Our WR's

[Lefty2SLO]

1. So, you think head coaches never change player distributions at positions from one year to the next to fit the strengths and weaknesses of the team's roster? I am simply telling you that our team has more often kept 6 WRs than 5, so there would be nothing abnormal about Staley keeping 6 WRs if Reed shows well in the preseason because he is not cutting any of the top 5 WRs on the roster. And sure, some of the WRs may be key special teams contributors. I never suggested anything to the contrary. I just said that we had a history of keeping 6 WRs instead of 5 until Staley arrived last year. And one year under Staley does not prove that he will always keep only 5 WRs.

2. Regarding Huntley, his INT% last year was lower than Herbert's, so your emphasis on his INTs is misplaced. As for the games he started, his injury riddled Ravens lost by 1 against GB (a 13 win team) and lost by 1 against LAR a 12 team that won the Super Bowl). They lost in OT against PIT after losing in regulation to PIT with Jackson at QB. When Jackson got injured, he left with the Ravens trailing CLE 10-0. Huntley got the Ravens to within 2 and they had the ball at the end of the gam with a chance to win. Close losses against good teams in the QB's first few starts with an injury riddled team is actually a pretty encouraging sign for Huntley. It is not as if Herbert did not have similar close loss experiences against good teams in some of his first few games (KC, TB and NO come to mind).

The whole point of having a guy like Huntley is that the team would install a smaller set of plays just for him before the season begins that would be very different than the plays called for Herbert. Lombardi's playbook is large and the Saints ran plays for Taysom Hill out of their offense. I am not too worried about his passer rating in but a few starts. That would improve with more experience. Also, Huntley's running ability would be an offset for any lack of passing efficiency.

It would be very difficult for a team to adjust to Huntley after preparing for Herbert as Huntley runs with the ball much more frequently per snap than Herbert does. The last a team should want with its backup QB is for him to be a similar, but watered down version of the starting QB, for which the opponent has already prepared.

Finally, one of the pluses about a guy like Huntley versus more of a big name QB is that Huntley is likely to be far less expensive than guys like Mayfield, Darnold, Garoppolo and Mariota, but every bit as good.

I don't care who the backup is, as long as it's not Stick or Daniels. Neither of those guys are going to win games for us. I like the running QB pitch, but that assumes that our offense can make the switch as well - the play calling would be dramatically different with a running QB as opposed to a thrower like Herbert. In a perfect world I'd like to see 1 of each type (running & throwing) as back ups. I'd like to see younger guys with upside, not retreads.

[dmac_bolt]

1. So, you think head coaches never change player distributions at positions from one year to the next to fit the strengths and weaknesses of the team's roster? I am simply telling you that our team has more often kept 6 WRs than 5, so there would be nothing abnormal about Staley keeping 6 WRs if Reed shows well in the preseason because he is not cutting any of the top 5 WRs on the roster. And sure, some of the WRs may be key special teams contributors. I never suggested anything to the contrary. I just said that we had a history of keeping 6 WRs instead of 5 until Staley arrived last year. And one year under Staley does not prove that he will always keep only 5 WRs.

2. Regarding Huntley, his INT% last year was lower than Herbert's, so your emphasis on his INTs is misplaced. As for the games he started, his injury riddled Ravens lost by 1 against GB (a 13 win team) and lost by 1 against LAR a 12 team that won the Super Bowl). They lost in OT against PIT after losing in regulation to PIT with Jackson at QB. When Jackson got injured, he left with the Ravens trailing CLE 10-0. Huntley got the Ravens to within 2 and they had the ball at the end of the gam with a chance to win. Close losses against good teams in the QB's first few starts with an injury riddled team is actually a pretty encouraging sign for Huntley. It is not as if Herbert did not have similar close loss experiences against good teams in some of his first few games (KC, TB and NO come to mind).

The whole point of having a guy like Huntley is that the team would install a smaller set of plays just for him before the season begins that would be very different than the plays called for Herbert. Lombardi's playbook is large and the Saints ran plays for Taysom Hill out of their offense. I am not too worried about his passer rating in but a few starts. That would improve with more experience. Also, Huntley's running ability would be an offset for any lack of passing efficiency.

