The Official QB Thread- JD5 taken #2. Randall 2.0 or Bayou Bob? Mariotta and Hartman forever. Fromm cut

[Est.1974]

12 minutes ago, FootballZombie said:

 

The bigger issue is you can't bring someone in w/ the promise of handing them the starting job if your planning to continue to scan the trade market. That could scare off some QBs who would rather go somewhere they are promised to start.

Yeah this is the key point for me.

 

As an aside, we all may know what Rodgers is doing by tomorrow. That could get things moving league wide depending on his intentions.

Edited March 7, 2022 by Est.1974

[DJHJR86]

23 minutes ago, MrJL said:

 

and you think that's the QB to draft?  He's a fifth year senior and only been good for one year.  That's the guy to hang everything on

 

Yes, you draft the guy most NFL ready who is not a project.  Rivera is entering year 3, not 1.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

• Liberty’s Malik Willis came out of Indy as the guy who gained the most among a pretty blah group of quarterbacks. He threw the ball much better than he had at the Senior Bowl, and interviewed well with teams—with the context being that he showed a capacity to learn and a strong personality, even if it’s pretty clear he’ll have a ways to go in learning the nuances of the pro game (and he did a very good job explaining the ins and outs of a simplistic Liberty offense to teams). And in the NFL’s current Patrick Mahomes–Josh Allen world, his combination of a howitzer for an arm and elite athleticism puts him in position to convince teams he can grow into a lot more than what he is right now. I’d say he’s in the lead to be the first QB taken. His pro day is March 22, and showing the kind of continued improvement he did between the Senior Bowl and combine there would help his cause.

 

 

...The Kyler Murray situation has potential to get worse before it gets better. And it might not wind up getting better. Here’s the bottom line: Murray’s camp isn’t going to be content to wait until the summer to negotiate a new contract, which is essentially where Arizona was with its franchise quarterback when it was approached about the contract after the season. My understanding is Murray wants this resolved between now and the draft for a couple of reasons.

1. There’d be a robust trade market if he were available now, with quarterback supply outweighed by demand. And Murray knows if a team trades for him, it’ll extend him, too. After the draft? Teams will have their quarterback plans set, so the market won’t be near what it is now. Which means if there’d be a time to push for a trade, it’d probably have to be before the end of April.

2. A summer holdout would be tough given the strengthened rules to further punish players who stay away. And realistically it’s much harder for a quarterback than it is for a guy at any other position to draw a line in the sand once training camp starts and a team has to come together around its leaders.

Now, I’m not necessarily saying that Murray will demand a trade. But I do think it’s on the table if things don’t go well over the next month or so. Add the leadership questions that have been raised about Murray in Arizona’s building—some see him as a sort of independent contractor, and this won’t help change that feeling—and the Cardinals definitely have an interesting few weeks ahead.

 

The Broncos have made no secret of their interest in upgrading at quarterback this offseason, and the interest seems to be getting reciprocated. I don’t think Russell Wilson or Deshaun Watson would mind going there. And if the Rodgers thing were to somehow fall apart this late in the process, I think the Broncos would be atop his list, too.

 

• If you’re surprised by the sudden revival of Mitchell Trubisky’s stock, take a look at supply and demand across the NFL at the position. There will be teams left standing when the music stops on the top guys, and Trubisky would give them a viable option with starting experience and upside. Andy Dalton got $10 million for a year last offseason. I could see Trubisky hitting that number this month.

[HigSkin]

Here are the QB FA's rankings and what PFF thinks their contracts would look like.  Notice where Trubisky falls...LOL

 

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-2022-free-agent-rankings-free-agency

 

41. QB JAMEIS WINSTON, NEW ORLEANS SAINTS

Scheme Fit/Role:
LOW-END STARTING QUARTERBACK: Trying to turn Winston into a game manager is a losing battle. He's been one of the worst quarterbacks in the NFL at avoiding negatively graded throws, including this season in New Orleans prior to his injury. But there should be a market out there for teams interested in his ability to pick up yardage in chunks downfield. Winston's style of play would be a refreshing change of pace for Pittsburgh after the low-ADOT approach of the last several seasons.

