Newton, Mallett, and Gabbert given form of our playbook

[Jackofalltrades]

Dear Beach, "alot" isn't a word.

[Marguide]

I feel pretty confident that if we draft a QB we are going to try to go to camp with Newton/Gabbert/Mallett, Clausen, and Moore.

The reason being that even if Cam is a "project" than we would rather be in a situation where Matt Moore is only under contract until the end of the season so that we can let him walk at that time. If we sign a free agent it is going to be hard to get one in here for a short term contract like one or two years so he can just be a "mentor" and then move on. No legit QB will want to do that.

You make a lot of good points. And you are right that technically Moore isn't a FA, although he is one of the people that would fit.

I like the idea of someone like Matt Hasselbeck. He is up there in age, knows he doesn't have much left in the tank, so he will be a more willing tutor to a young guy.

[Mr. Scot]

Yes, and all those draft picks, no matter what the position, will add to the youth of the team.

Not all of our position groups are as young as the QB and WR groups.

Getting some youth at OL, for example, not a bad thing.

[Marguide]

Not all of our position groups are as young as the QB and WR groups.

Getting some youth at OL, for example, not a bad thing.

You are right regarding the OL. And frankly, that is one of the things that has to be considered. I'm a bit worried that we are wasting the best years of a solid OL, along with D Will and Stewart, because we have no legitimate QB.

[Mr. Scot]

You are right regarding the OL. And frankly, that is one of the things that has to be considered. I'm a bit worried that we are wasting the best years of a solid OL, along with D Will and Stewart, because we have no legitimate QB.

If that's your thinking, getting an FA that can step in right away makes way more sense than a rookie that needs at least a year or more to get ready.

[teeray]

You make a lot of good points. And you are right that technically Moore isn't a FA, although he is one of the people that would fit.

I like the idea of someone like Matt Hasselbeck. He is up there in age, knows he doesn't have much left in the tank, so he will be a more willing tutor to a young guy.

Just to clarify that is assuming all the tenders stand. That would let us keep Moore with just a 1 year extension essentially.

[Marguide]

If that's your thinking, getting an FA that can step in right away makes way more sense than a rookie that needs at least a year or more to get ready.

There are two ways to look at it. If we get a young QB, I expect him to see some limited playing time next year, and hopefully become the full time starter in 2012.

It would aid his development greatly to have a strong OL and a good running game.

Either way to look at it has its merits, which is one reason why there is no consensus on the issue.

[davos]

We used two draft picks just last year on quarterbacks, three on receivers, and all of them are still on roster.

Mixed results on the bunch, but we've got a new staff and last year was a massive MCF, so it's tough to dump any of those guys with that as your only judging criteria.

Youth? that we've got. What we lack is leadership and experience. You don't get that in the draft. That's what free agents are for.

I don't like the idea of going to camp, much less another season, with that much youth.

There are other needs that this year's draft picks can be used on.

But there's a difference between youth and potential. What I'm thinking is: We'd essentially be dumping Pike (no biggie), drafting a Kaep/Stanzi/Ponder/Dalton, keeping Clausen, Moore, & a vet...3 make the team, if Clausen and Moore beat out the new guy, he goes to the PS. Why even bother keeping Pike when there's better potential at low risk?

[Mr. Scot]

But there's a difference between youth and potential. What I'm thinking is: We'd essentially be dumping Pike (no biggie), drafting a Kaep/Stanzi/Ponder/Dalton, keeping Clausen, Moore, & a vet...3 make the team, if Clausen and Moore beat out the new guy, he goes to the PS. Why even bother keeping Pike when there's better potential at low risk?

Given that Rivera just came out and said (again) that he doesn't feel last year is a fair measuring stick for Jimmy Clausen, I have a hard time buying that he's just going to think Tony Pike is trash with even less evidence to go on.

[davos]

Given that Rivera just came out and said (again) that he doesn't feel last year is a fair measuring stick for Jimmy Clausen, I have a hard time buying that he's just going to think Tony Pike is trash with even less evidence to go on.

No doubt he'll give Pike a look, I just don't think it will be that long of one b/c of his build & vision. He's just not at the NFL level and I'm thinking Chud & Shula will see this early on...maybe they already have.

[Mr. Scot]

No doubt he'll give Pike a look, I just don't think it will be that long of one b/c of his build & vision. He's just not at the NFL level and I'm thinking Chud & Shula will see this early on...maybe they already have.

My favorite Pike scenario involves shipping him to Cincinnati - a team that's said to like him - as part of a larger deal to get Carson Palmer.

Nothing against Pike, but to get Palmer it could be worth it.

[CarolinaCatBrigade]

My favorite Pike scenario involves shipping him to Cincinnati - a team that's said to like him - as part of a larger deal to get Carson Palmer.

Nothing against Pike, but to get Palmer it could be worth it.

Unless Pike actually becomes a great NFL QB. :eek: