SmokinwithWilly

Call me crazy, but my personal opinion is to go from 9 to 1 will take 3 1sts, (2) 2nds this year, and 2 future 3rds.

Yeah. I suggested Burns and 9 a month ago, but that all depends on their valuation on Burns and his contract, and whether or not they consider him to be an elite edge guy, not just a pash rusher.

They can ignore it and get the player that they want and pick up an additional 1st and a couple other picks if they choose. If Anderson or Carter is "their guy", then they will only move as far as they can to guarantee they still get one or the other. Sure they don't add a 25' 1st, but they get the player they wanted and some.

Maybe, maybe not. They could take 2 1sts from Indy to move down to 4 and still get the guy they had targeted all along. Either way at 4 they'd get Anderson or Carter.

The bandaids were all under Rhule and you have to be able to get your guy. If Chicago plays it the way I suggested, Stroud and Young are gone. If Indy offers more for 1, both are gone. At that point, are we as confident in Levis or AR as a fit or being able to develop properly to pay 2 or3 1sts to move up to 3? I don't disagree with taking a shot as long as it's the right one. Rhule was all about the bandaids. Different coach, different rules now.

What's your plan if you can't get the top 2 qbs or LJ?

Dan isn't saying anything anyone with half a football brain doesn't already know. We need to get the right QB of those that are available, if we choose to go QB in the draft. Whether or not we will be able to remains to be seen. So much depends on what Chicago will do and if they will try to maximize that pick and still get my guy. If I was Chicago, I'd be trying to sell 1 to Houston and 2 to Indy pitting them against Carolina. They end up at 4, still get a bunch of extra picks, and get either Anderson or Carter at 4. That would be a massive win for them, IMO.

I remember a bunch of talk about how Leaf could end up being better but no one I remember listening to or talking to ever took it seriously. It all seemed like a bunch of hype trying to get Indy to pick someone other than Payton. Payton was always considered a sure fire lock, it was just was Leaf going to be the better of the two "locks." This is quite a while back of course, but that's what I remember anyway.

and P. Manning.

No doubt. So did I. Some guys rise to the moment, some stay the same, and some crumble. I think we've seen enough of the Baker and Darnold types.

I don't think the majority of us are scared to move. The point many of us are making is, if we do make a move, make it because we've evaluated the player thoroughly and decided he's the best fit for our offense. No jumping for the mega hype underwear olympics high flyer just because they're the sexy pick. FYI, the last 4 times next years first was traded away was Mahomes (17), Watson(17), Goff(16) and Wentz(16). Of the 4, I would say that Mahomes is the only completely successful more. Wentz was leading Philly to the SB when he got injured so that's kind of a partially successful given the rest of his work. Watson got himself traded away for being handsy, and Goff is well, Goff. The only other time before that I could find was RG3. I wouldn't say trading away an extra 1st is necessarily the blueprint, though it has been done with some success and some failure.

It's playing the game the NFL put in play, but not really one I'd want to admit to playing. I'd want everyone on my staff knowing their abilities are why they're in the building.

I know. I'm just hoping some other football discussions can come from it. Like turning our 1st into another 1 and a couple more 2s and what we could do with those resources. We could fill a lot of gaps by not being desperate. The Darnold trade shows how bad you get screwed when you're desperate.

The one thing that did impress me is he didn't wilt in the big moment. While he may not have always been a success, he didn't play with fear. That's something we haven't seen since Cam when he was healthy.

My plan is to let the guys in charge do a proper evaluation of all players, even the ones I'm not particularly fond of, and choose the best move to make for the franchise. But there's a laundry list of questions to be answered regarding the available QBs. For those in the draft, they have to be evaluated and their overall potential ranked. I don't see a franchise maker such as Burrow, Lawrence, Mahomes, Allen sitting there at 1. If they were, Chicago wouldn't be willing to trade out. That changes how I proceed from there. I add Minshew as a FA QB. We need a vet QB if we don't go after one of the top 3 available. Having him allows some freedom in the draft and you don't have to act out of desperation. Stroud/Young are likely going 1/2. Unless we're willing to pay a small fortune, we aren't getting either. I see Indy possibly moving up to 1 or Houston. Chicago could end up trading down twice, end up at 4 and still get Carter or Anderson which would be ideal for them. Someone is going to fall, Levis or AR, but how far. I'd sit at 9 because the Raiders or Atlanta could take one if they don't end up with LJ or AR. I think one does. That leaves us with choice of the 4th QB, or in position to trade back if we have a partner. Personally, I'd like to trade back into the teens or early 20s, pick up a couple extra 2s, grab Mayer or Battle in the 1st, and go into the 2nd with 4 picks. In the 2nd, I'd like to add Sewell with the 1st pick, Ika with the 2nd, Nolan Smith 3rd (don't know if he lasts that long), and then Hooker with the 4th. I like him as a prospect and while he does need development, he also has shown he doesn't wilt in the moment which I really like. That should give us a chance to evaluate Corral and Hooker both. Minshew isn't as bad as he's made out to be. Again, all this is dependent on where AR, LJ, and DC end up and how evaluations go. All of this is speculation and could change tomorrow. I trust the braintrust we have in the coaches' offices right now. There's over a century of experience in those rooms. Getting the right fit at QB is more important than necessarily getting the draft or FA darling.

