How do they do it? Howie Roseman

[CannonFire]

My point was purely about the contract and the player (expected production), not the feasibility of it actually happening. That said, for the sake of curiosity... Who say's "No" to this deal?

We're trading up to the #1 spot (any of the last 2 drafts), Baker Mayfield for that pick, straight up.

If Baker is so good and he's "so cheap" as other's like to point out to me, and we won't need him anymore if we're trading up to get a QB, why would any team "not budge from where they were at"?

No one. Just look at what the Panthers traded to move from 9th to 1st: 2 firsts, 2 seconds and DJ Moore. Same draft the Texans traded two firsts a second and a third round pick to move from 12th to 3rd. Moving up from a high teens/low 20s draft position is more expensive than that.

My initial reaction to your statement of "no one", lead me to think that if that were the case, then deals like this would be done routinely. My thinking was that QB's would never have a 5th year option picked up because a team would trade their guy after year 3. The QB's would very rarely get re-signed by the team that drafted them. The only ones re-signed would be guys like Mahomes, Borrow, Jackson, and Allen. Guys like Lawrence, Goff, Murray, and Tua would've been traded. Mayfield would've been traded after 2020. Of course though, it's subject to how teams feel about the incoming class. It's not like every year there's 5 QB's hitting Y4 on their deal... it's usually only 2 or 3, just like the number of incoming QB's.

Then I started thinking... maybe not. General Managers are in general, not very good at their job, with respect to QB's. We know this for a fact because they keep handing out these long term big money contracts to guys who are "ok". We also know this because GM's would rather hold firm on their inaccuracies than have humility and admit they're wrong. They do this for the extra 1 to 3 more years of a job. If a GM goes to his owner and says, "We need to go get this QB and pay him this much money because he's we feel really great about him as our QB of the future", then turns around just 3 years later and say "Oops, we were wrong. We need to trade (or cut or bench), this guy and may have to give up more picks and money for that guy", most likely won't have a job much longer. I mean, we know this right? It's why Winston got 5 years. It's why Murray, Lawrence, Tua, Goff, and others got re-signed.

If a GM was smart, he'd spend the most important picks on the players that truly matter more than anything, the OLine and DLine. In today's NFL, virtually any QB is acceptable (see the names I've already mentioned). Building the trenches and then focusing in on the weapons will give virtually any QB a path to success. I think Seattle is a team that's starting to realize this. I'm thinking so is Minnesota. Seattle thought they had a great defense and talent on offense. The bring in Geno and find out that he's acceptable, so they move on from Wilson. They give Geno a new deal, but it was actually cheaper than Mayfield's. Instead of paying him $40M+ per year, they trade him and bring in Darnold on a deal similar to Mayfield's. Here's where they were right... they're not banking on Darnold. They drafted a QB in the 3rd Rd. They brought in Kupp and have JSN. They have a decent backfield and spent their first two draft picks last year in trenches and their first pick in this years draft on the OL. I think that after this season, they'll evaluate Milroe. If they like what they see, I bet Darnold is gone after this year (trade him most likely), and Milroe will be there guy for 2 more. After that second season, if he's "the guy", he'll get a new deal. If he's not, they're going to spend a 2nd or 3rd round pick on a new QB.

I think the Vikings are going to do that as well. It's why they drafted McCarthy instead of re-upping Darnold. They're not letting his 2024 season (which was better than Mayfield's 2023 season), blind them to the fact that they know he's just a guy. As it appears, right now, the Seahawks & Vikings are playing chess while the rest of the league (who don't have studs), are playing checkers. A "GOOD" GM will convince his owner that the idea of the franchise QB as we know it, is outdated. There's no reason to accept "meh", when almost everyone is about "meh", save a small few.

[__Chef__]

...There's no reason to accept "meh", when almost everyone is about "meh", save a small few.

From a numbers and strategy perspective, this makes sense ... But I was just thinking, there's also the psychological perspective. This great team you're building out around the QB ... What are they thinking/seeing when they feel they are on the cusp, and their young QB gets dumped for a rookie? Are they still putting in 100% for the offseason, or are they looking to be traded or not sign their next contract and hit the road?

