2022 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[Going Commando]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Tannehill bring me back to a dude we both liked on the board DarrellGreenie.   I chatted with him a bunch including off this board via email in 2012, he was a big Tannehill guy among others.

 

To me Tannehill, the college version, reminds me a little of Pickett, too.  I recall Tannehill in college just loved rolling in the pocket and throwing on the move.  Not that Corral doesn't do that.  But when I think of boots, Pickett hit me before any of these guys.

 

 

Yeah, me too.  Good news is I get the vibe that they will shoot hard for him.  Now do we land him, that's a different story.

 

Pickett loves that right side scramble.  That's his comfort blanket.  When he gets confused by a coverage or he feels pressure, he'll roll right and start creating.  I think those are some of his most impressive plays.  He makes that play where you are running right and throw it back into those really fleeting windows that you get in the middle zones look easy, especially on where he had a levels built in and it's really hard to see that lane to the high option from the broadcast view.  He kind of won me over with plays like that.  Also there was like a 15-20 yard shovel pass against BC in 2020 that he pulled off that showed off his innate creativity that really impressed me.

 

I wasn't like you about Pickett.  I found him irritating and he kind of had to win me over in spite of his personality.  I recognized that he was good and had made a leap after I saw him tapdance on GT this year, but I didn't really want him for our QB until I really started watching all of his cut ups and saw the creativity and the accuracy.  I didn't love his arm strength either, and still don't TBH.  Seeing how he has to set up and put everything he's got into the throw to rip those seam passes worries me.  That's one big difference between him and Tannehill, as Tannehill's got such easy and natural arm strength.  But every prospect has warts and if Pickett had elite arm strength we wouldn't be talking about him as an option at 11.

 

Re: Wilson, I haven't been paying much attention to the process of courting him because it never felt realistic to me.  But if Ron gets him, I would be stunned and impressed.  Wilson is the absolute best outcome to me.  I don't want to get my hopes up about him, but if it happens... yeah that would definitely breathe life into this organization and fanbase.  It'd be the best I've felt about the team since 2012 and I think it would basically ensure that the Ron Rivera era will be long and highly competitive.

[Skinsinparadise]

46 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

Re: Wilson, I haven't been paying much attention to the process of courting him because it never felt realistic to me.  But if Ron gets him, I would be stunned and impressed.  Wilson is the absolute best outcome to me.  I don't want to get my hopes up about him, but if it happens... yeah that would definitely breathe life into this organization and fanbase.  It'd be the best I've felt about the team since 2012 and I think it would basically ensure that the Ron Rivera era will be long and highly competitive.

 

My hopes aren't up but it looks clear the will take a swing at getting him.  it also came out in the Mike Silver (Silver is Rons buddy) column last year that they considered shooting for Wilson in the last off season.  Silver's latest column strongly suggested they'd swing hard for a big fish.   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

Pickett loves that right side scramble.  That's his comfort blanket.  When he gets confused by a coverage or he feels pressure, he'll roll right and start creating.  I think those are some of his most impressive plays.  He makes that play where you are running right and throw it back into those really fleeting windows that you get in the middle zones look easy, especially on where he had a levels built in and it's really hard to see that lane to the high option from the broadcast view.  He kind of won me over with plays like that.  Also there was like a 15-20 yard shovel pass against BC in 2020 that he pulled off that showed off his innate creativity that really impressed me.

 

I wasn't like you about Pickett.  I found him irritating and he kind of had to win me over in spite of his personality.  I recognized that he was good and had made a leap after I saw him tapdance on GT this year, but I didn't really want him for our QB until I really started watching all of his cut ups and saw the creativity and the accuracy.  I didn't love his arm strength either, and still don't TBH.  Seeing how he has to set up and put everything he's got into the throw to rip those seam passes worries me.  That's one big difference between him and Tannehill, as Tannehill's got such easy and natural arm strength.  But every prospect has warts and if Pickett had elite arm strength we wouldn't be talking about him as an option at 11.

 

 

He's not my Qb #1 but I like him.   And I like his personality the best, Carson Strong might be the runner up.   Granted its not easy to guess that just based on interviews and articles.  It's part of the reason why teams delve so much supposedly into these guys.

