The Official QB Thread- JD5 taken #2. Randal 2.0 or Bayou Bob? Mariota and Fromm battle for QB2 and so begins the Handsome Harem for Hartman

[Spaceman Spiff]

7 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

Hope you're not holding your breath.

 

**** no.

[ExoDus84]

14 hours ago, El Mexican said:

Is RGIII still around?

Imagine that comeback...

 

[CjSuAvE22]

2 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Kirk is probably only QB we drafted that didn't fail horribly here, but imo never took the step needed to be the guy we should've given what the Vikings gave him.  We really don't have a history of developing elite franchise QBs the last 20 years to lean on despite all the first rounders we've used.  Its always something, with the culture at the top typically having something to do with the failure, a constant in any future draft pick will have to deal with.

I ageree its a formidable task but we need to start spending more resources on it it needs to get done to save this fanbase. We keep rolling out a bunch of jags at QB and its all but done imo, nobody has hope for the future and watching Dallas be good is beyond frustrating since finally they have done it correctly, means we have to as well im tried of these weak henchmen put into leadership roles in this organization to put out press releases and save face waste fans time etc... GET  A QB that can play  and build around him till we do we should be drafting one every other year or at least once every three years. 

Edited October 21, 2021 by CjSuAvE22

[Renegade7]

3 minutes ago, CjSuAvE22 said:

I ageree its a formidable task but we need to start spending more resources on it it needs to get done to save this fanbase. We keep rolling out a bunch of jags at QB and its all but done imo. 

 

I agree it needs to be a priority, but if we rush it, we'll screw it up.  I dont know how much time we have, i jus know when we get it right folks will be back in the stadium.  We got a taste of that in 2012, which seems like ages ago.  

[samy316]

In my opinion, the QB position is the only thing that the team should be working on day and night to solve.  This franchise has been twisting in the winds of mediocrity and irrelevancy for the last 30 years, due in part to the incompetence from our ownership and front office, but you can argue that not having a franchise QB during this time period is just as big a factor into the team's decent into mediocrity and irrelevancy.  The modern NFL requires you to have a franchise QB to at least have a shot at being a contender for the SB every year.  The NFL is not what it once was 30 years ago, 20 years ago, or even 10 years ago.  You're not going to be relevant or in contention unless you have a QB that can guide you to double digit victories.  Look at the top QB's today.  Rodgers, Brady, Wilson and Mahommes can sleepwalk their way to 10-11 wins, even with a bad defense.  If you don't have at least a top 10 QB, you're margin of error to win every week is 50-50 at best.  Even teams with a great defense or a great running game can be contained more thoroughly than a team with just a great QB.

 

It's why I was never a big believer in our chances to compete this year.  Sure we had a top 5 defense (last year),  but look how handily Tom Brady neutralized our D-Line in that Wild Card game.  The NFL is in a place now where the best defense won't beat a Top QB.  If we're trotting out Ryan Fitzpatrick/Taylor Heinecke and a Top 5 defense against a Top 5 QB and a decent team around that Top 5 QB, who do you think is going to prevail?  We were never going to win more than 8-9 games this year best case scenario.  Even if the defense was performing like it did last year, do you think we would be favored to win games against the QB's we've faced so far this year?  The answer is no, because those QB's will always make the plays to move the chains, and score points.

 

We need to swing for the fences at some point to try to attain a franchise QB.  If it means trading up to the top spot in the draft for the QB that they like, then they need to do it.  If it also means giving up draft capital to acquire a Rodgers or a Wilson, then do it.  They can't play around anymore when it comes to the QB position.  If you have a franchise QB who can get this team in contention year in and year out, that might be enough for fans to start coming back to games again, and generate excitement.  RGIII in 2012 showed us what having a potential franchise QB was like.  That was an exciting, thrilling year for this team, that hasn't had too may thrilling seasons since 1991.  If you have a franchise QB, the fans will come back.  It's the only way to win in the Dan Snyder era.

Edited October 21, 2021 by samy316

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

Of course we were going to be in the market for a QB in a big way this coming offseason.  With the signing of Fitzy for a one year deal, the thought was to ride this defense with an average quarterback.  That's all out the window.

 

We were always headed into this offseason looking for a QB, that hasn't changed.  I don't believe that Tua is the guy, I don't want him here.

 

I wanted Mac Jones so ****ing bad in the last draft.  And of course he's completing 71% of his passes so far this year.  Yeah, the QB/INT ratio isn't great but I'd kill for a guy who completes 71% of his passes.  Mac Jones will be fine moving forward.

 

I dunno if there's anyone like that in the upcoming draft but I want the most accurate guy there is. 

 

I posted probably more about Mac Jones than any player in the draft thread both last year and the off season leading to the draft.  He wasn't my favorite QB in that draft but I liked him and debated on his behalf plenty.     So i get anyone liking Mac.   IMHO I actually like Matt Corral better than I did Mac.  I'd go advantage Mac in terms of short-in the flat type accuracy.  I'd go advantage Corral as for the deep ball and mobility.  Mac had special intangibles from some accounts.  I am still digesting Corral on that front.

Edited October 21, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Spaceman Spiff]

9 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I posted probably more about Mac Jones than any player in the draft thread both last year and the off season leading to the draft.  He wasn't my favorite QB in that draft but I liked him and debated on his behalf plenty.     So i get anyone liking Mac.   IMHO I actually like Matt Corral better than I did Mac.  I'd go advantage Mac in terms of short-in the flat type accuracy.  I'd go advantage Corral as for the deep ball and mobility.  Mac had special intangibles from some accounts.  I am still digesting Corral on that front.

 

I dunno who I'm going to be stumping for come the spring when I have strong opinions based on the 10-15 minutes of highlight tapes I've watched.  We'll see.

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, Koolblue13 said:

While I'm not as aggressive as you, I absolutely go after the best vet I can get, then draft one very high and again a little later and probably get another one or two for the PS. I really want to see 4 or 5 new QBs on the team next time the roster is at 90.

 

You posed the question as to what we would do.  I am actually stumped a little.

 

I am not a big reclamation QB guy.  Every rehab QB isn't Tannehill amd Tannehill in my book wasn't even a rehab QB, it was just an example of a Qb who got better at their next spot.   And I don't think the top QBs who can hit the trade market won't want to come here.

 

In the draft, I am a Corral guy so I'd trade up for him if need be but I don't love him to the extent that I'd trade up big for him.

 

I am ok with taking multiple shots at that spot ala 2012.  So if a QB like Strong or Howell or whomever falls farther I'd double down.  But a 2nd-3rd round QB isn't my top pursuit, that would be my double down-back up.

 

7 picks for QB as someone mentioned here is a bit over the top for me.  But going 2 QBs while over the top might not be crazy IMO. 

2 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

By time Kirk proved to me he was legit starter, the game of chicken was already over, we jus didn't know it yet.  Thats really all want to say more on the Kirk topic.

 

I get the point but IMO they could have done the first tag at 24 million and turned that into a contract, he wasn't that much of an unknown at that juncture, while that seemed like a fortune then, it ended up cheap.  But Bruce had no vision.  It's not the only contract-trade possibilities he botched.  Water under the bridge.  Bruce is gone, good riddance for many reasons. 

Edited October 21, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[slinky]

Trade Chase for Tua

[mistertim]

I'm pretty meh on the idea of reclamation projects and picking up other teams' castoffs. Outside of one or two super rare instances, it never works. The best it will do is get the team into a position of being mediocre for several years. Maybe fall backwards into a playoff spot once or twice, but never anywhere close to SB bound.

 

As far as Tua...eh I dunno. I enjoyed watching him play in college but I didn't really like him as an NFL QB coming out. However, if the price were a 3rd rounder then I'd be with @KDawgand be open to giving him a shot. Anything higher than that I'd probably pass.

[Skinsinparadise]

8 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

I dunno who I'm going to be stumping for come the spring when I have strong opinions based on the 10-15 minutes of highlight tapes I've watched.  We'll see.

 

 

[KDawg]

Just now, mistertim said:

I'm pretty meh on the idea of reclamation projects and picking up other teams' castoffs. Outside of one or two super rare instances, it never works. The best it will do is get the team into a position of being mediocre for several years. Maybe fall backwards into a playoff spot once or twice, but never anywhere close to SB bound.

 

As far as Tua...eh I dunno. I enjoyed watching him play in college but I didn't really like him as an NFL QB coming out. However, if the price were a 3rd rounder then I'd be with @KDawgand be open to giving him a shot. Anything higher than that I'd probably pass.

 

Here's the thing... High draft picks haven't exactly helped us in acquiring a QB to this point, either.

 

And while being mediocre has been painful... at least watching the games is fun and not a painful task that I do out of habit. 

 

We need a QB. Tu'a is very likely not the guy. But Tu'a for a third? Why not give it the ol' college effort? That's kind of where my thinking is. I don't really know that Tu'a is the long term guy. If I were betting on it... Well, I wouldn't bet on it because it's more likely that the injury has caused Tu'a to be a different guy. 

 

But for a third?

 

Worth the shot. 

[PartyPosse]

15 hours ago, El Mexican said:

Is RGIII still around?

Imagine that comeback...

RG 3.2?

[Est.1974]

We need to accept that we have limited options for our 2022 QB. Can’t see us getting a decent FA unless the footprint of the organisation does a miraculous turn around in the next 5 months. Not happening.
 

As for the draft, we have limited picks compared to others and I strongly believe the best we could draft I’d more than likely the 3rd or 4th ranked QB. 

[Renegade7]

Here's a problem, if we trade for Tua, we won't have enough ammo to trade up for Corrall.  Which is the better fix?

 

At some point Corrall has to go through the combine, and our folks will know by then if he really can be the guy.  I hate the idea of trading up during a rebuild, this guy has to be worth it, because if we are wrong...

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, Renegade7 said:

Here's a problem, if we trade for Tua, we won't have enough ammo to trade up for Corrall.  Which is the better fix?

 

At some point Corrall has to go through the combine, and our folks will know by then if he really can be the guy.  I hate the idea of trading up during a rebuild, this guy has to be worth it, because if we are wrong...

If Tu’a is a third round cost that won’t stop us from trading up for Corral… assuming he’s even there and available to be traded up for.

[Renegade7]

7 minutes ago, KDawg said:

If Tu’a is a third round cost that won’t stop us from trading up for Corral… assuming he’s even there and available to be traded up for.

 

Huh, won't we need all the picks we can get if he ends up overvalued in a QB deprived draft?  Straight up, would you rather have Tu'a or Corrall?

[philibusters]

40 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I posted probably more about Mac Jones than any player in the draft thread both last year and the off season leading to the draft.  He wasn't my favorite QB in that draft but I liked him and debated on his behalf plenty.     So i get anyone liking Mac.   IMHO I actually like Matt Corral better than I did Mac.  I'd go advantage Mac in terms of short-in the flat type accuracy.  I'd go advantage Corral as for the deep ball and mobility.  Mac had special intangibles from some accounts.  I am still digesting Corral on that front.

 

If you could redraft now with the hindsight we have 6 games how would you redraft last year's QB.

 

I would probably go:

1.  Lawrence

2.  Wilson

3.  Fields

4.  Jones

5.  Lance

 

Lance may end up being good, but to me you only draft a project if you already have a starter (and San Fran kind of does in Jimmy G)

[Est.1974]

2023 2nd rounder for Tu’a. 

 

Otherwise maybe a 2022 3rd and future 3rd or 4th.

 

Right side of our OL looks pretty strong to protect. 

[KDawg]

Just now, Renegade7 said:

 

Huh, won't we need all the picks we can get if he ends up overvalued in a QB deprived draft?  Straight up, would you rather have Tu'a or Corrall?

Have you ever seen a single quarterback cost an entire draft worth of picks?

 

It isn’t a “straight up” scenario. This is professional football not pretend land, man. 
 

Getting Tu’a for a third does not mean you lose the ability to get Corral. Likewise, if Corral is rated that highly what makes you think we’d even be able to get him in a trade up scenario? And if we’re bad enough to be picking high enough to take him what is stopping us from doing so?

 

You’re, in my opinion, looking at this the wrong way. Say we don’t get Tu’a, none of the halfway decent FAs want to come here… we go to the draft hoping to get Corral or Howell but we are unsuccessful. 
 

Would you prefer a panic trade up for this year’s first and next years into the top 10 for a Kenny Pickett or take a flier on Tu’a for a third where we can bail out if the opportunity presents itself and draft a better QB OR if nothing materializes we at least have Tu’a, a young, talented QB on a rookie deal that won’t cripple us?

 

In your fantasy land scenario you want the rookie, the undamaged goods. But that’s not how this works.

 

I’d prefer Rodgers over all of them if we’re playing fantasy.

[Skinsinparadise]

8 minutes ago, philibusters said:

 

If you could redraft now with the hindsight we have 6 games how would you redraft last year's QB.

 

I would probably go:

1.  Lawrence

2.  Wilson

3.  Fields

4.  Jones

5.  Lance

 

Lance may end up being good, but to me you only draft a project if you already have a starter (and San Fran kind of does in Jimmy G)

 

I liked Lawrence, Fields, Wilson a lot.  I was intrigued by Lance but was unsure whether he was boom-bust.  I compared Mac Jones a lot to Kirk Cousins.  I thought Kirk had a slightly better arm.  Mac with slightly better mobility.  And the hope would be Mac would have the better clutch gene.   