The HC would need to have demonstrated and instilled in his guys that the #2 and/or #3 QB can plug and play with zero drop off. Not an easy task.

[CannonFire]

...There's no reason to accept "meh", when almost everyone is about "meh", save a small few.

From a numbers and strategy perspective, this makes sense ... But I was just thinking, there's also the psychological perspective. This great team you're building out around the QB ... What are they thinking/seeing when they feel they are on the cusp, and their young QB gets dumped for a rookie? Are they still putting in 100% for the offseason, or are they looking to be traded or not sign their next contract and hit the road?

The HC would need to have demonstrated and instilled in his guys that the #2 and/or #3 QB can plug and play with zero drop off. Not an easy task.

I'm thinking that the players would be fine with it. How do you think Saquon Barkley felt (and even other Giants players), when he got tagged but a meh QB got paid?

Remember when Evans was asked about Winston and Fitzpatrick? He responded with "it doesn't matter who the QB is, I have a job to do". Or something to that effect.

Every player in the locker room knows exactly what every other player brings to the table. They're not fooled like fans are.

[__Chef__]

..."it doesn't matter who the QB is, I have a job to do". ...

Sure, but not everyone is happy to go along on this carousel. When teams "hit the reset" for a rebuild, none of the vets left on the team are happy about it because they know they won't be competing for the next year plus.

The scenario described is not the same as a full blown rebuild, but most teams aren't happy about bringing in a rookie QB, because most rookie QBs aren't ready to compete for a title. Doing so while jettisoning a QB who one would assume had provided serviceable, yet not elite play, would not yield the most desirable psychological response from the rest of the guys who'd been busting their tails to win a championship.

I'm just saying there is a human element which would need to be factored in, especially when dealing with such a centrally important position who is generally the teams "leader".

I'd almost say it might be better to sign a journeyman to the position for this strategy.

In either case, it would be a moot point if the HC had demonstrated his scheme and system were successful regardless of who was plugged in to get the rest of the team to buy in, but generally, most teams are looking for their QB to be "the guy" for the team, and tossing them aside does have an affect.

[CannonFire]

..."it doesn't matter who the QB is, I have a job to do". ...

Sure, but not everyone is happy to go along on this carousel. When teams "hit the reset" for a rebuild, none of the vets left on the team are happy about it because they know they won't be competing for the next year plus.

The scenario described is not the same as a full blown rebuild, but most teams aren't happy about bringing in a rookie QB, because most rookie QBs aren't ready to compete for a title. Doing so while jettisoning a QB who one would assume had provided serviceable, yet not elite play, would not yield the most desirable psychological response from the rest of the guys who'd been busting their tails to win a championship.

I'm just saying there is a human element which would need to be factored in, especially when dealing with such a centrally important position who is generally the teams "leader".

I'd almost say it might be better to sign a journeyman to the position for this strategy.

In either case, it would be a moot point if the HC had demonstrated his scheme and system were successful regardless of who was plugged in to get the rest of the team to buy in, but generally, most teams are looking for their QB to be "the guy" for the team, and tossing them aside does have an affect.

Yes, they're looking for "the guy", which is why they shouldn't settle for "a guy", and I think the rest of the team would see that too.

[Pirate Life]

My initial reaction to your statement of "no one", lead me to think that if that were the case, then deals like this would be done routinely. My thinking was that QB's would never have a 5th year option picked up because a team would trade their guy after year 3. The QB's would very rarely get re-signed by the team that drafted them. The only ones re-signed would be guys like Mahomes, Borrow, Jackson, and Allen. Guys like Lawrence, Goff, Murray, and Tua would've been traded. Mayfield would've been traded after 2020. Of course though, it's subject to how teams feel about the incoming class. It's not like every year there's 5 QB's hitting Y4 on their deal... it's usually only 2 or 3, just like the number of incoming QB's.

