 90 range. Above 90 would be a good game. When I say solid I mean at least mediocre enough to win a game, I don't mean above average. Obviously the rankings have increased, but what the difference between an 84 or a 92 rating, a couple throws missed.
Those ratings are good enough to win with a good run game. Keep in mind he's been without Glenn at left tackle for a couple games, no Green and no Eifert. Any qb would struggle somewhat without major weapons at his disposal.
What an odd definition of “solid”, considering that QBs who have a passer rating above 80 yet below 90 are a combined 30-35 (46%).
Doing the math, that equates to 7-9. I guess standards have been lowered.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - fredtoast - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:44 PM)Synric Wrote: This is the first game Lazor gave Driskel a chance to really throw the ball more than 5 yards down field. We all noticed the high balls but he also underthrew guys and threw the wrong route a few times.
Passes thrown 20+ yards past the LOS this year.
Dalton....14-34...332yds...5 td...3 int....79.9 rating
Driskel.... 1- 7.... 37 yds...0 td...1 int.... 9.5 rating
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - wolverine515151 - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 03:01 PM)fredtoast Wrote: But you can't win a lot of games with a QB who has a passer rating in the 60's or 70's, and that is where 11 of the last 25 QBs taken in the first round sit right now.
And THAT is exactly why teams don't gamble on a first round pick when they have a solid starter like Andy Dalton.
Driskel would probably have a rating around 90 if we fix the offensive line and get Green and Eifert back. You add a first round qb in the draft and even another qb like a Bradford for 3 million in free agency. We could go with 3 qb's if it's needed.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - fredtoast - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 03:06 PM)wolverine515151 Wrote: Driskel would probably have a rating around 90 if we fix the offensive line and get Green and Eifert back.
No he wouldn't.
He can't throw the ball accurately downfield.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Synric - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 02:58 PM)wolverine515151 Wrote: I've discussed this in previous posts, Dalton would be hard to trade with his contract amount and how old he is, cutting him would be the most likely scenario.
Actually his contract, age, and experience is a perfect reason to trade for him.
His contract is very managable with the option to move on with little dead cap. He is only 31 QBs are playing into their late 30s especially pocket passers like Dalton. Andy also has had success in the NFL and has seen just about anything defensive coordinators can throw at him.