34 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

Here's the thing... High draft picks haven't exactly helped us in acquiring a QB to this point, either.

 

Depends on how we define high.  Only one swing at a QB with a top 10 pick under Dan.

[KDawg]

4 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

Depends on how we define high.  Only one swing at a QB with a top 10 pick under Dan.

 

It doesn't really matter for my point.

 

We've had high draft choices and went elsewhere is more my point. And although the rumor is we'd go QB, if we're picking third and 1 and 2 both go QB... are we going QB?

[Est.1974]

I’m not even sure 2-15 will get us the top QB. We’re gonna be looking at a 49ers type outlay to bag a top 2 or 3 QB. 
 

Maybe we can wait until the offseason. I don’t see life being any easier that far down the road though. We’re in a tough spot. Desperate, and the rest of the league isn’t taking pity on anyone. It’s going to take an aggressive, and probably risky, move in some capacity whether we like it or not.

 

[Renegade7]

22 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Have you ever seen a single quarterback cost an entire draft worth of picks?

 

In the Griffin trade, it involved three first rounders and a second.  Let's say we to give up a second to move up, if we already gave up a third to get Tu'a, then we arent drafting again until at least the 4th round.  Hard no from me.

 

22 minutes ago, KDawg said:

It isn’t a “straight up” scenario. This is professional football not pretend land, man. 
 

 

Weak.  Tu'a or Winston, pick one, easy question.

 

22 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Getting Tu’a for a third does not mean you lose the ability to get Corral. Likewise, if Corral is rated that highly what makes you think we’d even be able to get him in a trade up scenario? And if we’re bad enough to be picking high enough to take him what is stopping us from doing so?

 

He could easily go #1 with this weak a draft class.  If he's worth it, ill listen. I dont believe we'll be picking number 1, we could easily split with Philly and New York and end up outside the top 5.

 

22 minutes ago, KDawg said:

You’re, in my opinion, looking at this the wrong way. Say we don’t get Tu’a, none of the halfway decent FAs want to come here… we go to the draft hoping to get Corral or Howell but we are unsuccessful. 
 

Would you prefer a panic trade up for this year’s first and next years into the top 10 for a Kenny Pickett or take a flier on Tu’a for a third where we can bail out if the opportunity presents itself and draft a better QB OR if nothing materializes we at least have Tu’a, a young, talented QB on a rookie deal that won’t cripple us?

 

That's a lot of ifs going on there, like if Tu'a stays healthy or develops into anything other then Alex Smith 2.0.  I've already said I'd rather have Winston to buy us time so we don't panic, thats where I'm at right now.  Who's better right now, Winston or Tu'a?

 

 

 

22 minutes ago, KDawg said:

In your fantasy land scenario you want the rookie, the undamaged goods. But that’s not how this works.

 

I’d prefer Rodgers over all of them if we’re playing fantasy.

 

I said I'm open to the rookie, but would prefer the veteran.  Keeping my options open while tour acting like Tua's agent.  You keep inviting hes worth it because he might be worth it, thats not a plan, thats jus another option.  At least I'm admitting that Winston would be a stop gap and Corrall would be a risk.

[KDawg]

4 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

In the Griffin trade, it involved three first rounders and a second.  Let's say we to give up a second to move up, if we already gave up a third to get Tu'a, then we arent drafting again until at least the 4th round.  Hard no from me.

 

 

Weak.  Tu'a or Winston, pick one, easy question.

 

 

He could easily go #1 with this weak a draft class.  If he's worth it, ill listen. I dont believe we'll be picking number 1, we could easily split with Philly and New York and end up outside the top 5.

 

 

That's a lot of ifs going on there, like if Tu'a stays healthy or develops into anything other then Alex Smith 2.0.  I've already said I'd rather have Winston to buy us time so we don't panic, thats where I'm at right now.  Who's better right now, Winston or Tu'a?

 

 

 

 

I said I'm open to the rookie, but would prefer the veteran.  Keeping my options open while tour acting like Tua's agent.  You keep inviting hes worth it because he might be worth it, thats not a plan, thats jus another option.  At least I'm admitting that Winston would be a stop gap and Corrall would be a risk.

I assure you I’m not Tua’s agent.

 

Preference beyond rookies and dream scenarios:

 

1) Tua

2) Trubisky

3) Bridgewater

4) Fitz

5) Winston

 

Also, I’ve been saying that Tu’a isn’t a sure thing in every post. If you’re going to attack me for my opinions at least try to keep them accurate.

Edited October 21, 2021 by KDawg