Then I started thinking... maybe not. General Managers are in general, not very good at their job, with respect to QB's. We know this for a fact because they keep handing out these long term big money contracts to guys who are "ok". We also know this because GM's would rather hold firm on their inaccuracies than have humility and admit they're wrong. They do this for the extra 1 to 3 more years of a job. If a GM goes to his owner and says, "We need to go get this QB and pay him this much money because he's we feel really great about him as our QB of the future", then turns around just 3 years later and say "Oops, we were wrong. We need to trade (or cut or bench), this guy and may have to give up more picks and money for that guy", most likely won't have a job much longer. I mean, we know this right? It's why Winston got 5 years. It's why Murray, Lawrence, Tua, Goff, and others got re-signed.

If a GM was smart, he'd spend the most important picks on the players that truly matter more than anything, the OLine and DLine. In today's NFL, virtually any QB is acceptable (see the names I've already mentioned). Building the trenches and then focusing in on the weapons will give virtually any QB a path to success. I think Seattle is a team that's starting to realize this. I'm thinking so is Minnesota. Seattle thought they had a great defense and talent on offense. The bring in Geno and find out that he's acceptable, so they move on from Wilson. They give Geno a new deal, but it was actually cheaper than Mayfield's. Instead of paying him $40M+ per year, they trade him and bring in Darnold on a deal similar to Mayfield's. Here's where they were right... they're not banking on Darnold. They drafted a QB in the 3rd Rd. They brought in Kupp and have JSN. They have a decent backfield and spent their first two draft picks last year in trenches and their first pick in this years draft on the OL. I think that after this season, they'll evaluate Milroe. If they like what they see, I bet Darnold is gone after this year (trade him most likely), and Milroe will be there guy for 2 more. After that second season, if he's "the guy", he'll get a new deal. If he's not, they're going to spend a 2nd or 3rd round pick on a new QB.

I think the Vikings are going to do that as well. It's why they drafted McCarthy instead of re-upping Darnold. They're not letting his 2024 season (which was better than Mayfield's 2023 season), blind them to the fact that they know he's just a guy. As it appears, right now, the Seahawks & Vikings are playing chess while the rest of the league (who don't have studs), are playing checkers. A "GOOD" GM will convince his owner that the idea of the franchise QB as we know it, is outdated. There's no reason to accept "meh", when almost everyone is about "meh", save a small few.

Been on vacation, so pardon the lateness of the response here but I'll be brief:

1) McCarthy was drafted shortly after they signed Darnold. Darnold was signed to be the backup to the QB they planned to draft after not resigning Cousins. Comparing Darnold's 24 season to Mayfield's 23 season is nonsensical and no matter how many times you try to say Darnold is a better QB than Mayfield in whatever twisted permutation of stats you can come up with, Darnold's not going to sleep with you. Please stop trying to make Darnold happen. It's like saying Brees' 2008 season was better than Brady's 2007 season because Brees had more yards.

2) Rookie QB contracts can be a cheat code, yes. However, you really need the QB you draft to be good to make it a viable strategy. That success rate is not very high over the last 5 or 6 seasons. 57 of them drafted between 2020 and 2024. Good ones? 8, maybe 9. And one of those was an afterthought in the 6th round. It's not just scouting, coaching and GMs that are part of the problem it's the talent level as well. Just look at the 'can't miss' guys drafted over the years that ended up terrible or had mediocre years. If you can get better than average QB play from anyone you plug into your team, you do it rookie or FA - and as an FA, Mayfield is cheaper than most of his peers that are around his production since coming to the team.

3) You have no idea what you are talking about in relation to Seattle. Smith was on the team for 3 seasons with Russell Wilson as the starter, got to play when Wilson was put on injured reserve in '21 and was in 4 games, 3 as a starter. Wilson got traded because he was frustrated with the offense and wanted out of Seattle. Denver looked at the Bucs and the Rams getting the previous two SB wins after getting veteran QBs from other teams, thought they'd do the same. Seattle's o-line is also abysmal, was one of the reasons Smith regressed the last couple of seasons. He spent a lot of time under pressure. As for his deal being better than Mayfield's back then, I'll let you in on a secret with NFL contracts: it's cheaper to sign a player now than it is a year from now because the floor rises as other players get their deals.

