2024 NFL Draft Position/Tracker - Final Pick #2

[Skinsinparadise]

15 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

@Skinsinparadise

 

Let's pull this back a second because you hit on something that I agree is the core of our disagreement.

 

Yes, this smells like dysfunction, but id say insisting we have to be open to the bright and shiny QB if we aren't sure about the guy we have is ALSO something Dan would do and has done (Jeff George over Brad Johnson for example).  Everything that glitters ain't gold, SIP.

 

 

 

I don't get how "considering" has anything to do about all that glitters ain't gold.  Not once did I say take the QB.  I said consider it.  But having a preconception of what to do and just riding with it, feels very Dan including his move for Jeff George.  I heard (I think it was Sheehan who said it) that he didn't like the trade for Brad which happened before he got there and already wanted him out.  So he ran with his preconceptions and just followed up on it.

 

The young QBs aren't some untouchable gems.  But under Dan they were all treated that way for years until it became obvious they shouldn't have been untouchable.   And look I am one of the bigger Sam fans here.  My only negative on him is I suspect he's not a top 5 type QB potential wise.    But I am open to being wrong about that.  Let the GM decide.

 

If there is a theme with QBs with this team under Dan its riding with preconceptions and making mistakes accordingly.

 

If we happen to pick top 5.  That's a unique oppotunity.  If we can get a QB without trading up.  That's a unique opportunity.  A QB that arguably has three dudes with serious hype and will likely go top 4.  Also unique opportunity. 

 

Let say for us to shrug off that opportunity and lets say the NY Giants if they are picking after us hit riches with the QB we pass over and our dude isn't as good and that defines the division for the next decade.  Doesn't that feel very Washington?  Big time for me.  It would fit the Washington's comedy of errors of QB which one say will be a 30-30 ESPN special someday.

 

Or conversely, if it goes the opposite way.  They take a dude and they suck and Howell thrives elsewere.

 

I am not saying I got the answer to this.  I know you don't have the answer to this either.  It's a complicated decision.  But I am not judging based on what i or you can figure out.  The dude running this team is paid to give a much better educated guess than you and I.  Why not let him do it?  By wanting him to punt on it -- its basically saying you think you got the answer enough already that you don't think to see if the new GM can do better on this call.

 

 

Edited December 11, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[Renegade7]

31 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

If we happen to pick top 5.  That's a unique oppotunity.  If we can get a QB without trading up.  That's a unique opportunity.  A QB that arguably has three dudes with serious hype and will likely go top 4.  Also unique opportunity. 

 

Let say for us to shrug off that opportunity and lets say the NY Giants if they are picking after us hit riches with the QB we pass over and our dude isn't as good and that defines the division for the next decade.  Doesn't that feel very Washington?  Big time for me.  It would fit the Washington's comedy of errors of QB which one say will be a 30-30 ESPN special someday.

 

So many Ifs, man, I remember some being concerned Haskins might end up with the Giants instead, homie said himself he felt they "messed up"...we both picked busts.

 

31 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Or conversely, if it goes the opposite way.  They take a dude and they suck and Howell thrives elsewere.

 

I am not saying I got the answer to this.  I know you don't have the answer to this either.  It's a complicared decision.  But I am not judging based on what i or you can figure out.  The dude running this team is paid to give a much better educated guess than you and I.  Why not let him do it?  By wanting him to punt on it -- its basically saying you think you got the answer enough already that you don't think to see if the new GM can do better on this call.

 

On the one hand, posters like you and I have been debating what a GM should or should not be doing for close to or more then 20 years here, and truly unfathomable how many times many felt they could make better individual micro and maybe even macro decisions then GMs or overall front office decisions over the years, and probably right about it.

 

The difference between you and me is I never got a chance to to live with giving this team a blank check to do whatever they want and get results back from it like the 80s.  I'm feel like im being asked to get out the way of a frachise altering decision that could be made from an owner that jus got here and frankly I don't agree with everything that's done with the franchises they already own.  Jus because he's new doesn't mean he's unfathomable, either.

