KillBill26

Darnold is intriguing. He would go from an environment where he was brought into the biggest market to be the savior, to a team that's already a playoff team due to their solid defense. He won't be asked to carry the team. It would be a great situation to build him back up. As far as cost, darnold would have to cost a 1st, considering even rosen fetched a 2nd in 2019 based on potential alone. That would be a high risk high reward scenario. Not sure if we even need to go that path, a lower ceiling qb at a more modest price might be better for us at this point. If we are giving up a 1st, my preference is stafford over darnold, bc stafford has a much higher floor.

I've been pushing for OT in round 1, due to both long term need and getting best value. Sewell will obviously be gone, but darrisaw, cosmi, mayfield etc will probably be there. And LT is such an important position. But it's really about BPA for me, which is impossible to tell right now. I personally just can't get behind rb in the 1st. Due to their short life span, and all the talent rb that are drafted in the middle rounds, I hope we don't go rb early. I agree with the logic of how a solid running game would elevate our team, I just think OT in 1st and RB in 3rd would be a better way to improve the offense for the long term.

https://thedraftnetwork.com/player/jeremy-ruckert Impressive game for Ohio St TE Ruckert so far. Write up also says he is a willing and enthusiastic blocker. If he declares, could be a nice midround target.

The bears have been playing well since MT was re inserted into the lineup. Maybe they could make cuts to tag him, but if that's the case, we aren't trading a 1st for him. I'd love allen robinson on this team, but I'm afraid his price tag will be too high. I'm guessing a contract similar to amari cooper in the 20 aav range. That's too rich for me. I'd prefer curtis samuel, whose touches increased when Scot turner took over play calling last season, and who would be a great fit for this offense, at half the cost of AR.

Trubisky will not get tagged considering he isn't very good and the bears will be tight against the cap next year (and them cutting foles would actually increase their cap hit), therefore MT can't be traded. Even if he was, no one would give a 1st for him. Maybe snyder, but no one else.

I agree we shouldn't over pursue a qb we don't love, but I disagree with you saying there is a dearth of free agent talent at qb this year, bc the free agent qb market is thin every year, this year being no different. And if stafford, ryan, and/or darnold are available, you could make a case that the options to acquire a qb this offseason are better than in the average off-season, when you add in dak, rivers, fitz, cam, jameis, etc. As far as the draft goes, we aren't going to be drafting high enough in the next few years to get a blue chip qb a la lawrence etc. Whomever we take, even if it's in the 1st, the qb will have warts. A lot of mid to late first round qbs are taken too high due to this same principle: getting a franchise qb is very hard. That's why manuel, lynch, ponder get taken that early. So while I agree we shouldn't rush / overpay, I strongly disagree with the notion that future offseasons will bring better options. I think the options in future offseasons will be similar to this offseason: sparse. So if we have an opportunity to acquire a proven qb at a palatable price, you do it now, hence my preference to trade for stafford for 19 overall (if he becomes available). If you are waiting for better options coming around the corner, you will be disappointed. Now I have someday never comes by CCR in my head. Great song!

That's so funny you posted that, I thought the same thing when I read the draft day story. Where everyone else would expect the owner to fire him, he actually loves it. Crazy. I love how Kyle said that right on the spot. Not only have the last couple drafts been awesome, but Kyle even nailed the worst pick we made, bc he was adamently against it. And I see where some ppl are saying Kyle should've done it in private, I can't say thats the wrong way to do it, I'm just so happy someone wasn't afraid to not be a snyder yes man. I hope if Dan tries to meddle with a pick again, instead of ranting after taking dans guy, they turn to Dan beforehand and say "no that's not who we are taking. You don't like it, fire me now." I know this isn't the most professional way to act, and it could be career suicide once other owners learn of it, but the best thing for this team is to ignore snyder's demands on personnel each and every time. Imagine how frustrating that mustve been for KS. you have spent months analyzing all these prospects, and you are on the clock, and the disgraceful, clueless owner tells you to forget your own analysis, and take a guy you know is a terrible pick. His blood must've been boiling.

