Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Your solution for the QB situation?


AU-panther
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

#6 would be my choice and I'd still sign another free agent IOL.

#6 almost feels like the highest upside of all the choices.  Maybe you end up with the top QB anyway in the draft, plus an extra lineman.

In some ways it feels like the biggest gamble, but by picking up the extra pick you mitigate the risk.  If you miss on the QB but hit on the IOL you at least come out of the draft with something.  

To me, #6 would be very tempting.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

6.  Trade down to around 15, draft QB (Howell, Ridder, or Correl), use newly acquired 2nd round pick on an IOL, and let BC play LT.

This is our best option.  You can flip a coin and argue all day on which QB in this draft is better.  I think Howell is being underestimated.  In 2020 when he had a stellar running game and two top flight WRs and a solid O-line and Howell excelled.  2021 he had none of the above and struggle but that should be all on him.

If we fix our line we have a solid running game, good WR and I think he would do well here.

If we get a 2nd you address the center and let Brown and another FA to play guard and let BC play LT. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My first choice is not on the list.  We decided it was a good idea to exercise the 5th year on Darnold at $18+M, we're not paying him to ride the bench.  Even if that is the best place for him.  Especially when this is not a great QB year in the draft.

Of what's left, I like #5 but I don't know if it is doable.  Again, $18+M tied up in Darnold, it boils down to how much one of those guys would add to our QB misadventure.  $18M is not a huge amount for a starting QB these days, but it is a lot for a guy riding the pine.  If you can get somebody to do what Darnold was supposed to do for some small amount, then it becomes realistic.

#6 is not my favorite because I want to build the line early in this years' draft pool.  That said, our QB depth chart is two guys who could be selling insurance or real estate next year barring some seismic shift in one or both of their performances.  I'd rather draft an OL in the 1st and QB in the 2nd in the scenario laid out, and if the QB looks like anything less that our future starter, draft another one next year when the pickings might be better.  But, unless the guy stinks the place up worse than our current duo, at least we have one on the depth chart heading into next year, even if he is a backup.

So, 1) none of the above, 2) #5 if the numbers can work, 3) #6 if we can pull off the trade and get an good OL with our lower first rounder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

I saw all 6. Your point? What makes those options our only options?

because I started the thread, create you own if you want other options.

Actually I tend to agree with you and if I had my way I would have him go with Darnold and just start over next year but like i said that isn't looking like it is going to happen.  So the point of the thread was what would people prefer out of the options that are looking more likely.

So basically if you can't get your way what other option would you like of the ones listed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 then 6, then 5 for me.

1) Watson solves the QB problem in the long term.

2 & 5) Jimmy G on this team isn't going to play much better than several of the FA options. I'd rather just pay a FA for similar production

3 & 4) None of the Rookies should go top 10 to this team.

  • Willis (highest ceiling) isn't going to be ready in time and Darnold also has a big arm and suspect decision making if that's what we are looking for. Our top pick needs to make an impact this season.
  • If the team likes Pickett that much why not just take Mac Jones last year? I feel like taking Pickett at 6 is doing something for the sake of doing something. I'm guessing whoever takes him will be debating if he's worth the 5th year option in a few years (just like the Browns and Giants are doing right now).
  • I'm warming up to the idea of Ridder (or Corral) in the late 1st after a trade down. I don't think Pickett or Willis fall that far.

5 & 6) I'm not sure a stud LT falls to 6 after seeing some recent mocks and I'm not excited about taking the hold machine out of Northern Iowa (Penning) or the C (Linderbaum) at 6. I think there is really good depth in this draft and would like to have picks to work with.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't let this administration make any big moves for a QB unless they can fix other areas.

No trades for anyone. No early draft picks for QB. 

Get a low cost/low risk FA QB, bring back cam for a year, and keep Sam and let those three battle it out.

If Rule can earn another year with that crew, then let him pick from next year's crop.

If Rule gets fired then the new coach can start over without Rhule's baggage at QB.

Big time focus needs to be on the OL this year and get things ready and gelling for next year's QB.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...