I can't imagine getting pancaked by a couple 330 lb linemen at that size. Seems like rib injuries would likely be in his future.

We also have never had an offensive minded coach either. I don't need to see us spend a multitude of picks yet to go get a QB. I'm willing to give this coaching staff more than a couple of months to evaluate and find the right QB pick. It could be that they don't think there is one worth trading up to get. Maybe there is. I'm willing to finally allow offensive minded people make some decisions instead of a defensive HC and a wanna be cheerleader.

Fact. 49ers made it to the NFC championship on their 3rd string QB Fact. Both 49ers QBs suffered game ending injuries. Fact. 49ers could not pass because their QB couldn't grip the football and their offense became one dimensional Fact. 3 1sts for Trey Lance is looking like a massive bust right now based on injury and performance history Fact. Neither AR nor LJ were in the championship game. Neither got it done. Fact. If AR or LJ had damaged their ulnar nerve that severely in game, they wouldn't be passing either and would have lost. Fact: Going and spending every asset you have to get AR or LJ or Stroud or Young or whatever shiny object QB you want isn't going to guarantee a Super Bowl win. Fact: You need effective, smart coaches and a smart FO to assemble as complete a team as possible, not just a QB.

The 49ers made it to the NFCCG this year with their 4th string QB. If he hadn't gotten massively injured in that game, it could very well be different. He outplayed the guy they traded 3 1sts to get. Coaching matters more than draft hype.

No. That's Huddle math. It only works in our part of the multiverse.

Right now, Darnold isn't even a viable option since he's a FA and may choose not to return to Carolina if he gets a better offer. Our only option right now is Matt Corral. We currently have zero actual game experience at QB.

It takes an entire team to win a championship, not just a QB. Paying 50 or 60m a year guaranteed for a QB is insane when you have to add in the picks it will cost to go get LJ or AR. Why do you think Brady constantly took less than market value, other than the fact he was making it up in his TB12 BS the Patriots were using and Giselle made more than him? He knew that he couldn't win it all alone. AR or LJ aren't going to get players to come here on a discount for a SB shot. Neither is a rookie QB. There are 52 other players to pay as well as QB. Contrary to what you think, LJ has asked for a fully guaranteed contract. At this point, he's trying to save face because he exercised extremely questionable judgement regarding hiring an agent. I hold far more credibility to DeMaurice Smith than SAS in that regard. That young pass rushing DE will be gone because we won't be able to pay him $30m a year. Bozeman too. Can't pay him if you sign AR or LJ. That leaves you the masterful Pat Elfein. Without young high end talent to replace those that are let go, overall talent level will decline. You better hope that Fitts is an amazing GM because he's going to need to hit on 3 years worth of 3rd - 7th round starters and significant contributors to fill out the roster. This is about more than a single year. If we were a QB away from a SB run, I'd say go for it. We aren't. We haven't built well over the past couple of years. We have some good pieces, but we are very shallow behind those. We're also changing from 4-3 base to 3-4 base which is going to require some shifting and adding in personnel. We need a NT, RB, TE or two, WR, return guy, edge, LBs, FS, slot corner and CB2 (Dante is coming off an Achilles and CJ isn't starter material yet if ever), IOL(C/G preferably), swing tackle, oh yeah, and a franchise QB. That's a lot to pull off in a single year, even 2, not to mention the players that will be leaving in FA, retirement or injury. And you can forget being active in FA because we won't have the cap room to do it. There's a right way and a wrong way to build a contender. Either get your franchise QB in the draft, which I prefer or trade for a LJ, AR, Stafford if you're ready to run now. As long as our FO and coaches believe that the QB they can get has all the attributes necessary to become a franchise QB, great. Go get him if you can. But that means you also need to open yourself to the possibility it could be Carr, Minshew, Brisett, Hooker, Corral, or someone other than Stroud or Young.

Everybody has flaws. It's just can you work around the flaws or get rid of them with development. Some things like character issues i.e. Leaf and Manzel, you can't work around. Other issues like Allen and Mahomes, you can with the right coaching. I hope this coaching staff can look at these QBs and make those determinations. If they see a Mahomes, Allen, Herbert, LJ in this draft, then by all means, go get him. I trust that with this much experience in our FO and coaching staff, we can recognize them and determine if we can work around them. With Rhule I think it was all about getting "X" QB to become OOU and hype them up and that might have worked until gameday when poo hit the fan and the real QB emerged.

People aren't comfortable staying put. They know you have to have a QB to win. They also realize it takes more than a QB to win. Paying an obscene contract and trading away multiple picks is going to make winning the NFC and a possible SB much more difficult. Then you also have to ask yourself, if these guys are so amazing, why are their franchises willing to let them walk? And just saying they're cheap isn't an answer. It's about maximizing value. Having a 2 million dollar sports car is great but if you can never get it above 80, what's the point? I'd rather have a nice car I can drive, a lake house, and a boat to take out on weekends with some extra money in the bank than a car that can never realize it's maximum potential for the same amount of money.