(07-27-2020, 02:27 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: Perhaps ZT thinks he is a QB whisperer and doesn’t need any vets to find success... not wise, but if we needed a vet why didn’t we try to just keep the one we had?

From what PDJ has said, the feeling is that Burrow will have Zac, Callahan, and Dan Pitcher to help guide him. All 3 of them all played QB so the thought is that they'll be the QB mentors.

I know what would have been a good option..

Add me to the list of Bengals' fans who want a better backup QB. If we keep a 3rd string QB I'd go with Delgado (sp.)

(07-28-2020, 08:57 AM)bfine32 Wrote: I know what would have been a good option..

While I agree Dalton would have been better than Finley I still think Moore would have been the best option and we showed zero interest in having a system vet behind Burrow so meh...I don't follow the team's logic but they've made their intentions clear.  The Chiefs re-signed Moore for a little over a million on the 10th of July, so it seems like we could have had him on a rather friendly deal.  Oy, the one person I'd support ZT digging up from his lousy Dolphins tenure and he doesn't do it.

Ah well, I hope we don't see Finley...then again I would have hoped we didn't see Moore but you know, vet QB mentor and all that jazz.

(07-28-2020, 01:26 AM)Bengal Dude Wrote: From what PDJ has said, the feeling is that Burrow will have Zac, Callahan, and Dan Pitcher to help guide him. All 3 of them all played QB so the thought is that they'll be the QB mentors.

Fwiw, Brian Callahan was a backup QB in High School, and never played further.



Prior to UCLA, Callahan played club ice hockey at UCLA for one season and high school football at De La Salle in Concord, California.  He was part of the team's 151-game winning streak where he was the backup quarterback to former Michigan and Idaho State signal caller Matt Gutierrez.

Dan Pitcher played QB at SUNY Courtland.

I'm not diminishing these guys skills as a coach or their knowledge of the playbook.  But acting like these guys are somehow better at their jobs because "they played the position" seems a bit much.

(07-28-2020, 08:57 AM)bfine32 Wrote: I know what would have been a good option..

You’re never going to convince people paying a backup QB 17 mil is a “good option.”

(07-28-2020, 01:26 AM)Bengal Dude Wrote: From what PDJ has said, the feeling is that Burrow will have Zac, Callahan, and Dan Pitcher to help guide him. All 3 of them all played QB so the thought is that they'll be the QB mentors.

I don't care about any of that.

I care about having a guy who is experienced enough to prepare for a game without getting any reps during the week and being able to step straight into the game and play efficiently.

I assume if our QB goes down in year 1 of the Burrow Era at that point you tank the season.

Having a solid back up QB rarely leads you to a Super bowl sans Foles.

(07-28-2020, 06:35 PM)QueenCity Wrote: I assume if our QB goes down in year 1 of the Burrow Era at that point you tank the season.

Having a solid back up QB rarely leads you to a Super bowl sans Foles.

Maybe if Burrow goes down we’ll have a chance at Sewell...

(07-28-2020, 06:35 PM)QueenCity Wrote: Having a solid back up QB rarely leads you to a Super bowl sans Foles.

The 2010 Steelers made the Super Bowl because their back up QBs went 3-1

The '05 Steelers made the Super Bowl because their back up QB went 2-2.

The '04 Steelers made the playoffs because their back up QB went 13-0

The '02 Buccaneers made the Super Bowl because their back up QB went 2-1

The '00 Ravens made the Super Bowl because their back up QB went 7-1.

(07-28-2020, 09:24 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The 2010 Steelers made the Super Bowl because their back up QBs went 3-1

The '05 Steelers made the Super Bowl because their back up QB went 2-2.

The '04 Steelers made the playoffs because their back up QB went 13-0

The '02 Buccaneers made the Super Bowl because their back up QB went 2-1

The '00 Ravens made the Super Bowl because their back up QB went 7-1.

How many  years in the league did those backups have in the league?
Going off memory the Bucs and Ravens identity was strong running games totally dominant defenses.
Even the Steelers philosophy was,built around a strong running attack and punishing defense 
2000 and 2002 2005 is a totally different era compared to now.

Your backup now better be able to drive the ball downfield with a proven arm. 