If AS gets the start and isn't pushing off his back foot and his throws are weak, I'd have a quick hook to bring TH in. Not bc I think TH has already proven he is the next joe montana, but why not. We are 6-9. We are playing with house money at this point, considering we shouldn't even be thinking playoffs at this point. Let's see what we have in TH, and if we lose, we get the silver lining of jumping up in the draft order. But if we win, and we give this young team the energy that we found our guy and the offense has improved, with limited tape for our qb, to go along with an improving defense, we could be a team with nothing to lose that could win playoff games. Now I think I've talked myself into wanting TH to start regardless of AS health.

I hear ya, and maybe settle at 6-7 is better than payne at 10. Out of the 6 young DL, we aren't paying more than 4. But we have to bring back sweat and young, and those will be sizable, as well as curl, tmac, etc. If we do want to keep the party going, we will have to shell out some decent coin in a relatively short period of time.

It is nice that our studs are staggered, and I don't see ion or settle extending with us. But if we do extend allen, payne, sweat, young, t mac and curl, then by 2025, we will have a large percentage of the cap filled by a handful of players. Or worse, they walk and we lose a top talent. I'm not saying we can't win past 2025, or that cap gurus can't navigate the situation, just that the window we have over the next 5 years gives us a HUGE advantage due to a lot of top talent all on cheap contracts.

I can't argue with that. If they allocate significant resources to a qb, they better nail it.

Having studs on their rookie contracts is a huge advantage. Look at the Seahawks with russell wilson. He was cheap on his rookie deal, and the Seahawks were able to surround him with premium talent, and they were elite. Then they had to pay Russ to retain him, and there is obvious drop in talent surrounding him, and the Seahawks aren't quite the force they were a few years back. Having their star qb on the rookie contract was a huge advantage. And I don't believe I'm cracking the code or telling you anything you don't know, but we are currently at a huge advantage where young, sweat, payne, allen, curl, gibson, t mac etc are all on their rookie contracts. Those are our stars. So there is a special window before those rookie contracts expire where we can use remaining cap space to supplement them. Once they are extended, or even worse forced to walk, there will be less cap space to supplement their talent, and it's hard to expect to be as well rounded as we could potentially be over the next few years. Now, as @KDawg mentioned, you can absolutely stay competitive with solid drafting and FA decisions, but just as the Seahawks have shown, they are still good, but not as great as they were during their "window".

Man, if Curl can play FS, he could make a case as one of the better defenders in the league, considering how well he does closer to the LOS. I don't disagree with any of the points you make regarding how important LBs are. But if LBs are our weakest unit, which I agree they are, I don't think that is a huge obstacle. The 2017 eagles won a super bowl, and their lb core was our very own mychal kendricks (solid lb), and Joe walker, Nigel bradham, najee goode, and kamu grugier-hill. The pats last super bowl, they had hightower (solid) and elandon roberts and Kyle can noy off the scrap heap from the lions. I have confidence with the way the skins have been drafting, that they can add a couple young lbs in the next couple drafts to add in with KPL, Holcomb, hudson, SDH, and have a group that's not pro bowlers, but whoever emerges from that group and wins the jobs will be serviceable to give us an elite defense considering our elite d line and solid secondary. Which brings me back to my original point regarding our back 7, we aren't necessarily where we want to be this moment, but with darby, curl, LC, everett, KPL, holcomb, hudson, SDH, etc, we have enough solid pieces that if we add in a few more to that group, we will have positional battles that whomever emerges will be able to get the job done. And with the eagles and pats examples, they didn't need high draft picks or high priced free agents to fill those spots. If the holes were pass rusher, cb, OT, QB, then that would take premium assets to acquire ( and we have needs there too), but I feel confident the way that we have been drafting that the core we already have in place can be added to with less than premium capital to be successful units. That's the luxury of having an elite d line, which we do.

I agree with needing to re sign darby. If 5 yrs 45 mil gets it done ( me speculating), it would be a smart move imo. Considering he is coming off a 1 yr 4 mil deal, can stay out on an emerging defense, in an off-season where many teams will be strapped with cap space, I feel confident we can bring him back. But if he leaves, we have a big hole at one of the most important positions. Curl has been fantastic, and I'd like to see him play alongside LC. I know LC has his weaknesses and isn't worth his contract, and plays the same position as KC, but considering we are often in nickel, there has got to be a way to get them both on the field. FS could use an upgrade, but I wouldn't consider it dire. Our pass defense has been elite with what we have now anyway. LBs are a big problem. I hope KPL comes back and holcomb has a better year next year. You would think LBs will be a focal point for the next couple offseasons. Also, recent champs, eagles come to mind and pats seem to have a turnstile at lb, have won with less than heralded linebackers. We get a couple LBs in first few rounds of next couple drafts, and the unit might not be the strength of the team, but at least won't be an achilles heel. Every team is going to have weaknesses, and an elite d line and solid secondary can make an average lb core serviceable.

I am firmly in camp A. Teams with elite fronts can beat anybody on any given day, and we have some good pieces to build around in our back 7. Which is why I prefer a vet over a rookie. I feel a rookie would be best if we were starting over, such as where the jets and jags currently are. If they draft a bust, they can start over at qb while their window is approaching, assuming they have added sufficient talent elsewhere. I am hoping for a proven vet if available to plug in and own the NFC East for the next 5 years. We could expect to host a playoff game every year if we are able to acquire a solid vet at qb. PS - cam newton is dead last on my wish list. Cross him off my board, hope for whatever is behind door #2. Take away his mvp season, he has often underachieved, and he pouts when he isn't successful. We don't need an elite qb to win with this defense, but I at least want a leader who brings more of a positive attitude, not a mope with eroding skills.

https://walterfootball.com/nflhotpress/article/Some-Teams-Have-Makeup-Concerns-with-Zach-Wilson [Wilson] has character concerns, rich kid who is an entitled brat - uncle owns Jet Blue -, parents are a pain, not a leader, selfish, and he's a know-it-all. This is the first I've heard about character concerns for him. Without those, he is probably sure fire top 5. He may still be. But if he drops to us bc of character concerns, and we have to deal with another first round young immature head case QB, I'm not sure if I'm ready for that again.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/30612281/ryan-fitzpatrick-tua-tagovailoa-art-mentoring-competition Fitzpatrick would be an interesting choice for qb in 2021. I'm sure he wouldn't be viewed as the first choice. But he is a veteran, has had success in the league, and very smart. He has also handled the role of mentor admirably. He would be a lot cheaper than rivers, stafford, ryan, dak etc. However, he is aggressive and can be turnover prone, which is probably not the best fit for the defensive heavy, field position and ball control style of football we are creating. For those who would prefer to wait another year or two for qb, if we still just have KA / TH after draft and FA, we could do worse for a stopgap.

Valid points. While I hope a good qb option presents itself sooner rather than later, there is definitely a number of paths (ie darrisaw at 19, premier FA at WR, methodically plug holes in a cost efficient way like we did last off-season) where we would improve. Be interesting to see how it all shakes out.

Agreed on how reaching for a qb can be devastating, but if it's decided to go after qb in 2022 as you mentioned earlier, and we just had a 2021 with similar qb shortcomings, then we enter the 2022 draft feeling we absolutely have to take a qb early. If our pick is up, and there is no qb worthy of the pick, you have to choose between reaching or not addressing qb for another year, and the window continues to close.

In the past few years, here are the qbs taken at 19 or later in the first few rounds of the draft 2020 - jordan love, jalen hurts 2019 - drew lock, will grier 2018 - lamar jackson, mason Rudolph 2017 - deshone kizer, davis webb, cj beathard 2016 - paxton lynch, christian hackenburg, jacoby brissett, cody kessler Lamar jackson is awesome, no doubt, but obviously an outlier. Look at the rest of the names, these are the caliber guys we are going to put our title hopes on during our short 5 year window? I agree with you on the cons of acquiring stafford. I just disagree with you on 1. putting off the qb decision and 2. relying on the draft for our qb, knowing we aren't drafting high due to our defense carrying us to at least a respectable record. The odds are high that we are going to end up with a Jo Schmo. I'd rather pin my hopes on Stafford.

