Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Are You Really Against Fields or Lance if they fall to #8...


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, chknwing said:

We can only take a quarterback if we're going to trade Sam darnold.  We have to pick a direction and move forward.

how is that? 

We are kicking the tires on Sam.  Nothing more.   Lance 100% needs to sit.   So you would have to have a QB to start if you drafted him.   Fields likely could compete with him.  Then you can bring him in slowly.   

Worst case scenario is you end up with two decent QBs on your roster for a cost that isn't bad given one was a draft pick.   Much better organizations than us aren't afraid of drafting a QB....and having him sit. 

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LinvilleGorge said:

On the contrary, I'm really against passing on one of them if he's there at #8.

Exactly.  If our staff think there is a bona fide NFL franchise QB on the board when our pick comes up, you TAKE THE PLAYER.  If we end up with two of them on our roster, FINE, we'll figure it out.

Let's say we draft Fields.  I don't think he starts week one, I think Darnold does.  I think both play extensively in the preseaon.  It also means we are UNLIKELY to pick up the $18 million option on Darnold, meaning he's now in a career year with every motivation to play OUT OF HIS MIND.

Now, suppose Darnold lights it up.  Great.  We've got our franchise QB and the cost was a first and a second.  THAT'S ACCEPTABLE for a franchise QB.  We've also got this guy on our bench who might ALSO turn out great, or at the very least he's a backup better than Teddy / PJ / Beard Guy.  WE WON.

Suppose Darnold is mediocre.  He's probably a better backup than anything we have.  Toward the end of the season Fields comes in and we find out what we've got with him.  Regardless of what Fields does, we've identified a solid backup in Darnold and we are rolling the dice on a top 10 prospect.  ACCEPTABLE AGAIN.

Suppose Darnold is terrible.  Fine.  Fields comes in earlier and we really get to see what we've got there.  Darnold is probably still a low end backup, and we could keep him around as such on a low contract.  We've rolled the dice on a top 10 QB prospect.  ACCEPTABLE OUTCOME.

There is now way drafting a QB at 8, assuming our staff believe in him, can go wrong.  I shouldn't say it that way.  Of course it can go wrong, the guy can fail.  But from the perspective of the franchise, you have to take those sorts of risks and they are just a coin flip. 

There is no version of an NFL roster with too many good QB's on it.  There just isn't.  If you end up with more than one franchise guy, you keep the one you like best and get your draft capital back by trading the other one.

I don't see any other way to look at it.

 

  • Pie 5
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im happy we got Darnold, but it seems to me we put the backup plan in place before we truly got desperate after the draft. I don't think we are counting on them to be there at 8, but will gladly take them if they are there. 

 

Thats why we are waiting on Darnold's 5th year option

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, t96 said:

Is Wilson really a given at #2? Everyone assumes it but I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it's Fields. Many still think he's the clear #2 behind Lawrence, despite Wilson being the talk of the town more recently. Jets could have their cards very close to their chest and be targeting Fields. Lawrence is the only pick that is 100% set in stone.

Was about to post this exact same thing.  It could also make sense why the 49ers are so secretive. Maybe Shanahan doesn't want Saleh knowing how much he likes a certain QB. Or maybe they aren't sure if Jets go Wilson or Fields. Everybody talking about Mac Jones, if the Jets go Fields the 49ers will run to the podium for Wilson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they are “all in” on Darnold that’s a dangerous game. If a better option is available always pursue it, especially at the QB position. I just don’t see a future 2nd and a couple late round picks as being fully committed to that player.

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Panthera onca said:

Seems like San Fran may have their eyes on Fields now. The Mac talk may have been an elaborate smokescreen.

I keep hearing this as well. But why smokescreen when they already have the number 3 pick locked up knowing who is going one and two? It would be like the Jets smoke screening with Wilson.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

I keep hearing this as well. But why smokescreen when they already have the number 3 pick locked up knowing who is going one and two? It would be like the Jets smoke screening with Wilson.

Good point but I think these coaches and GMs are paranoid as hell in the weeks before the draft. Especially if there is a guy they want in the worst way.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

I keep hearing this as well. But why smokescreen when they already have the number 3 pick locked up knowing who is going one and two? It would be like the Jets smoke screening with Wilson.

I know the media is pushing the Zach Wilson talk heavily, but I'm not 100% sold until I hear from the Jets, or actually hear his name on draft night. I still say there is a chance that the Jets go Fields at #2.....you didn't hear anything in the media at all, but the Jets were also at Fields pro day on Wednesday

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. QB is still a need and will likely be an even bigger need next draft if we don’t get a QB. 
I have no faith in Darnold or Bridgewater. I think the team has the potential to be better and play out of a top 10 pick. But if our QB situation doesn’t show some improvement we will likely have to do a 49ers and trade up to get a QB. 
I hope that doesn’t happen and we solidify our starting QB in 2021. We need stabilization at the QB position so badly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fields no. Lance meh.

It’d be very stupid to pass on fields and just give Darnold zero competition.

Zero competition is what led the Panthers to 5 winning seasons in 25 years or whatever. No fairness no favorites.

It’s also the reason the Panthers are a year, maybe 2, late looking for a new qb.

It does come down to value as well though. So I can see an argument for Lance at 8. But if Fields is there (doubtful) they better draft him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TheProcess said:

I know the media is pushing the Zach Wilson talk heavily, but I'm not 100% sold until I hear from the Jets, or actually hear his name on draft night. I still say there is a chance that the Jets go Fields at #2.....you didn't hear anything in the media at all, but the Jets were also at Fields pro day on Wednesday

That makes sense. They don’t want the Jets high on Fields. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...