BrianS

There are reads. They aren't as common because the wide splits and option / choice routes in that offense mean that he's more often "reading" his receiver. But it's there.

Mayer does seem like the total package. Not sure 9 is the right place to take him, but I really like him as a prospect.

When you dismiss a player as a gimmick or system QB, you're the same person who would never have drafted Mahomes. I'm not saying that Hooker is the next Mahomes, I'm just saying that it's a weak argument. You have to come up with actual "flaws". With Hooker, it's hard to spot them. The only one I can really find is that his offense doesn't have very many opportunities for anticipation type throws. But he reads the field. He makes all the throws. His mobility is focused on continuing to look downfield. He's played more than one year, against good competition. He's improved every year. I like him a lot.

No. More. Top. Ten. RB's. The guy is talented. No argument. But we can get that production 60 slots later.

If you take money out of the equation, then it's very difficult to argue that we are better off without him. But with his contract, I think we will be able to move that money to positions which have a greater impact on the outcome of the game. You just don't need to spend that kind of money for a RB - even a guy who is likely an all time great.

No more Sam. He's a good dude, but not an NFL QB. Hopefully the staff we have now can see that clearly.

All I know is we need to release Jeremy Chinn to play much closer to the line so he can be "that guy" we all saw in his rookie season. He was electric.

I wish we could stop trying to find "the next Cam" and just find a franchise QB. I'm sure I could find it in my heart to "settle" for a Justin Herbert, Joe Burrow, Josh Allen, Patrick Mahomes, etc. There will never be another Cam Newton.

That's the way I read it. Our staff is looking for a guy who can get it to his teammates on schedule, or make something happen when the play breaks down. A modern franchise QB. Not sure that's really a surprising statement honestly. It's kinda what every team is looking for, but Mahomes, Herbert, Allen, Hurts . . . those guys don't pop up very often.

It's just another piece of data that helps you complete the picture. For instance, if you've got a guy who played in a one read system in college, you could look at his score and perhaps project whether he might be able to do full field reads. It makes sense. Especially at QB. That's the position where a lot of guys have the physical tools, but not very many of them have the tools above the shoulders.

I think the difference between Carr and the other retreads we have tried is that Carr actually has shown a level of consistency over time that none of the others have. He's also shown growth and improvement over his career.

I really think Hooker is one of the top QB's in the draft. I have him above Levis and way above Richardson. Would love to see him here with the teachers we have. The IQ is there.

The ludicrous dollars being paid to QB's these days is 100% the fault of the competition committee. Their insistence on continually changing the rules to favor higher and higher scoring games brought this on. Gone are the days when you could build a great defense and have an offense simply take the chances presented by that defense. We'll never see SB's where guys like Brad Johnson, Joe Flacco, Trent Dilfer, Jim McMahon, etc lead their teams to a title. In order to lower the QB salary range, you've got to make defense a real possibility for building a championship team.

This to me is the reason to be excited about Brown compared to Joe Brady. Joe Brady just didn't have the correct support around him.

The biggest problem with all the "wait til next year" crowd is that they consistently make the assumption we'll be in the same general range when drafting. That's especially troubling now considering that our coaching is VASTLY superior to what it was last year - you could make the case that our coaching is the best it's ever been. I find it quite easy to assume that we'll win another two games next year. That puts us in the 17 - 21 range drafting. If you want to move up from that range to the top 4 (as opposed to where we are this year), the cost is going to be 1.5 to 2 times. The value of those first 3-4 picks is ludicrously high.

We just traded away (arguably) the best RB in football. And you want us to draft another? Come on man. The leading rusher in the SB was a seventh round pick for heavens sake. If we trade up, it better be for a QB - regardless of what round we're talking about. It's the only position in football worth trading up for.

If it's Carr + Hendon Hooker, that's actually kind of enticing. I'm very curious where Hooker falls to in the draft.

I am so split over Carr. I think he's a good QB, but he's only got maybe 3-4 years left. And at what cost?

I am not sold on Griese. I think it's too soon. Brian Johnson is out given the new Colts HC. I think it likely ends up with Jim Bob Cooter, though Thomas Brown would not be out of the question.

Seems like that makes it unlikely we can get Brian Johnson as OC. I assume the Eagles will promote him.

Players should be taking notice here. This is not The Process. This is actual NFL coaches who have overseen success in the league.

No. His development as a passer has been non-existent thus far. INT rate is far too high and completion percentage too low. Once teams start treating him like Vick, he'll be just another backup.

Burns value just went way up with Evero coming in. He's now going to be in a position that suits him as opposed to being forced into a slot as a 4-3 DE.

imo . . . about the same as last year. All the concerns from last year would still be there. Can he process the whole field? Can he be a more polished player from the pocket? I'd put him somewhere between 5th and 10th QB in this draft. I like him better than Anthony Richardson but not as well as Hendon Hooker. Which is not a popular opinion, but Hooker and Corral both have a lot more history of production in college than Richardson. I like to see college QB's with multiple successful years as the starter. I think it gives you a better read on them. I also like to see improvement over those years. That lets me know that perhaps there is a higher ceiling.

Hooker's injury, while bad, shouldn't impact his game long term. If the film tells you he's a franchise guy, you should take him. I think the only reason he might slide is because a team might want him to play this coming season. Not sure that's gonna happen. His numbers look good. He's a little older, which is either a positive or a negative depending on your evaluation. I think he has a chance to be a good one.