Eagles 1st round pick watch

[Pick6]

And subsequently retire instead of playing in Cleveland

I didn't say anything about him playing in Cleveland? Jerry is going to trade him to a team he OK's and it clearly won't be the Browns. I am talking about the Bears or Jets potentially getting him, thus removing a team with the "need" ahead of the Browns.

 

[Lee]

And subsequently retire instead of playing in Cleveland

Romo to Denver makes so much sense imo I bet it happens.

 

[ajz20]

Trubisky is the only QB i like in the first round even though best comparison i found for him was Ryan Leaf.

Just not sold on anyone else.

Leaf was messed up mentally, he had enough physical skills to have a solid NFL career. A bit more upside of Alex Snith is not a bad comparison. Mitch could be top 12 to 15 NFL qb if he develops and stays healthy. More then enough to win with, which means he will likely be gone by the Eagles pick.

 

[WellYouNeednt]

Leaf was messed up mentally, he had enough physical skills to have a solid NFL career. A bit more upside of Alex Snith is not a bad comparison. Mitch could be top 12 to 15 NFL qb if he develops and stays healthy. More then enough to win with, which means he will likely be gone by the Eagles pick.

 

[natedagg]

Leaf was messed up mentally, he had enough physical skills to have a solid NFL career. A bit more upside of Alex Snith is not a bad comparison. Mitch could be top 12 to 15 NFL qb if he develops and stays healthy. More then enough to win with, which means he will likely be gone by the Eagles pick.

You don't draft a QB anywhere in the 1st round if you don't think they will have a chance at being a top 5 QB.
























And it's "more than"

 

[ajz20]

You don't draft a QB anywhere in the 1st round if you don't think they will have a chance at being a top 5 QB. A top 5 qb is great but not always needed to be a super bowl contender. You need effective and efficient qb play and those guys are well worth first round picks. I could very well argue that Marcus Mariotta may never be a top 5 Qb, but I would love to take him in the first round and have him as my qb for 12-15 years without hesitation, which is well worth a first rounder.
























And it's "more than"

Not sure I agree at all. A top 10/12 QB is good enough to win super bowls with in the right situation. Flacco and qbs such as Eli Manning are well worth first round picks in the teens even though they are not top 5 qbs.

 

[Snarly]

Where ever the picks land I just hope the Browns are over their coke addiction of trading back in drafts. Never mind that maybe they should just read this board as half the people here would have had better drafts then the "Coaches and GMs" saw fit. I would not mind to have the first and tenth picks that is my hope.

 

[natedagg]

Not sure I agree at all. A top 10/12 QB is good enough to win super bowls with in the right situation. Flacco and qbs such as Eli Manning are well worth first round picks in the teens even though they are not top 5 qbs.

When the Ravens drafted Flacco, they had him almost tied w Matt Ryan, but thought Flacco had a higher ceiling.
"
Team officials convinced Bisciotti the smarter play was to trade back, acquire more picks, and take Flacco. The Ravens had Ryan rated as the No. 3 player in the entire draft and Flacco at No. 15. There wasn't much separation between the quarterbacks in the Ravens' opinion.

The team's scouts thought Flacco had a lower floor than Ryan, but he had the higher ceiling."

Here's a quote about how awe struck the were w his workout:
"
Team officials walked to their cars in silence. They didn't even look at each other. With just a month left before the draft, the Ravens didn't want to give anyone watching a hint that they were so impressed with Flacco.

"It was there that we all looked at each other and kind of said the same thing: ‘Do you believe what we just saw?'" said Cam Cameron, the Ravens' offensive coordinator at the time.
"

You don't draft QBs in the first round to manage games as a top 10-12 QB. You might not be right about them, and they may end up a top 12 QB, but when you draft them that high, the intent is for them to be top 5 QBs.

I'd go on, but I suspect this is a reading comprehension problem, as your first sentence said you disagreed and then you regurgitated a portion of my post that you agreed with, and I hate typing on my iPad more than anything.

