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!

     

What if it’s not Young or CJ at #1?


Wanderlai
 Share

Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, Donald LaFell said:

It’d be pretty hilarious. Even though Richardson has potential it’d be a bad decision to take a guy who isn’t NFL ready at 1. 
 

I think it’d be funny if one day a team trades up to #1 only to trade down multiple times for an overall better haul. 

The plot for Draft Day 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As mentioned, trading back makes no sense. Not only do you need to get a WR as good as DJ back, but you also have to replace the First you traded away ... before you even begin to look at what you "get" in the trade. No one is going to give us a star WR, and three Firsts (to which we "get" two Firsts in the deal).

I'm rambling, but we have to recoup what we gave away before we even look at what we can "get" for trading down.

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • No it's not, there isn't a single coach who's only job is to win games, because no coach is going to win games unless they're also improving the quality of play out of their players. For coaches with contending teams, winning is their #1 job, but I think it's a more than reasonable take to say that coaches of not yet contending teams winning comes second to making your players better. We have 11 games left, if you gave me the option of winning all 11 of the games in terribly ugly fashion to where we don't improve the quality of our players vs we lose all 11 games, but do so in spectacular fashion where our players show significant improvement, I'm taking option B every time. Because option B is the path to future and long term success, while option A is a path to short term happiness at the expense of long term franchise stability.   And yes, that is clearly an extreme example that could never actually play out in either way, but you still know what I mean.  And no, it has nothing to do with draft position, it's about how good will these players be a year, 2 years, 3 years, etc, down the line, when you hope to be a true contending team, because nobody actually thinks we're that type of team this year unless you're literally crazy
    • Yeah if that's what we're signing up for here, then I just can't get behind it.  That contract extension that Hurney gave Jake that offseason was BRUTAL.
    • That's quite literally his only job. Every year has new goals, new identities, etc. But the one constant is to win at all costs. He isn't guaranteed to be here next year UNLESS he wins. Why would he give a poo to mold a bunch of players someone else might be coaching? 
×
×
  • Create New...