2012 QB Prospects (Part 2)

[celts32]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I'm just going to put this out there. Browns apparently really want Barkley. Like they realllly want him.

Could be that they'd be willing to trade their 2 1st round picks to move up to get him.

So...say we have a shot to get Barkley...or we have a shot to trade down and get say a Landry Jones and a nother first round pick. Or maybe we get two 1st round non QBs and someone like a Nick Foles (as an example) at the top of the 2nd.

What do you do?

No deal. No more games...no more settling...I want the highest rated QB we can get our hands on and that's going to mean trading up not down.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by celts32

No deal. No more games...no more settling...I want the highest rated QB we can get our hands on and that's going to mean trading up not down.

Yeah, I agree.. This first round should be about doing what needs to be done to solve the QB position. Whether it's Barkley or RGIII (my preference) we need to be aggressive to make sure we get our man. I think we're going to end up in the pick 7-11 range so we may have to give up a #2 in 2013 and maybe a #3 in 2012 to get into the top 4-6 to get one of them. So what, make the move. We MUST solve this position next spring.

That being said, I'm SO GLAD we passed on Gabbert last draft. He looks skittish in the pocket and appears as if he's destined to be an average to below average QB. Bullet dodged.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Yeah, I agree.. This first round should be about doing what needs to be done to solve the QB position. Whether it's Barkley or RGIII (my preference) we need to be aggressive to make sure we get our man. I think we're going to end up in the pick 7-11 range so we may have to give up a #2 in 2013 and maybe a #3 in 2012 to get into the top 4-6 to get one of them. So what, make the move. We MUST solve this position next spring.

That being said, I'm SO GLAD we passed on Gabbert last draft. He looks skittish in the pocket and appears as if he's destined to be an average to below average QB. Bullet dodged.

I'm all about being aggressive, but I don't want the team to throw away the farm. I'd be willing to go with trading this yrs 1st and next yrs 1st round picks. I'd be willing to go with trading this yrs 1st and 3rd. but "IF" the Browns are interested in someone and they are willing to throw their 2 first rounders out there to move up to get them we don't stand a chance. Maybe if we dropped like this yrs 1st and 2nd and next yrs 1st which I'm not willing to do. The team has too many holes to only think QB. We need

QB
WR
OL
FS

and back ups. and not everyone can be a 1st round pick. Some here want WR in the 1st round cause you can't find a true #1 in the later rounds. Some want a QB no matter who he is and no matter where he technically should be drafted because we need a QB.

What I think is funny is the fans who seem to think the Skins will automatically have a chance at picking Luck, RGIII, or Barkley sitting at #7 or later. and then there are the fans who simply say "well, we'll just have to trade up" like all the teams ahead of us won't want any of those QB's and it will be easy to give whatever we want to move up in the draft to get whoever we want with out competition.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by celts32

No deal. No more games...no more settling...I want the highest rated QB we can get our hands on and that's going to mean trading up not down.

But... if the Colts won't give up their slot at #1 and they take Luck, and the Rams are not happy with Bradford or feel they could take another QB cause of the Rookie CAP they wouldn't be blowing a ton of money on a 2nd stringer and they take say RGIII, then Miami takes Barkley.... your saying you'd settle for Landry Jones or Tannehill? or one of the others

Foles
Weeden
Keenum
Lindley

thats SmootSmacks point. If the QB's we all really want are not available when we go to pick because other teams didn't want to trade out with us then would you just take one of the others or would you trade back for more picks, take something else or would you take whatever QB was available?

[celts32]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

But... if the Colts won't give up their slot at #1 and they take Luck, and the Rams are not happy with Bradford or feel they could take another QB cause of the Rookie CAP they wouldn't be blowing a ton of money on a 2nd stringer and they take say RGIII, then Miami takes Barkley.... your saying you'd settle for Landry Jones or Tannehill? or one of the others

Foles
Weeden
Keenum
Lindley

thats SmootSmacks point. If the QB's we all really want are not available when we go to pick because other teams didn't want to trade out with us then would you just take one of the others or would you trade back for more picks, take something else or would you take whatever QB was available?

Well it would depend on my (Shannys) grade on Jones or Tannehill. But I will tell you what i would do if your scenario plays out...my move would be to trade with the Rams for Bradford. He's only been in the league 2 years and we already know that Shanny had a very high grade on him. His first year in the league was promising and i blame this year on the Rams for changing offenses in a year with no offseason. He went #1 overall for a reason...he has franchise QB potential. I prefer Bradford over everyone but Luck & RG3...

[skinsfaninok]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

But... if the Colts won't give up their slot at #1 and they take Luck, and the Rams are not happy with Bradford or feel they could take another QB cause of the Rookie CAP they wouldn't be blowing a ton of money on a 2nd stringer and they take say RGIII, then Miami takes Barkley.... your saying you'd settle for Landry Jones or Tannehill? or one of the others

Foles
Weeden
Keenum
Lindley

thats SmootSmacks point. If the QB's we all really want are not available when we go to pick because other teams didn't want to trade out with us then would you just take one of the others or would you trade back for more picks, take something else or would you take whatever QB was available?

IDK where u heard that but that is 100% Wrong

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

IDK where u heard that but that is 100% Wrong

The only way the Rams take a QB is if a whole new regime comes in and then they milk the market for Bradford. Right now, however, everything I have read indicates that the Rams FO loves Bradford (Couldn't find the link but saw it from the ESPN NFC West beat writer and on SI).

[skinsfaninok]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

The only way the Rams take a QB is if a whole new regime comes in and then they milk the market for Bradford. Right now, however, everything I have read indicates that the Rams FO loves Bradford (Couldn't find the link but saw it from the ESPN NFC West beat writer and on SI).

That question came up around this area and almost everyone with knowledge close to Sam has said NO WAY he leaves STL they love him and think he's the next big time QB

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

IDK where u heard that but that is 100% Wrong

I think the Rams would be stupid to get rid of Bradford. Although they have been very dissappointing this season, the Rams FO needs to give some weapons.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

IDK where u heard that but that is 100% Wrong

He didn't say they were. He was throwing out hypotheticals that would paint a picture where the top QB's were not available to the skins when their #1 pick came up.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

IDK where u heard that but that is 100% Wrong

I'm not meaning "not happy" as in they will cut him bad not happy. I'm talking he's good but not awsome and recently injured. I could see them taking a QB. Doubtful but with the Rookie CAP they would have 2 really good QB's to choose from and play the best of the two.

My scenerio is just as crazy as the people who think if the QB's we want are not available then we should just trade with the Rams for Bradford. What makes people think the Rams will trade him? Same with Rivers? I keep hearing how, again, if the QB we want are not available the Skins should make a play for Rivers.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by celts32

No deal. No more games...no more settling...I want the highest rated QB we can get our hands on and that's going to mean trading up not down.

I'm with you, Celts. Maybe we can't get Bradford, as others have indicated. In that case we should do whatever it takes to engineer a draft trade to move up above someone like Miami. It likely will be impossible to move to #1 no matter what we offer, but we could move from #7 to #3 or so and take our guy. I think this is what we should do. Anything to end our hunger for a real QB.