 

On the other hand this comes across as way simpler then I'm making it out to be, far less extreme then it needs to be.  Someone who knows what they're doing can look at tape and see things one of these prospects can do that Howell can't no matter how long he stays in this league.  They should be able to see mistakes a prospect makes less or not at all.

 

But that's still a lot of ifs seeing that translate to the NFL.  We should be running our race and building units to counter our divisional rivals, not picking prospects because we're afraid they might get them instead.  The idea we can keep another franchise from getting their elite QB in one draft speaks nothing to how many other chances or ways they can do it, time and resources should be better spent on building on beating them even if they find one.

 

I've said a couple times I'll listen but right now I don't agree with replacing Sam jus because we can possibly get someone better.  I am currently a hard no even after reasons you and others have presented NOT because I've made up mind but because maybe this is the wrong thread for this debate.  I'm having trouble processing all these hypotheticals for what in my mind should be more of an Xs and Os conversation.  

 

Be sure and on who and then I might be more receptive, I can't do this "we have a top 5 pick we should consider A QB", I'm adamantly against this concept, more specifics on who may help me see better from your perspective here.  And it's maybe too early to tell because of draft order, so I'll consider that in future responses here, I'm not crazy I don't like going in circles, either.

Edited December 11, 2023 by Renegade7

[Koolblue13]

We are drafting a QB at some point. We hve nobody except Howell.

 

If we end up with a Brees/Rivers situation, Awesome.

 

I think Daniels might go before Maye.

 

I also think we need play makers, but I don't want Harrison.

[KDawg]

I think there are a lot of great points on both sides of the QB debate…

 

And I know what I’m going to say isn’t going to make a single lick of a difference…

 

But…

 

We have absolutely no idea where we are picking yet. We don’t know who the GM or head coach are. And we don’t know anything about FA and even who is all declaring for the draft aside from seniors and those who have already announced.

 

We are all passionate, but it’s a little early to be too passionate on this in any direction. 
 

Let it play out. 
 

Continue to discuss, that’s what we’re here for… but keep in mind most folks opinions are going to change 29 times before we get to the point decisions are made because more facts will fill out.

[Warhead36]

15 minutes ago, KDawg said:

I think there are a lot of great points on both sides of the QB debate…

 

And I know what I’m going to say isn’t going to make a single lick of a difference…

 

But…

 

We have absolutely no idea where we are picking yet. We don’t know who the GM or head coach are. And we don’t know anything about FA and even who is all declaring for the draft aside from seniors and those who have already announced.

 

We are all passionate, but it’s a little early to be too passionate on this in any direction. 
 

Let it play out. 
 

Continue to discuss, that’s what we’re here for… but keep in mind most folks opinions are going to change 29 times before we get to the point decisions are made because more facts will fill out.

Yeah that's what sucks about being so bad early in the year. We have to talk about this stuff with so many things still up in the air.

 

I'm of the opinion now that, if we have a top 4 pick, we should either draft a QB or trade down if the trade down can net us a 2025 1st.

 

I don't hate Howell but watching Red Zone yesterday and I don't think he'll project to be elite.. I want one of those elite guys who can elevate the entire team. Lifts the entire ceiling. Makes you a national brand team. 

 

Lets shoot for the moon for once.

[Anselmheifer]

43 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

We are drafting a QB at some point. We hve nobody except Howell.

 

If we end up with a Brees/Rivers situation, Awesome.

 

I think Daniels might go before Maye.

 

I also think we need play makers, but I don't want Harrison.

why don’t you want Harrison? Is it about Garrison as a prospect, or about the position he plays?

Edited December 11, 2023 by Anselmheifer

[Warhead36]

I think there could be a legit four way tie between the Pats, Cards, Commanders, and Giants at 4 wins. It'll be interesting to see who picks where in that situation.

[sjinhan]

6 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

Yeah that's what sucks about being so bad early in the year. We have to talk about this stuff with so many things still up in the air.

