(08-13-2023, 01:25 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I'm going to go ahead and say that I would not be comfortable with either Trevor Siemian or Jack Browning having to steer the ship for more than a series or two in regular season action.  Browning looks to have some steady in him to be developed, as he seemed to elevate TE Tanner Hudson when plays began to break down.  Browning looks to be worth keeping around and continuing his development.

Trevor Siemian on the other hand looked really lost and flustered, especially when you consider that he's got 8 years of experience, including 30 starts.  Not only did he look "lost" at times, I questioned what appeared to be a lack of effort.  Many of us seemed comfortable with him as backup QB when he was signed, but now I'm not so sure that he's the guy.

(08-13-2023, 03:43 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I don't think we're going to make any moves, so we may as well file this under "In Zac we trust" and/or "It's only preseason, did know the 0-16 Lions went 4-0 in the preseason?"

(08-13-2023, 04:22 PM)maclanta Wrote: If the backup QB is playing in the regular season with other backups, it will be because we are blowing a team out.

The backups would probably look better with our starting rotation.

Were they good on Friday? No… but I don’t think they ran their regular season offense.

It’s the preseason. Zach doesn’t play to win these games, which I thinks blows people’s minds.  But I guess congratulations are due to the Ravens that have now won 24 preseason games in a row.

(08-13-2023, 07:30 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Good backups cost money. They got Semien for around $1 million. Brandon Allen was always cheap too.

(08-14-2023, 11:58 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: Flacco was called Joe Cool as well so they might get along

(08-14-2023, 12:00 PM)bengalfan74 Wrote: Siemian surprised me, (in a bad way). I didn't think he was gonna be all John Elway but, he didn't look very sharp at all. Hopefully he looks much better next game. Frankly I figured it wouldn't even be a question between him and Browing? Now I'm not so sure?

Browning, like has been said, just looks uncomfortable, unsure, even scared to me. I know the Oline was playing poorly, to be fair.

Lets see how they look next week? But I wouldn't be opposed to some shopping at this point.

(08-14-2023, 12:43 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: The 16-0 Patriots went 0-4 in preseason the year before that.

(08-14-2023, 12:47 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Right.  So our backup QBs sucking and losing in the pre-season is fine because we don't want to go 0-16 by winning in the preseason.  I hope they both throw 6 INTs next week.

(08-14-2023, 01:51 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Precisely. Your neck must get tired having to lug around such a massive brain all day.

(08-14-2023, 01:55 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Ehh, I'm being a bit facetious here.  Like I said, we talk about how the preseason doesn't matter, but we're talking about making changes to our QB room based upon the preseason.

That 2008 Lions team going 4-0 in the preseason is probably being mentioned on every team message board right now that didn't look perfect in game 1 so far.  Has anyone watched those 4 games?  Did the Lions look good?  Did their backups just win?  I don't recall anyone saying the 2008 Lions would be good before or after the preseason.

Anyways, the days of anyone with starting talent playing in the preseason seem behind us, so it's extra moot now, I'd wager. 

(08-14-2023, 01:55 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Ehh, I'm being a bit facetious here.  Like I said, we talk about how the preseason doesn't matter, but we're talking about making changes to our QB room based upon the preseason.

That 2008 Lions team going 4-0 in the preseason is probably being mentioned on every team message board right now that didn't look perfect in game 1 so far.  Has anyone watched those 4 games?  Did the Lions look good?  Did their backups just win?  I don't recall anyone saying the 2008 Lions would be good before or after the preseason.

Anyways, the days of anyone with starting talent playing in the preseason seem behind us, so it's extra moot now, I'd wager. 

(08-14-2023, 02:18 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Oh I know how you operate by now, lol (I don't mean that in a bad way).

I was just having fun with it, although sarcasm and humor often doesn't translate via text the way we want it to.

I think (as usual) the truth lies between the 2 extremes. We can't (or shouldn't) make sweeping judgements based on preseason games. Everything should be taken with a lump of salt. That said, even the teams themselves make some judgement calls based on preseason performances.

So I think it's fair for fans to do the same.

Of course, it's possible one of these guys comes out next week and throws 4 TD's in a half and puts some serious pressure on Joe Burrow. I'm kidding. I think.

Again, the truth is usually in the middle.

(08-14-2023, 02:30 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Anyone who says Preseason doesn't matter is silly. Anyone who says preseason game scores matter is sillier. 

(08-14-2023, 02:31 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I hear ya, part of talking NFL is admitting that the 2008 Lions have made it as hard to be critical of the preason as Brady being drafted at 199 has made it hard to discount a QB taken...anywhere in the draft.  Kurt Warner helps dispel the myth that a QB even needs to be drafted. 

(08-14-2023, 02:37 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: What do all of those things have in common, though? They were all very fluky occurrences. Hence why we remember them.

2 QB's (3 if you want to count Romo) being taken late (or not being drafted at all) doesn't throw a wrench into the notion that you should draft a QB in the first round.

Just as the 2007 Patriots or 2008 Lions don't prove that preseason doesn't matter. Particularly when it comes to evaluating individual players.

(08-14-2023, 02:39 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I was going to joke that at least Warren Moon was long enough ago that people aren't looking to the CFL for HOF QBs...though I wouldn't mind Nathan Rourke being here.

(08-14-2023, 11:55 AM)The D.O.Z. Wrote: Hopefully they’re looking into possible cuts / other teams’ practice squads. Matty Ice is not an answer. Wentz isn’t either. Both are broken QBs.

(08-14-2023, 02:55 PM)ochocincos Wrote: When looking at backups, Matt Ryan really is above average.
Continually completes 65% or better.
Last year was his only year he was close to even number of TDs and INTs, but still better than most backups in that aspect.
Higher QB Rating than Mayfield and Siemian last year.

Dalton would probably have been a preferred choice if he were available, but I can't see a scenario where CAR would see him expendable given Young's first year.