 

Contract Projection: One year, $7 million, incentives can boost it to $12 million

 

49. QB TEDDY BRIDGEWATER, DENVER BRONCOS

 

Scheme Fit/Role:
BRIDGE QUARTERBACK/HIGH-END BACKUP: Bridgewater has shown he is capable of starting and playing well in the NFL, but also that there is a ceiling to his play and a conservative streak to his passing that limits his effectiveness. He isn't likely to take a team all the way to a Super Bowl, but he can back up the player who does — or keep the seat warm for a young player in the meantime.

 

Contract Projection: Two years, $17 million ($8.5M per year, $12 million total guaranteed)

 

60. QB MARCUS MARIOTA, LAS VEGAS RAIDERS

 

Scheme Fit/Role:
HIGH-END BACKUP/LAST-CHANCE STARTER: Mariota never really got going in Tennessee, devolving rather than evolving as a starter before being replaced by Ryan Tannehill. As a backup with the Raiders, he has flashed the potential to be a starter again after time on the bench. But in a league with plenty of options, there won't be many chances for him to start again. His best role may be that of a high-end backup who can offer a change-of-pace package of rushing plays in certain situations from the bench.

 

Contract Projection: One year, $8 million fully guaranteed

 

113. QB ANDY DALTON, CHICAGO BEARS

 

Scheme Fit/Role:
BRIDGE QB: Teams aren't looking to build around Dalton, but he's a low-end starter who can hold the fort as a bridge to the future.

 

Contract Projection: One year, $7.25 million fully guaranteed

 

117. QB RYAN FITZPATRICK, WASHINGTON COMMANDERS

 

Scheme Fit/Role:
BRIDGE QB: When healthy, Fitzpatrick is a good short-term starter who can win some games, but he's ultimately a stopgap for an organization in transition.

 

Contract Projection: One year, $7 million fully guaranteed

 

126. QB MITCHELL TRUBISKY, BUFFALO BILLS

 

Scheme Fit/Role:
BRIDGE/BACKUP QB: Trubisky never panned out in Chicago, and even in his best statistical season, his accuracy and decision-making were lacking when compared to other starting NFL quarterbacks. He profiles as a strong backup, however, who is capable of putting together a string of solid games with his good arm and athleticism.

 

Contract Projection: One year, $14 million ($10.5 million total guaranteed)

 

144. QB JACOBY BRISSETT, MIAMI DOLPHINS

 

Scheme Fit/Role:
BACKUP QB: Brissett has two full seasons as a starter, grading at 62.4 in 2017 and 59.2 in 2019. He has settled in as a high-end backup who generally takes good care of the ball.

 

Contract Projection: Three years, $25 million ($8.3M per year), $13.25 million total guaranteed

 

148. QB TYROD TAYLOR, HOUSTON TEXANS

 

Scheme Fit/Role:
BACKUP QB: Taylor had early flashes in 2021, but he's likely just a high-end backup at this point as his last good season was 2017. Taylor can take care of the ball and move the chains with his legs, making him one of the better backups in the league.

 

Contract Projection: One year, $5 million fully guaranteed

[Voice_of_Reason]

2 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

The Texans should fire sale Watson now and just get it over with so they can move on. I'm willing to bet a few teams would trade 2 1rsts for him today, regardless of criminal charges. Hedge their bet, reload their cap and draft and just start building a team again. 

 

To each their own, but I think that's a massively big risk to take if you don't know if the guy is going to jail, and how long a criminal case could play out.  Sure, it's possible he would not get charged, and it's also possible he could get off. But it's also possible he IS charged, and it's also possible he IS convicted.  

