2024 NFL Draft Position/Tracker - Final Pick #2

[Warhead36]

TE is definitely a need for us as well. Thomas has no wiggle and can't block at all. Bates is a JAG blocker. Turner is less than a JAG.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

1 hour ago, The Consigliere said:

I just hope he's better than some seem to think. Gives me nightmares of how I kinda liked that Seattle OL better than Trent Williams a decade plus ago and how he became a joe average OT in his career. 

 

Okung 

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

40 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I do like the idea of getting future 1sts though. They tend to be undervalued, especially by teams making desperation short term moves. Plus its pretty fun rooting against a team because you want a high pick from them. It'll be fun for example rooting vehemently against the Bears tonight and that's only for their 2nd rounder. Imagine if we had their 1st...

 

If they win tonight, we also move up ahead of their original 1st rounder, to 4th overall.

 

This increases the odds of us being able to move down a few spots and still draft a great talent. What's better, picking at #4 after #3 takes MHJ, or moving down 4-6 spots and picking a similar talent that we could have had at #4. Every spot we move up increases our return even if all we do is barely trade down.

 

Last year two big trades for non-QB's in the Top 10:

• Texans moved up from #12 to #3 from the Cardinals. 9 spots. Cardinals gained a Future 1st, Future 3rd, Current 2nd (33rd overall) for moving down 9 spots and also giving up a Current 4th (105 overall).
• Cardinals moved up from #12 to #6 from the Lions. 6 spots. Lions gained a Current 2nd (34th overall), Current 5th (168th overall) for moving down 6 spots and also giving up a Current 3rd (81st overall).

From that, if we think MHJ is the only "generational prospect" left and he's gone, then moving down say 4-6 spots should net us a good pick in the #39-43 range.

 

[Destino]

I think you have to go BPA with a top five pick. That said, I’ll be disappointed if we don’t come out of this draft with anything less than two starting offensive lineman. Preferably a tackle and a guard. (And I still expect an upgrade in FA, as well). I can’t remember the last time we had a dominant center, and that feels like a luxury. 
 

I want an offense that averages 24ppg or more. I want slow developing pass plays and running that get beyond the LoS before contact routinely. I’m tired of having to focus on quick passes every season because we can’t run the ball on third and short, and we can’t pass block on 3rd and long. 

[Warhead36]

11 minutes ago, Destino said:

 

I want an offense that averages 24ppg or more. I want slow developing pass plays and running that get beyond the LoS before contact routinely. I’m tired of having to focus on quick passes every season because we can’t run the ball on third and short, and we can’t pass block on 3rd and long. 

I want an offense that's explosive. Its exhausting having to rely on 10 minute 10 play drives. Lets get some guys who can take it to the house from the 20 yard line.

[The Consigliere]

1 hour ago, Renegade7 said:

 

If you want a target where it doesn't matter if they can block, draft a WR.

 

TE's can be instrumental in run blocking and chipping even when they go out if passes.

 

We've had TEs that can't block for ****, I'm not interested in anymore.

 

 

A lot of opinions on how long this will take.  I believe Howell is good enough QB isn't a high priority and the team could be competitive very quickly depending on where we focus our resources first in context of how long it may take to address different position groups. 

 

It will take longer to be competitive if we don't prioritize oline, imo, I've watched this position group ruin multiple games this year.  It only takes one or two loses to be in our out the playoff race as a wildcard.

 

Don't draft a TE on day 1 or 2 if you prioritize blocking over pass catching chops. 

 

I think we have 1 usable QB on the roster and we have no idea how good he is because he's got a dozen starts to his name. Advanced metrics have him floating around between 10th percentile and 65th percentile depending upon the metric. We just don't know what he is. With no depth at the position and nothing proven, I don't know how we can toss out QB out of hand. This could just be PTSD related to having nothing but Cary Conklin's rumored upside behind Rypien, Frerotte behind Shuler, Ramsey and the Gatorskins, Jason Campbell and Boonell, McNabb and that Miami Dolphin scrub until RGIII and Cousins, and then the endless litany of veteran detritus and bogus draft boondoggles we started after letting Cousins go. I'd like something with upside alongside the question mark that is Howell (and I like Howell). 