 

[DJTJ]

Where ever the picks land I just hope the Browns are over their coke addiction of trading back in drafts. Never mind that maybe they should just read this board as half the people here would have had better drafts then the "Coaches and GMs" saw fit. I would not mind to have the first and tenth picks that is my hope.

Wut?

If you get blown away with a deal to move down and get a guy with that second first that you really like, you do it twenty times out of twenty.

If we had hit on the Mangini trade down, and the Phil Taylor trade down, everyone would be celebrating.

Missing picks doesn't mean you don't do the smart move for a shitty team.

 

[GreasySpread36]

You don't draft a QB anywhere in the 1st round if you don't think they will have a chance at being a top 5 QB.

Don't agree with that at all. If anything you have more of a margin for error when you're picking a QB because he doesn't have to be great. A merely good QB has more of a positive impact than a great player at a lot of other positions.

 

[ajz20]

When the Ravens drafted Flacco, they had him almost tied w Matt Ryan, but thought Flacco had a higher ceiling.
"
Team officials convinced Bisciotti the smarter play was to trade back, acquire more picks, and take Flacco. The Ravens had Ryan rated as the No. 3 player in the entire draft and Flacco at No. 15. There wasn't much separation between the quarterbacks in the Ravens' opinion.

The team's scouts thought Flacco had a lower floor than Ryan, but he had the higher ceiling."

Here's a quote about how awe struck the were w his workout:
"
Team officials walked to their cars in silence. They didn't even look at each other. With just a month left before the draft, the Ravens didn't want to give anyone watching a hint that they were so impressed with Flacco.

"It was there that we all looked at each other and kind of said the same thing: ‘Do you believe what we just saw?'" said Cam Cameron, the Ravens' offensive coordinator at the time.
"

You don't draft QBs in the first round to manage games as a top 10-12 QB. You might not be right about them, and they may end up a top 12 QB, but when you draft them that high, the intent is for them to be top 5 QBs.

I'd go on, but I suspect this is a reading comprehension problem, as your first sentence said you disagreed and then you regurgitated a portion of my post that you agreed with, and I hate typing on my iPad more than anything.

There is no reading comp problem, I disagree that you should not invest a first round pick in a qb prospect just because you think he may not be good enough to crack the top 5. I don't think the 9th or tenth or 11th best qbs are necessarily game managers at all. Qb is the most important position on the team, and there are less then 32 people in this world that can play the position at an effective level long term as a starter. If you deem a prospect as having a chance to develop into a clear above average starter who is good enough to win championships with given a solid supporting cast then he is well worth a first rounder. There have been plenty of qbs that have won Super Bowls who are not top 5 qbs over time, but were still vital in the teams success.

 

[natedagg]

There is no reading comp problem, I disagree that you should not invest a first round pick in a qb prospect just because you think he may not be good enough to crack the top 5. I don't think the 9th or tenth or 11th best qbs are necessarily game managers at all. Qb is the most important position on the team, and there are less then 32 people in this world that can play the position at an effective level long term as a starter. If you deem a prospect as having a chance to develop into a clear above average starter who is good enough to win championships with given a solid supporting cast then he is well worth a first rounder. There have been plenty of qbs that have won Super Bowls who are not top 5 qbs over time, but were still vital in the teams success.

Jesus Christ man, it's LESS THAN...

I'll try to slow down...

-I don't think the 9-11th QB's are necessarily game managers at all (this means that I am agreeing with you; in fact I never made a claim to the contrary) AND
-I don't think that, of those 9-11th best QBs in the league who were drafted in the 1st round, any of them were drafted with the hope of them being the 9-11th best QB in the league. Those drafted in the 1st round were picked where they were with the hope that they had the potential to crack the top 5 AND
-I agree that there are plenty of non top 5 QBs who have won the SB and been vital to teams' success. In your first post, this was some point you were making, saying you didn't agree at all, when I never claimed otherwise.

Then you bring up Flacco, who is on pace for a 4300 yard season, and the very team that drafted him thought he was neck-and-neck with Matt Ryan, but critically, thought he had a higher upside than Matt Ryan. I don't see how that helps your point. Then you brought up Eli, who was drafted 1st, meaning he was drafted with the intention of cracking the top 5 of NFL QBs.

