QB Apocalypse: The Seventh Sign

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by 30gut

But how would we know if they are on the same page or not?

I think its much more likely that Mike and Kyle are more on the same page then not.

we dont for sure, but we do know from recent history they dont appear to be and what we hear from rumors its always Mikes likes this guy, Kyle prefers the other guy...but hey we all are really assuming and critiquing alot from a distance.

[mbedner3420]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

My cousin from another cousins baby brother that has a step dad who knows Bruce Allens 4th cousins cousin predicts we will Sign Archie not Peyton

Hahahaha Well at least your sources have more credibility.

[Mahons21]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

No point to prove. It wasn't a statement in regards to how he'll turn out. It is in reference to how many people have their heart/mind set on us moving up to draft this kid and aren't considering anything else viable. They are setting themselves up for a huge letdown. This doesn't have anything to do with whether I think drafting him is wrong or if I think he'll be a bust. I want the kid, but I'm quite sure that Mike isn't going to trade up to get him. It's just going to be funny to watch all these people explode if or when it doesn't happen.

From a guy who's debated this topic at length with the masses on ES, I can fully agree with your sentiment here.

Some of these guys have literally said;
-They would trade five first round draft choices for RG3
-Gaffney is a #1 receiver

And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Like you I wouldn't mind drafting RG3, if he fell to us at 6, but I don't see that happening. Furthermore I think trading back and snagging Tannehill is a pretty awesome consolation prize. Both RG3 and Tannehill have low floors, and both guys have high ceilings but for different reasons.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by Mahons21

From a guy who's debated this topic at length with the masses on ES, I can fully agree with your sentiment here.

Some of these guys have literally said;
-They would trade five first round draft choices for RG3
-Gaffney is a #1 receiver

And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Like you I wouldn't mind drafting RG3, if he fell to us at 6, but I don't see that happening. Furthermore I think trading back and snagging Tannehill is a pretty awesome consolation prize. Both RG3 and Tannehill have low floors, and both guys have high ceilings but for different reasons.

nice opening post, welcome. I dont know how great of a consolation prize Tannehill will be though compare to other talent we need vs whats available with a 1st round draft pick.

[Mahons21]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

nice opening post, welcome.

Appreciate it.

I dont know how great of a consolation prize Tannehill will be though compare to other talent we need vs whats available with a 1st round draft pick.

Ideally we would acquire Tannehill by trading back and picking him up in the end of the 1st round, acquiring an additional 2nd rd pick along the way.

But who knows, it's all going to depend on how FA pans out, and who's drafted before we pick.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Mahons21

Appreciate it.




Ideally we would acquire Tannehill by trading back and picking him up in the end of the 1st round, acquiring an additional 2nd rd pick along the way.

But who knows, it's all going to depend on how FA pans out, and who's drafted before we pick.

Welcome to the board. You stole my argument. Great minds think alike.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by Mahons21

Appreciate it.




Ideally we would acquire Tannehill by trading back and picking him up in the end of the 1st round, acquiring an additional 2nd rd pick along the way.

But who knows, it's all going to depend on how FA pans out, and who's drafted before we pick.

That's my ideal scenario. If we give up a couple of year's worth of draft picks, we might still have a major letdown even if the QB we choose works out.

FA is still a great venue for adding talent, but if we are missing high picks in the draft for 2-3 years when we lack so much talent, I'd just rather have the picks.

Don't get me wrong, the QB situation HAS to be addressed, but not at the cost. Maybe we end up trading up and it's way more cost effective than any of us think, but I won't hold my breath on that one...

[SmootSmack]

So much depends on how FA plays out, but I'm not sure I see Tannehill making it past Seattle at 12.

But let's say we sign Peyton, then I could see a trade down into the later 2nd/early 3rd where you pick a guy like Foles or Cousins and/or maybe you find someway to add a 1st in 2013

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

So much depends on how FA plays out, but I'm not sure I see Tannehill making it past Seattle at 12.

But let's say we sign Peyton, then I could see a trade down into the later 2nd/early 3rd where you pick a guy like Foles or Cousins and/or maybe you find someway to add a 1st in 2013

And THAT would be one hell of a price to pay to move up that high. PROVIDED we can get an improvement over Grossman, I'm OK just letting the next few years play out with whomever is at QB.

If that Luck deal was still possible, I'm willing to take that risk, but right now I don't know if I'd trade a ton of picks to move up for RGIII.

[NYCskinfan82]

IMO signing PM will make some FA want to come here, other than money.

[Chico23231]

In trade down scenario, I like the trade back with Cincy, the 17th and 21st pick. They are looking for a RB, Trent is there for them. We pick 17 and could trade back again with the 21st.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

In trade down scenario, I like the trade back with Cincy, the 17th and 21st pick. They are looking for a RB, Trent is there for them. We pick 17 and could trade back again with the 21st.

Who do you take there that's still available? If Tannehill is gone, I'd take the best OT available and then CB.

[NYCskinfan82]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

In trade down scenario, I like the trade back with Cincy, the 17th and 21st pick. They are looking for a RB, Trent is there for them. We pick 17 and could trade back again with the 21st.

That would be fantastic, wishfull thinking.

[NYCskinfan82]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Who do you take there that's still available? If Tannehill is gone, I'd take the best OT available and then CB.

Agree, not really worried about Tann, if we're picking in the first then We have PM or best FA QB available & we will be picking up a project QB in the late 2nd to 4th round IMO.

[biffle]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Who do you take there that's still available? If Tannehill is gone, I'd take the best OT available and then CB.

If Cincy did that (unlikely) then I would want Tannehill and Adams/Glenn. If I couldn't do one or the other (almost certainly Tannehill, as I can't imagine both of those Ts would be gone), then I would probably want to trade down again.