 

Btw, OL is prioritized by signing a top 2 FA OL, and by using 2 of our first four or five picks on the position, I have no issue with doing any of that, or even signing 2 OL's instead of just one. 

1 hour ago, method man said:

The point of Bowers at least being a threat as a blocker is 1) it is less of a giveaway of what we are going to do when he is on the field and 2) a big reason our run game is not very good is because our receivers and TEs can’t block (Gruden keeps calling this out). As great as Kittle and Kelce are as receivers, both guys are also fantastic blockers

Don't have a problem with any of that, as you saw in my post (that one or another) I added that pass blocking skills by TE's and RB's, allow you to disguise playcalling. In the past when you had say a Gibson, and a bruiser, it's a dead giveaway what our intention is. Same thing with that stud TE with 10 million concussions that we drafted a decade ago. Forgot his name. Couldn't block, so he was a give away.

 

I care about blocking for that value, but pass catching is why you get these guys. It's priority #1, it's what makes the guy the difference maker. Otherwise you can sign a blocking TE who catches and falls like Logan Paulsen or whatever as a late day 3 guy or an UDFA or cheap FA guy. They are a dime a dozen. #1 priority is the ability to be a difference maker as a pass catcher, otherwise they are JAG's, #2 priority is that they can block so you don't have to pull them out on running downs, and you can also use them in a pinch on passing plays too. But the pass catching skills is what makes the guys worth the high draft capital, otherwise it's just Jets Drafting in the eighties and nineties level stupidity. 

[Warhead36]

I don't think anyone is prioritizing blocking over catching, but you can't be a complete swinging gate as a blocker either.

 

The value of a guy like Gronk was that he wasn't just a dominant receiver, he was like having a 3rd OT out there when you needed him to block. Its a huge force multiplier effect.

[The Consigliere]

1 hour ago, Warhead36 said:

Yeah we need a TE who can block AND catch. But thankfully, Bowers fits the bill. He's a heck of a blocker on top of being a tremendous receiver.

For those of us that are best available player types (I am one, although I usually list Guard, Safety, Linebacker, CB, and kinda TE. However, TE has become an immensely valuable weapon if you acquire a dual threat option with ridiculous catch and run chops. 

 

I'm still a QB, OT, Edge, DT, DB guy like Al Davis kind of was but mega alpha WR prospects like Chase, and Pitts are worth top 10 picks, and I've lightened up a bit on Guard too. 

 

For me right now, it's the QB's, Harrison Jr, Fashanu, and Bowers, but I have my eyes on other QB's, Kool-Aid for the name, and Alt. I'd pass on Edge until next year. Feels silly. 

[The Consigliere]

17 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I don't think anyone is prioritizing blocking over catching, but you can't be a complete swinging gate as a blocker either.

 

The value of a guy like Gronk was that he wasn't just a dominant receiver, he was like having a 3rd OT out there when you needed him to block. Its a huge force multiplier effect.

I don't disagree, but we shouldn't be doing what the Browns did with Njoku. Waste his entire rookie contract ridiculing his blocking skills in public, and then sign him to an extension at a much higher cost after you finally start to use his talent four years in. You should not be drafting Njoku's in rounds 1 and 2 if you plan on benching them until they're a pro bowl level blocker, it's absurd. You know ahead of time if the guy has blocking chops or not, if you're system demands that they be an elite blocker on top of pass catching chops, you gotta be more choosy. Take Bowers, take Gronk, take Kittle etc. Do not take Evan Engram's and David Njoku's because you'll just waste them. 

[oraphus]

my priorities for both FA and draft are:

1A - Oline (tackles, guards, vending machines, etc.) pretty much anything thats better than what we have now.

        I would actually try to shore up oline in FA - you have the highest chance of these players producing after big contracts. 

1B - Top flight receiver (draft) tall, big, fast.