4) Winston got 5 years because that was the rookie contract structure. He got his 5th year option because the Bucs brought in new coaches and the 2019 draft was pretty poor for QB prospects: Kyler Murray and Dwayne Haskins were about it unless you liked Drew Lock. He's never had a 5 year contract after his rookie one. And again, this is a player that was considered a no brainer and about as safe a pick as you could make for a QB because of his arm talent, work ethic and 'football iq' at the time.

Please do some basic research when you do this stuff, you're wrong more than NFL scouts evaluating QB talent in the draft.

[CannonFire]

My initial reaction to your statement of "no one", lead me to think that if that were the case, then deals like this would be done routinely. My thinking was that QB's would never have a 5th year option picked up because a team would trade their guy after year 3. The QB's would very rarely get re-signed by the team that drafted them. The only ones re-signed would be guys like Mahomes, Borrow, Jackson, and Allen. Guys like Lawrence, Goff, Murray, and Tua would've been traded. Mayfield would've been traded after 2020. Of course though, it's subject to how teams feel about the incoming class. It's not like every year there's 5 QB's hitting Y4 on their deal... it's usually only 2 or 3, just like the number of incoming QB's.

Then I started thinking... maybe not. General Managers are in general, not very good at their job, with respect to QB's. We know this for a fact because they keep handing out these long term big money contracts to guys who are "ok". We also know this because GM's would rather hold firm on their inaccuracies than have humility and admit they're wrong. They do this for the extra 1 to 3 more years of a job. If a GM goes to his owner and says, "We need to go get this QB and pay him this much money because he's we feel really great about him as our QB of the future", then turns around just 3 years later and say "Oops, we were wrong. We need to trade (or cut or bench), this guy and may have to give up more picks and money for that guy", most likely won't have a job much longer. I mean, we know this right? It's why Winston got 5 years. It's why Murray, Lawrence, Tua, Goff, and others got re-signed.

If a GM was smart, he'd spend the most important picks on the players that truly matter more than anything, the OLine and DLine. In today's NFL, virtually any QB is acceptable (see the names I've already mentioned). Building the trenches and then focusing in on the weapons will give virtually any QB a path to success. I think Seattle is a team that's starting to realize this. I'm thinking so is Minnesota. Seattle thought they had a great defense and talent on offense. The bring in Geno and find out that he's acceptable, so they move on from Wilson. They give Geno a new deal, but it was actually cheaper than Mayfield's. Instead of paying him $40M+ per year, they trade him and bring in Darnold on a deal similar to Mayfield's. Here's where they were right... they're not banking on Darnold. They drafted a QB in the 3rd Rd. They brought in Kupp and have JSN. They have a decent backfield and spent their first two draft picks last year in trenches and their first pick in this years draft on the OL. I think that after this season, they'll evaluate Milroe. If they like what they see, I bet Darnold is gone after this year (trade him most likely), and Milroe will be there guy for 2 more. After that second season, if he's "the guy", he'll get a new deal. If he's not, they're going to spend a 2nd or 3rd round pick on a new QB.

I think the Vikings are going to do that as well. It's why they drafted McCarthy instead of re-upping Darnold. They're not letting his 2024 season (which was better than Mayfield's 2023 season), blind them to the fact that they know he's just a guy. As it appears, right now, the Seahawks & Vikings are playing chess while the rest of the league (who don't have studs), are playing checkers. A "GOOD" GM will convince his owner that the idea of the franchise QB as we know it, is outdated. There's no reason to accept "meh", when almost everyone is about "meh", save a small few.

Been on vacation, so pardon the lateness of the response here but I'll be brief:

1) McCarthy was drafted shortly after they signed Darnold. Darnold was signed to be the backup to the QB they planned to draft after not resigning Cousins. Comparing Darnold's 24 season to Mayfield's 23 season is nonsensical and no matter how many times you try to say Darnold is a better QB than Mayfield in whatever twisted permutation of stats you can come up with, Darnold's not going to sleep with you. Please stop trying to make Darnold happen. It's like saying Brees' 2008 season was better than Brady's 2007 season because Brees had more yards.

