Today there was aREPORT from Jenna Laine. She is a reporter who covers the Bucs The gist of it was that IF/WHEN the Bucs get knocked out this season they have to think hard about drafting a QB.
So, that makes Laine, Sikkema and Campbell . . all of them cover or have covered the Bucs, two of them analysts . . .NOT one has said the Bucs do NOT need to draft a QB.
Sikkemma in particular stands out because he is a diehard Gator who watched Trask his whole college career and he actually says DIRECTLY that Trask is NOT a NFL QB
I want Trask to be the Buc franchise QB for the next decade, but where is the PFF or Walter Football or Risk Stroud or Greg Auman report saying the the Bucs want to sit Mayfield for Trask? or "no the Bucs will not draft a QB because they have Trask?"
What's best for the Bucs is what matters to the Bucs, not what's best for Trask
And, whether intentional or not, this is the part that you can’t seem to wrap your head around.
What would be best for the Bucs (and what should matter) is finding out what they actually have in a player they invested a 2nd round pick in.
Is this someone they can see a future with? Is this someone they can build around?
Or, is he not any of those (and we need to invest a 1st rounder in a QB/trade up/etc.)
What's best for the Bucs is what matters to the Bucs, not what's best for Trask
And, whether intentional or not, this is the part that you can’t seem to wrap your head around.
What would be best for the Bucs (and what should matter) is finding out what they actually have in a player they invested a 2nd round pick in.
Is this someone they can see a future with? Is this someone they can build around?
Or, is he not any of those (and we need to invest a 1st rounder in a QB/trade up/etc.)
and do you think the Bucs have already made that decision?
right, wrong, or indifferent many would argue that decision to “move on” from Trask was made last offseason. Or no?
What would be best for the Bucs (and what should matter) is finding out what they actually have in a player they invested a 2nd round pick in.
i don't think there is a single person who disagrees with that lol
the issue is the TIMING
right, wrong, or indifferent many would argue that decision to “move on” from Trask was made last offseason. Or no?
the reporting certainly makes it seem like that is the case
right, wrong, or indifferent many would argue that decision to “move on” from Trask was made last offseason. Or no?
the reporting certainly makes it seem like that is the case
Just like it was Bowles who made the decision to play the FA LG that Bowles signed. Now that Stinnie is playing, the run game has greatly improved over the last few games. The Bucs should have started Stinnie from game one, but Bowles had made up his mind that the FA would be the starter. It was Bowles who decided that when he signed Mayfield, that Mayfield would be the starter. There never was any fair competition.
t was Bowles who decided that when he signed Mayfield, that Mayfield would be the starter. There never was any fair competition.
well, the reporting was of an actual competition, but fair enough because who knows?
I agree that mayfield had the upper hand, but that is sort of what one might expect given the circumstances
I don't disagree with this at all once the Bucs are effectively eliminated. I previously thought that would mean one game max, because it would come down to the Saints game in Week 17. But now it's evident that it could be four games if they lose to the Falcons. So I'm all in favor of putting Trask in for the remainder of the season. Again, we don't know who the new head coach would be, but I have a sneaking suspicion they will find a way to keep the continuity on offense especially with the growth that has gradually happened on the O-line. Do you really want to bring in a new system and have to start over again? At the start of the season it was the offense which was the question mark. Now it's the defense. All we need on offense is a couple pieces including a QB, C and another TE. But you don't need to revamp the whole thing.What's best for the Bucs is what matters to the Bucs, not what's best for Trask
And, whether intentional or not, this is the part that you can’t seem to wrap your head around.
What would be best for the Bucs (and what should matter) is finding out what they actually have in a player they invested a 2nd round pick in.
Is this someone they can see a future with? Is this someone they can build around?
Or, is he not any of those (and we need to invest a 1st rounder in a QB/trade up/etc.)
Anyway, so if you keep Canales, then you need a QB who fits what he wants to do, and I think he wants more mobility from the QB than either Trask or Mayfield can provide IMO. Nix, McCarthy and especial Daniels have that level of mobility where he can run the offense he wants to run. They can draft a QB, sign Mayfield for cheap to be a bridge/backup and where does that leave Trask? Trade bait. So that's why I think it could be a showcase for a trade more than a tryout for the Bucs starting QB next year. But in any case I'm all for him getting the starts.
The competition was never real. The one "fan" blog had their main guy stating all through camp and preseason that barring a collapse by Mayfield he would be the starter because of the experience and Bowles playing for his job. This is where a more active owner could have stepped in and said "You can go with whomever at QB, but if you start Mayfield, you need to win a playoff game...but go with Trask, I'll give you next year barring the team just collapses." Then the guy who really stood out more in camp and preseason would have been starting all year and we'd be in a better position regardless of win totals. We've now wasted a year on a rental QB that is clearly not the answer, and still don't know if Trask could be the guy or not. In my mind, that's piss poor management. The reality is that when Todd had Baker come signed he basically guaranteed him the job as long as he could control the picks. Trask never really had a chance. Despite this, he drastically improved over the camps and preseason to the point he, in my opinion, played better than Mayfield and should have gotten the chance to start.
Remember this, Dan Mullen made the same mistake of believing the guy with moxie and leadership was the guy to go with and valued practice way too much. Had Franks kept playing at QB, Dan might have gotten fired sooner. Trask turned that team around instantly despite not playing for a couple of years. I think it's dumb to do what we are doing, and it will likely bite us in the ass as it has in the past.
Not buying the trade bait angle
What is his realistic value right now? A 5th or 6th? 23 passes to his career in year 3
now after a potential falcons loss, and he gets four starts. Let’s see
best case scenario - he pulls a Mahomes and lights it up. Well then he’s likely our guy next year and not trading him.
he plays mid to above average. Ehh too small a sample size. We likely keep him as a backup. Not enough for a team to seriously consider him as a starter
he plays poorly. Likely he is third string next year
if Bucs lose Sunday, it’s likely Bowles is toast. New coach comes in, will want his own rookie QB or a veteran of his choosing not a 4th year backup.
unless those Trask supporters actually think Trask will be forced onto a new coach 😂
The competition was never real.
Good grief. That sounds like a Noles fan saying Winston wasn’t to blame for all those interceptions.
of course Trask had a chance to beat him out
remind me again about how Gator love has nothing to do with this.
Ehh too small a sample size.
Oh, so now 4 games is too small of a sample size.
Your flip-flopping is epic, Mr. "Baker is Having His Best Year as a Pro...It's Easy to Look Up"
🤡🤡🤡