        Make Dotson the slot guy, (Terry a perfect 1B but cut or trade after 2023 season if the top guy balls out, if not cut after 24)

2A - CB - Fuller is gone, Forbes sucks - need 2 solid additions. 

2B - DE - One top flight in the draft should be sufficient

       Our DE depth is decent and these guys can be resigned on the cheap

2B. LB - need a true upgrade.. should be ablet to find in either draft or fa

3. TE - Thomas has lost a step and not worth the contract. I would want to see what the other can do with better coaching.. but an upgrade would be nice.

4. RB - Gibson is done - Robinson is solid.. need a 3rd down, fast change of pace RB

 

[Skinsinparadise]

3 hours ago, The Consigliere said:

 

I would recommend that while I tend to agree that plenty of elite TE's can be found in later rounds. All the best TE's in the league right now are basically later draft picks, either day 2 or 3 (Kelce, Andrews, Kittle) or later day 1/2 turn style guys like Laporta and Kincaid and Goedert (constantly injured), Trey McBride whose waking up now etc. So you can definitely get a top 10 pick outside the blue chip zone,

 

Depends really on the draft.  I recall you aren't big on watching players and prefer to read about them.  But heck FOs-scouts watch these guys for a reason. 

 

At the end of each draft, some of us pick our top 15-20 favorite players in the draft.   Laporta made that list for me.   Last years draft was deep enough at TE where guys like Kincaid and Laporta can go late first or early 2nd.

 

When I watch Bowers, as much as i like Laporta i think Bowers is distinctly the better player for reasons i previously expressed.   I've watched the next 3 TEs that the draft geeks feel are the next best crop and I am not taken by any of them.   I don't see the Michael Mayer, Musgrave, Kincaid, Laporta talent in the late first-2nd round this coming draft.  Granted it doesn't matter what I think but if the new FO sees it similarily -- it might be a factor.

 

I get the whole hey name that random mid rounder might be a stud.  Jahiem Bell might end up being the best in the class.  But you being a numbers guy, I am sure you also realize the typical mid rounder fails.  Guessing the right one isn't easy.  It would be one thing if the typical 5th rounder becomes George Kittle but that's not the case.  The typical 5th rounder is more like Zach Davidson, some dude who does nothing.

 

I think the TE spot over the years feels a bit more valued than years past because if you have the right one they can change an offense and they aren't easy to find.  

 

 

Edited November 27, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

Bowers is a good prospect, but people are elevating his blocking acumen to mythical proportions. He's not close to Gronk or Kittle in college. Let's be real here.

 

If we trade down far, I'd entertain Bowers. But at pick #5? No way.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

We aren't talking about QB at all on the list of priorities. Maybe the new FO doesn't prioritize it and signs a cheap-ish backup in the off-season. OR maybe they prefer to use a 5th/6th rounder on a backup ala a Aidan O'Connell type.

 

But it is inevitable that a QB will fall at some point, and if there's a QB there in the 2nd I wouldn't be surprised if our new FO goes after one, not just to be backup, but to push Sam and be a solid Plan B should things go sideways in 2024. CBSSports has 7 QBs in the top 52 and 13 QBs in the Top 100. 

 

Quinn Ewers is prospect #52. Maybe he stays at Texas, but he's got Arch on his heels and may come out. Michael Penix, Jr. is #49. Bo Nix is #50.

 

If we are sitting there having drafted an OT and DE with our 2nd round pick coming up, would it shock anyone if we wennt with Ewers, Penix or Nix there with our 2nd #2?

 

The new FO is hopefully going to make their own determination on Sam Howell. Maybe they think he's "the guy" and we go grab some 5th rounder (someone from the Top 100 at QB will fall, there aren't going to be 13 QBs drafted in the first 3 rounds. Maybe we sign a career backup who we know won't win games if called upon, unlike this year when we felt we had to get Brissett with Howell being a total unknown.

 

But one thing is for certain, we NEED 1-2 QBs on this roster with Sam being the only one on the roster once the new year starts. So whether it's a combo of vet backup or early-to-mid round QB, someone is going to need to be added. And it'll be interesting to see the pedigree of the person added, as I think it could be telling re: what the new FO thinks about Howell. 