(07-28-2020, 09:40 PM)impactplaya Wrote: How many  years in the league did those backups have in the league?
Going off memory the Bucs and Ravens identity was strong running games totally dominant defenses.
Even the Steelers philosophy was,built around a strong running attack and punishing defense 
2000 and 2002 2005 is a totally different era compared to now.

Your backup now better be able to drive the ball downfield with a proven arm. 

The point I was making was that the back up QB position is important.  Some people claim the psoition doesn't matter because if the starter is injured the season is over.

I think you are agreeing with me.

(07-28-2020, 09:24 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The 2010 Steelers made the Super Bowl because their back up QBs went 3-1

The '05 Steelers made the Super Bowl because their back up QB went 2-2.

The '04 Steelers made the playoffs because their back up QB went 13-0

The '02 Buccaneers made the Super Bowl because their back up QB went 2-1

The '00 Ravens made the Super Bowl because their back up QB went 7-1.

I think you can even consider Kansas City last year to be a part of this discussion.  Who knows what would have happened had Matt Moore not played as well as he did.

He was 2-1 in the 3 game stretch he played in.  Had 100.9 QB rating, with zero turnovers.

Had they imploded and lost either or both of those games they would have dropped in seeding.  They could have been faced with having to play in the Wild Card round, and winning an extra game.  And they may have lost the home field advantage they enjoyed throughout the playoffs.

(07-29-2020, 10:12 AM)fredtoast Wrote: The point I was making was that the back up QB position is important.  Some people claim the psoition doesn't matter because if the starter is injured the season is over.

I think you are agreeing with me.

You are correct 

(07-29-2020, 10:29 AM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: I think you can even consider Kansas City last year to be a part of this discussion.  Who knows what would have happened had Matt Moore not played as well as he did.

He was 2-1 in the 3 game stretch he played in.  Had 100.9 QB rating, with zero turnovers.

Had they imploded and lost either or both of those games they would have dropped in seeding.  They could have been faced with having to play in the Wild Card round, and winning an extra game.  And they may have lost the home field advantage they enjoyed throughout the playoffs.

Thanks.  Matt Moore is another example of the point I was making

I just pulled that info from a post I made over a year ago.

(07-27-2020, 12:26 AM)Bengalfan4life27c Wrote: Bottom of the barrel at this position finley or dolegala will cause us to look like last years team. whenever Burrow eventually catches virus. Reds are currently having this problem now with their offense.

Need to bring in another backup for sure. Finley is not the answer with that arm man.

Sounds it will be Brandon Allen whom I didn't know.

(07-29-2020, 10:29 AM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: I think you can even consider Kansas City last year to be a part of this discussion.  Who knows what would have happened had Matt Moore not played as well as he did.

He was 2-1 in the 3 game stretch he played in.  Had 100.9 QB rating, with zero turnovers.

Had they imploded and lost either or both of those games they would have dropped in seeding.  They could have been faced with having to play in the Wild Card round, and winning an extra game.  And they may have lost the home field advantage they enjoyed throughout the playoffs.

I popped by the KC message board when Mahommes hurt his knee in that game and a lot of posts there were about how he was done for the year and Reid needed to go because he'd never win it all.

A back up QB is more valuable if you already have a damn good team. I believe most of those teams you listed were super bowl contenders.

Bengals coming off a 2-14 record is doomed if their franchise QB goes down regardless who we put back there. Might as well get a top 5 pick.

(07-29-2020, 10:29 AM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: I think you can even consider Kansas City last year to be a part of this discussion.

Fred listed 5 specific teams since 2000 in which backup QBs contributed to winning meaningful games in a metrologically verifiable manner. We can add the recent Chiefs team and the Foles Super Bowl team to the list. That's 7 teams out of 640 (32 teams times 20 years). Doing some "monkey math" that's about a 1% chance of a backup QB starting games and contributing to "meaningful" wins since the year 2000, just using these examples that we've cited. 

That doesn't get into the "mentorship" train of thought. Bruce Gradkowski seemed to really get into that sort of role during Dalton's early years for instance. For around a million per year? It seems worth it to have a good backup, especially if you're talking about a team that can potentially win a Super Bowl.