2) Rookie QB contracts can be a cheat code, yes. However, you really need the QB you draft to be good to make it a viable strategy. That success rate is not very high over the last 5 or 6 seasons. 57 of them drafted between 2020 and 2024. Good ones? 8, maybe 9. And one of those was an afterthought in the 6th round. It's not just scouting, coaching and GMs that are part of the problem it's the talent level as well. Just look at the 'can't miss' guys drafted over the years that ended up terrible or had mediocre years. If you can get better than average QB play from anyone you plug into your team, you do it rookie or FA - and as an FA, Mayfield is cheaper than most of his peers that are around his production since coming to the team.

3) You have no idea what you are talking about in relation to Seattle. Smith was on the team for 3 seasons with Russell Wilson as the starter, got to play when Wilson was put on injured reserve in '21 and was in 4 games, 3 as a starter. Wilson got traded because he was frustrated with the offense and wanted out of Seattle. Denver looked at the Bucs and the Rams getting the previous two SB wins after getting veteran QBs from other teams, thought they'd do the same. Seattle's o-line is also abysmal, was one of the reasons Smith regressed the last couple of seasons. He spent a lot of time under pressure. As for his deal being better than Mayfield's back then, I'll let you in on a secret with NFL contracts: it's cheaper to sign a player now than it is a year from now because the floor rises as other players get their deals.

4) Winston got 5 years because that was the rookie contract structure. He got his 5th year option because the Bucs brought in new coaches and the 2019 draft was pretty poor for QB prospects: Kyler Murray and Dwayne Haskins were about it unless you liked Drew Lock. He's never had a 5 year contract after his rookie one. And again, this is a player that was considered a no brainer and about as safe a pick as you could make for a QB because of his arm talent, work ethic and 'football iq' at the time.

Please do some basic research when you do this stuff, you're wrong more than NFL scouts evaluating QB talent in the draft.

1) Sam Darnold 2024: 66.2% / 4319 yards / 35 TD's / 12 Ints / 7.9 yps / 102.5 passer rating / 60.4 QBR
Baker Mayfield 2023: 64.3% / 4044 yards / 28 TD's / 10 Ints / 7.1 yps / 94.6 passer rating / 54.3 QBR

Looks comparable to me. I never said Darnold was a better QB, I said his season was better. Also, you're right, the Vikings drafted McCarthy just after signing Darnold... it's because they knew Darnold was a stop gap. Also, Darnold didn't just have more yards, he bettered Mayfield at almost every level... comp %, TD's, ypa, passer rating, and QBR. The ONLY category Mayfield was better, was Int's

Not worth addressing the rest when you've shown complete bias in point #1.

[Pirate Life]

1) Sam Darnold 2024: 66.2% / 4319 yards / 35 TD's / 12 Ints / 7.9 yps / 102.5 passer rating / 60.4 QBR
Baker Mayfield 2023: 64.3% / 4044 yards / 28 TD's / 10 Ints / 7.1 yps / 94.6 passer rating / 54.3 QBR

Looks comparable to me. I never said Darnold was a better QB, I said his season was better. Also, you're right, the Vikings drafted McCarthy just after signing Darnold... it's because they knew Darnold was a stop gap. Also, Darnold didn't just have more yards, he bettered Mayfield at almost every level... comp %, TD's, ypa, passer rating, and QBR. The ONLY category Mayfield was better, was Int's

Not worth addressing the rest when you've shown complete bias in point #1.