Edited November 27, 2023 by JamesMadisonSkins

[Rex Tomb]

If MHJr falls to #5, I think we would take him.  Gives Sam a bonafide weapon and instantly makes our WR corps the best in the division.  If he's not there, I think about taking the best LT and don't look back.  We haven't had an LT like Trent Williams in years and the patchwork offensive line, anchored by Leno, is trash.  I'm with several others that have already stated that if we don't come out of the draft, with five picks in the first three rounds, and have essentially rebuilt the offensive line, then I won't exactly view it as a good thing.  

[JamesMadisonSkins]

With so many R1 caliber OTs do we sit there and potentially take the guy who's atop our board, or turn around and deal the pick to a team coming up for a QB or Marvin Harrison.

Would be tough to pass on a generational talent like Harrison at WR, but if the return is there, it would be tempting. We have so many holes to fill, starting with an OL, that it's hard for me to stomach using a premier R1 pick on any position that isn't OL.

 

 

I just keep running mocks to see what we get out of the #5 pick. Saints offered #12, #49 and a 2025 2nd. I think I'd take that. 

Then I was offered #19 and #51 by Atlanta for #12. I would also take that.

I am obsessed with trading down for assets but I think it's because I like too many players and I always want us to be able to draft every position. That is not reality. However, if there were a draft to take advantage and add capital, this would probably be the one (how deep it is, how many holes we have on the roster).

 

But picking 19, 36, 38, 49, 51, 59, 96 and 102 while adding a 2nd in 2025  ... that would be juicy. 

 

Trades have to be there. I think they will be if we are at #5, esp. if Harrison is somehow there. Or one of the QBs that end up being considered Top 5.

Edited November 27, 2023 by JamesMadisonSkins

[Renegade7]

@The Consigliere kinds surprised by some of your takes here...

 

As has been noted by couple different posters, no one is prioritizing run blocking over pass catching for a potential top 10 pick on a TE. 

 

I can't with straight face support it if the TE is a liability in blocking, that's NOT worth a top 10 pick to me in context the truly great TEs in the NFL can do both catch and block and I've already gone on record my priority on improving our blocking.  TE is me being reasonable to the need for more weapons because it's true, we need more then we have.

 

And I'm not considering QB if for any reason because the franchise has already phoned out their support around Howell as their franchise QB now...i personally agree that I've seen enough to not go throwing around picks we don't have to see if we can do better.  Even if we can doesn't mean we should because we don't need to.

 

Sam is showing his floor to be at minimum a servicable stop gap we can win with until we decide we do need a more elite talent at that position.  He's earned that respect from several people outside our organization as well.

[Voice_of_Reason]

4 hours ago, Warhead36 said:

Reaching for needs gets you less talented players and in the long run doesn't get you that much closer to a championship.

Agreed, however there is so much fluff in what is defined as a reach. And a reach is not defined by what Mel, Todd, or that dumbass Thor Nystrom has to say about anything. There really is no way to know if the next team is going to pick the guy you "reached" for.  

 

The way I look at it, you have to bucket guys together, pick whatever method you want, color, number grades, letter grades, whatever.

 

But in the end, there's no real way to say "this offensive tackle is definitively better than that linebacker."  You can say one position is more valuable than the other, and you can group guys together and say "this is group 1, this is group 2, this is group 3." 

 

Once you've got guys in a group, picking the guy you want from that group, you should go with the position which would help your team the most.

 

Where you get into trouble is picking outside of the group.  So, if you have 4 guys in group 1, but you NEED a tackle, and you don't have any tackles in group 1, so you go to a group 2 tackle, THAT is bad. If that means you have to take a position of less need or less value because the player is in a higher group, that's fine. 

 

But I don't believe there is a definitive list of rankings that is worth a damn.  Every team is going to have a different ranking order, and none of them are more right than the next.  

