Treylon Burks debut

[rns90]

3 minutes ago, IowaOiler said:

@Mythos27 and @Bink...Willis was an awful pick.  I don't fault anyone for trying to be optimistic with him, but again, we've tried this before...drafting an athletic QB with a 'strong arm' but that 'needs some work.'  We drafted Locker and gave him almost an entire year to sit behind Hasselbeck...did it help?  We drafted Young, and despite saving Fisher's ass twice, he was an imbecile child.  We drafted Mariota...another wasted pick on a QB with athletisicm and accuracy issues.  We've seen this before, just like we've seen Vrabel before.  Sports isn't fun if you can't be optimistic about something, but we're also seeing this for the 4th time, and what's the definition of insanity.  

 

I do understand that Young, Locker, and Mariota have nothing to do with whether Willis succeeds...but the fact is, there aren't many QBs that lead their teams to championships that lack accuracy and the ability to read defenses.  Lamar is the closest, and he's a laughingstock as a QB.  Willis has 0 chance...0.  He's an awful QB, and I know it's been 1 pre-season game, but considering we were going against a second string vanilla defense and he looked seriously outmatched.  

 

But I don't blame anyone for being optimistic.  The alternative with this franchise is despair at the ineptitude.  If not for liking Henry (despite knowing we can't ride him to a championship), that's where I would be.

Look I get why you feel this pick sucks.  And to be honest, I'm closer to your level to skepticism than the homers here.  But this was a pick in the late 80s AND they had extra picks, and you're assuming that every pick that JRob makes will lead to a contributor.  There's no guarantee at all that the guy they picked instead of Willis would have been a starter or depth.  He could be the next Darryton Evans or Taywan Taylor.

 

So that's why I'm not that peeved about it. But if he even develops into a backup level QB it's a good investment.

[Mythos27]

1 hour ago, rns90 said:

Look I get why you feel this pick sucks.  And to be honest, I'm closer to your level to skepticism than the homers here.  But this was a pick in the late 80s AND they had extra picks, and you're assuming that every pick that JRob makes will lead to a contributor.  There's no guarantee at all that the guy they picked instead of Willis would have been a starter or depth.  He could be the next Darryton Evans or Taywan Taylor.

 

So that's why I'm not that peeved about it. But if he even develops into a backup level QB it's a good investment.

Right. Thinking Willis's odds of success are slim to none is perfectly reasonable. The pick he was taken at however makes this unimportant. This pick only matters if it hits which we've all pretty agreed is unlikely. Why spend time worrying about it?

[StephenIsLegend]

I think you need to give the kid a little more than two quarters of a preseason game to call him a bust/bad pick.  There's plenty to like about him as a prospect, and as others have mentioned.. he was drafted in the 80s.  It's not like this singular preseason game was his only chance to develop.  Then again, I can see your point-of-view since you don't think Vrabel is a good coach.  The fact is, he IS an exciting prospect; especially if you look at it through the lens of the athletic QB being what EVERYONE is going for.  Especially those with a big arm (he looks like he has the strength to make every throw) and speed to boot.

 

I honestly have zero idea what to expect, but I'm hoping for the best. 

[ChemEngr79]

5 hours ago, BlueThunder said:

Like many on this board......real optimists.....lol. Take one statistics class in college and you won't gamble again.

I think it is safe to assume people losing their paychecks to scratch offs have not been to college math courses...

[IowaOiler]

3 hours ago, TheChosenTitan said:

Those were top 10 picks. Willis was our second third round pick 

 

I'm aware.

 

3 hours ago, rns90 said:

Look I get why you feel this pick sucks.  And to be honest, I'm closer to your level to skepticism than the homers here.  But this was a pick in the late 80s AND they had extra picks, and you're assuming that every pick that JRob makes will lead to a contributor.  There's no guarantee at all that the guy they picked instead of Willis would have been a starter or depth.  He could be the next Darryton Evans or Taywan Taylor.

 

So that's why I'm not that peeved about it. But if he even develops into a backup level QB it's a good investment.

 

So JRob 'could' have fucked up the pick worse?  I mean, we could use that same argument with our first rounders...he 'could' have drafted another Wilson, so why not take a chance?

 

2 hours ago, Mythos27 said:

Right. Thinking Willis's odds of success are slim to none is perfectly reasonable. The pick he was taken at however makes this unimportant. This pick only matters if it hits which we've all pretty agreed is unlikely. Why spend time worrying about it?

 

That's not true at all.  3rd round picks aren't 6th round picks.  Last year's 3rd rounders were Rice and Molden.  He's also drafted Nate Davis in the 3rd, and Jonnu Smith, and Kevin Byard.  Would anyone be willing to give up those guys for Willis?

[OILERMAN]

The Willis pick is a long shot but it damn sure looks like the rest of the draft was a home run 

[IsntLifeFunny]

46 minutes ago, OILERMAN said:

The Willis pick is a long shot but it damn sure looks like the rest of the draft was a home run 

Iowa is simply moving on from Vrabel to Robinson. I said it before the draft and It's played out to a T. 