 

He seems like a grounded guy, close with his family, those who cover him say he's a nice guy, nice family.  His teammates like him.  Yet he's not boring nice, he has some baller-competitive streak to him which I like.

 

Howell to me is maybe a bit too low key at times based on what I've read.  Described as a bit unassuming and not the most extroverted guy.  Corral is extroverted, intense but also high strung and some say a bit too emotional/over confident.  So Pickett strikes me as a balance between those perhaps extremes as far as personaity?

 

Like I've said I'll depend heavy though on Nagy post Senior Bowl.  Nagy is great as for sharing stories about these guys personalities, drive, work ethic, etc.  And Nagy doesn't just tout everyone, he picks his spots.

 

 

 

Edited January 24, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Warhead36]

Identify whoever has the highest upside and get him. Even if its only a 1% chance, you take it. Otherwise you have NO CHANCE of being a winner in today's NFL.

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

52 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

Identify whoever has the highest upside and get him. Even if its only a 1% chance, you take it. Otherwise you have NO CHANCE of being a winner in today's NFL.

 

2017 begs to differ.  Foles, Bortles, and Keenum were all in the AFC and NFC Championship Games.

 

Currently, while Stafford, Mahomes, and Allen all have top talent.  Jimmy G does not, but his opponent did. 

 

It's not a "no chance", but certainly makes it less likely.

[Warhead36]

5 minutes ago, Alcoholic Zebra said:

 

2017 begs to differ.  Foles, Bortles, and Keenum were all in the AFC and NFC Championship Games.

 

Currently, while Stafford, Mahomes, and Allen all have top talent.  Jimmy G does not, but his opponent did. 

 

It's not a "no chance", but certainly makes it less likely.

There are always exceptions every year, but look at the franchises that SUSTAIN success. They all have DAT DUDE at QB.

[mistertim]

57 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

There are always exceptions every year, but look at the franchises that SUSTAIN success. They all have DAT DUDE at QB.

 

Yeah this is why I pretty much always use the term "perennial contender" instead of "winner": because those one off exceptions do happen. But the teams that are tops year in and year out are the ones who have the top QBs.

 

And that sustained perennial contender status is what I'm looking for. I'm not interested in trying to build a stacked team with a mediocre QB with the hope that we might get super duper lucky one season if all the stars align and we sneak into a Super Bowl. I want us to be a relevant team for the next 10 years. For that you need a top franchise QB.

[kingdaddy]

9 hours ago, Alcoholic Zebra said:

 

2017 begs to differ.  Foles, Bortles, and Keenum were all in the AFC and NFC Championship Games.

 

Currently, while Stafford, Mahomes, and Allen all have top talent.  Jimmy G does not, but his opponent did. 

 

It's not a "no chance", but certainly makes it less likely.

Thank you, finally someone who realizes you need a full roster to win and can win with a lesser caliber QB. Nick Foles won the Super Bowl and made it look pretty easy while abusing the New England defense. That year, everything broke right for the Eagles as other teams had injury issues, the schedule was favorable and the league as a whole wasn't as strong. 

I'm not saying TH is the answer but we need to upgrade on both sides of the ball by getting some playmakers, particularly some upgrades at LB, WR and probably safety. As I've said in other posts, I love how the Niners play, they run the ball and get the ball to their playmakers in very creative ways. We need an OC who can do this. 

[Warhead36]

Of course you can win with a lesser QB, but why set your standards so low? I don't want to just have one lucky good year where we win 11 games and get bounced in the 2nd round. I want to contend for 10+ wins every year for a decade. I want like what the Chiefs have, Bills have, Steelers had for Big Ben's prime, etc. I don't understand the mindset of settling for anything less.

 

Of course we have holes at other positions, but every team is gonna have holes at other positions every year. You can win with mediocrity at many positions, but you NEED a guy at QB. 

 

 

[hot4u]

1 hour ago, Warhead36 said:

Of course you can win with a lesser QB, but why set your standards so low? I don't want to just have one lucky good year where we win 11 games and get bounced in the 2nd round. I want to contend for 10+ wins every year for a decade. I want like what the Chiefs have, Bills have, Steelers had for Big Ben's prime, etc. I don't understand the mindset of settling for anything less.