4 hours ago, Warhead36 said:

I'm against drafting TE high out of principle but I'm not gonna lie, Bowers would be tempting, and would fit the bill of the dynamic blue chip game changing type player that we need. Kid could be the best TE in the league by 2025.

Didn't they say that about Kyle Pitts? I think that was the guy, he was revolutionary or what not?  And I don't think he has been. 

 

You never know. 

 

The draft is the ultimate guessing game.  

[Redskins 2021]

I think the pick has got to be an ot or trade down. I don't think we will get any higher then pick 4. The 3 teams ahead if us have 2 and 1 win.

[Rufus T Firefly]

4 hours ago, The Consigliere said:

Depends what team it would be from. The Chicago trade with Carolina last year was genius. Bad Defense, no weapons on offense, young, tiny QB? That pick was guaranteed to be top 10 in '24. Kinda like when we stole two firsts from Carolina 25 years ago for Sean Gilbert (and then wasted on on a Brad Johnson rental). My big issue w/trading the pick is that for now anyway, while not as bad as '22, the the '25 QB class looks a bit similar to '19, with maybe one super blue chipper, and not a lot of depth, especially 1st round depth. I don't know how valuable the pick is, I also don't know how good the class is. 

The team is not contending for anything in 24, so if we're trading down, getting a 1st in 25 is better than a 2nd now no matter who it's from. 

 

But it does make sense to target certain teams for such a deal, if there are options. Using the current top 12 as an example, obviously doing it with a team besides the Jets, and maybe the Chargers, would make sense. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

4 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

You don't trust any analyst and you don't watch any college football, but you're full of opinions about it.

One thing I have literally NEVER done ever is suggest drafting a player in the draft.  I'm nowhere near qualified to even have an opinion, and I never, ever, ever participate in those discussions because I would add absolutely nothing to them. 

 

4 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

We have 5 picks in the top 100 and then a few more and they're all important.

I'm aware.  

 

4 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

There are certain positions that go off the board at certain points of the draft and some who rise above that and some slip[ past. It's a crap shoot, but you can't ignore production, measurables, and a bunch of other stuff and yes, a full media market has been built around it.

Yeah, I understand about athleticism and production and all that stuff.  

 

I get annoyed that any Tom, Dick or Harry can now have an "expert opinion."  That's a personal beef.   

 

4 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

If you read this thread religiously, you'll see a group of about 7 or 8 posters conversing back and forth about a bunch of players they like and then every once in a while some random poster comes in declaring player X the generational must have and everyone moves on.

I actually do read the draft threads.  I rarely post in them.  Again, because honestly nothing I say about a player would be based in knowledge.  I actually really enjoy the back and forth which goes on, and it's one of the ways I educate myself a little bit on the players who are available.

 

At times, I'll ask a question or two. But that's about it.  

 

I will insert an opinion on what I think makes good roster building sense, because that translates from player evaluation to NFL team construction.  I knew who Forbes was mostly because I read the draft thread last year.  I don't care if they picked Gonzales or Forbes.  That was a bad pick.  Because it was an additional high investment on defense.  I hated the Martin pick for the same reason.  

 

When it comes to assets and how to use them to build a roster, I have an opinion.  When it comes to who to select, I never have an opinion.  

 

4 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

Unless you are making the point like you made in the preseason about how it's impossible to tell if any team is going to be better than another team, because then I don't want to talk to you.

Frankly, I think the NFL has, once again, proven my point that there is no way you can tell who's going to be good, and when they're going to be good. Just a few highlights:

 

Over-projecting wins based on pre-season Vegas over/unders from the beginning of the season:

- Bengals 11.5 (they have 5 now)

- Bills 10.5 (they have 6 now)

- Jets 9.5 (they have 4 now)

- Chargers 9.5 (they have 4 now)

- Panthers 7.5 (they have 1 now)

- Patriots 7.5 (they have 2 now)

- Bears 7.5 (they have 3 now)

- Giants 7.5 (they have 3 now, thanks to the fact they played us twice, or they might have 1)

 

Mostly the teams which are good were expected to be good.  A lot of teams which were supposed to be good or at least average are not. 

