Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 12 of 19
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Pasadena, Maryland
    Posts
    844

    3rd string QB spot



    I feel the Ravens should keep Olsen and drop St. Pierre. The future will be better keeping Olsen rather then St. Pierre. The couple of years with Olsen to develop may pay off for the Ravens in the future. What do other site members think ?





  2. #2

    Re: 3rd string QB spot

    I think that I don't understand the continuing fascination with Drew Olsen. From most accounts, he hasn't looked very good in practice. I'd stick with St. Pierre and maybe stash Olsen on the PS. No one drafted him after all, so I doubt teams will be lining up to take him from us.




  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Foggy Bottom, DC
    Posts
    500

    Re: 3rd string QB spot

    I think we should stash Olson on the PS (he was undrafted, so he might not end up a Brown). I also think we should cut St. Pierre and only carry 2 QBs. We aren't going to win any games with BSP at QB and the odds of the third QB ever seeing PT is rare.




  4. #4

    Re: 3rd string QB spot

    I don't think your take makes sense. What makes you think St. Pierre isn't a better option than Olson? I don't believe Drew Olson is a future starting QB in the NFL so there really is no reason to "develop" him. Especially when St. Pierre has already become familiar with the RAVENS system, and has been running the scout team for a year.

    It's obvious the RAVENS see a lot more upside in St. Pierre than they do Olson, otherwise they would have been playing him more in the preseason. He didn't look that great in practice the times I saw him, and if he isn't playing well in practice they aren't going to be confident with him on the field.




  5. #5

    Re: 3rd string QB spot

    St. Pierre is a better option today. From watching Olsen in the scrimmage, he didn't seem to have as good an arm as St. Pierre, plus he's a rookie. The risk of losing him off the taxi squad is small. And, if he is lost, it should not be that big of a deal.





  6. #6

    Re: 3rd string QB spot

    According to Aaron's article it looks like St. Pierre is going to be the 3rd QB.



    The team will only keep three quarterbacks on the active roster - Steve McNair, Kyle Boller and Brian St. Pierre - meaning rookie Drew Olson is hoping for a spot on the practice squad.
    http://www.carrollcountytimes.com/ar...sports3-16.txt




  7. #7

    Re: 3rd string QB spot

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenWave52
    and the odds of the third QB ever seeing PT is rare.
    Not if our OL keeps playing like it did like week. By the way, who would be our emergency QB if we didn't carry St. Pierre or Olsen?




  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Mesa Arizona
    Posts
    537

    Re: 3rd string QB spot

    The little bit I saw of BSP, I wasn't impressed. Do we actually have to carry three QB's? I shudder at the prospect of having to see him in a game that counts. I say carry two QB's and use the extra spot for an additional OL guy. If the need arises for another QB due to injury, we could pick up a retread for a few games. Let Boller do the scout team duty, at least he won't just be standing on the sidelines and it might be a learning experience for him.




  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Foggy Bottom, DC
    Posts
    500

    Re: 3rd string QB spot

    Quote Originally Posted by highwater
    Not if our OL keeps playing like it did like week. By the way, who would be our emergency QB if we didn't carry St. Pierre or Olsen?
    Last year it would have been Randy Hymes, but without him around I'm not sure. I know Ed Reed played some QB in training camp, but I don't know if we have anyone else with High School or College experience.




  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Mt. Arrogance in the middle of the .11 rolling acres of The Windbag Estates
    Posts
    4,450

    Re: 3rd string QB spot

    Here's the deal. Yes, cutting St. Pierre and Olsen opens a spot up on the 53, but not on gameday. Right now we dress 45 on game day, 8 are inactive. Of those 45, 44 are normal and 1 is a special category, emergency QB. If he comes into the game before the 4th quarter neither the 1st or 2nd QB can re-enter the game.

    So if we don't carry a 3rd QB we save a roster spot but gain NOTHING on game day because we can only dress 44. If we designate anybody else as the 3rd QB and dress them as the 45th they can only play QB and if they enter before the 4th quarter neither Boller or McNair could come back into the game.

    So what do you really gain by this carrying of 2 QBs? A 9th guy inactive every week?




  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    SW Florida (Venice area)
    Posts
    532

    Re: 3rd string QB spot

    Quote Originally Posted by Greg
    Here's the deal. Yes, cutting St. Pierre and Olsen opens a spot up on the 53, but not on gameday. Right now we dress 45 on game day, 8 are inactive. Of those 45, 44 are normal and 1 is a special category, emergency QB. If he comes into the game before the 4th quarter neither the 1st or 2nd QB can re-enter the game.

    So if we don't carry a 3rd QB we save a roster spot but gain NOTHING on game day because we can only dress 44. If we designate anybody else as the 3rd QB and dress them as the 45th they can only play QB and if they enter before the 4th quarter neither Boller or McNair could come back into the game.

    So what do you really gain by this carrying of 2 QBs? A 9th guy inactive every week?
    I have never understood the login in this. If you're paying 53 guys every week, then all of them ought to be eligible to play.

    What if that 3rd person gets hurt? Who is allowed to play quarterback then? Stupid regulation.
    ENFORCE THE 1ST AMENDMENT WITH THE SECOND, NEVER DISARM




  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Mesa Arizona
    Posts
    537

    Re: 3rd string QB spot

    To me what we gain is another body on the OL, another option. If they can't be active for a game oh well, they are still on the roster and can used in another game. If they aren't on the roster at all because we have a dead weight QB there then it cuts our OL options by one.
    I agree Art, it's a stupid regulation.




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland