Go for Carr hard and save #9 pick?

[LinvilleGorge]

18 minutes ago, rayzor said:

Carr is a 5-10 year guy. It just doesn't make sense to draft who you hope is a franchise guy this year and sign Carr.

I think he's much more of a 5 year guy than a 10 year guy but I agree that he's young enough that if you acquire him for what he's going to get on the open market you need to fully commit to him.

[Byrdman4real]

22 minutes ago, Jay Roosevelt said:

No vets. No bridges. DRAFT A QB!

This

[TheSpecialJuan]

We've tried this already it hasn't worked just take a QB in the 1st round and let Reich develop him. 

When is the last time we took a QB in the 1st? Cam? it's been a while 

[CRA]

9 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'm not sure that's true.

well, I haven't heard an argument that makes sense to take on a pricey win now QB and then spend a top 10 pick on a QB.    Who has done that? 

because you aren't committing to anything really.  That's no man's land. 

you sign Carr and you try to win now or you spend a top 10 pick on a QB and try to get him ready ASAP.  Those make sense. 

[ericr0319]

its a tough spot because we either have to commit to Carr first. if we do, we are out of the QB market in the draft. 

Carr is a top 12 QB? He has played for a top 3 dysfunctional franchise. Bringing him here, with this coaching staff he would thrive. He is a team player and wants to win. If we pay him then I am all in. 

Honestly, rather have Carr then move up to #1 and give up multiple first rounders. That philosophy has NEVER worked out. 

[CamWhoaaCam]

7 minutes ago, stbugs said:

I don’t want Carr unless we determine that we can’t get the QB(s) that we want. We are likely in the exact same draft situation next year so we need a QB. I don’t like retreads that haven’t done squat in the playoffs but I do know Carr is better than all the QBs we’ve shuffled through since Cam.

We don't need a QB that's just better than Mayfield, Darnold, Bridgewater.

 

We need a QB that's a franchise QB.

 

Carr is not a franchise QB. So if you sign Carr you better be prepared to stick with him for the next 4 years because we wont be in position to draft the top QB's and we won't be competing for SB's either. There is no in between with Carr.

 

If we want mediocrity just sign Carr and be done with it.

 

If we want a franchise QB then trade up and get him.

[LinvilleGorge]

17 minutes ago, stbugs said:

I don’t want Carr unless we determine that we can’t get the QB(s) that we want. We are likely in the exact same draft situation next year so we need a QB. I don’t like retreads that haven’t done squat in the playoffs but I do know Carr is better than all the QBs we’ve shuffled through since Cam.

Pretty much where I'm at. I'd greatly prefer a QB via the draft. I'm just nervous about that sitting at #9.

 

[CamWhoaaCam]

1 minute ago, ericr0319 said:

its a tough spot because we either have to commit to Carr first. if we do, we are out of the QB market in the draft. 

Carr is a top 12 QB? He has played for a top 3 dysfunctional franchise. Bringing him here, with this coaching staff he would thrive. He is a team player and wants to win. If we pay him then I am all in. 

Honestly, rather have Carr then move up to #1 and give up multiple first rounders. That philosophy has NEVER worked out. 

Carr is 32 bro.

A top 12 QB should be making the playoffs more than 1 time in his entire 9 year career.

You talking about needing a coaching staff for him to thrive at his age. Cmon bro he is what he is.

 

Stafford the only QB who went to another team and thrived and that's because the team he went to was a superteam. We can't offer Carr that.

 

Carr needs to go to the 49ers if we being honest. That could give him a chance to win a SB.

[Mr. Scot]

17 minutes ago, CRA said:

well, I haven't heard an argument that makes sense to take on a pricey win now QB and then spend a top 10 pick on a QB.    Who has done that? 

because you aren't committing to anything really.  That's no man's land. 

you sign Carr and you try to win now or you spend a top 10 pick on a QB and try to get him ready ASAP.  Those make sense. 

I don't see one as precluding the other.

I'll grant that it does depend somewhat on what kind of deal you give to Carr.

[SmittysLawnGuy]

The sign Carr draft Richardson in a slight trade back makes a little bit of sense. 3yr. deal with an out after 2 if Richardson is flourishing. Gives you an out either way. If he bombs at least we still have Carr.

[KBRed]

I’m on the pick up Carr, trade down, get WR, TE, and Hooker train.

Edited February 15, 2023 by KBRed

[BrianS]

2 minutes ago, KBRed said:

I’m on the pick up Carr, trade down, get WR, TE, and Hooker train.

If it's Carr + Hendon Hooker, that's actually kind of enticing.  I'm very curious where Hooker falls to in the draft.

[SmokinwithWilly]

All of this depends on what Carr wants and if he believes he can succeed here under Reich. We are getting a vet QB. That is a certainty. Corral and any rookie will do better if we give them a chance to develop some before throwing them into the fire. Mahomes sat an entire year behind Alex Smith. I wouldn't want to sign Carr to more than a 3 year deal. That would give us an opportunity to take a QB this year at 9 if one we like falls.

We have to get past the idea that we are going to be able to trade up. That will only work if someone is willing to move down to 9, which Chicago may not be willing to do, AND other teams don't draft the QB we want. If they view any of the top 4 as a franchise QB, they're not going to move. Chicago is rumored to want one of the top defensive prospects, and I don't think they will drop much past 4 to make sure they get him. That could require a trade up to 3 and then to 1 if we want the #1 and that will cost a damn fortune in picks and/or players. 

Again, all of this goes back to Carr and his contract demands and the strategy for building. I don't think Carr is as bad as he played with the Raiders. He could be more, he could be less. But I'm much more confident now that we have someone who can actually evaluate QB talent, whether it be Carr, or a rookie QB to move up and get. 

[Jon Snow]

4 minutes ago, SmittysLawnGuy said:

The sign Carr draft Richardson in a slight trade back makes a little bit of sense. 3yr. deal with an out after 2 if Richardson is flourishing. Gives you an out either way. If he bombs at least we still have Carr.

This is what scenario I was thinking that could happen.  In essence Carr would be insurance in the event the rookie you draft just doesn't have it to be the guy. Now it's not something I would consider as a first choice.  It would be a plan C consideration to kick around.