Audible_Red40 Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Lets say The Detroit Lions select Aaron Curry? Then what do ya'll think happens? You now have two QB "Prospects" and 12 spots before we make our selection. Who's the better QB? Depends on who you ask or what you read. If all these trade up speculations are true, do you think Stafford being available will make Vinny/Danny a little less aggressive? Would 1 of the 2 QB's now fall to #13. Are the Skins even interested in Stafford if he's available. Who would you rather have Stafford or Sanchez? I am ok with Campbell being our QB. I do think he gives us the best chance to win in 2009. Do I think he's a "Franchise QB"? No. But he's serviceable and maybe could be better having the same system and coach for the second year in a row. But having the chance of getting a "Franchise QB" seems to be the talk right now. Whether it's because The Dan wants one, Zorn wants one or Shanahan wants one, etc. Detroit taking Curry, hmm, what would happen then? Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kvarlo12000 Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 very possible. I don't like Stafford, I am on the Sanchez bandwagon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stew Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 I thought Stafford stood out as head and shoulders above the other QB's in the draft...? I dunno, I just hope whatever happens works out for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 From what I've read, Stafford is being compared to Jay Cutler. If he's truly as good as Cutler, he will do more for a team than Sanchez. An OC can build an offense around his abilities as Shanahan did in Denver. If he's not as good as Cutler, his abilities won't fit the disciplined schemes gaining prominence now in the NFL -- whereas Sanchez is a good fit in most NFL schemes. Bottom line: Stafford is a higher risk/ higher gain bet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 We shouldn't even be having this conversation. No quarterback is necessary, ESPECIALLY this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SIXX99 Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Lets not draft a QB! How bout that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 lets not draft a qb! How bout that? +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audible_Red40 Posted April 21, 2009 Author Share Posted April 21, 2009 Hey, I am all for not drafting a qb, but the "smokescreens" may be legit, so just wondering the opinions on the strategies if Stafford becomes available at #2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cphil006 Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Let's say we trade our #13 pick to Detroit for their #1, no questions asked. They just want to avoid paying #1 money.... You get the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DGREENHULK Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Yeah lets not daft a QB this year..but say we did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SIXX99 Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Yeah lets not daft a QB this year..but say we did. If only we could get our of this mess that easily.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LB Dizzle Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Lets say The Detroit Lions select Aaron Curry? Then what do ya'll think happens?You now have two QB "Prospects" and 12 spots before we make our selection. Who's the better QB? Depends on who you ask or what you read. If all these trade up speculations are true, do you think Stafford being available will make Vinny/Danny a little less aggressive? Would 1 of the 2 QB's now fall to #13. Are the Skins even interested in Stafford if he's available. Who would you rather have Stafford or Sanchez? I am ok with Campbell being our QB. I do think he gives us the best chance to win in 2009. Do I think he's a "Franchise QB"? No. But he's serviceable and maybe could be better having the same system and coach for the second year in a row. But having the chance of getting a "Franchise QB" seems to be the talk right now. Whether it's because The Dan wants one, Zorn wants one or Shanahan wants one, etc. Detroit taking Curry, hmm, what would happen then? Thoughts? I think the difference between them is that Stafford has pretty much everything you look in a franchise QB....good size, big arm, quick release, pretty accurate, played in a pro offense against the top competition. I think his biggest weakness is that he will try to force it (risk taker). I would compare him to a player like Farve and Cutler (mentioned above). Mark Sanchez also has most of these qualities accept he doesn't have the big arm. I think he is more accurate and may be able to escape the rush a little better. I can't think of a great comparison for him. Maybe a better version of Jeff Garcia. (could be way off there) For some reason, I think Sanchez will be better. I also think he is the perfect fit for the skins west coast offense. Quick release, quick decision maker, and extremely accurate. However, I do not want to trade up to draft anyone so it is unlikely that we would land him if I was GM. If this scenario did happend then I would think that Dan & Vinny would need to be less aggressive because as you mentioned, they may not need to trade up, or at least not as high. Who knows what will happen. This draft can't get here soon enough. A month ago I would have thought people are crazy to talk about getting a QB. Now I have been falling on the Sanchez bandwagon just because I don't think Campbell is the long-term answer and Sanchez seems to be a good fit in our scheme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 IF we were going to draft a QB in the first round, and IF Detroit passes up on Stafford, and IF we were going to trade up to the first couple picks anyway to get Sanchez, then if Stafford is still there get him instead. He is a better QB than Sanchez. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirClintonPortis Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Let's draft both of them, and then open competition. After all, QB is the only position that matters. NOTHING ELSE. Depth especially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audible_Red40 Posted April 21, 2009 Author Share Posted April 21, 2009 Let's draft both of them, and then open competition. After all, QB is the only position that matters. NOTHING ELSE. Depth especially. 50% boom/bust ratio? 1 of them has got to pan out. Good idea! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veretax Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 So your saying: 1. Detroit Lions: Aaron Curry, LB, Wake Forest 2. St Louis Rams: Jason Smith, OT, Baylor (I don't think this pick changes what St Louis does, unless they want to trade Bulger for some strange reason, I do not see them taking Stafford or Sanchez) 3. Kansas City Chiefs: B. J. Raji, NT, Boston College The Chiefs are the real wild card here, if Curry is gone, I doubt they go QB, they could take Eugene Monroe, OT, UVA, they could also look to DLine, and draft Brian Orakpo, Aaron Maybin, or perhaps they could take a NT BJ Raji, I'm betting they'd take the NT since they are transitioning to the 3-4. 