It would be very difficult for a team to adjust to Huntley after preparing for Herbert as Huntley runs with the ball much more frequently per snap than Herbert does. The last a team should want with its backup QB is for him to be a similar, but watered down version of the starting QB, for which the opponent has already prepared.

Finally, one of the pluses about a guy like Huntley versus more of a big name QB is that Huntley is likely to be far less expensive than guys like Mayfield, Darnold, Garoppolo and Mariota, but every bit as good.

1. We’ll see. Reed hasn’t shown anything yet since he was drafted. They gave him some chances each season and he failed to show anything at all. They tried him as a returner and he did poorly there. They tried to run him on sweeps and if I recall he lost yards almost if not every time. I don’t get the Reed-affection personally. Maybe he turns a corner and is better this year- I’m not against it. Just not betting anything on him and I’m sure not reserving a spot on the roster for him today. Let the kid show us and I’m happy to consider him.

2. Huntley is basically a RPO running QB prospect, very raw and very different than the pro set timing design that Lombo installed and the team spent the off season learning. Its ridiculous to want your QB2 to be the polar opposite of QB1 so he can run a completely different offense that no one on the offense knows or is skilled at and players were not selected for. If QB2 has to come in to a game, he needs to run the offense that QB1 runs, he needs to run literally the same game plan they installed and practiced that week. Not run a completely different offense. Thats absurd, stupid, ridiculous and guaranteed to fail. Having a couple trick plays in the bag to run your QB2 and try to fool defense is cute and all but its really not all that successful in the NFL and that is definitely not why you have a QB2 on your roster. You have a QB2 to replace QB1 if QB1 goes down. The reason he’s a viable QB2 in BAL is exactly because Jackson is similar to him.

Good grief, forget about the defense adjusting. It would be very difficult for our OFFENSE to adjust to Huntley when they practice every day for Herbert’s offense. I have to think you’re intentionally trying to harm the club now, you can’t be this dumb.

oh, and you can claim IFs are SKIFs and we’re really all sailors - but he lost 3 of the 4 games he started. He had more INTs than TDs. And now you dare to compare him to Herbert? GTFO, now you’re just being obtuse on purpose. I could care less about a QB that may put the team in a position to win and then lose. Win or win not, there is only this. There is no “position” column in the standings.

For the record, I’m not on the Mariota bus. I think he’s a loser and mediocre QB, personally. The others you list are all credible backups for Herbert.

[Guest]

1. We’ll see. Reed hasn’t shown anything yet since he was drafted. They gave him some chances each season and he failed to show anything at all. They tried him as a returner and he did poorly there. They tried to run him on sweeps and if I recall he lost yards almost if not every time. I don’t get the Reed-affection personally. Maybe he turns a corner and is better this year- I’m not against it. Just not betting anything on him and I’m sure not reserving a spot on the roster for him today. Let the kid show us and I’m happy to consider him.

2. Huntley is basically a RPO running QB prospect, very raw and very different than the pro set timing design that Lombo installed and the team spent the off season learning. Its ridiculous to want your QB2 to be the polar opposite of QB1 so he can run a completely different offense that no one on the offense knows or is skilled at and players were not selected for. If QB2 has to come in to a game, he needs to run the offense that QB1 runs, he needs to run literally the same game plan they installed and practiced that week. Not run a completely different offense. Thats absurd, stupid, ridiculous and guaranteed to fail. Having a couple trick plays in the bag to run your QB2 and try to fool defense is cute and all but its really not all that successful in the NFL and that is definitely not why you have a QB2 on your roster. You have a QB2 to replace QB1 if QB1 goes down. The reason he’s a viable QB2 in BAL is exactly because Jackson is similar to him.

Good grief, forget about the defense adjusting. It would be very difficult for our OFFENSE to adjust to Huntley when they practice every day for Herbert’s offense. I have to think you’re intentionally trying to harm the club now, you can’t be this dumb.

oh, and you can claim IFs are SKIFs and we’re really all sailors - but he lost 3 of the 4 games he started. He had more INTs than TDs. And now you dare to compare him to Herbert? GTFO, now you’re just being obtuse on purpose. I could care less about a QB that may put the team in a position to win and then lose. Win or win not, there is only this. There is no “position” column in the standings.

For the record, I’m not on the Mariota bus. I think he’s a loser and mediocre QB, personally. The others you list are all credible backups for Herbert.