You've said multiple times Darnold is a better QB than Mayfield when discussing their time on the Panthers. Said Mayfield was named the starter because Darnold was injured, which was wrong. Said Mayfield was released because Darnold came off of IR, which was also wrong. You've said before that he had a better 2024 season than Mayfield's 2024 as well. In fact, your last two sentences in there are what I wrote about both of their 2024 seasons when you stated that, just switch their names around. Comparing anyone's best season to some other player's not best season in a different year is the very definition of cherry picking to make your guy look better. League changes year to year after all. Compare any other of their seasons and Mayfield ends up better far more often than not. Mayfield has 6 of 7 seasons with 3000+ passing yards, Darnold 2. Mayfield has 5 of 7 seasons with 20 or more TD passes. Darnold has 1. Hell, Mayfield's had double digit passing TDs every season he's been in. Darnold has 3 of them. Mayfield has 6 of 7 seasons with 60% or better completion percentage. Darnold has 3. You do a lot of gymnastics to avoid what Mayfield did in 2024 compared to all of these QBs.

Also, if Mayfield's contract is so horrible, why are you praising the Seahawks as geniuses when they signed Darnold to a contract worth more with more guaranteed money? By your recent logic, would that not be a bad GM move and a bad team move - especially for a guy who wasn't on the team last season?

And no, Darnold was not signed to be a stop gap. They signed him to be the backup QB to whomever they drafted (though they got the guy they wanted in McCarthy). Hell, the press release from them signing him highlighted that he comes from an athletic family because his grandfather played college basketball and was an Olympic volleyball player.

As for the rest, surrender duly noted.

[CannonFire]

1) Sam Darnold 2024: 66.2% / 4319 yards / 35 TD's / 12 Ints / 7.9 yps / 102.5 passer rating / 60.4 QBR
Baker Mayfield 2023: 64.3% / 4044 yards / 28 TD's / 10 Ints / 7.1 yps / 94.6 passer rating / 54.3 QBR

Looks comparable to me. I never said Darnold was a better QB, I said his season was better. Also, you're right, the Vikings drafted McCarthy just after signing Darnold... it's because they knew Darnold was a stop gap. Also, Darnold didn't just have more yards, he bettered Mayfield at almost every level... comp %, TD's, ypa, passer rating, and QBR. The ONLY category Mayfield was better, was Int's

Not worth addressing the rest when you've shown complete bias in point #1.

You've said multiple times Darnold is a better QB than Mayfield when discussing their time on the Panthers. Said Mayfield was named the starter because Darnold was injured, which was wrong. Said Mayfield was released because Darnold came off of IR, which was also wrong. You've said before that he had a better 2024 season than Mayfield's 2024 as well. In fact, your last two sentences in there are what I wrote about both of their 2024 seasons when you stated that, just switch their names around. Comparing anyone's best season to some other player's not best season in a different year is the very definition of cherry picking to make your guy look better. League changes year to year after all. Compare any other of their seasons and Mayfield ends up better far more often than not. Mayfield has 6 of 7 seasons with 3000+ passing yards, Darnold 2. Mayfield has 5 of 7 seasons with 20 or more TD passes. Darnold has 1. Hell, Mayfield's had double digit passing TDs every season he's been in. Darnold has 3 of them. Mayfield has 6 of 7 seasons with 60% or better completion percentage. Darnold has 3. You do a lot of gymnastics to avoid what Mayfield did in 2024 compared to all of these QBs.

Also, if Mayfield's contract is so horrible, why are you praising the Seahawks as geniuses when they signed Darnold to a contract worth more with more guaranteed money? By your recent logic, would that not be a bad GM move and a bad team move - especially for a guy who wasn't on the team last season?

And no, Darnold was not signed to be a stop gap. They signed him to be the backup QB to whomever they drafted (though they got the guy they wanted in McCarthy). Hell, the press release from them signing him highlighted that he comes from an athletic family because his grandfather played college basketball and was an Olympic volleyball player.

As for the rest, surrender duly noted.

I didn't say Darnold WAS better, I said he performed better. This is a fact, it's not in question, why'd you'd debate that is absurd.

I never praised Seattle for the contract, I said that Minnesota did it right. I used Seattle as a reference to where they signed Darnold to virtually the same deal that we signed Mayfield.

Fine, they signed him to be a backup. That changes nothing... if anything, it proves my point more. Thanks.

I've discussed this ad nauseum, you can read any posts at your leisure. You're coming off just like everyone else on this board. I don't think Mayfield is a top 10 QB, I don't think we should invest a lot of money in him... so that must mean I think he sucks and want the Bucs to lose because that'll prove I'm right.

The only thing I've done in relation to Mayfield about stats, was point out people's hypocrisy. I wasn't saying he sucked. If you want to be like them and act like 10 year old's, go ahead and do it without me.

[Pirate Life]

I didn't say Darnold WAS better, I said he performed better. This is a fact, it's not in question, why'd you'd debate that is absurd.

I never praised Seattle for the contract, I said that Minnesota did it right. I used Seattle as a reference to where they signed Darnold to virtually the same deal that we signed Mayfield.

Fine, they signed him to be a backup. That changes nothing... if anything, it proves my point more. Thanks.

I've discussed this ad nauseum, you can read any posts at your leisure. You're coming off just like everyone else on this board. I don't think Mayfield is a top 10 QB, I don't think we should invest a lot of money in him... so that must mean I think he sucks and want the Bucs to lose because that'll prove I'm right.

The only thing I've done in relation to Mayfield about stats, was point out people's hypocrisy. I wasn't saying he sucked. If you want to be like them and act like 10 year old's, go ahead and do it without me.

You have said he was better. You listed him being a better QB as why Mayfield was let go from Carolina and have at times tried to say his 24 season was better than Mayfield's 24 season. As far as Mayfield, you've shifted your argument over time. His contract was not a thing for you until this offseason and quite frankly it's a red herring considering how much the QBs you say would do just as well or better than him here. I'm not even making the argument that Mayfield's great or belongs in the HoF either as you are wont to paint the folks who debate this with you. I guess progress has been made, you're finally admitting that Mayfield's not a bad QB.

I guess you don't read what you write afterwards, here's what you said about Seattle:

Building the trenches and then focusing in on the weapons will give virtually any QB a path to success. I think Seattle is a team that's starting to realize this. I'm thinking so is Minnesota. Seattle thought they had a great defense and talent on offense. The bring in Geno and find out that he's acceptable, so they move on from Wilson. They give Geno a new deal, but it was actually cheaper than Mayfield's. Instead of paying him $40M+ per year, they trade him and bring in Darnold on a deal similar to Mayfield's.

They didn't find out anything about Geno until after they'd traded Wilson. They moved on from Wilson because Wilson essentially forced the trade, and from many reports by the players had stopped doing anything but going through the motions midway through the 2021 season. Denver offers a king's ransom for him in draft picks and players including Drew Lock and Noah Fant. Geno was a stop gap at that point, he'd been their plan for a backup until that trade. They did have an honest competition in training camp which Smith won. Smith did well the next few seasons behind a pretty bad o-line. Their two tackles aren't really living up to their draft position quite yet. Like I said earlier, Smith's contract is cheaper than Mayfield's because he got his deal done before Mayfield's was - the season before actually. Seahawks were looking to resign him, but it wasn't money that made them eventually trade him as much as what Seattle was offering gave them a lot of outs and less guaranteed than Smith wanted because of those outs combined with Smith's desire to play for Pete Carroll again.

Darnold's contract is not similar to the one Mayfield signed. It pays him more overall, gives him more guaranteed money and reflects the way NFL contracts escalate year over year. Darnold's contract is seen as low risk due to the cost. It's basically the 2025 version of Smith's 75 million contract in dollar value vs the rest of the league's journeyman starters (though Darnold's has more incentives than Smith's did - he has potential to earn about $3 million more than Mayfield if both hit all of their incentives). Mayfield's contract is seen as a really good bargain by most because of his play on the field and the cost relative to most of the QBs putting up similar stats since he got to the Bucs.

[Phantom]

Did USF lose five consecutive games that year? Yes, that USF team was GREAT!

[Buc2]

Did USF lose five consecutive games that year? Yes, that USF team was GREAT!

Reboot, dude. Your CPU is overtaxed.