This isn't even a strong position by me, but you're welcome to dig in, again, against points that I didn't make...

Now for your only good point, which was really @GreasySpread36 's point, although I disagree with it: "If you deem a prospect as having a chance to develop into a clear above average starter who is good enough to win championships with given a solid supporting cast then he is well worth a first rounder."

Nobody has a chance (unknown probability) to develop into a clear (definite) above average starter. There's just these young kids that you have to feel damn good about to take them in the 1st round, and the real reason I disagree with this point is that it's unrealistic. OF COURSE, if you can look backward and say instead of Weeden, I'll take (insert 10th best QB in NFL now), OF COURSE you do that. It just doesn't work like that. At all.

It's just game theory: (very very simplified here but) you have 22 starting positions to fill. If a team had the 18th pick in the draft, in round one, would you think that their expectations are to end up with a guy who doesn't have a CHANCE to crack the top 5 at his position?!? Same goes with the 28th pick.

So then you are left with Greasy's point - QB is so important that you'll gladly take a middle-of-the-pack NFL QB with the 1st pick. It still doesn't make sense. You would take that QB, but before that QB was drafted, he was just a projection, and that projection had a room full of draft experts and coaches thinking that he had a CHANCE to be a top 5 QB. If it didn't, then they shouldn't have used a first round pick on him.

 

[GreasySpread36]

So then you are left with Greasy's point - QB is so important that you'll gladly take a middle-of-the-pack NFL QB with the 1st pick.

"Average" is pushing it a little bit. I was thinking more in terms of the guy not having to be a superstar. I don't need him to be Peyton Manning, although that would be ideal; Joe Flacco or Carson Palmer would be good enough. A guy you can win with, although admittedly that's a bit nebulous.

It still doesn't make sense. You would take that QB, but before that QB was drafted, he was just a projection, and that projection had a room full of draft experts and coaches thinking that he had a CHANCE to be a top 5 QB. If it didn't, then they shouldn't have used a first round pick on him.

Agreed, but I'm thinking more in terms of how he turns out, not necessarily how he was projected.

 

[natedagg]

"Average" is pushing it a little bit. I was thinking more in terms of the guy not having to be a superstar. I don't need him to be Peyton Manning, although that would be ideal; Joe Flacco or Carson Palmer would be good enough. A guy you can win with, although admittedly that's a bit nebulous.



Agreed, but I'm thinking more in terms of how he turns out, not necessarily how he was projected.

Switching gears, the other matter is strictly practical: we aren't a Flacco or Palmer away from anything, unfortunately.

What we need is Garrett and then for the 2nd pick, what we need is nasty. Not sure who that is yet, but hopefully they are violent and explosive. Here's a mock where Rueben Foster falls past us: http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/...re-at-quarterback-to-clemsons-deshaun-watson/ ... Now that would qualify as nasty. So would Fournette. People say this LSU Adams safety is nasty too, but his stats are weak...

I hope we skip on QB and give the hard working, decently promising Kessler a chance to blow it next year, behind an upgraded line, with TP/Coleman having a year more as pro receivers, in games where the score is close and we aren't forced to throw. His stats, given that he wasn't even supposed to take a snap this year, are good enough for me, but I don't watch the games.

 

[GreasySpread36]

Switching gears, the other matter is strictly practical: we aren't a Flacco or Palmer away from anything, unfortunately.

Well, we aren't one player away from anything. A big thing for me, though, is having stability at the QB position. It would be huge for this franchise to just have the position handled and to be able to move on and focus our concerns on other areas. The revolving door at QB has been a killer. We can't continue to have a situation in which we're cycling through three and four different starting quarterbacks per season.

That having been said, first and foremost we need good players regardless of position. I'm fine with Myles Garrett at the top pick. It isn't as if we can't use a game-changing player in the front seven. We haven't had one of those since, geez... Michael Dean Perry, maybe? Chip Banks? It's been a long time either way.