1. My entire discussion was based on Reed showing well and demonstrating an ability to play a role similar to that played by Deebo Samuel. My recollection without looking is that Reed carried the ball 5 times for 29 yards and a TD. that he was tried 5 times carrying the ball in limited playing time suggests that somebody in the former regime thought he was adept at running with the ball. But the sample size is way too small to tell if that thinking was correct.

2. When Lombardi was in New Orleans, the Saints ran designed plays for Taysom Hill even though their offense was primarily tailored to Drew Brees. Also, Hill started a fair number of games as well. Thus, your notion that Lombardi is incapable of incorporating plays for a QB that runs the ball more like Huntley is strange. Also, you are clearly selling Huntley short as passer. He is a better passer than either Daniel or Stick, especially Stick.

The QBs do not need to be exactly the same. I would expect Huntley not to be able to make every throw that Herbert can make, so the passes called within the same offensive system would be changed to suit Huntley's strengths and Huntley would be more likely to pull the down and run than Herbert would be, which would be effective for him as he averaged 6.3 yards per carry for the Ravens last year. The offensive players must know the entire playbook and be ready to execute those plays when called.

Finally, are you drunk posting? You are the one that brought up that Huntley had 4 INTs. You pulled that number out of context. Huntley attempted enough passes such that his INT% was lower than Herbert's. That Huntley threw INTs at a lower rate than Herbert seems particularly relevant when you are trying to emphasize that Huntley would not be a suitable backup for Herbert because of the INTs he threw.

And I do not need to discuss "ifs", Huntley had his lesser team in the game against multiple better teams and gave his team a chance to win on the road against a 13 win team and at home against a 12 win Super Bowl champion team. The Ravens lost both games by one point. One was lost on a failed potentially game winning two-point conversion in the final minute in GB (after Huntley led the offense to 30 points scored) and the other was lost in the final minute when the Rams scored a game winning TD.

Could you imagine if we had to start Daniel against LAR or GB, assuming they are as good as they were last year? The game would be over before it began. We would be lucky to be within 14 points. So, yeah, I would take a chance to win the game in the 4th quarter against that caliber of team with my backup QB any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

[Guest]

I don't care who the backup is, as long as it's not Stick or Daniels. Neither of those guys are going to win games for us. I like the running QB pitch, but that assumes that our offense can make the switch as well - the play calling would be dramatically different with a running QB as opposed to a thrower like Herbert. In a perfect world I'd like to see 1 of each type (running & throwing) as back ups. I'd like to see younger guys with upside, not retreads.

I am with you on this. Retreads are expensive and ineffective. I would like cheap and athletically gifted. And to be clear, the QB does not have to be Huntley and only Huntley. It could be a similar player. A third QB as pocket passer would be fine as well. And I 100% agree that our present backups are not going to do anything for us unless we are lucky enough to be playing an NFL worst type team in the week in question.

[dmac_bolt]

1. My entire discussion was based on Reed showing well and demonstrating an ability to play a role similar to that played by Deebo Samuel. My recollection without looking is that Reed carried the ball 5 times for 29 yards and a TD. that he was tried 5 times carrying the ball in limited playing time suggests that somebody in the former regime thought he was adept at running with the ball. But the sample size is way too small to tell if that thinking was correct.

2. When Lombardi was in New Orleans, the Saints ran designed plays for Taysom Hill even though their offense was primarily tailored to Drew Brees. Also, Hill started a fair number of games as well. Thus, your notion that Lombardi is incapable of incorporating plays for a QB that runs the ball more like Huntley is strange. Also, you are clearly selling Huntley short as passer. He is a better passer than either Daniel or Stick, especially Stick.

The QBs do not need to be exactly the same. I would expect Huntley not to be able to make every throw that Herbert can make, so the passes called within the same offensive system would be changed to suit Huntley's strengths and Huntley would be more likely to pull the down and run than Herbert would be, which would be effective for him as he averaged 6.3 yards per carry for the Ravens last year. The offensive players must know the entire playbook and be ready to execute those plays when called.

