45catfan

Sorry, but those statements are contradictory. I agree with the second part, but that doesn't mesh with the first. Usually you need a solid running to take pressure off a rookie QB. Henry still has it, no doubt, but he's high priced and high mileage, neither of which I'm down with.

Too many miles, too much wear and tear and getting old in RB years. Not too mention the money he would require. The days of the 'bell cow' RB are over. Sure, it's still around, but rarer as time goes on. Plus, plenty of FAs and a deep draft this year at RB. Hard pass.

True, IF we do move up, #3 is better than #1 for me. I don't want to move up at all, but keeping our 2025 first round pick while getting a top QB is the smarter solution.

First move in FA is to slightly overpay for Brissett. Gotta happen, or a comp similar to him. Better to overpay him a couple million and get him off the market quickly than keep getting deeper down the list in talent with the FA QBs. Like it or not folks, we GOT to have a veteran QB on this roster, though not necessarily the starter. It would be irresponsible not to.

He always relished himself as an outsider and when he went to work for "The Man" it seemed like a bad marriage. He likes the Panthers and the allure of working for them was probably a once in a lifetime opportunity, but it always felt like he wouldn't be a lifer with the organization.

So they win a weak division, get their teeth kicked in during the playoffs and keep their cycle of never rebuilding alive for another year or two? Great! When they utterly implode in a couple of seasons, we should be peaking. Perfect timing.

People are sleeping on the Raiders and Falcons. Assuming Rodgers goes back to Green Bay, that leaves the Jets, Saints, Raiders and Falcons vying for Carr and Jimmy G. Two teams looking at the veteran route is going to have to go rookie QB unless settling on a 3rd tier veteran. I can't see either the Jets, Raiders or Saints going that route, possibly the Falcons.

Hopefully, Tepper stays out of this, but I doubt it. Maybe he learned his lesson form Rhule and lets the football people do their jobs he's paying them to do. Obviously he's going to be in the loop, I mean influencing decisions.

All he'd have to do is Google QB draft history to find out his statement about QBs "falling" to #9 is utter nonsense. Plenty of solid QBs have been drafted outside the top 5, even some outside the top 10.

Signing a vet regardless. Not going to go into the season with two QBs with zero regular seasons starts. The level of the vet depends on where the QB is drafted. Top 3, a cheaper vet, #9 or later, an expensive vet.

Frank will get a bit more leash than Fitts, that's unless we just suck. If we are competitive and a rookie--> 2nd year QBs play is holding us back, then Fitts will likely get canned. Worst case scenario is we are this year's Jets in two years. A team loaded only held back by a QB draft bust.

When I say generational, I mean the unquestioned #1 overall. Most recently Trevor Lawrence. You could have offered the Jags the moon and they wouldn't have come off that pick. Yes, there are a lot of intriguing prospects this year, but in most years (last year being an exception) there are usually a minimum of 2 up to 4 or 5 of these "high potential" QBs in every draft. You proved my point in the bold section. All really solid prospects, and it's been a mixed bag with arguably the higher picks having the worst results. Mahommes was pick #10 (would have dropped out of the top 10 had KC not traded up for him, people for get that). So this 'WE HAVE TO MOVE UP TO THE TOP THREE RIGHT NOW!' is nothing but impatience. Yes, the organization feels it too, but they will be calculating. The fans are just irrationally impatient.

Just like the absolute assumption that moving up for a QB will solve our QB problems. He either will or he won't. History shows the weight is much more heavy on the won't side. Missing on a QB is going to happen, but don't compound it by giving up a poo-ton of future draft capital too. If a QB drops to #9 and the staff wants to take a swing, go for it. I personally want to wait another year, but I won't be upset because a bust is only this years first and not other firsts in future drafts.

How's the Jets franchise QB doing?

Such as the actual NFL professional scouts/coaches don't buy into sports writers and fan hype?

Possibly, even probably. I just hope it's at #9 and not any higher.

The fallacy of not getting a franchise QB outside the top 10 is strong here. Why? Where did this come from? I see it time and time again. I will say this for the umteenth time--there is NO generational QB in this draft. IF there was, I might be on board with moving up. That said, I do not see the necessity to move up. Most of the best QBs in the NFL are not, I repeat NOT #1 overall or even top three selections. So even if we are in the teens next year as our draft slot, we might only have to move inside the top 10 (see only TWO first rounders, not THREE) to get the guy we want. This artificial pressure to get our rookie QB this year is simply impatient fans. Hopefully the staff is weighing all their options and staying away form the Huddle.

Depends who is remaining. Over Richardson, possibly, because he's so underdeveloped. No, I would not take Hooker at #9 even if they have him higher than AR. At #40, sure. He will not be ready until late camp despite hoping to be ready by camp open. When I say ready, meaning no restrictions. I doubt a medical team will fully clear him in the next four months.

I'd take a flier on Hooker and stay at #9. I totally think that if Hendon didn't tear his ACL, he'd be right there in the conversation with the other four QBs. To clarify, that is take Hooker with one of the 2nd round picks, not at #9.

That right there shows that you know it's a huge risk. Squander the next several drafts on such a move and the QB we went all-in on is anything less than a legit franchise QB seals Fitts fate here in Carolina. Again, moving up to the top 3 is a 'push all your chips to center table' move. Go big or go home--if that QB doesn't go big, Fitts will be going home.

Anyone thinking the Bears dropping from #1 to #9 is ANYTHING less than 3 first rounders--bare minimum, is hooked up to the hopium tank. Probably a 2nd or 3rd thrown in there too.

Lol, and us being the furthest back of the QB needy teams to move up would have to give up a TON to go to #1, but I'm getting flack for suggesting we stay put at #9. Some of you guys would give up your first born child to move to #1.

The trap is moving up to #3 or #1. You just don't realize it. This is an average, thin and top heavy draft at QB. Thus the reason most is wanting to move up. If it were deeper at the top and throughout, the need to move up would be moot. It will be a bigger class next year and I predict more evenly distributed. We don't have to be bad or need to move up because the entire value of the class won't be concentrated in the top 5 picks.

Can get him as a FA probably then. Usually 1 or 2 FBs get drafted every year. Namely because most teams don't use FBs anymore.

Just as risky, yes, but a bigger class means missing won't hamstring us for nearly as long because the need to move up to the top 3 won't be necessary.