 

So, if you send 2 first rounders to the Texans, and then you eat his $35M salary for 2022, and then he is charged and goes to jail, you're completely, totally, and in every way screwed for the next 2-3 years. Because you've blown up your cap AND you've traded away the assets which you would use to fix the problem for the next few years.

 

The ONLY way you can do that is if the picks are contingent on playing time, and you get back absolutely everything you traded if he is convicted OR suspended and doesn't play.  

 

Otherwise, in my opinion, it's WAY to big a risk to take at this point.

 

For any organization.  

 

I'll add, if he did do the things he is accused of, he's a sexual predator and I don't want him on our team, and he can rot in hell.  

2 hours ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

Heres my take. See if you can trade 11 for 20 and take Pittsburgh’s 2023 1st. They get Willis. I know this fanbase will go nuts, but if this FO doesn’t believe in this class that’s the move to make. And I’d be okay with it. 
 

....

To me this entirely depends on the evaluation of the QBs.  If they are evaluated as though they are not going to develop into a top-10 QB, then I'm fine with the crux of the plan, but with a few additional caveats:

- It's a HUGE risk to try and ride with "Mitch Mariota" for the season and not address the long term QB in some way shape or form.  I'd be ok with them taking a flyer on Ridder or Strong in the second or third if they went this way.  The worst case is you possibly could upgrade your backup and have somebody you could flip down the road.

- I don't think having 2 firsts next year in the 10-24 range gets them to #1 or #2.  Teams that are #1 overall (or 2) tend to want to stay in the top 6.  In most years, there's a pretty big dropoff in evaluated talent somewhere around the 4th - 6th pick.  

- I have said this before, I would not reach for a QB who they think has a Jimmy G. or Kirk C. type ceiling.  If he's there at 11, fine, pick him.  If he's not, don't.  And certainly don't trade up to get that level of QB.  

 

 

 

2 hours ago, DJHJR86 said:

There is a very bizarre desire to defend or trash Taylor Heinicke.  I don't get it.  We have one of the best backups in the league.  This should be celebrated, but bizarrely it's turned into a debate about how great or how terrible he is.  

We have an ok backup.  We don't have a great backup, we don't have a terrible backup.  We have an ok backup.  

 

What has caused a lot of the noise is 2 to 3 posters keep trying to insert TH as an answer to the starting job, whether it be as the bridge or otherwise, and make some ridiculously outlandish and incorrect statements.  Then everybody else piles on them, and we have a goat rodeo for a few pages, then it quiets down.  

 

Then they do it again, and the cycle repeats.  

 

 

2 hours ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

This is "The QB Thread"...which includes the backup solution...of which we haven't had a reliable one since 2012.

That's not really true: McCoy was a capable backup for years.  Jay just wanted his adopted son to start, which was the big eff-up.  

 

You could also argue Alex Smith was a capable backup as well in 2020.  And maybe that Kyle Allen was a capable backup the same season.  

 

49 minutes ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

When we picked, there really weren't any quarterbacks worth taking.  Andy Dalton, Tyrod Taylor, Mitch Trubisky, and Jameis Winston were all available last year...and they picked Fitzpatrick.  

Fitzy was coming off of the two best seasons.  Winston was not coming here, he was going to stay in New Orleans to start, so he wasn't really an option.  You were really choosing between Mitch, who really HADN'T had a good season in 2019, Dalton and Tyrod vs. Fitz, and they felt FItz was the best fit for a year or two.  Also, I'm sure they liked the fact Fitz has been a really good mentor to all of the QBs he's played with, and is known as a leader.

 

I had no problem with them selecting Fitz last year when they couldn't get Stafford. They also inquired about trading up for Fields, but the cost was more than their evaluation, so it didn't make sense.  

[Zim489]

15 minutes ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

Yes, you draft the guy most NFL ready who is not a project.  Rivera is entering year 3, not 1.

You draft the QB who you think will be best in their career

[Koolblue13]

2 hours ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

This is debatable.  Especially with people salivating at the prospect of Trubisky or Mariota.  

 

2 hours ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

And...here you are...taking the bait again to bizarrely show your disdain for Heinicke at the mere mention of him.  I'm not trying to "revive" any "argument".  Pages and pages have him being brought up and people, such as yourself, entering the chat to remind everyone how much he sucks and isn't an NFL starter.  We get it.  He's not a starter.  But he's not Mike Glennon.

Please ****ing stop. PLEASE. Every QB you mentioned in your SB post is an NFL level starter. Heinicke is a ****ing back up.

 

WE'VE INQUIRED ABOUT 40 QBs. 40!!!

 

Super, we have the greatest back up QB in back up QB history ever ever. Nobody gives a ****.

 

Nobody hates Heinicke and I'm the closest to that. We hate that people keep bringing him up. It's like all the grown ups are having a discussion and some special kid covered in cake keeps yelling out from the little plastic table about Heinicke. Tighten your helmet and pick your crayons up and go back to drawing Heinicke pictures.

 

****.

[DJHJR86]

1 minute ago, Koolblue13 said:

 

Please ****ing stop. PLEASE. Every QB you mentioned in your SB post is an NFL level starter. Heinicke is a ****ing back up.

 

WE'VE INQUIRED ABOUT 40 QBs. 40!!!

 

Super, we have the greatest back up QB in back up QB history ever ever. Nobody gives a ****.

 

Nobody hates Heinicke and I'm the closest to that. We hate that people keep bringing him up. It's like all the grown ups are having a discussion and some special kid covered in cake keeps yelling out from the little plastic table about Heinicke. Tighten your helmet and pick your crayons up and go back to drawing Heinicke pictures.

 

****.

 

Lol.

 

Like I said.  It's really bizarre to see these posts over and over again.  

[MrJL]

17 minutes ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

Yes, you draft the guy most NFL ready who is not a project.  Rivera is entering year 3, not 1.

 

as some people have pointed out, as a fifth year senior he's already 23.  He'll be 24 before training camp.  Maybe he did so well in his last year cause he was a man playing against boys

[Koolblue13]

4 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

To each their own, but I think that's a massively big risk to take if you don't know if the guy is going to jail, and how long a criminal case could play out.  Sure, it's possible he would not get charged, and it's also possible he could get off. But it's also possible he IS charged, and it's also possible he IS convicted.  

 

So, if you send 2 first rounders to the Texans, and then you eat his $35M salary for 2022, and then he is charged and goes to jail, you're completely, totally, and in every way screwed for the next 2-3 years. Because you've blown up your cap AND you've traded away the assets which you would use to fix the problem for the next few years.

 

The ONLY way you can do that is if the picks are contingent on playing time, and you get back absolutely everything you traded if he is convicted OR suspended and doesn't play.  

 

Otherwise, in my opinion, it's WAY to big a risk to take at this point.

 

For any organization.  

 

I'll add, if he did do the things he is accused of, he's a sexual predator and I don't want him on our team, and he can rot in hell.  

To me this entirely depends on the evaluation of the QBs.  If they are evaluated as though they are not going to develop into a top-10 QB, then I'm fine with the crux of the plan, but with a few additional caveats:

- It's a HUGE risk to try and ride with "Mitch Mariota" for the season and not address the long term QB in some way shape or form.  I'd be ok with them taking a flyer on Ridder or Strong in the second or third if they went this way.  The worst case is you possibly could upgrade your backup and have somebody you could flip down the road.

- I don't think having 2 firsts next year in the 10-24 range gets them to #1 or #2.  Teams that are #1 overall (or 2) tend to want to stay in the top 6.  In most years, there's a pretty big dropoff in evaluated talent somewhere around the 4th - 6th pick.  

- I have said this before, I would not reach for a QB who they think has a Jimmy G. or Kirk C. type ceiling.  If he's there at 11, fine, pick him.  If he's not, don't.  And certainly don't trade up to get that level of QB.  