 

Of course we have holes at other positions, but every team is gonna have holes at other positions every year. You can win with mediocrity at many positions, but you NEED a guy at QB. 

 

 

Just a question if Foles had started the whole year all 16 games for philly would they have been in the super bowl

[Koolblue13]

1 hour ago, Warhead36 said:

Of course you can win with a lesser QB, but why set your standards so low? I don't want to just have one lucky good year where we win 11 games and get bounced in the 2nd round. I want to contend for 10+ wins every year for a decade. I want like what the Chiefs have, Bills have, Steelers had for Big Ben's prime, etc. I don't understand the mindset of settling for anything less.

 

Of course we have holes at other positions, but every team is gonna have holes at other positions every year. You can win with mediocrity at many positions, but you NEED a guy at QB. 

 

 

Absolutely agree with this. 100%. We all should want an Elite QB and although you don't always need one, it sure as hell helps a lot. I think this can be considered a fact.

 

So, do you only draft a 1rst round QB every year and hope one has that elite QB magic that's almost impossible to find, even in a great QB draft? You would most likely stay a bad team. This is what the Bengals and Bills have sort of done.

 

If you don't get an elite QB, but a pretty good one after trying every year, but kind of have a decent team already, you can win. Kind of like the Browns or Eagles and sometimes things can all break right and you get to go to the superbowl (and if you are from the East, beat Brady)

 

Then, there is another way to do it. Get a pretty good QB and build the team around him, be competitive for a few years, but never dominant. Then, when your team is really close, and there is that rookie you think has the elite magic, sell the house and get him like the Chiefs did and now the 49ers are going to do and probably Tennessee will next year.

 

Me personally, think our team has a lot of talent, but just a few very important holes to fill (QB, MLB, FS) and then with a "pretty good" QB, can be right there with the 49ers, Tennessee.

 

Do you want to just keep swinging at that unicorn rookie, while all the other talent leaves and then build around the new QB? That would make us like the Bengals who only had to wait 30 years for that to happen or do you want to be like the 49ers or Alex Smith Chiefs? And continue to build and look for that unicorn who would be able to step into a finely tuned machine and race to the SB or do you want to hope our Unicorn QB can just walk into the junkyard and hope the car runs well enough?

 

Most of us were pretty sure we would contend with Fitz at QB, instead we floundered and failed with a bench player, 

 

Next year is suppose to have the Mahomes, Jackson, Allen type of prospects and there are none this year. Sure, there might be a good one, but it's such a low hit rate even when they're blue chip studs.

[kingdaddy]

1 hour ago, Warhead36 said:

Of course you can win with a lesser QB, but why set your standards so low? I don't want to just have one lucky good year where we win 11 games and get bounced in the 2nd round. I want to contend for 10+ wins every year for a decade. I want like what the Chiefs have, Bills have, Steelers had for Big Ben's prime, etc. I don't understand the mindset of settling for anything less.

 

Of course we have holes at other positions, but every team is gonna have holes at other positions every year. You can win with mediocrity at many positions, but you NEED a guy at QB. 

 

 

We all want what you want...just figure out how to get these guys and we'll all be happy (most of us anyway). Maybe Foles is the answer, he has a ring?????

[Zim489]

5 hours ago, Warhead36 said:

Of course you can win with a lesser QB, but why set your standards so low? I don't want to just have one lucky good year where we win 11 games and get bounced in the 2nd round. I want to contend for 10+ wins every year for a decade. I want like what the Chiefs have, Bills have, Steelers had for Big Ben's prime, etc. I don't understand the mindset of settling for anything less.

 

Of course we have holes at other positions, but every team is gonna have holes at other positions every year. You can win with mediocrity at many positions, but you NEED a guy at QB. 

 

 

I have noticed that the people who talk about the teams or needing just decent QBs often think of only 1 year timelines 

4 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

Do you want to just keep swinging at that unicorn rookie, while all the other talent leaves and then build around the new QB?

Absolutely. Nothing else matters until than. 

[Darth Tater]

A franchise QB is not going to win you SBs, what he does is gets you more bites at the SB apple (playoffs).  If Logan and McKissic don't go down and the defense had played to its 2020 level, we would have been in the playoffs.  A top-tier guy could have taken us to the playoff in spite of the injuries and the defensive regression.

[stoshuaj]

22 minutes ago, Darth Tater said:

A franchise QB is not going to win you SBs, what he does is gets you more bites at the SB apple (playoffs).  If Logan and McKissic don't go down and the defense had played to its 2020 level, we would have been in the playoffs.  A top-tier guy could have taken us to the playoff in spite of the injuries and the defensive regression.

Cynical rant on:

 

Ifs and buts along w would shoulda coulda.  For the last 20 years.

 

Not the only team to deal w injuries, Covid, and turmoil.  Not just this year, every year.

 

If we had a top tier guy we’d stink.  He’d be broken, disenfranchised or a nitwit.  Hell, we don’t even know how many previous players (and coaches) should or would have been top tier but we screwed them up.

 

We’re light years away from consistently even having the expectation of playing the caliber of football that was played this wknd.

 

Cynical rant off.

 

yes, it would be nice to get a hopefully top tier qb in here.  I feel sorry for whomever it may be though.  This place is a career killer until it’s not.  We are the Lions ffs.

Edited January 24, 2022 by stoshuaj

[GhostofAlvinWalton]

On 1/18/2022 at 6:53 PM, kingdaddy said:

I've been a fan for almost 50 years and when you tell me how they'll get a franchise QB then let me know cause I haven't seen one here since Joe Theismann. I'm all for taking a shot on a very good to elite QB, more than you would ever know, just tell me your guaranteed plan of finding one and I'll jump on your train. If there's no surefire QB there at #11 when we pick then I'm taking a playmaker and continuing to build the roster. Like I said, I'd build the way the Texans and Niners have done it. I guess you're not a fan of drafting guys like Deebo Samuel, Derrick Henry, George Kittle and others over reaching for a hopeful franchise QB. The Niners and Titans took shots on vet castoffs, that's where I'd start my search. You can disagree, no worries.

 

From Kyle S. in regards to passing on Watson and Mahomes in 2017 and taking DL Solomon Thomas.

 

https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/49ers/kyle-shanahan-explains-why-49ers-didnt-draft-patrick-mahomes

 

"Anybody who had a chance to take Patrick Mahomes or Deshaun who didn't, everyone knows ... yeah, everyone wishes we had a time machine," 

 

"So you're looking into these rookies, we've got the second pick in the draft, and no one at that time was considering those guys top-five picks, top-10 picks. But people knew that they had some ability."

 

"I thought the D-line is kind of what gets you to the Super Bowl, but you've gotta have the quarterback to do it, so which one is going to come first? And you have guys that weren't being classified as top-10 picks yet because no one thought they were exactly a slam dunk yet, and so do you want to make that risk now?

 

 

[Berggy9598]

17 hours ago, Alcoholic Zebra said:

 

2017 begs to differ.  Foles, Bortles, and Keenum were all in the AFC and NFC Championship Games.

 

Currently, while Stafford, Mahomes, and Allen all have top talent.  Jimmy G does not, but his opponent did. 

 

It's not a "no chance", but certainly makes it less likely.

Unsustainable outlier, plus Foles isn't in the Super Bowl without Carson Wentz in superman mode until the injury, and Tom Brady ended up in the Super Bowl on the other side. Outliers always beg to differ but in the long run they don't differ at all. 

[Zim489]

On 1/18/2022 at 6:53 PM, kingdaddy said:

guess you're not a fan of drafting guys like Deebo Samuel, Derrick Henry, George Kittle and others over reaching for a hopeful franchise QB. The Niners and Titans took shots on vet castoffs, that's where I'd start my search. You can disagree, no worries.

one doesnt stop the other

[Berggy9598]

On 1/18/2022 at 5:53 PM, kingdaddy said:

I've been a fan for almost 50 years and when you tell me how they'll get a franchise QB then let me know cause I haven't seen one here since Joe Theismann. I'm all for taking a shot on a very good to elite QB, more than you would ever know, just tell me your guaranteed plan of finding one and I'll jump on your train. If there's no surefire QB there at #11 when we pick then I'm taking a playmaker and continuing to build the roster. Like I said, I'd build the way the Texans and Niners have done it. I guess you're not a fan of drafting guys like Deebo Samuel, Derrick Henry, George Kittle and others over reaching for a hopeful franchise QB. The Niners and Titans took shots on vet castoffs, that's where I'd start my search. You can disagree, no worries.

You'll find a franchise QB before you find another Deebo/Derrick Henry, and good luck emulating what the 49ers are doing. Jimmy G's trade at the time it was made was not a random punt on a journeyman vet, and even with Derrick Henry, the Titans are not winning a Super Bowl with Ryan Tannehill, because you can't put the game on his shoulders in the playoffs. As has been pointed out, it's not a choice between stacking the roster and finding a franchise QB. 

[Warhead36]

1 hour ago, Darth Tater said:

A franchise QB is not going to win you SBs, what he does is gets you more bites at the SB apple (playoffs).  If Logan and McKissic don't go down and the defense had played to its 2020 level, we would have been in the playoffs.  A top-tier guy could have taken us to the playoff in spite of the injuries and the defensive regression.

This is the right take.

 

A franchise QB doesn't mean you win the Super Bowl every year. You won't even win that often(unless you're Brady). 

 

But you're going to be winning 10+ games every year for a decade or so, barring injury. The only real exception to that is Stafford who was stuck on the absolute dog doo doo Detroit Lions franchise(but even then he managed to at least take them to the playoffs a couple of times).

 

Look at the teams that sustain success. Not just nowadays but historically. They've all had franchise QBs. I think this fan base is cynical to that because we're the only team that won multiple SBs with multiple different guys, but all three of those teams had very good QB play. We essentially did have a franchise QB, just split between three different guys. But the idealogy is the same really.

 

In today's NFL its hard to maintain a great team for more than like 2-3 years because of the salary cap. The QB is the one constant. You can shuffle in/out and replace other guys on your team, as long as you have that top notch QB in place you can maintain a winning standard.

 

Its time for us to find that guy. Its been too long.

[clskinsfan]

Half way through the year I would have said no thanks to Wilson. He just wasnt the same player after his finger injury. But he played well the last quarter of the season. I still think with the new identity we go rookie QB. It just makes too much sense to start everything with a fresh new look. 

[Berggy9598]

1 hour ago, Warhead36 said:

This is the right take.

 

A franchise QB doesn't mean you win the Super Bowl every year. You won't even win that often(unless you're Brady). 

 

But you're going to be winning 10+ games every year for a decade or so, barring injury. The only real exception to that is Stafford who was stuck on the absolute dog doo doo Detroit Lions franchise(but even then he managed to at least take them to the playoffs a couple of times).

 

Look at the teams that sustain success. Not just nowadays but historically. They've all had franchise QBs. I think this fan base is cynical to that because we're the only team that won multiple SBs with multiple different guys, but all three of those teams had very good QB play. We essentially did have a franchise QB, just split between three different guys. But the idealogy is the same really.

 

In today's NFL its hard to maintain a great team for more than like 2-3 years because of the salary cap. The QB is the one constant. You can shuffle in/out and replace other guys on your team, as long as you have that top notch QB in place you can maintain a winning standard.

 

Its time for us to find that guy. Its been too long.

Those teams quite a few hall of famers (inducted or otherwise) all over the place. Going on one run to a Super Bowl with an average QB is hard enough, but nobody will ever again put together a team capable of being that good for a decade with whoever at QB. If you look at some of the outlying teams over the years, are the odds of being able to put together defenses that are dominant year in year our or finding a RB like Derrick Henry that much higher than landing a franchise QB? Absolutely not. It’s the inability to develop that’s killed us, not identifying and drafting a high level QB. 

