Wundrbread33

This comp dates me some, but Corral makes me think of Jake Plummer with more arm talent. Corral needs to use his athleticism that way. No more running over dudes, but covering lots of ground on boots, and having the secondary ability to gash teams if they forget about his legs. Corral has a nicely refined play action and sells it well. A great pump fake too. He does a lot of little things well.

He’s looking better and better as the college season progresses and these prospects show more red flags. He didn’t fall to round 3 because of talent (or lack of it).

I may be misremembering. I’d have to go back and watch…but it would make me sad.

I think the main point was that Cam (if you want to say he wasn’t slam dunk) was one of if not the most physically gifted QB specimen ever, and he dominated the SEC in route to a NC and Heisman. Dude was a thoroughbred. The potential was enormous and worthy of #1.

I don’t recall him throwing poorly. He showed the arm strength and threw a great ball. The ball just popped off his arm. Do you mean he missed some throws? He also displayed his athleticism and stature. Cam was questioned for off the field, not on it, aside from the typical athletic QB “but is he smart enough to read a defense?” questioning. I do agree that Luck and Lawrence were more slam dunk though. They also were more “clean cut” (coded) and weren’t labeled as thugs.

Walker is a great story, but a general rule is that around 5ish games of tape make or break these backups who flash. (Teddy, Kyle Allen, Sam) I’m rooting for him obviously, but can he succeed when teams have a better feel for his tendencies? I was in the cut PJ camp. Thought it was the best move at the time because why have 4 QB’s taking reps? Happily enjoying watching him take advantage of his opportunity now though.

Exactly. What’s wild is that people can disagree with this in this thread regarding the Rams offer for Burns, but they would be furious if we traded something like our 2nd rounder this year, for just a 2nd rounder next year. They simultaneously think “a 1st is a 1st” and “a 1st this year is worth more than a 1st next year”, at the same time. Well which is it?

You literally just said that you wouldn’t accept next years 2nd for this years 2nd because they would have to make the trade “worth our while.” Why does a team have to make it “worth our while?” It’s because we could select a player right there to help our team right now, versus waiting a year to draft a player in the same round. Thats why you demand either more picks, or a future pick in a higher round. What’s interesting about the logic, is how you can agree and disagree with it at the same time.

Absolutely. If someone wanted this years 2nd, they would have to trade next years 2nd and 3rd, or 2nd 4th 5th, or next years…1st. Therefore…you actually agree with the opposing view that you have argued against for pages.

You must remember the Texans taking David Carr over Julius Peppers. Of course they needed a QB, but Peppers was basically a slam dunk.

@mrcompletely11 still waiting for an answer, or at least why you said “it doesn’t work like that.”

So…an opinion piece is used to strengthen your argument? Pretty weak.

I don’t think the cap will be as bad as it seems, since we will have a QB on a cheap contract for the whole duration of Burns next contract.

Hope we can corral a QB with an accurate strong arm, quick release, good mobility, and a competitive attitude who lays its on the line for the team.

Why not? Also, why didn’t you give an answer?

One last stab at it. A few people have said the equivalent of “I don’t care about the gm system, we are fans and that’s the point of view that matters.” Let’s say we end up with round 2, pick 15. A team really wants that pick, and will only trade future picks. Would you be fine with a 2024 2nd round pick? We don’t lose a 2nd round pick. Maybe the 2024 is better than 15th in the round. We are just kicking it back a year. Maybe the 2024 class is better… Or would you absolutely rage?

43 pages for a no brainer.

Nope. At least 5 more pages of “you’re stupid” and “no you stupid” before this trails off.

Acknowledging that’s how GM’s view picks (not just Fitt, but the Rams GM too) means… …more picks need to be in the trade. A fans value of a pick is irrelevant. The way GM’s value picks is highly relevant. Does pointing this out make me, others, and/or the concept itself stupid? You seriously think that?

Well that’s too simplistic. There’s reality that a 1st round pick in 2045 is a 1st round pick the same way that this years 1st round pick is a 1st round pick. (The year is an exaggeration, just used to illustrate) Then there is league wide perception that GM’s consistently display, which is that future picks are not as valuable as current picks, and also, players on your team that panned out and didn’t bust. If they trade Burns, fine, but perception is relevant, and should be leveraged to get more than two future picks, since GM’s do in fact perceive them as less valuable than current picks. That is a “reality” as well.

This thread is both sides saying the same thing over and over. Has anyone changed their stance yet?

It's not because the people making trades have their jobs based on if they win or not. That’s why future picks are valued less. A GM isn’t valuing a 1st two years from now as high as a 1st this year, because 4 years down the road when the player picked is developed and playing well, it is highly likely a new coach and front office are the ones benefitting from it.

So many people here actually believe they have it all figured out, and if you disagree, you’re an idiot. Hopefully these people are just young. That poo is cancer.