 

 

 

We have an ok backup.  We don't have a great backup, we don't have a terrible backup.  We have an ok backup.  

 

What has caused a lot of the noise is 2 to 3 posters keep trying to insert TH as an answer to the starting job, whether it be as the bridge or otherwise, and make some ridiculously outlandish and incorrect statements.  Then everybody else piles on them, and we have a goat rodeo for a few pages, then it quiets down.  

 

Then they do it again, and the cycle repeats.  

 

 

That's not really true: McCoy was a capable backup for years.  Jay just wanted his adopted son to start, which was the big eff-up.  

 

You could also argue Alex Smith was a capable backup as well in 2020.  And maybe that Kyle Allen was a capable backup the same season.  

 

Fitzy was coming off of the two best seasons.  Winston was not coming here, he was going to stay in New Orleans to start, so he wasn't really an option.  You were really choosing between Mitch, who really HADN'T had a good season in 2019, Dalton and Tyrod vs. Fitz, and they felt FItz was the best fit for a year or two.  Also, I'm sure they liked the fact Fitz has been a really good mentor to all of the QBs he's played with, and is known as a leader.

 

I had no problem with them selecting Fitz last year when they couldn't get Stafford. They also inquired about trading up for Fields, but the cost was more than their evaluation, so it didn't make sense.  

I'm not saying that I'd trade for Watson. I wouldn't sign him as a FA. Character matters to me. I'm saying the Texans need that dark cloud to move away from them.

[RWJ]

27 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Listening to Keim this morning, I just caught up with that interview, and I just listened to the beginning of the Standig podcast from today.    I get the impression that they do this:

 

A.  Trubisky or Bridgewater

B.  Trubisky with a 2nd-3rd round QB.  Bridgewater with the first round QB

C.  They are willing to swing again in 2023 -- that's from Keim

D.  Top targets:  Malik and Pickett

 

 

Thanks as always for the input, SIP.  Bridgewater all day long over Trubisky if that's the options (of course Keim/Standig speculate but are more on target than a lot of the yahoos) The ONLY concern with Bridgewater is the many concussions he's had.  As I've stated he's Reed 2.0 when it comes to concussions.  If he could make it through 2 seasons healthy as a bridge no pun intended to his name, to the 1st round QB that would be best. Why we don't target Winston/Mariota is beyond me instead.  I think one of the two QBs of Willis or Pickett will be there at #11 when we pick.  Just a guess because of all the D talent that is available this year.  

[MrJL]

3 minutes ago, RWJ said:

Thanks as always for the input, SIP.  Bridgewater all day long over Trubisky if that's the options (of course Keim/Standig speculate but are more on target than a lot of the yahoos) The ONLY concern with Bridgewater is the many concussions he's had.  As I've stated he's Reed 2.0 when it comes to concussions.  If he could make it through 2 seasons healthy as a bridge no pun intended to his name, to the 1st round QB that would be best. Why we don't target Winston/Mariota is beyond me instead.  I think one of the two QBs of Willis or Pickett will be there at #11 when we pick.  Just a guess because of all the D talent that is available this year.  

 

the thing about the concussion issue?  We have a good OL and Bridgewater is not a TE catching passes over the middle

[DJHJR86]

 

 

They pick before us.

 

[Skinsinparadise]

Keim's new podcast that he put up just a few minutes ago

 

A.  Would like a veteran in place to attract FAs.  Lack of Qb makes it tough to lure top FA WRs

 

B.  In on Derek Carr and Watson.  Doesn't know how aggressive they'd be on Watson but he's on the table.

 

C.  Be hard to get Watson if Philly competes for Watson.

 

D.  Carr is about does he get an extension?  The owner isn't a big fan of Carr.  McDaniels supposedly likes Jimmy G.  It's not impossible that something happens. This team is into Carr.

