Would you trade Burrow for Watson

[GodFather]

(01-14-2021, 12:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: My fear is that the Steelers put something together.

Don't say that, they need to be at the bottom of our division for awhile. Those players and fans deserve to be at the bottom. 


Plus they are in a ton of trouble with cap space, if they figure it out and improve I will lose it knowing I will hear it again from all those Steeler fans in my area....

[BengalChris]

I voted no and it wasn't a hard choice for me. Watson can't fix Taylor, so it would be a complete waste. Burrow couldn't fix Taylor either, but at least he's on a rookie deal for now. Possibly some of the talent that has depart will be replaced soon on the Bengals roster and the next HC can do something with it.

[Tony]

Hell ***** NO!

Why would you want 5o trade those contracts!? We are building team chemistry here,and Joe is vital too that..

[Tony]

(01-13-2021, 01:35 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: No, of course not.  It makes no sense to trade a QB that is on a rookie deal for a QB that just signed a huge extension just this past offseason.

The value Joe Burrow can potentially provide for the next two to four years (depending on extension details) is like the Holy Grail of NFL contracts.  If he progresses like we all think and hope he does we'll be getting a 40+ million dollar QB for under 10 million a season.

Not to mention the fact that there's a very good chance that he's just straight up a better QB than Watson down the line, this makes it all the more ridiculous.

I will be shocked if a single person votes yes on this.

You got trademark, and a few other Burrow haters here...

[Tony]

(01-13-2021, 01:52 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Burrow is outstanding, but Watson is next level elite. I can't even think of 3 QBs in the NFL that are better than him. And I definitely can't think of 3 QBs that are better than him that are also as young as him.

The only downside to the trade is the increased cap hit, but with a QB like Watson, you can afford to skimp in a few areas.

Ya, that worked great  in Houston ....

[HarleyDog]

YES - Because Mantooth said he didn't think anyone would say it. Then, I would say "SIKE!" and as I walked away laughing at such a ridiculous idea tell MB, "That is the reason you should not be making decisions."


Shit: Edit: Just realized you said MB called. I answer with, "No Speaka Da Watson!"

[*bfine32*]

(01-14-2021, 06:56 PM)GodFather Wrote: A message for the 8 people who voted yes  

For the 8 wh o voted yes

YES!!

91.8% of Bengal fans would not trade an injured Burrow 24 year old coming off a Rookie season in which he had a passer rating 89.8 straight up for an established elite 25 year old QB coming off a season where he led the league in passing yards, had a passer rating of 112.4, 33 TDS, 7 INTS, while adding 44 yards and 3 TDS on the ground. 

WTF are those 8 folks thinking? 

[CorpusChristiBengal]

Cap hit + all the draft capital it would take, no.

[Nicomo Cosca]

This is even more lopsided than the keep Zac Taylor poll. Lol

[MileHighGrowler]

I think it's an interesting and thought-provoking scenario, but not as one to compare Burrow and Watson, but rather whether people think that a single player can completely elevate and change the team. And I think the answer to that is no. If it was backyard football and Watson was calling his own plays, maybe. But this is still a team being led by an OC who seems clueless, so I think you'd see Watson regress and the other gaps still there on the team.

I also don't like the financial impact, and I'm too lazy because this is just a crazy scenario to dig into how much the Bengals would actually take on vs what Houston still had to pay out.

I think Watson is a great player. His locker room persona is a little concerning if he's asking out now. And we have no idea what Burrow's ceiling is, or how he'll come back from injury. But there's just no way I'd be inclined to take the trade straight up with the rookie deal Burrow is on, questions about the cap moving and not knowing how things will play out over the next couple of seasons.

[HarleyDog]

(01-14-2021, 08:15 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: This is even more lopsided than the keep Zac Taylor poll. Lol

[Destro]

And he also only had 4 wins this year. So much for a QB can carry a team. He's balking with the Texans, he would be setting the Bengals on fire if he was in Cincy. Burrow still plays nice.

[Brownshoe]

Nah I wouldn't do it. I think Burrow is a much better QB, and he will be on his rookie contract for a bit longer.

[GodFather]

(01-14-2021, 07:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: WTF are those 8 folks thinking? 

Exactly!

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

No, just a simple no. Burrow could be a great passing QB like Brady or Peyton or his fave Brees.

I don't see Watson ever being this good.

[thillan]

There are really people who think Burrow is better than Watson? Lol. I’m really excited for the kid, but come on. Watson isn’t much older, and gave Mahomes a battle in the playoffs last year. When you add all the other factors in though, mainly the rookie contract and the flexibility it could provide, it makes it really difficult.

Honestly, I think I’d do it. Talk about a tough decision on a GM though lol

[MasonDT70]

(01-14-2021, 10:00 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: No, just a simple no. Burrow could be a great passing QB like Brady or Peyton or his fave Brees.

I don't see Watson ever being this good.

Watson id say would compare more to a Rodgers or wilson, 2 future 1st ballot HoF qbs. Either way those are all super bowl winning qbs. A lot of posters are undervaluing Watson, and I'm in no way saying burrow is bad, overvaluing burrow a rookie qb who hasn't even played 1 full season. 

[hollodero]

I would do it. Burrow is coming off a grim injury and it can only be hoped that it does not affect him long term or that he does not have a Sam Bradford career. Aside from that, Burrow is often called a superstar in the making, as if that was a guarantee. It is not a guarantee, and the sample size is too small to already give one. What he did in his few games was partly good, partly not all that efficient. He needs great develpmental steps to become a superstar at the position - and when he finally is, he will demand big money too.

Watson is an established superstar at the position, of the type that does not come around all that often. Sure he's real expensive. Some of that expenses could be rewarded with free agents coming more willingly here, that don't need overpaying. He wouzld make the team way more competitive in an instant.

[*rfaulk34*]

(01-15-2021, 02:55 PM)hollodero Wrote: I would do it. Burrow is coming off a grim injury and it can only be hoped that it does not affect him long term or that he does not have a Sam Bradford career. Aside from that, Burrow is often called a superstar in the making, as if that was a guarantee. It is not a guarantee, and the sample size is too small to already give one. What he did in his few games was partly good, partly not all that efficient. He needs great develpmental steps to become a superstar at the position - and when he finally is, he will demand big money too.

Not really. He just needs game experience and some protection. 

[hollodero]

(01-15-2021, 03:00 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Not really. He just needs game experience and some protection. 

Yeah, I'm not that sold on him yet, from what I've seen. I'm not saying he is bad in any way, just that he still needs some steps to be a superstar at the position - game experience, if you will. He can be great for sure, but again I have an issue with taking this for granted. He has a few games and not everything in those games was excellent, e.g. fumbling issues, holding the ball too long etc.

The protection thing is true for sure, putting our golden boy behind that line is some kind of negligent physical injury. It makes some sense to rather fix that issue first before thinking of the QB position - and go with the cheaper option before it is fixed. This line might as well get Watson down too.

Which btw is why I would rather get Fitzpatrick or someone for one year and let Burrow come back the season after, but stating that is against the OP rules.