Results are all that matters and the result of this year looks to be a division title, albeit in a down year, but he's made lemonade out of lemons with what we have at QB and RB and our O-line looks to have solidified. Praying that the football gods deliver us a QB this offseason...Brees, Goff, Lynch...Whoever!!
To be fair, it was BoB who acquired the lemons at QB and RB. I'm more concerned with his talent evaluation and pick management than his Xs and Os
Who else could he have had? Carr? Bridgewater? Bortles? Carr was never likely a consideration, so that was out of his hands. Bortles is looking pretty good, actually. I thought he'd be nothing. With Clowney trending up, and all the hype, I don't fault anyone for picking him over Bortles. It was a safe choice, and there's no way a rookie head coach ties himself to an iffy quarterback at number one and watches a potential generational talent go by. Especially when you can pair him with Watt. Bridgewater is the only one I fault him for. Teddy is starting to hit his stride, even though there are those here that would doubt that. O'Brien could have developed him even better than Minny has. Is he as good without Peterson, though (suspension...)? Maybe if Foster isn't injured... It would have been amazing to walk away with Clowney and Carr. As I said, though, I seriously doubt O'Brien would have been allowed to take Carr even if he wanted to. There were also rumors that Carr wouldn't have played here. It would have been great to pair Clowney and Bridgewater as well. That's my only bummer so far with this staff.
I agree. He's made a ton of questionable calls when it comes to talent evaluation and roster management (mismanagement). However, he gets the most out of these guys when it comes to the actual game.
Regarding QB...wouldnt you guys prefer Fitz to what we have now? We could have had Fitz with Hoyer as a backup.
Well you named 3 guys right there. All had arguable reasons to NOT go with of course, but he had choices. As far as the Carr thing, if it's true, that's bad ownership.
Would we have given Hoyer that contract if Fitz was going to start? Fitz and Hoyer are interchangeable. Pretty much the same career stats and the same stats under BoB.
Or maybe just kept Fitzpatrick one more year to keep the seat warm for whoever the incumbent was going to be. They would have had the same starting QB for two years in a row. Or maybe even kept Keenum as a backup instead of Mallet. Any of those is better than what they started the season with.
But Fitz probably would have been better one year into the system. Fitz was obviously okay with being a backup; that's what he was doing in NY.
All things being equal, I'd rather have the guy who was most familiar with this system... but there's really not much of a difference between the two. I find it slightly odd that the less a QB has familiarity with this system... the better the offense appears to execute (saw it with Yates against the Jets and Weeden didn't completely **** the bed with a totally dumbed down offense). BOB and the entire staff needs to do a better job of dumbing it down when the QB or personnel isn't capable of running the system "as is".... sometimes they overthink the whole thing (as evidenced by their purposeful avoidance of Hopkins against NE). Also, NFL teams might as well start trying to acquire 2 starting QB's (as they do with RB's), given the higher awareness of concussions and just the rash of injuries that seem to cripple all teams.