4. Seattle Seahawks: Michael Crabtree, WR, Texas Tech Seahawks will have a dilemma, two top tier QBs they could take, and its rumored they might want to take a QB as heir apparent to Hasselbech, and while they have recently said they might Take Sanchez over stafford, I don't buy it, they reporteldy were very interested in him earlier in the year. It was not until the Skins started to show interest that this happened. Personally I think the Seahawks could trade down from here, and someone will take a QB, but if they are stuck here I still think that they could take OT Eugene Monroe or WR Michael Crabtree. My money is on them taking a Tackle. I know the Seahawks signed Housh from the Bengals, but I gotta think they take a top tier WR here. 5. Cleveland Browns: Jeremy Maclin, WR, Missouri Cleveland could be in a trade down position, with both QBs sitting here, a tarde could happen here for either QB, but if they stick I think they might take Brian Orakpo, DE/LB, Texas, who is perhaps the better Talent over the WRs they may be considering. (Which would likely be Jeremy Maclin, but I think their need at WR is too great to take BPA available here, if they can't trade down, they take what they need most, a WR) 6. Cincinatti Bengals: Eugene Monroe, OT, Virginia Cincy has to be laughing to the bank here, they get the second best tackle in the draft, and unless, they trade out, they will be looking to have a better O-line to protect palmer 7. Oakland Raiders: Michael Oher, OT/OG, Texas The Raiders could be unpredictable here, and with both QBs on the board, you gotta bet they will get trade offers, and the raiders could use more picks that much is sure, I think they trade down in this scenario, question is with who, but if they stay, they could look to go WR or possibly OL. 8. Jacksonville Jaguars: Rey Maualuga, MLB, USC Not a great position here for Jacksonville, with the top three tackles gone, BJ Raji also Gone, the best remaining LBs are Rey Maluagua, and while Jacksonville could take a QB here (stafford I'd bet), they likely could trade down for more picks here, but if they stick here I think they take LB. 9. Green Bay Packers: Tyson Jackson, DE, LSU Packers always take BPA, but I don't see them taking a QB, Ted Thompson will look to trade out and add more depth later on if he can (possibly SF could trade up one pick to go ahead and Grab Stafford), but if he can't I don't see him taking Andre Smith though Brian orakpo will tempt them, but they reportedly like Tyson Jackson more for their 3-4 scheme. 10. San Fancisco 49ers: Matthew Stafford, QB, Georgia SF will have a hardtime not taking stafford here, even though they extended/renegotiated Alex Smith's contract, I believe that if they don't trade out they will have to take him here. 11. Buffalo Bills: Andre Smith, OT, Alabama 12. Denver Broncos: James Laurinitas, ILB, Ohio State Denver is in a pickle, with Raji gone early, their hope to find a stud NT this year is likely gone. They still have needs on Defense that have to be addressed though, I think they go DE (Michael Johnson, DE, Georgia Tech or Aaron Maybin, DE/LB, Penn state) or LB (James Laurinitas, ILB, Ohio State) at this point. 13. Washington Redskins: Mark Sanchez, QB, USC Now the redskins are in a Pickle, they've talked up wanting to take Mark Sanchez all this time, and its time to put the pudding where the mouth is. If the Jets come calling, do the Skins trade back? Do they draft Sanchez? Most of the top tier guys are gone at OT, DT, DE) I'm not sure who they would take here if it isn't Sanchez, if they don't really want Sanchez, they had better trade back in this scenario. from there its a crap shoot I think. This looks to be a good scenario for multiple possible trade backs starting with the Chiefs, Browns, Raiders and Packers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HA1LV1CT0RY Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 We shouldn't even be having this conversation. No quarterback is necessary, ESPECIALLY this year. this this this this and this. we always want what we dont need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aubreyjn Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Lets say The Detroit Lions select Aaron Curry? Then what do ya'll think happens? they wont pay an OLB $40 mil. in guaranteed money.... it just wont happen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirClintonPortis Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 50% boom/bust ratio? 1 of them has got to pan out. Good idea! Let's also trade Samuels and Dock for more picks for MORE QBs. Too much is better than too little.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audible_Red40 Posted April 21, 2009 Author Share Posted April 21, 2009 they wont pay an OLB $40 mil. in guaranteed money.... it just wont happen The way salaries are going in the NFL, there is no 1 position that makes more money then the other anymore. Once kickers started getting more then 4 million in signing bonuses, and 3 million per season, I would never say never. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veretax Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 they wont pay an OLB $40 mil. in guaranteed money.... it just wont happen Yeah, and we said for several years they would not draft ANOTHER WR #1. Granted this isn't the Millen at the helm anymore, but detroit is more than one big player away, and I'm not sold on Stafford or Sanchez necessarily being able to come in and make an immediate difference for Detroit. Curry could in fact do that, but man I'd be shocked if they made this pick, cause OT is another huge need for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirClintonPortis Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Yeah, and we said for several years they would not draft ANOTHER WR #1. Granted this isn't the Millen at the helm anymore, but detroit is more than one big player away, and I'm not sold on Stafford or Sanchez necessarily being able to come in and make an immediate difference for Detroit. Curry could in fact do that, but man I'd be shocked if they made this pick, cause OT is another huge need for them. The also need to fix their run defense, and that means big uglies. Of course those on here would go 'sexy' and draft DBs first.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rd421 Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 I am not sold on Stafford...I am just not...so I vote no Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veretax Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Personally I think if Detroit does not take Stafford that Seattle might take him, or entertain a trade, if not them, then Cleveland for sure will trade out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wvtbred Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 If only we could get our of this mess that easily.... Oh it's REAL easy to get out of this mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.