Agreed, and if you know you have a 5 year window, it's tough to say "let's not address qb this year, let's wait til next year to figure it out". You are basically choosing to flush a year down the toilet, delaying the qb getting acclimated, and banking on there being qb options that are just as good or better the following off-season.

I hear ya, that was my mentality for the last couple months as this topic has been discussed. You summed up my concerns perfectly. But if the FO / medical team does their research and feel good about the medical side of things, I think MS might be our best option. As this year has proven, our defense alone will carry us to enough wins that we can expect a top pick anymore. So if we are picking middle of the 1st, any qb we take will be a significant question mark. And as I mentioned, by the time it's proven to not have worked out, our window will be closing. Do you really want to put all our chips in on a second tier qb prospect? And if you want to top tier qb prospect, you have to give up significant draft capital, which also goes against your desire to heavily consider cost. No situation is fool proof or without cost. I just feel if we could get stafford for 19 overall, I think that might be the skins best option at qb moving forward, all things considered. (Obviously i would start negotiations with later picks or 2022 1st rounder, but I'm using 2021 19 overall as my final offer, I wouldnt give more than that unless it took a late day 3 pick to make it happen).

I've started to shift my thinking from being anti-acquiring Stafford due to cost, to thinking it is our best option. Ive always been very impressed with Matt Stafford. Even though his teams haven't been great, he is a very good qb. I remember being very impressed with him when he led that comeback over the skins in detroit a few years back (I believe that was the game Matt jones fumbled at the goal line and we kept shooting ourselves in the foot). But stafford took advantage of our mistakes and carried his team to victory. Very impressive. He is a legit, above average qb, who may be considered elite in a different environment. The reason I have been anti stafford recently are two-fold: with AS coming back and leading the team on a recent win streak, I was thinking I'd rather stick with AS. AS knows the system and the personnel, and we can't have both AS and MS, so no reason to give up draft capital and a big cap number for stafford. However, with AS struggling to get back on the field with an injury they are saying is related to his leg injury, it's hard to feel AS is reliable moving forward. Second, with stafford's variety of injuries, including fractures in his back last year, I felt he was an old 32, and I didn't want to give up assets for an injury prone, aging qb. However, digging a little deeper, it seems if anything, MS has proven to be a tough qb who can play through his injuries. He hasn't missed as many games as I thought. The site Sportsinjurypredictor gives him a 5 for durability, the highest score you can receive. This year he has proven the back issues aren't holding him back. https://sportsinjurypredictor.com/player/matthew-stafford/2 Also, stafford has been stuck with some pretty bad defenses as of late. Over the last 6 years, the lions have been bottom half of the league 5 times, with the last 2 seasons being 31st (in yards). https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/det/index.htm Imagine stafford going from having to carry his team due to a bad defense, to just having to protect the football and keep the chains moving. He could be just what we need. It boils down to this for me: if the FO does their research, and determines that MS can play at a similar level for 5 more years (also needs to consider that his wife had brain surgery a year or two ago, if it takes a turn for the worse football will not be a priority for him, as it should be. Just something we need to be aware of), that coincides perfectly with our young core being on cheap contracts. Our window of opportunity may be closed past that. Do we really want to gamble on a high draft pick during that window? Once you've determined that young qb isn't the answer, your window is almost closed. I've started to change my thinking towards adding MS and parting ways with AS. If MS can give us 5 years at his present level of play, he would absolutely be worth #19 overall. Inserting an above average qb into this lineup, as well as addressing the rest of the holes with our cap space and remaining draft picks, we would be in a good position to make a title run. It would be an exciting 5 years.

I'm excited for TH. I don't expect much, but we don't need much from that position. We've proven that. Just don't make boneheaded turnovers. With the running game and spreading the ball around, get first downs and chew clock, and let the defense win the game. Then in the off-season, upgrade the position as best you can. I'm just glad what's his name is gone.

I'm really hoping for Pittman4Two. I miss that guy.