If this isn't the year...

[DeAngelo Beason]

13 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

Let's say we don't get a true franchise quarterback this year but we do get somebody who's decent and an improvement over Bridgewater...

Will that be enough to hold you until we can try again next year or in the near future?

Or will it be torches and pitchforks time?

Pitchforks.  A semi-decent QB brings us back to Delhomme style mediocrity where a top-tier QB just never seems to fall in our laps.  After suffering through this dumpster fire of a team the past few years it's time to get a franchise-altering signalcaller.

[pantherclaw]

We have a lot of holes to fill, an olibe to build, for me to get caught up in any major QB addition. 

 

[Khyber53]

14 hours ago, Mage said:

Same ish with Cam.  I 100% understood releasing him.  The problem was replacing him with Teddy.  Why not just stick with Cam at that point?

Same thing here.  Don't get rid of Teddy just to replace him with another mediocre QB.  You either go after a guy like Watson or someone in the draft who you think can be a franchise QB, or you stick with Teddy.  

They got rid of Cam because this was Cam's team. There was no doubt about it, any new coach coming in would either be beholding to Cam's wishes or he'd have to move him away. Cam's diminishing capabilities on the field (his charisma was completely unaffected by injuries) only made the decision easier.

For a complete rebuild, Cam had to be shown the door. New coach had to be the biggest dog in the yard, just like Steve Smith had to be moved out to let Cam take the leadership role.

[Khyber53]

If we decide that there isn't a franchise QB at our pick in the draft, then we pick the best player available and continue the rebuild. If that means Bridgewater gets another season, I'm not upset with that. 

There is a chance with better protection and another year as a starter we would see some improvement with Teddy. It would be a better move than investing big in a reclamation project like Darnold, Carr or someone of their stripe. In the end, Teddy would have a year's head start on upgrading and we'd only have his contract to deal with rather than two contracts of that level to pay at once.

 

[thefuzz]

Keeping Teddy:

Sit where we are in the draft, especially if a top LT falls.  Take him, and tag or sign Moton, I prefer to sign.  Draft centered around the offensive line and secondary.  Take a shot at an older MLB, if the money is right.  Let Curtis walk, but maybe bring in a decent possession WR or TE.  Continue to cut the fat and keep the contracts manageable.

In other words, continue to smartly build a football team.  Be ready to swing for the fences at QB when the moment arises.

 

I'm not big on giving up multiple 1st for any player....ever...but I would do that for Trevor, but that ain't happening.  I wouldn't blow a gasket if we moved a player and a 1st for Wilson, but not two 1's.  I'd move two 1's and CMC for Watson.  No other QB's are worth a trade up IMO, too risky.

 

 

[Peon Awesome]

Let's do away with the narrative that there's little chance to find a qb in 2022. Most people agree there are at least a couple college qbs that are on a similar level as Fields or will be after another year like Howell and Rattler. Every year a fringe prospect or 2 launches up draft boards, like Wilson this year or Burrow last. So there's a good chance we'll have another top 3 or 4 on par with this year (minus Lawrence). Now add veterans that teams might move on from or make available for trade: Aaron Rodgers, Carr, Russell Wilson, Kirk Cousins, and even possibly Watson if the team stands firm this year. Possibly others: who thought Watson might be available this time last year. And even if some of those names aren't long-term answers, they could put us in immediate contention with good drafts and free agency and buy us a couple more years to find the long term answer. 

Don't get me wrong; I'm totally fine with drafting a top qb prospect at 8 if available. Or you could even sell me on trading 8 and a 4th to move up to 6 or 7 to get one. But if neither of those is a realistic option, I'd much rather sit tight, draft Slater or Sewell, cover other critical positions of need like CB and IOL in the 2nd and 3rd and figure out qb later. To me that's much more likely a recipe for success than sacrificing that much for an unknown that will be asked to play behind a patchwork offensive line with limited resources to upgrade. 

[Mr. Scot]

15 hours ago, thefuzz said:

I'm not big on giving up multiple 1st for any player....ever...but I would do that for Trevor, but that ain't happening.  I wouldn't blow a gasket if we moved a player and a 1st for Wilson, but not two 1's.  I'd move two 1's and CMC for Watson.  No other QB's are worth a trade up IMO, too risky.

McCaffrey isn't cap practical.

If I recall correctly, our resident movie Shogun suggested two firsts and Brian Burns. Would you be on board with that?

[Mage]

26 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

McCaffrey isn't cap practical.

If I recall correctly, our resident movie Shogun suggested two firsts and Brian Burns. Would you be on board with that?

For Watson?

That would be highway robbery.  Texans would never accept that.  Well maybe if Bill O'Brien returns

Edited February 24, 2021 by Mage

[Mr. Scot]

6 minutes ago, Mage said:

For Watson?

That would be highway robbery.  Texans would never accept that.  Well maybe if Bill O'Brien returns

He didn't think they would either.

He did say that was as much as he'd offer though, with the rationale being that throwing Burns in there essentially makes the deal equal to three first round picks.