QB Mike Glennon Is Our Best Option

[blackbart]

They may not want to trade him. I just think with Lovie really liking McCown and a rookie #1 overall pick at QB...Glennon makes sense as the odd man out if they can get a pick for him

A logical enough deduction. If it was me I'd want them all competing in TC before I decide who is going.

 

[jrry32]

A logical enough deduction. If it was me I'd want them all competing in TC before I decide who is going.

I would too. But it was pretty clear that wasn't what went down this year(well, to me at least...maybe others felt differently). Lovie handed the job to McCown and, imo, never really gave Glennon a fair shake. Even during the season, Glennon came in for an injured McCown and outplayed him...and then was sent right back to the bench.

I think McCown is Lovie's "guy" which means he'll get the backup job. And I think TB will start their rookie QB if he's ready. If not, McCown starts until he is.

 

[Alan]

jrry32 possibly living in the past:
I think McCown is Lovie's "guy" which means he'll get the backup job. And I think TB will start their rookie QB if he's ready. If not, McCown starts until he is.

I think you might not be accounting for what input their new OC is going to have in that decision. I don't think he cares about getting a draft pick. Were it me, I'd be wanting to make darn sure I had the two best QBs on my team because my future depends on me producing. Lovie could over rule him but that wouldn't bode well for the future of their relationship I wouldn't think.

I think the decision will come down to them agreeing about what they see on the tape. Just like you did. Do you think they'll come to a different conclusion than you? I'm not disagreeing with your take on Glennon, just curious.

 

[jrry32]

I think you might not be accounting for what input their new OC is going to have in that decision. I don't think he cares about getting a draft pick. Were it me, I'd be wanting to make darn sure I had the two best QBs on my team because my future depends on me producing. Lovie could over rule him but that wouldn't bode well for the future of their relationship I wouldn't think.

I think the decision will come down to them agreeing about what they see on the tape. Just like you did. Do you think they'll come to a different conclusion than you? I'm not disagreeing with your take on Glennon, just curious.

I think Lovie, like Fisher, will have final say. And he'll choose keeping McCown over Glennon. JMO.

 

[dieterbrock]

Maybe Lovie will bring in Rex Grossman for camp competition thus making Glennon more expendable

 

[Alan]

 

[thirteen28]

Maybe Lovie will bring in Rex Grossman for camp competition thus making Glennon more expendable

He might also bring in Jamie Duncan to play MLB.

 

[moklerman]

IMO we got so hosed by not focusing the position ahead of time. In today's NFL you gotta have a guy on the depth chart developing even if it means using a higher pick than you want on a non-need position. Which means that even if the Rams trade for a vet to compete with Bradford they need to draft the position as well.

And keep drafting it until they find a guy they can call their QB of the future. Then, when he takes over, keep drafting it here and there to ensure that depth is there. QB is that important and Fish needs to get past his concerns over QB controversies and understand that in today's NFL you're not gonna get a franchise QB who is ready to play unless you draft at the top of the pile so investing ahead of time is required.

I've heard this idea more than once and I'm wondering just how many teams have really done this? There're a few examples but some of the one's I'm thinking of are likely being distorted by hindsight. I think the Packers are a good example of approaching things this way but they don't exactly fit. They thought Favre's time was short and had good reason considering he was what, 36 when they drafted Rodgers.

Rivers and Brees in SD kind of fits but then again, SD wasn't really planning for the future they'd given up on Brees. So, in that case it wasn't like they had a starter and drafted a guy anyway and started developing him, they'd decided to move on from Brees and then were surprised when the light came on for him.

Who else? New England maybe? I guess you could say they've spent some higher picks the last few years on Mallet and Garapolo but that seems like more of a Green Bay situation where Brady's on the wrong side of 35 and New England simply has to face reality. It's not like they've been in a constant state of developing QB's since Brady's been there.

So, I wonder why this thought process seems so popular? I can't think of any teams that've really taken this approach and proved the process.

 

[moklerman]

Here's a scary thought. Wasn't Les Snead part of the Falcons scouting department that acquired Matt Schaub? Maybe he's the next FA QB acquisition for the Rams.

 

[Ramathon]

IMO we got so hosed by not focusing the position ahead of time. In today's NFL you gotta have a guy on the depth chart developing even if it means using a higher pick than you want on a non-need position. Which means that even if the Rams trade for a vet to compete with Bradford they need to draft the position as well.

And keep drafting it until they find a guy they can call their QB of the future. Then, when he takes over, keep drafting it here and there to ensure that depth is there. QB is that important and Fish needs to get past his concerns over QB controversies and understand that in today's NFL you're not gonna get a franchise QB who is ready to play unless you draft at the top of the pile so investing ahead of time is required.

They did address the position ahead of time. Hill was signed as the best backup they believed to be available, and they took a flyer on Gilbert as a developmental guy. Clearly, neither worked out as well as one might have hoped. But with as many other holes as existed on the team, it didn't seem like a bad strategy at the time. But it wasn't ignored.