 

It's extremely possible the Bills and Bengals will both miss the playoffs, and who saw that coming?

 

It's a week to week league. It's impossible to figure out how tough the schedule is going to be until you get into it.  

[Rufus T Firefly]

Man, I really wanted to lose that Pats game. And I wanted to trae away a bunch more before the deadline, which might have made it happen. 

 

Right now, we'd be assured #3 if we lost out and #1 would be somewhat in play. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

51 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

With so many R1 caliber OTs do we sit there and potentially take the guy who's atop our board, or turn around and deal the pick to a team coming up for a QB or Marvin Harrison.

I think that would really depend on if they think they can get basically the same player by moving down.  

 

What I don't think they would want to do, and I certainly would not want to do, is move down to a different tier.  

 

Even within round one, there are tiers of players.  If there are 3 tackles in tier 1, and you move down to a point where you have to pick up a tier 2 tackle, or the only tier 1 players left are at other positions, then I don't think it worked out for you.

 

If you trade down a few spots and still get a guy in the same tier, then that's a win-win.  

[The Consigliere]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Depends really on the draft.  I recall you aren't big on watching players and prefer to read about them.  But heck FOs-scouts watch these guys for a reason. 

 

At the end of each draft, some of us pick our top 15-20 favorite players in the draft.   Laporta made that list for me.   Last years draft was deep enough at TE where guys like Kincaid and Laporta can go late first or early 2nd.

 

When I watch Bowers, as much as i like Laporta i think Bowers is distinctly the better player for reasons i previously expressed.   I've watched the next 3 TEs that the draft geeks feel are the next best crop and I am not taken by any of them.   I don't see the Michael Mayer, Musgrave, Kincaid, Laporta talent in the late first-2nd round this coming draft.  Granted it doesn't matter what I think but if the new FO sees it similarily -- it might be a factor.

 

I get the whole hey name that random mid rounder might be a stud.  Jahiem Bell might end up being the best in the class.  But you being a numbers guy, I am sure you also realize the typical mid rounder fails.  Guessing the right one isn't easy.  It would be one thing if the typical 5th rounder becomes George Kittle but that's not the case.  The typical 5th rounder is more like Zach Davidson, some dude who does nothing.

 

I think the TE spot over the years feels a bit more valued than years past because if you have the right one they can change an offense and they aren't easy to find.  

 

 

Don't disagree, I don't know the TE class, and from little research I've done, it backs up what you say, generally tiering Bowers right along side Harrison Jr as a Tier 1 playmaking prospect. 

 

Let me underline, that as I said elsewhere, I think day 3 hunting for any kind of prospect is really a speculative endeavor. That's why so many teams specifically target Special Teams capable players so they can justify roster spots while they evaluate them, if a guy can't play ST's from day 3, he's gonna have to be a pretty major hit to stick. 

 

So w/regards to TE prospects, I completely understand Bowers being where he is in the ratings, and I agree, at least superficially, last year's TE class was the best in terms of upside options since '17, maybe not as deep, but just as much cream (and as it turned out, probably better cream). 

 

Btw, I do tend to watch a little bit of tape, but I don't trust tape evals in the same way I trust the metrics based stuff beyond the blatantly obvious, the only unbiased anything you can get is the #'s, and even that doesn't have as much power because across conferences competition is so distinctly different in quality and scale. 

 

There's no perfect way to do any of it. I do pretty well with WR's, better with RB's, I'm erratic with TE's though I usually can point out the obvious (other than '17 which was nuts), QB I'm totally hit and miss, like the espn dude recently said to the ex espn guy on bill simmons podcast network, the best I do in terms of QB evaluation tends to be w/regards to guys I don't like rather than hitting on guys I do (though I did like Mahomes, Watson, Lamar, Kyler, Tua (more than Burrow, whoops). We'll see. For now anyway, with regards to Bowers, its a rare instance in which I'd be fine w/a TE that high. I like his eval, if we can get an All Pro caliber prospect inside the top 10, or just an above average OT, I'd rather get the all pro TE, and sign a top end OL in FA, and draft another one in round 2. 

