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!

     

Draft a QB or Nix the idea?


 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

No QB.

 

Sanders is ours for the taking if Bryce doesn't pan out.

Oh Jesus. That's exactly what this organization needs. Dealing with Deion's chirping to draft another QB who isn't a high level NFL prospect. Hell, sounds like something that would be right out of Tepper's playbook though.

  • Pie 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recall some teams taking 2 QBs in the draft (not sure about consecutive years) and it turned out.  Aikman and took Steve Walsh (going from memory, so correct any mistakes) that same year in the supplemental draft.  Of course, perhaps the richest QB ever was selected  in the fourth round behind RGIII. 

I think Brock Purdy and his success in SF after playing a lot of ball in college has opened some eyes. 

If you are the Panthers, you draft a QB in round 2 to develop to be a backup and compete.  I do not get why anyone should think that competition for the starting QB is a bad thing.  Iron sharpens Iron. 

My perspective, however, is that we have Dalton for this season, but who are we getting next year, if we need to develop a Young replacement?  In other words, if you think Bryce sucks and you think we should not waste a pick on a QB this season, then my question would be, "Then you are good with keeping Bryce for 2 seasons?"  Next year, Dalton is gone and we have a bust QB in year 3--if Canales fails to bring him along. 

We are not in a great situation, and the blame goes to the dotards that are no longer here and Tepper, the lone supreme dotard.

Having said that, it is my view that Bryce would be better off with a seasoned veteran in his ear than a developing rookie, so I say that going "all in" on Bryce may be the way to go--not the ideal way...

 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

and say no to bo...or really any QB this year. 

do what we can to give BY every opportunity for success or at least substantial improvement. 

if it's not there, then we try again next year. but at least it couldn't be said that we didn't even try or give it a full effort.

we invested that much into him...we have to give it a real honest go with a real team around him and a non-dysfunctional coaching staff. 

  • Pie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Too much investment. But, I am 100% behind requiring our QB to win the job in a legit competition. 

You have to have that competition. I am more on Rattler if he happened to be there at 101. Get somebody with a possible future in here that can compete.

That is showing me you want to win. 

 

 

Edited by strato
  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ChuckWag78 said:

No QB this year. All in on Bryce this year. No QB Battle distractions. Make it or break it year.  

Thats not necesarrily how it works, if Bryce stinks it up again you need somebody that can come in and perform. We as fans look at as tanking if he does and you pick your qb next year so its cool but the team just isnt gonna operate like that and the players will not be comfortable with that. If anything a QB battle should push bryce, if it doesnt then he is a lost cause.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

No QB.

 

Sanders is ours for the taking if Bryce doesn't pan out.

 I feel you but Deions remarks  make me think he'd not want his son around Tepper. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, CPF4LIFE said:

Thats not necesarrily how it works, if Bryce stinks it up again you need somebody that can come in and perform. We as fans look at as tanking if he does and you pick your qb next year so its cool but the team just isnt gonna operate like that and the players will not be comfortable with that. If anything a QB battle should push bryce, if it doesnt then he is a lost cause.

That is how the media works though.  I don't want to hear about it all year. For 2024, Bryce is the guy. There is almost no scenario where I would pull him, outside of injury, for the backup.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You aren’t going to expect a big contribution the first year from a 4th round QB.  If Young really doesn’t show a whole lot better then maybe you can see what the new guy looks like the last few games ands maybe that helps get him ready for the next year. 

I just think they are in a situation where they need upgrading of that position wherever it comes from. I see the adding weapons to juice up the offense so it may look better but I only expect marginal improvement from Young himself. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, MHS831 said:

I recall some teams taking 2 QBs in the draft (not sure about consecutive years) and it turned out.  Aikman and took Steve Walsh (going from memory, so correct any mistakes) that same year in the supplemental draft.  Of course, perhaps the richest QB ever was selected  in the fourth round behind RGIII. 

I think Brock Purdy and his success in SF after playing a lot of ball in college has opened some eyes. 

If you are the Panthers, you draft a QB in round 2 to develop to be a backup and compete.  I do not get why anyone should think that competition for the starting QB is a bad thing.  Iron sharpens Iron. 

My perspective, however, is that we have Dalton for this season, but who are we getting next year, if we need to develop a Young replacement?  In other words, if you think Bryce sucks and you think we should not waste a pick on a QB this season, then my question would be, "Then you are good with keeping Bryce for 2 seasons?"  Next year, Dalton is gone and we have a bust QB in year 3--if Canales fails to bring him along. 

We are not in a great situation, and the blame goes to the dotards that are no longer here and Tepper, the lone supreme dotard.

Having said that, it is my view that Bryce would be better off with a seasoned veteran in his ear than a developing rookie, so I say that going "all in" on Bryce may be the way to go--not the ideal way...

 

Kirk Cousins and Brock Purdy weren’t taken in the 2nd round.  I think the difference is significant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ChuckWag78 said:

That is how the media works though.  I don't want to hear about it all year. For 2024, Bryce is the guy. There is almost no scenario where I would pull him, outside of injury, for the backup.  

If it's about winning, then Bryce has to be pullable. If it's not, then why the hell are you playing the game? 

  • Pie 4
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

    • Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
    • Sanders is with Tom Brady brand and that's his mentor. The Raiders owner was with Sanders taking pics at a Vegas game together.   It doesn't take much to connect the dots that Vegas will be interested in Sanders as their franchise QB. Oh yeah and guess who hasa small ownership stake in the Raiders Tom Brady.   I guess this is just another made up Madden idea by me huh?
    • Bro I don't mind debating you, but did you really have to write all that to get your point across.   This isn't Madden. If you have the #1 pick you literally control your own destiny. If nobody wants to trade which I have a hard time believing they won't then you obviously take the best QB.   I think we will have suitors. If that's Madden then so be it.
×
×
  • Create New...