 

Willis wasn't even a gamble. He was a high upside pick with enough talent and intelligence to at least be a solid backup. They picked him because he has a unique skillet that if developed whatsoever provides for a situation where the entire season isn't tanked if Tannehill goes down for 4-6 weeks. Having a guy that can make plays as a QB is a valuable commodity regardless of any other circumstances.

 

I think of it like this: I wouldn't want Lamar Jackson as my franchise QB, especially with how they've catered the offense around him. If Willis is even close to Lamar Jackson he's a great pick because of potential added wins over a scrub backup like Woodside. 

 

In a perfect world he never takes a snap as a Titan except in garbage time.

[oldschool]

9 hours ago, IowaOiler said:

@Mythos27 and @Bink...Willis was an awful pick.  I don't fault anyone for trying to be optimistic with him, but again, we've tried this before...drafting an athletic QB with a 'strong arm' but that 'needs some work.'  We drafted Locker and gave him almost an entire year to sit behind Hasselbeck...did it help?  We drafted Young, and despite saving Fisher's ass twice, he was an imbecile child.  We drafted Mariota...another wasted pick on a QB with athletisicm and accuracy issues.  We've seen this before, just like we've seen Vrabel before.  Sports isn't fun if you can't be optimistic about something, but we're also seeing this for the 4th time, and what's the definition of insanity.  

 

I do understand that Young, Locker, and Mariota have nothing to do with whether Willis succeeds...but the fact is, there aren't many QBs that lead their teams to championships that lack accuracy and the ability to read defenses.  Lamar is the closest, and he's a laughingstock as a QB.  Willis has 0 chance...0.  He's an awful QB, and I know it's been 1 pre-season game, but considering we were going against a second string vanilla defense and he looked seriously outmatched.  

 

But I don't blame anyone for being optimistic.  The alternative with this franchise is despair at the ineptitude.  If not for liking Henry (despite knowing we can't ride him to a championship), that's where I would be.

 

There is one massive hole in your argument. Willis was a mid 3rd rounder, Locker and Young were top 10 picks. The investment is critical here. Taking a flyer on Willis in the 3rd is fine. Taking him in the 1st would have been dumb as hell.

[Mythos27]

4 hours ago, BlueThunder said:

Well he was ripped for his terrible college habits, so yeah. You are digging a deeper hole, and have little support. You should give it a rest.

Support from who? Idiots like you. No one respects you around here for good reason. Now mind your business, I was talking to someone with a brain in their head. 

[begooode]

6 hours ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

Willis wasn't even a gamble. He was a high upside pick with enough talent and intelligence to at least be a solid backup. They picked him because he has a unique skillet that if developed whatsoever provides for a situation where the entire season isn't tanked if Tannehill goes down for 4-6 weeks. Having a guy that can make plays as a QB is a valuable commodity regardless of any other circumstances.

 

I think of it like this: I wouldn't want Lamar Jackson as my franchise QB, especially with how they've catered the offense around him. If Willis is even close to Lamar Jackson he's a great pick because of potential added wins over a scrub backup like Woodside. 

 

Agree with most of this with a caveat worth reinforcing: it's ideal if the backup QB can run a large % of the base offense. If so much change is required to get the most from the backup -- effectively an alternative offense -- then that's potentially a big problem midseason , and a real inhibitor of 'running QBs' making teams in backup roles in general.

[Mythos27]

11 minutes ago, BlueThunder said:

LOL>..you have a following of about two morons. You used to have credibility here, but your take on Willis is SO wrong you are being laughed at. 

Joe, please. You're a laughing stock. You're getting laughed out of every thread for being the only person on the planet deepthroating Logan Woodside and that's like the 8th most embarrassing thing about you. Don't you have some minorities or women to harass? Beat it. 

[Mythos27]

Just now, BlueThunder said:

Keep loving on Willis.  He is getting eaten up today. MORE bad play. You should be thankful we have a decent back up QB. But then, you don't care about the Titans, you have your own agenda.

 

You're such an idiot that you don't even know what my stance on Willis is. You're not worth discussing anything with. Get lost.

[Mythos27]

Just now, BlueThunder said:

The big reversal is coming. Need some help getting off the Willis bandwagon? Maybe you can save face.

Again, you don't know anything, as usual. Oh yeah Woodside is a fucking bum.

[TheChosenTitan]

7 minutes ago, BlueThunder said:

Keep loving on Willis.  He is getting eaten up today. MORE bad play. You should be thankful we have a decent back up QB. But then, you don't care about the Titans, you have your own agenda.

 

Woodside is a decent backup QB? 

[IsntLifeFunny]

1 hour ago, begooode said:

 

Agree with most of this with a caveat worth reinforcing: it's ideal if the backup QB can run a large % of the base offense. If so much change is required to get the most from the backup -- effectively an alternative offense -- then that's potentially a big problem midseason , and a real inhibitor of 'running QBs' making teams in backup roles in general.

For sure, which is why I'm happy Vrabel is pushing the kid to not just be a running QB. It could ruin him trying to retrain him in such a way by making him hesitant, but if he's ever going to be a real NFL QB he has to learn to run the offense.