[mistertim]

2 hours ago, Berggy9598 said:

You'll find a franchise QB before you find another Deebo/Derrick Henry, and good luck emulating what the 49ers are doing. Jimmy G's trade at the time it was made was not a random punt on a journeyman vet, and even with Derrick Henry, the Titans are not winning a Super Bowl with Ryan Tannehill, because you can't put the game on his shoulders in the playoffs. As has been pointed out, it's not a choice between stacking the roster and finding a franchise QB. 

 

Yeah I never really understood that sort of black and white thinking when it comes to QBs vs the rest of the roster. Of course both are important, but the question is which comes first?

 

If you get the stud supporting cast first then you've basically given yourself a small window of 3-5 years at the most to find your franchise QB. And if you draft a rookie QB it's likely that even if he turns out to be elite, it will take him a couple years to get there. So by the time he actually gets close to where he could be, the rest of your cast is probably going downhill since it's almost impossible to keep a star studded group together for more than a few years due to cap issues.

 

If you get the stud QB first then you've basically given yourself 10-15 years (assuming you drafted him) for supporting roster development. And during that 10-15 year timespan you'll be able to refresh those supporting groups multiple times.

 

With the way the modern NFL is, to me it's just a no-brainer. And it seems like pretty much all NFL coaches and execs think the same thing.

[Berggy9598]

55 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Yeah I never really understood that sort of black and white thinking when it comes to QBs vs the rest of the roster. Of course both are important, but the question is which comes first?

 

If you get the stud supporting cast first then you've basically given yourself a small window of 3-5 years at the most to find your franchise QB. And if you draft a rookie QB it's likely that even if he turns out to be elite, it will take him a couple years to get there. So by the time he actually gets close to where he could be, the rest of your cast is probably going downhill since it's almost impossible to keep a star studded group together for more than a few years due to cap issues.

 

If you get the stud QB first then you've basically given yourself 10-15 years (assuming you drafted him) for supporting roster development. And during that 10-15 year timespan you'll be able to refresh those supporting groups multiple times.

 

With the way the modern NFL is, to me it's just a no-brainer. And it seems like pretty much all NFL coaches and execs think the same thing.

IMO that’s because it’s just easier to play QB now a days. You can legitimately go up and down the field manufacturing throws with an athletic QB and one or two receivers that can win 1on1. 

[Anselmheifer]

I barely post anymore, but just thought I'd add 2 cents on the QB's in the draft. I have no idea who will be better. McQueen, I love your stuff. I did notice however that you said Kenny Pickett's hand size doesn't matter. We already know it matters. If it didn't matter, he wouldn't have to wear 2 pairs of gloves. We don't have to hypothesize. I'm not saying that he can't throw an NFL ball. I'm just saying, people are justified in their concern. I do agree that he appeared to see the field and process the game on a different level from the other prospects in this draft. 

Also, if we are drafting for ceiling, I'm not sure that I like Malik Willis more than Matt Corral. The top two concerns about Corral, IMHO, are his size and his college offense. He was very productive. His running looks like it will translate. He's a great athlete. Great arm. Great off-platform thrower. When asked who to compare him to, Lane Kiffen said...Mahommes, just in terms of the arm and off-platform ability. I'm posting a video of him throwing the ball 77 yards in high school, not that that matters too much. But, if we love Willis for his cannon, I don't think Corral gets enough props for his. 

 

 

 

 

In 2020 Corral went 21/28 for 365 yards, 2 TD's and rushed for another 40 against Alabama, who wound up ranked 2nd. Watch the highlights. You can see how his elusiveness will translate to the NFL.  Escaping Tim Anderson and outrunning Dylan Moses to the edge for a 1st down is going to translate. He had those kinds of escapes over and over again, some for passes, some for runs. Corral was also 22/31 for 395 yards 3TD 1 INT and another 50 yards rushing against Florida, who wound up ranked number 5. They lost both of those games, a fact that isn't lost on me, but the Ole Miss defense was terrible. 

 

I bring up those two games because they are exactly what we haven't seen against Malik Willis. What is Willis' statement game, 217 yards passing against VT? If I'm going to draft an arm and a pair of legs, I feel more confident drafting a guy I've seen do it against multiple top ranked SEC programs. I don't think Corral is a spotless prospect, but if we are going for ceiling, Corral would be my choice at 11.