 

Depends though. For now, I'm pretty nervous we win 1 of the Rams-Jets-Dolphins games, and the Cowboys rest their starters during the season finale, pushing us up to 6 wins, and likely out of the happy dance zone of the top 4-5.  On the plus side, I think another 2 QB's, possibly 3 end up sliding in between 5-15, which would push talent to us, if we went away from QB. 

1 hour ago, Always A Commander Never A Captain said:

Bowers is a good prospect, but people are elevating his blocking acumen to mythical proportions. He's not close to Gronk or Kittle in college. Let's be real here.

 

If we trade down far, I'd entertain Bowers. But at pick #5? No way.

What matters is if he can be used as a blocker or not. I don't really care if he's elite (though it would be nice) I care if he's adequate or not. If he is, sign me up. 

[The Consigliere]

1 hour ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

We aren't talking about QB at all on the list of priorities. Maybe the new FO doesn't prioritize it and signs a cheap-ish backup in the off-season. OR maybe they prefer to use a 5th/6th rounder on a backup ala a Aidan O'Connell type.

 

But it is inevitable that a QB will fall at some point, and if there's a QB there in the 2nd I wouldn't be surprised if our new FO goes after one, not just to be backup, but to push Sam and be a solid Plan B should things go sideways in 2024. CBSSports has 7 QBs in the top 52 and 13 QBs in the Top 100. 

 

Quinn Ewers is prospect #52. Maybe he stays at Texas, but he's got Arch on his heels and may come out. Michael Penix, Jr. is #49. Bo Nix is #50.

 

If we are sitting there having drafted an OT and DE with our 2nd round pick coming up, would it shock anyone if we wennt with Ewers, Penix or Nix there with our 2nd #2?

 

The new FO is hopefully going to make their own determination on Sam Howell. Maybe they think he's "the guy" and we go grab some 5th rounder (someone from the Top 100 at QB will fall, there aren't going to be 13 QBs drafted in the first 3 rounds. Maybe we sign a career backup who we know won't win games if called upon, unlike this year when we felt we had to get Brissett with Howell being a total unknown.

 

But one thing is for certain, we NEED 1-2 QBs on this roster with Sam being the only one on the roster once the new year starts. So whether it's a combo of vet backup or early-to-mid round QB, someone is going to need to be added. And it'll be interesting to see the pedigree of the person added, as I think it could be telling re: what the new FO thinks about Howell. 

Agree 1000%, and I'm surprised at how sanguine some people are. Then again this is a fan base used to ---- QB's over the years, and stop gap types, and equally used to high end OL's, so having neither is probably causing a lot of internal disquiet.

 

Personally, I'm considering a QB in round 1, and round 2 and round 3, and round 4. Not after that. 

[The Consigliere]

1 hour ago, Renegade7 said:

@The Consigliere kinds surprised by some of your takes here...

 

As has been noted by couple different posters, no one is prioritizing run blocking over pass catching for a potential top 10 pick on a TE. 

 

I can't with straight face support it if the TE is a liability in blocking, that's NOT worth a top 10 pick to me in context the truly great TEs in the NFL can do both catch and block and I've already gone on record my priority on improving our blocking.  TE is me being reasonable to the need for more weapons because it's true, we need more then we have.

 

And I'm not considering QB if for any reason because the franchise has already phoned out their support around Howell as their franchise QB now...i personally agree that I've seen enough to not go throwing around picks we don't have to see if we can do better.  Even if we can doesn't mean we should because we don't need to.

 

Sam is showing his floor to be at minimum a servicable stop gap we can win with until we decide we do need a more elite talent at that position.  He's earned that respect from several people outside our organization as well.

 

#1: I've seen some people that seem really concerned with Bowers Run Blocking, or talking about how his ability to be a real asset as a sixth blocker is essential. I don't agree. I think being a difference maker in the passing game is about 10x as important, adequate at blocking is fine, doesn't have to be superior.

 

#2: The next organization isn't in the building yet. Everyone seems to agree Ron is out and the F.O. is probably getting ---- canned too, so it is irrelevant what the current football people think, it's far more relevant whether the next guys believe in him or not. Sometimes, the key selling point of a new regime is an in house developmental QB they like, sometimes its being able to get their own guy. We'll find out where the new guys fit on this spectrum over the next 4-6 months. I'd also add that with just a vet emergency backup in place behind him, we need to draft a developmental option to challenge sam, even if we do like him.

 

#3: I don't think that approach works very well. You need a ton of luck to steal a high end QB prospect people underrate to pull off the whole: "get the rest of the team set up, then worry about QB," because if they're wrong about Sam (the new guys if they stick with him), they'll probably improve the roster enough, that like Ron's '20-'22 iteration, they'll play their way out of the blue chip zone and be stuck, totally unable to trade up for a franchise guy, and not bad enough to have any likelihood of making that acquisition down the line. We simply picked too low in '21-'23 according to the org, in '20 we could have, but later we couldn't, and its just quite rare that you have a guy fall. It happens, Ben Roth in '04, Rodgers in '05, Wilson in '12, Mahomes and Watson in '17, Lamar in '18 etc (I don't add the much later round guys because they are so speculative as to be considered border line penny stocks). 

 

To me the core problem with 3, is that if Howell ends up just being a 16th-23rd type (what he is now, w/everything around him imploding), we're screwed by not going QB this year. He needs to either be horrible, or show enough to clearly be capable of being a 7th-12th type. So far, just flashes of that high end thing (big time throws stat he's through the roof). So by sticking with him, we run a HUGE risk, that we're just one of those many teams that have a ceiling of 7-10 wins because the QB doesn't cut it. 

 

I'm open to the idea that Howell could be a legit tier 2 starter, he's been pretty good more than half the time despite having nothing to help him whatsoever, it's just a big risk. The one thing that gives me some hope, beyond him, is that the roster is so crap, that even if we did go another direction and then he preceeded to flop, well, we might be top 5 anyway next year. But again, the problem is? Next year's QB class aint close to this one. That's a problem. Howell HAS to hit, otherwise, things are gonna be bad for far longer than some of you expect (basically, at least through the '26 season) and considering how long this team has sucked (already 30 years running at this point), pushing back contention into 2026/2027 is a hard sell. 

1 hour ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Agreed, however there is so much fluff in what is defined as a reach. And a reach is not defined by what Mel, Todd, or that dumbass Thor Nystrom has to say about anything. There really is no way to know if the next team is going to pick the guy you "reached" for.  

 

The way I look at it, you have to bucket guys together, pick whatever method you want, color, number grades, letter grades, whatever.

 

But in the end, there's no real way to say "this offensive tackle is definitively better than that linebacker."  You can say one position is more valuable than the other, and you can group guys together and say "this is group 1, this is group 2, this is group 3." 

 

Once you've got guys in a group, picking the guy you want from that group, you should go with the position which would help your team the most.

 

Where you get into trouble is picking outside of the group.  So, if you have 4 guys in group 1, but you NEED a tackle, and you don't have any tackles in group 1, so you go to a group 2 tackle, THAT is bad. If that means you have to take a position of less need or less value because the player is in a higher group, that's fine. 

 

But I don't believe there is a definitive list of rankings that is worth a damn.  Every team is going to have a different ranking order, and none of them are more right than the next.  

Didn't they say that about Kyle Pitts? I think that was the guy, he was revolutionary or what not?  And I don't think he has been. 

 

You never know. 

 

The draft is the ultimate guessing game.  

Pitts has failed for the same reason Drake London and Bijan has failed. They've saddled him with one of the worst QB's in the league, every year, and one of the least productive and aggressive passing games to boot. Pitts is a great talent, but for him, just like London and Bijan, there are few teams they could have landed on that were worse (off the top of my head, probably NYJ, NE, Tenn, NYG, Washington, Chicago, Carolina, and Atlanta are basically bermuda triangle level horror shows for elite playmaking prospects-go there and disappear).