 

E.  They could strike out and end up with Trubisky, Wentz, Bridgewater.

 

F.  Suggests if they go for Malik it would need to be paired up with a veteran

 

G.  He'd be surprised if Trubisky would sign here if Willis is in play -- Trubsiky likely doesn't want to go to a team who would use a first rounder on a QB but maybe money would sway him to get

 

H.  The idea they have is to pair a veteran if its a reclamation type with a similar style QBs from the draft.  So Trubisky and Willis for example would work together because of their mobility

 

[DWinzit]

41 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

A.  Trubisky or Bridgewater

B.  Trubisky with a 2nd-3rd round QB.  Bridgewater with the first round QB

C.  They are willing to swing again in 2023 -- that's from Keim

D.  Top targets:  Malik and Pickett

 

IMO while I don't hate the idea of a 2nd-3rd QB.  I only like it under this premise.

If they are bringing the 3rd round into play, are they speaking Zappe/Eleby type or just saying whoever of the top 6 drop? 

I do get if they loook at them equal to just wait

[kingdaddy]

1 hour ago, Zim489 said:

Except we won’t be. Unlikely to be enough options given the number of teams picking. Teams not liking to drop from top 5-7 to late teens. They generally like to move back a couple spots. 
 

I think this scenario about 2023 producing a good QB prospect for this team is less likely than taking one of the QBs at 11. 

OK

[Skinsinparadise]

13 minutes ago, RWJ said:

Thanks as always for the input, SIP.  Bridgewater all day long over Trubisky if that's the options (of course Keim/Standig speculate but are more on target than a lot of the yahoos) The ONLY concern with Bridgewater is the many concussions he's had.  As I've stated he's Reed 2.0 when it comes to concussions.  If he could make it through 2 seasons healthy as a bridge no pun intended to his name, to the 1st round QB that would be best. Why we don't target Winston/Mariota is beyond me instead.  I think one of the two QBs of Willis or Pickett will be there at #11 when we pick.  Just a guess because of all the D talent that is available this year.  

 

I've never loved Bridgewater, I do think he's a better QB than Trubisky but with less upside.

 

I happened to watch his game against the Giants this season where he looked like Joe Montana against them with surprising mobility.  

 

I don't get excited about Bridgewater but if he's cheap and doesn't come along with the condition of no high draft pick than yeah I am all in if that's what we end up doing.  I'd take Mariota and Winston over Bridgewater but I wouldn't hate it as long as they take a rookie.

 

The whole Trubisky doesn't want a draft pick, or high draft pick coming with him, feels very much like when we traded for Alex Smith.  As I recall Smith's camp wanted that reassurance and he got it from us but they didn't get it from the Browns who were also in pursuit of a trade and that along with the money tipped the balance our way.  No way I like the idea of being held hostage to the demands of Trubisky's agent. 

Edited March 7, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Redskins 2021]

6 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Keim's new podcast that he put up just a few minutes ago

 

A.  Would like a veteran in place to attract FAs.  Lack of Qb makes it tough to lure top FA WRs

 

B.  In on Derek Carr and Watson.  Doesn't know how aggressive they'd be on Watson but he's on the table.

 

C.  Be hard to get Watson if Philly competes for Watson.

 

D.  Carr is about does he get an extension?  The owner isn't a big fan of Carr.  McDaniels supposedly likes Jimmy G.  It's not impossible that something happens. This team is into Carr.

 

E.  They could strike out and end up with Trubisky, Wentz, Bridgewater.

 

F.  Suggests if they go for Malik it would need to be paired up with a veteran

 

G.  He'd be surprised if Trubisky would sign here if Willis is in play -- Trubsiky likely doesn't want to go to a team who would use a first rounder on a QB but maybe money would sway him to get

 

H.  The idea they have is to pair a veteran if its a reclamation type with a similar style QBs from the draft.  So Trubisky and Willis for example would work together because of their mobility

 

 Sounds like Carr thing not over yet. If Rodgers goes to Denver they may be more willing to trade but it will be expensive.

 

Edited March 7, 2022 by Redskins 2021

[Skinsinparadise]

4 minutes ago, DWinzit said:

If they are bringing the 3rd round into play, are they speaking Zappe/Eleby type or just saying whoever of the top 6 drop? 

I do get if they loook at them equal to just wait

 

Tough to tell. I've seen Strong in particular in the third round in some mocks so maybe the thinking  is maybe he falls that far.  Keim has been consistent that they like Ridder and Strong after the first.  

1 minute ago, Redskins 2021 said:

 Sounds like Carr thing not over yet. If Rodgers goes to Denver they may be more willing to trade but it will be expensive.

 

 

Keim has consistently beat that drum.  At a minimum sounds like this team hasn't stopped trying to get him.

[DJHJR86]

3 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

In on Derek Carr and Watson.  Doesn't know how aggressive they'd be on Watson but he's on the table.

 

That's a no from me on both fronts.  It's too much to give up for Watson (reportedly), and I don't think the Raiders move on from Carr to a team that offers them nothing in return at the position.  The hypothetical 49ers trade makes much more sense for the Raiders.  There's also this with regards to Wentz:

 

 

 

[Jericho]

10 hours ago, Zim489 said:

I dont think they realize the uproar that is going to cause within the fan base if that were to happen. 

 

But the team isn't here to appease impatient fans. The team should be here to win games. Making the wrong choice, just to appease a vocal minority, at the detriment of the overall team likely sets everything back further. Also likely costs anyone their jobs. And the team still sucks. The true lose-lose-lose outcome. Which is what Washington is good at, so maybe that's what happens.

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

2 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Keim has been consistent that they like Ridder and Strong after the first.  

 

 

 

Strong?  Ugh.  I refuse to believe it.

 

I doubt Ridder lasts until pick #42.  But this sounds more like the team just really doesn't think there's a QB in this draft for them.

[DWinzit]

3 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Tough to tell. I've seen Strong in particular in the third round in some mocks so maybe the thinking  is maybe he falls that far.  Keim has been consistent that they like Ridder and Strong after the first.  

 

Yeah I have been staring at Strong for a bit now thinking he is the guy if they get a decent bridge QB as Ridder has probably moved himself back into the first round. 

If no decent bridge then they will go with a QB at 11

[Skinsinparadise]

1 minute ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

That's a no from me on both fronts.  It's too much to give up for Watson (reportedly),

 

 

I am neutral on Watson but lean negative on it.  At a minimum he needs to clear his criminal cases but I doesn't feel right to me.  They'd really have to explain it to change my mind.

 

2 minutes ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

and I don't think the Raiders move on from Carr to a team that offers them nothing in return at the position.  

 

Judging by rumors, that narrative makes 100% sense for the Seahawks with Wilson but it doesn't apply so much with the Raiders because of things mentioned on this thread many times.  But impossible to know for sure. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

17 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

I'm not saying that I'd trade for Watson. I wouldn't sign him as a FA. Character matters to me. I'm saying the Texans need that dark cloud to move away from them.

Ok fair I misread your post. 
 

But I think my point still holds:  NO TEAM is going to trade for Watson with the criminal stuff hanging over them unless there is a way for them to get out of everything the traded if he’s charged/convicted.  
 

So while I agree the aye and should fire sale him I don’t think they could even get an offer for anything other than a day 3 pick until it’s know the guy isn’t going to jail. 
 

Maybe I’m wrong and it’s possible the teams have additional information on the proceedings.  But that’s my guess at the moment.  
 

The Texans are in a tough spot: they want him gone, they don’t want his cap hit, and they want assets for him.  
 

Im starting to think they’re going to screw themselves no matter what and they should just release him and take the hit.  They will give up the opportunity cost of the assets.  But the salary cap hit will be lower than his current hit and they might end up in this situation anyway with a larger hit if he’s charged with a crime.  
 

I don’t envy their situation.  Though they did bring at least parts of it on themselves.