Finally, are you drunk posting? You are the one that brought up that Huntley had 4 INTs. You pulled that number out of context. Huntley attempted enough passes such that his INT% was lower than Herbert's. That Huntley threw INTs at a lower rate than Herbert seems particularly relevant when you are trying to emphasize that Huntley would not be a suitable backup for Herbert because of the INTs he threw.

And I do not need to discuss "ifs", Huntley had his lesser team in the game against multiple better teams and gave his team a chance to win on the road against a 13 win team and at home against a 12 win Super Bowl champion team. The Ravens lost both games by one point. One was lost on a failed potentially game winning two-point conversion in the final minute in GB (after Huntley led the offense to 30 points scored) and the other was lost in the final minute when the Rams scored a game winning TD.

Could you imagine if we had to start Daniel against LAR or GB, assuming they are as good as they were last year? The game would be over before it began. We would be lucky to be within 14 points. So, yeah, I would take a chance to win the game in the 4th quarter against that caliber of team with my backup QB any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Reed’s runs that gained a couple yards were mostly WR reverses, not Deebo handoff or direct snap type runs. He’s not an explosive Deebo player and your constant comparisons to Deebo are absurd. It was in 2020. He gained zero last year. Since we’re logging into his career stat sheet - you failed to note he has amassed zero receptions for zero yards in his career.

You’re all about IFs. IF Reed was used like Deebo, alas he’s not Deebo. If Huntley was able to win, alas he hasn’t won. Maybe they are a lesser team because of Huntley. The fact remains you think Reed is Deebo in hiding, and you think getting a QB2 thats the polar opposite of QB1 is a great idea because it will confuse only the defense. Two horrible recommendations.

Are you dementia posting? I compared the 4 INTs to his 3 TDs. The ratio is a useful barometer on whether a QB is hurting more than helping. It should be 3-to-1, 4-to-1 or greater in TDs to INTs. Huntley is under water on that metric. Its is universally understood that throwing more INTs than TDs is a very bad thing, yet you’re oblivious. Instead you try to claim he was so prolific that his INTs are just fine. So If he threw so many passes, and was such a great QB, why only 3 TDs and why only 1000 yards? Give me a break - you’re suffering sclerotic brain cramps again. Comparing Huntley to Herbie is like comparing Jacob Hester to Gale Sayers.

And now Taysom Hill? Sure, compare Huntley to Hill. Taysom Hill is a horrible QB, he’s a trick play wildcat gimmick guy they try to call QB who has disappointed NO ever since they got that great idea to draft a 2nd QB thats not first and foremost a passing QB. this is what you want for the Chargers. You’re a horrible GM. The difference between you and me is I NEVER advocated for Daniel. I don’t even like Daniel. I don’t think he’s a QB-whisperer, I don’t think he’s needed in the QB room, i don’t think he has one thing to teach Herbie, and I find no value in his roster inclusion. I have always advocated to cut him - even if that means Stick is our QB2.

Your dream roster is Huntley trying to throw deep to Tbilly and Guyton. What a horrible team that would be.

[Boltjolt]

1. We’ll see. Reed hasn’t shown anything yet since he was drafted. They gave him some chances each season and he failed to show anything at all. They tried him as a returner and he did poorly there. They tried to run him on sweeps and if I recall he lost yards almost if not every time. I don’t get the Reed-affection personally. Maybe he turns a corner and is better this year- I’m not against it. Just not betting anything on him and I’m sure not reserving a spot on the roster for him today. Let the kid show us and I’m happy to consider him.

2. Huntley is basically a RPO running QB prospect, very raw and very different than the pro set timing design that Lombo installed and the team spent the off season learning. Its ridiculous to want your QB2 to be the polar opposite of QB1 so he can run a completely different offense that no one on the offense knows or is skilled at and players were not selected for. If QB2 has to come in to a game, he needs to run the offense that QB1 runs, he needs to run literally the same game plan they installed and practiced that week. Not run a completely different offense. Thats absurd, stupid, ridiculous and guaranteed to fail. Having a couple trick plays in the bag to run your QB2 and try to fool defense is cute and all but its really not all that successful in the NFL and that is definitely not why you have a QB2 on your roster. You have a QB2 to replace QB1 if QB1 goes down. The reason he’s a viable QB2 in BAL is exactly because Jackson is similar to him.

Good grief, forget about the defense adjusting. It would be very difficult for our OFFENSE to adjust to Huntley when they practice every day for Herbert’s offense. I have to think you’re intentionally trying to harm the club now, you can’t be this dumb.

oh, and you can claim IFs are SKIFs and we’re really all sailors - but he lost 3 of the 4 games he started. He had more INTs than TDs. And now you dare to compare him to Herbert? GTFO, now you’re just being obtuse on purpose. I could care less about a QB that may put the team in a position to win and then lose. Win or win not, there is only this. There is no “position” column in the standings.

For the record, I’m not on the Mariota bus. I think he’s a loser and mediocre QB, personally. The others you list are all credible backups for Herbert.

Actually going to agree with CC here.

Reed has not had chances both years.
He missed all last season after having surgery from a TC injury.

I certainly am not saying he is a sure thing but he was dynamic in college and did a little something as a rookie in his limited chances.
And,.... also it is correct that we used to carry 6 WRs but that was under different regimes.
So far Staley has carried 5 but im for carrying 6 if Reed shows something or perhaps he can beat out Carter who shouldn't be a lock at all for WR.

He was signed to return kicks but if Reed can do it ......cut a TE, we don't need 4 on the active roster.

Another note:
Taysom Hill is 221 lbs
Huntley is 196 lbs

Huntley isn't holding up all season playing a Taysom Hill role.

[RockyMtnBoltFan]

This is what makes CC such a fascinating read. You can go from one thread where he says Palmer is garbage and can’t possibly get any better, then come to another thread where he’s suggesting Reed has the potential to be the next Deebo Samuel. I’m sure I’m missing something…and I’m sure he’ll let me know where I’m wrong, but this seems like a total contradiction.

[wu-dai clan]

Actually going to agree with CC here.

Reed has not had chances both years.
He missed all last season after having surgery from a TC injury.

I certainly am not saying he is a sure thing but he was dynamic in college and did a little something as a rookie in his limited chances.
And,.... also it is correct that we used to carry 6 WRs but that was under different regimes.
So far Staley has carried 5 but im for carrying 6 if Reed shows something or perhaps he can beat out Carter who shouldn't be a lock at all for WR.

He was signed to return kicks but if Reed can do it ......cut a TE, we don't need 4 on the active roster.

Role flexibility must be taken into consideration.

Adam Thielen. Rod Smith. Antonio Gates.Tiki Barber. Rich Gannon.

There are examples of late bloomers at skill positions.

Let's give it all a shot.

[dmac_bolt]

Actually going to agree with CC here.

Reed has not had chances both years.
He missed all last season after having surgery from a TC injury.

I certainly am not saying he is a sure thing but he was dynamic in college and did a little something as a rookie in his limited chances.
And,.... also it is correct that we used to carry 6 WRs but that was under different regimes.
So far Staley has carried 5 but im for carrying 6 if Reed shows something or perhaps he can beat out Carter who shouldn't be a lock at all for WR.

He was signed to return kicks but if Reed can do it ......cut a TE, we don't need 4 on the active roster.

I remember Reed in preseason, there’s a reason he wasn’t getting a lot of opportunities in the regular season. He wasn’t that impressive. Of course he can improve, all young players can improve. I’ll be delighted to see him become a professional WR. I just don’t get the hysterical calls for him to be given tries. Why him?

Chargers carried 6 WRs under Lynn and previously, but they didn’t under Staley. Staley is the coach. Last year’s offense was better than the year before. Demanding Staley must carry 6 WRs on the roster for the offense to operate is de facto proven false. If there is 6 WRs on the roster, odds are close to certain that #6 is inactive on game day anyway. If WR6 is on the 53 roster and inactive or on the PS, its kind of the same except for him and his pay. I’m agnostic on it.

The Huntley thing is another example of his shoot-from-hip inability to synthesize all information. Its not just he wants Huntley, its that he wants Huntley BECAUSE he is a completely different style and skill set than Herbert. But why do we have QB2? To run a couple trick plays per week?

No - we need QB2 to be able to jog in off the sideline after any play at any time in any game throughout the season and continue to execute the offensive game plan installed that week for Herbert without missing a beat. Coaches do not install two different offenses in a year, much less prepare the team to execute two different schemes every week. It is not just a bad idea, its insane. If, pray never, we needed QB2 to go in, with CC we’ll have a QB that can’t execute our offense.

he thinks thats a genius move as he’s going to fool defenses with that. Lol.

[blueman]

I’m so confused. I’m glad Palmer is WR #3.

[Boltjolt]

I remember Reed in preseason, there’s a reason he wasn’t getting a lot of opportunities in the regular season. He wasn’t that impressive. Of course he can improve, all young players can improve. I’ll be delighted to see him become a professional WR. I just don’t get the hysterical calls for him to be given tries. Why him?

Chargers carried 6 WRs under Lynn and previously, but they didn’t under Staley. Staley is the coach. Last year’s offense was better than the year before. Demanding Staley must carry 6 WRs on the roster for the offense to operate is de facto proven false. If there is 6 WRs on the roster, odds are close to certain that #6 is inactive on game day anyway. If WR6 is on the 53 roster and inactive or on the PS, its kind of the same except for him and his pay. I’m agnostic on it.

The Huntley thing is another example of his shoot-from-hip inability to synthesize all information. Its not just he wants Huntley, its that he wants Huntley BECAUSE he is a completely different style and skill set than Herbert. But why do we have QB2? To run a couple trick plays per week?

No - we need QB2 to be able to jog in off the sideline after any play at any time in any game throughout the season and continue to execute the offensive game plan installed that week for Herbert without missing a beat. Coaches do not install two different offenses in a year, much less prepare the team to execute two different schemes every week. It is not just a bad idea, its insane. If, pray never, we needed QB2 to go in, with CC we’ll have a QB that can’t execute our offense.

he thinks thats a genius move as he’s going to fool defenses with that. Lol.

You aren't remembering right is all. He didn't play last season and got an injury in TC and then had surgery.

Why him? Well I know CC never saw him play in college so for me, he is a big body WR with speed.
He returned kicks in college and was good at it. Our STs stink under Lynn so I'm not writing him off from that based on that and he can do other things. He ran the ball a handful of times as a rookie.

Can he be Deebo? I don't know about that.

He can run the ball demonstated by returning kicks but didn't do it a lot in college. Had 1 season with 21 carries and a career of 34. So we'll see what they do with him.

Just someone I'm not writing off and I don't see Carter as anything special to call him a lock with a vet minimum 1 year deal that would cost us 100K to cut him.

As for Huntley, yeah we aren't bringing him in to be a 196 lb Taysom Hill lol. Arguing he has a lower INT rate than Herbert is a laugher as well. 5 game sample with little tape on him.
CC likes to use these miniscule stats that mean nothing for a argument.
So OK, Herbert's INT rate last year was 2.2, Huntley was 2.1.

Herbert has thrown 1267 career passes and his INT rate is 2.
Huntley has 190 career passes and his INT rate is still 2.1, so technically, he is wrong,.... career wise.

Last year a big .1% difference with Herbert throwing 500 more passes.

Or you can turn it into a negative and say Huntley INT rate is higher than his TD pass %. He only had 3 TD passes and 4 INTs

[Guest]

Reed’s runs that gained a couple yards were mostly WR reverses, not Deebo handoff or direct snap type runs. He’s not an explosive Deebo player and your constant comparisons to Deebo are absurd. It was in 2020. He gained zero last year. Since we’re logging into his career stat sheet - you failed to note he has amassed zero receptions for zero yards in his career.

You’re all about IFs. IF Reed was used like Deebo, alas he’s not Deebo. If Huntley was able to win, alas he hasn’t won. Maybe they are a lesser team because of Huntley. The fact remains you think Reed is Deebo in hiding, and you think getting a QB2 thats the polar opposite of QB1 is a great idea because it will confuse only the defense. Two horrible recommendations.

Are you dementia posting? I compared the 4 INTs to his 3 TDs. The ratio is a useful barometer on whether a QB is hurting more than helping. It should be 3-to-1, 4-to-1 or greater in TDs to INTs. Huntley is under water on that metric. Its is universally understood that throwing more INTs than TDs is a very bad thing, yet you’re oblivious. Instead you try to claim he was so prolific that his INTs are just fine. So If he threw so many passes, and was such a great QB, why only 3 TDs and why only 1000 yards? Give me a break - you’re suffering sclerotic brain cramps again. Comparing Huntley to Herbie is like comparing Jacob Hester to Gale Sayers.

