CL1022

And Levis will end up rewriting the record books. #keeppounding

We may have increased the value of these top picks by taking #1 by compressing the range of where QBs will be taken. Before the trade, the top 4 could have gone 2, 4 and anywhere from 5-9. Now, it's nearly certain that 3 QBs will go top 4, and that last one standing could be very valuable to those 5-8 teams still needing one. Could this have been part of the thought process all along? Regardless, I'd love to hear what everyone thinks of this hypothetical: What if we traded down until there was only 1 QB left, at least to 5 you'd think. According to most draft charts, that would be worth about three 2nds, which are valued roughly equal to future 1sts. If we could net something equivalent to three 2024 1sts to take the leftovers at 5 or 6, the pick itself would be free. We'd have traded DJ + a 2025 2nd for two extra 1sts in 2024 AND moved up from 9 to 5 this year. All-in, we'd have a rookie top 5 QB, three 1st rounders and our own 2nd next year, and our 2025 1st. If the leftovers, presumably Levis, ends up hitting, then we are loaded for the future. If he busts, we're better positioned to trade up for our guy next year. This would give us two shots at getting what we want, with the 1st option just being better, but the 2nd option no worse off than we were before. None of these guys are Luck or Lawrence level sure things. If we get a chance, give me a free mulligan if needed and if not, we can cash our mulligan in next year and build a dynasty for the next decade.

Agree with the point, but in fairness Brady missed a season, as did Manning.

There's a scenario I haven't seen discussed, but to me would make a lot of sense. We had a roughly .500 roster with Darnold/Wilks. I'm not convinced we are "one player away" at this point. But I think with Reich/Darnold we could be competitive for the division in 2023 and give Corral a chance to develop another year under Reich. What if we traded down with someone like Tampa Bay at 19 (a team on the decline and desperate for a QB). We could probably get their 1st next year, which could easily be a high pick. Unlike years past where this would sound like a "tank" scenario, I actually think we can be competitive at worst, win the division at best, and still end up with a potential top 10 pick plus our own next year. How could this play out? 1. We suck and end up with two high picks next year to package for Caleb Williams, or my personal homer preference, Drake May. We would be closer to a more complete roster around them with the #19 from TB this year. 2. We find out that Corral (or Darnold ) actually can play and we don't need a QB, and now have 2 first rounders to use to continue to build around them. 3. I suppose we could just be mediocre again, but that's just something in between the two and we still are in a better position to move up to get Williams or Maye, with a better roster around them and fully stocked shelves in 2025 to continue building. It's not sexy, but it's practical and doesn't have a lot of downsides either way.

I mean, yes and no. At 20m even for 7 years, that’s a $76m bigger risk than before. Big number, but it’s about 0.69% of DTs net worth.

Nothing to add that hasn’t been said. But posting to bump the approval count in case Tepper actually checks Huddle for good ideas. I wanted Harbaugh the last two times we hired a coach and for once I’d like to at least see us lose doing things I thought were smart so I won’t have a right to complain .

As long as we beat Tampa, we have a few pathways. There is even a possibility that we could get in if we beat TB and lost both other games.

There’s actually a scenario where the entire NFCS ends up 6-11. Lol

Doesn’t this question almost counter the tanking argument? Like, if we lose out and get the 5th pick, “we’re a joke” so no coach wants to come here. But if we go a respectable 8-9, seem competitive, then no coach wants to come because we don’t have a high enough pick to get the QB they want?

There’s a big gap between the worst and great. He’s probably the same middle tier coach we’ve always had who can’t get over the hump. If he can run the table to the divisional round, I’d love to hope otherwise. But that’s the trajectory I see right now.

There’s an ocean of a gap between the next great NFL HC and Matt Rhule. Wilks falls somewhere along that curve.

That 1st and goal from the 4 comes to mind. There’s a spot he still adds value. He’s not a full time signal caller now. But there are a few spots that come up where he’d be great to have around.

If he would work in a Taysom Hill type of Swiss Army knife role, absolutely. As a QB, he’s done. But as an Athlete….he’s got a few good ones in him per week. Plus the intangible bonus that he would add some crowd energy for our one home playoff game. Not the worst idea the franchise would have ever had. It won’t happen and I’m not sure it should. But damn it would be cool to see.

Personally this feels like I’m watching a presser of Lou from the movie Major League. I think the mystery word in question isn’t “are” or “our”, I think it’s “or”. “Coaching changes”, OR “players traded” OR “the organization trying to tank it.” I think he stood down quickly and intelligently by clarifying that he meant outside media. But I think it was a slip that he admitted the organization wasn’t “expecting to win”, while not necessarily implying they were “trying to lose”. Who cares? We are winning. Let’s just go win the division and enjoy a home playoff game for the first time in 7 years. But I do think it’s funny that we probably did think we were tanking (as an organization), but reality is even a “failed HC position coach” made this team a playoff caliber contender. Shows how much it really was Rhule all along. (IMHO)

Over/under 100 pages on this thread by midnight tonight?!