If a run on QBs happen 1 thru 7, I say we pick LT or CB if we stay at 8

[musicman]

I see Sewell (I would love) or Slater or 1 of the top 2 CB's. 2 important and expensive positions. I based this on our FA signings so far and now that the Bengals signed Riley Reiff for OT..... 3 QBs, 1 WR, 1 DE (Giants), probably 1 OT (maybe Philly) and Parson at LB (Lions), and TE (Philly) is where I think it falls, natural order or trades. I don't think they'll take Lance at 8 (or Jones) looking at the GM's track record, Seattle hasn't taking a QB in the 1st round on a long long time..

I also don't think trade ahead unless #2 for Wilson but it's gonna cost a lot. I see them building a solid winning team with picks until they find the QB of the future, even if it takes a year or 2. Taking a chance on a QB (they are a risk) and giving away lots of picks could give us another 2 years of losing before it turns around and that might turn off the fan base more than they want.... I also wouldn't be shocked if they took TE Pitts if he falls as that would give us 4 top end stars catching the ball (Robbie, DJ, CMC and Pitts). He could be a game changer and I see OC Brady changing his style from what he learned, especially in the red zone.

BTW giving away picks for Watson (before all this stuff went down) is different as he's a proven commodity. Drafting is a crap shoot. 

 

[travisura]

Given Fitt's history at Seattle, I would expect us to trade down if the top 4 QBs are gone by 8.

[OldhamA]

I still think we're another two good Drafts and a season away from having a competitive team. 

I'd just take BPA at #8.

[SmokinwithWilly]

3 minutes ago, Trainwreck said:

I would be stoked to get Sewell and starting to like Slater more and more, but I would just trade down and add more picks. 

If you have a chance to get a franchise tackle you have to take him. It's the 2nd hardest position to fill on the team. Moton/Sewell or Slater would be bookends for the next 5 years. 

[top dawg]

6 minutes ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

If you have a chance to get a franchise tackle you have to take him. It's the 2nd hardest position to fill on the team. Moton/Sewell or Slater would be bookends for the next 5 years. 

Yessir! It seems like drafting a "franchise LT" is almost as hard as drafting a franchise QB! If a tackle is that good you have to take him! But...you better get it right!

[BrianS]

It's not a given that anyone would even want to trade up if QB's 1-4 are gone by our pick.  I actually don't see very many ways that a trade down would happen.  I can see us moving up for a QB, or sitting pat and taking BPA.

[joemac]

Agreed.  If there are 4 or 5 QBs taken all in a row at the top, we would then be sitting pretty to grab our pick of whatever stud nonQB player we want.  I think at that point we would have to grab one of Sewell, Slater, Farley or Surtain Jr.  Any of those 4 would fill a huge position of need for us.

[Khyber53]

I still think Jones is our guy at #8, but if there's a run on QBs beyond what anyone is expecting, we could see ourself with a top OT, CB or TE falling into our laps. I  don't see it happening, but if it did, I can certainly see us pulling the trigger on one of those positions and just waiting out the QB situation, perhaps even running with Bridgewater again (that makes me cringe a bit just typing it).

[chbright]

51 minutes ago, Trainwreck said:

Slater could go ahead of Sewell. Both could be gone with four QBs before our pick. I actually like this year’s tackle class a lot- Darrisaw, Eichenberg, Mayfield, Radunz, Jenkins, Carman, Leatherwood, Cosmi, and Little. 

Please let someone get slater and we can get sewell...... I agree it's good overall OL class. 

[Scott12345]

get us a LT that can be here for years

[LinvilleGorge]

In that situation, my far and away best option available would be to trade down and try to pickup an additional 1st next year. We may need it to make a move next year for a QB because guess what, we're basically going to be in the same situation which is the situation of needing a QB.

If we can't do that, them yeah, LT or CB would be the best absolute worst fuging case scenarios available to us.

Half-ass it for Howell mode in full effect.

[BrianS]

47 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

In that situation, my far and away best option available would be to trade down and try to pickup an additional 1st next year. We may need it to make a move next year for a QB because guess what, we're basically going to be in the same situation which is the situation of needing a QB.

If we can't do that, them yeah, LT or CB would be the best absolute worst fuging case scenarios available to us.

Half-ass it for Howell mode in full effect.

I'm terrified that we're going to be better next year . . . like 7-9 or so.  Not good enough to be a contender, not bad enough for a real shot at a franchise QB.

[Captain Morgan]

13 minutes ago, BrianS said:

I'm terrified that we're going to be better next year . . . like 7-9 or so.  Not good enough to be a contender, not bad enough for a real shot at a franchise QB.

 

This is my thought, and perhaps why we seem to so crazy dead set on getting a franchise QB this year.  Even with Teddy, this team will win more games next year, moving us even further away from the top of the draft.  It's very close to a now or never situation.  I do agree with Linville that if we can get an extra first for next year, especially from a team we think might draft in the bottom next year, we have to consider that if we can't get a QB this year.

However it would suck if we two firsts next year and the QB class stinks.

[Ornias]

3 hours ago, Trainwreck said:

I would be stoked to get Sewell and starting to like Slater more and more, but I would just trade down and add more picks. 

Much rather trade down a few slots and still get 1 of the CB's or OT that will fall. We need more picks, not less this year.