And now Taysom Hill? Sure, compare Huntley to Hill. Taysom Hill is a horrible QB, he’s a trick play wildcat gimmick guy they try to call QB who has disappointed NO ever since they got that great idea to draft a 2nd QB thats not first and foremost a passing QB. this is what you want for the Chargers. You’re a horrible GM. The difference between you and me is I NEVER advocated for Daniel. I don’t even like Daniel. I don’t think he’s a QB-whisperer, I don’t think he’s needed in the QB room, i don’t think he has one thing to teach Herbie, and I find no value in his roster inclusion. I have always advocated to cut him - even if that means Stick is our QB2.

Your dream roster is Huntley trying to throw deep to Tbilly and Guyton. What a horrible team that would be.

I am not sure why you keep missing what I am saying. I am not suggesting that Reed has been good so far in his career. In response to a poster that suggested that Guyton could be a Samuel type player, I suggested that Reed has traits that were the most similar to Samuel out of anyone on our roster and that he did display some ability to run with the ball--5 carries, 29 yards, and a TD.

My entire discussion about Reed as a potential 6th WR was based on the assumption that he showed well in training camp this year. I never said that I was predicting that he would show well or that we would keep 6 WRs even if he did. I never said that I thought that Reed was Deebo in hiding even though Reed has the physical traits most similar to Samuel on our roster.

I merely stated that a 6 WR distribution was nothing irregular if Staley saw something he liked and that we had room to get rid of someone at the QB position to make that happen.

That said, we may not even kick the tires on Reed as a ball carrier even though I think that would be something worthwhile to look into as our RB depth is not great unless one of the UDFAs fares better than most UDFAs do (like Ekeler did in 2017). I am counting Horvath as a FB in this discussion so we have Ekeler, Spiller, Rountree, Kelley and UDFAs to the best of my recollection and without looking.

Also, I do not disagree that Reed's running yards were mostly, if not entirely, from end arounds. I am pretty sure that is how Samuel started taking handoffs as a WR too.

Regarding Huntley, you seem to be clueless about NFL playbooks. Lombardi's Saints style system was large enough and diverse enough to include plays suited to the games of very different QBs ranging from Drew Brees (a pocket passer that does not run at all) to Taysom Hill (a running QB), who played in the same season. It is laughable that you think it is a problem to have two QBs that have different styles. Were you on this forum complaining about how Herbert could never back up Tyrod Taylor or vice versa after Herbert won the job from Taylor? I mean, how could anyone put them on the same team since their games are different from one another? By the way, I suspect there are not too many QBs on this planet with a game similar to Herbert's--just sayin'.

When do you think I advocated for Daniel? That is just more made up nonsense. Saying that Daniel is better than Stick is not advocating up for him. It is saying that Stick sucks even worse than Daniel does. In fact, I have clearly stated that Huntley is way better than both Daniel and Stick and have stated that we clearly need an upgrade at the QB2 position, which is pretty much the opposite of advocating for Daniel. Where do you get this nonsense?

In addition, you emphasized INTs not TD/INT ratio, so I pointed out that Huntley's INT percentage is lower than Herbert's. He is not an INT machine even though you tried to portray him that way. I agree that he did not have very many passing TDs--shocking in BAL's offense--SMH.... He did have two rushing TDs and his team did average over 21 points in games in which he was the primary QB, which is fine given that he was functionally a rookie, having attempted all of 5 passes in his actual rookie season. He clearly has athletic ability and untapped potential (solid accuracy, good arm strength, and very good running ability).

Finally, you keep spouting idiocy about my alleged wanting of Huntley to be throwing the ball to Johnson and Guyton. Your statement is, of course, total BS. I have stated that I think Huntley would represent a potentially cheap upgrade at QB2 and that we should have kept Johnson and that Guyton's game complements the games of Allen and Williams better than Palmer's does as Guyton offers something that Allen and Williams lack, unlike Palmer. I have never stated anything other than that Guyton should be given most of the reps at WR3 and that Johnson should not have been cut because he works well with Herbert. Where in that discussion have I stated that I want Huntley to be our starting QB or that I would want Guyton and Johnson (if he were on the team team) to start over Allen and Williams? Your statement is ridiculous.