I seriously doubt Fisher has ANY concerns over QB controversies, and fully understands what's needed in today's NFL.....FAR better than any of us armchair GM's. And drafting at the 'top of the pile' doesn't remotely guarantee getting one that's ready to play. Too often, starting on Day 1 has been forced on draftees that weren't remotely 'ready to play', but there they were starting anyway.

 

[…..]

After the 1986 season, the San Francisco 49ers traded for a QB with a record of 3-16 as a starter. That loser went on to help them win a Super Bowl and earned a spot in the Hall of Fame.

Teams win and teams lose...not individual players.

I'm not claiming Glennon will be a HOFer or even a Pro Bowl QB but I think he's a good option as a backup if we roll with Bradford. Not liking our options in the draft outside the top two guys.

Great example because you are of course referring to another Tampa Bay QB. .....Touche!

 

[snackdaddy]

Here's a scary thought. Wasn't Les Snead part of the Falcons scouting department that acquired Matt Schaub? Maybe he's the next FA QB acquisition for the Rams.

I don't know what happened to Schaub. He was a decent for a couple seasons then he dropped off a cliff as far as his play. I thought a change of scenery would do him good but he got beat out by a rookie. Wouldn't mind bringing him in for competition though. Maybe the right team can bring out better play in him.

 

[Username]

Schaub has nothing left in the tank after the beating he took in his time at Houston. Looked absolutely abysmal the last few times he played. Please dear God no.

 

[blue4]

I must say the W/L record of a QB isn't a viable indicator of how a QB has played. This isn't baseball. That's like judging a MLB on his W/L record. Maybe on a team as built as GB or Seattle, where the talent level is indisputable. But TB or Washington? There's nothing there to work with.

 

[Merlin]

They did address the position ahead of time. Hill was signed as the best backup they believed to be available, and they took a flyer on Gilbert as a developmental guy. Clearly, neither worked out as well as one might have hoped. But with as many other holes as existed on the team, it didn't seem like a bad strategy at the time. But it wasn't ignored.

I seriously doubt Fisher has ANY concerns over QB controversies, and fully understands what's needed in today's NFL.....FAR better than any of us armchair GM's. And drafting at the 'top of the pile' doesn't remotely guarantee getting one that's ready to play. Too often, starting on Day 1 has been forced on draftees that weren't remotely 'ready to play', but there they were starting anyway.

I don't consider a 6th round QB and signing Hill as addressing the position when you know Bradford is injury prone. Fact is they gambled on Sam and lost.

Fish and Snead have done a great job in the draft at every position but QB and interior OL. My point remains that if you aren't set at QB you need to draft the position ahead of time because so many of these guys are gonna need to adjust to the NFL game. The Patriots were far more settled at QB than we were, yet they still managed to take a flyer on Garoppolo in the 2nd round. THAT is what I am talking about.

Now their backs are against the wall, everyone knows they need QB, and they'll be one of the teams you move ahead of in a given round to take the QB you want. As I said they need to draft the position this year, and if they're not impressed by their QB of the future draft it again and again until they get it right.

 

[Stranger]

Fish and Snead have done a great job in the draft at every position but QB and interior OL. My point remains that if you aren't set at QB you need to draft the position ahead of time because so many of these guys are gonna need to adjust to the NFL game. The Patriots were far more settled at QB than we were, yet they still managed to take a flyer on Garoppolo in the 2nd round. THAT is what I am talking about.

I totally agree that we need to fix the QB situation. But with due respect, I really think the Snishers really thought that they had the QB problem addressed, even with Sam's 1st knee injury. I think Sam was a major reason why the Snishers came to StL. But we've certainly experienced our share of bad "luck", so now we're in a position where it appears that all of the past decisions have been bad ones. I'm pissed that we're now in this situation, which has no good options, but I think I would have done exactly the same thing that the Snishers did in last year's draft.

 

[LesBaker]

I think Lovie, like Fisher, will have final say. And he'll choose keeping McCown over Glennon. JMO.

If the Bucs gave Lovie final say they really are a fucked up franchise.

 

[Ramathon]

I don't consider a 6th round QB and signing Hill as addressing the position when you know Bradford is injury prone. Fact is they gambled on Sam and lost......

Of course you don't...now. Hindsight being hindsight. You'd have thought it was a great plan if Hill had played better than he did, and if Gilbert had looked like the 2nd coming of Favre in training camp.

 

[Alan]

Ramathon halfway there:
Of course you don't...now. Hindsight being hindsight. You'd have thought it was a great plan if Hill had played better than he did, and if Gilbert had looked like the 2nd coming of Favre in training camp.

Gilbert? Maybe. Would you really call picking a QB in the 6th round to actually address the situation?

Hill? He played, if anything, better than expected. That's not hindsight, that's a recognition that they hoped to get by with just a decent backup type QB who could replace SB for short periods of time. A gamble we all lost.

 

[Ramathon]

Gilbert? Maybe. Would you really call picking a QB in the 6th round to actually address the situation?

Four words.....Tom Brady / Kurt Warner.