 

I'm of the opinion now that, if we have a top 4 pick, we should either draft a QB or trade down if the trade down can net us a 2025 1st.

 

I don't hate Howell but watching Red Zone yesterday and I don't think he'll project to be elite.. I want one of those elite guys who can elevate the entire team. Lifts the entire ceiling. Makes you a national brand team. 

 

Lets shoot for the moon for once.

 

Although I am the camp of trading our 1st for a haul of picks that will set us 1st rounder in 2025 AND more... I would say that if we draft a QB with our first pick then we should DEFINITELY trade Howell for draft capital right away.   As much as I like Howell, if we picked a QB this high then we are saying Howell isn't our future so lets trade him for a pick that will allow us to get additional help on the OL.

[Koolblue13]

4 minutes ago, Anselmheifer said:

why don’t you want Harrison? Is it about Garrison as a prospect, or about the position he plays?

It's the position. WR doesn't touch the ball that much and I think there are other options. 

 

Without QBs, to me, It's Fashanu, Alt, Bowers, Verse, Koolaid as the top 5 for me. 

[Warhead36]

1 minute ago, sjinhan said:

 

Although I am the camp of trading our 1st for a haul of picks that will set us 1st rounder in 2025 AND more... I would say that if we draft a QB with our first pick then we should DEFINITELY trade Howell for draft capital right away.   As much as I like Howell, if we picked a QB this high then we are saying Howell isn't our future so lets trade him for a pick that will allow us to get additional help on the OL.

I'm okay with either direction. I wouldn't just give Howell away, I'd need like minimum a 3rd to trade him. If we keep him then well hey there are worse options than having two good QBs when we've been in the QB desert for 30 years.

[Koolblue13]

We could draft Maye and Nix and I still wouldn't trade Howell this year.

[KDawg]

Just now, Koolblue13 said:

It's the position. WR doesn't touch the ball that much and I think there are other options. 

 

Without QBs, to me, It's Fashanu, Alt, Bowers, Verse, Koolaid as the top 5 for me. 

 

I am not sure I agree that receivers don't touch the ball that much... The best receivers get 100+ receptions and 150+ targets a year.

 

Bienemy doesn't get the ball to them... But a new OC may.

[Koolblue13]

2 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

I am not sure I agree that receivers don't touch the ball that much... The best receivers get 100+ receptions and 150+ targets a year.

 

Bienemy doesn't get the ball to them... But a new OC may.

Don't get me started on Bienemy. That's almost over.

 

I'm not completely devaluing the position, I just don't think I'd take one in the top 10 over some other positions of importance.

[sjinhan]

3 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I'm okay with either direction. I wouldn't just give Howell away, I'd need like minimum a 3rd to trade him. If we keep him then well hey there are worse options than having two good QBs when we've been in the QB desert for 30 years.

yeah i would agree that it would have to be a minimum 3rd this year and for next year it would be 2nd rounder or more value...  My case for this scenario is based on that we wont be able to develope ANY QB if we have a OL to protect them.  I think we need to basically replace 4 to 5 starters on the OL so we need to do what we can to make it a successful rebuild on the OL.

[skinsfan66]

When we hire the new people to build this team, it would be so not right if they did not explore every option available to the team Draft,Trades, and FA.  Everyone has to be evaluated including Howell and all we can do is hope for the best. If they did it any other way they should have not gotten the Job's to make these decisions. It's going to be on the new owners to hire the right People to build this team.  I am hoping Howell is the QB after years of hiring other team castoffs. But all we can do is hope for better than what we have got the last 25/30 year's depending on how you see it. As for Casserly I see it this way. He had a big part of every superbowl , strike players list, Sanders, Clark, Lachey the trade equalizer For the Calvin Muhumed trade by Bethard. The 2 trades for Koch, Johnson on a team that had everything But a DT and DE on the right side, it helped make them as S.B. favorites and winners. It was also Gibbs who made the call to trade 2 No.1's for the Heisman hood ornament from ND after winning the S.B. and gaining control from B.B. We also were way over the cap when it came into effect and cuts had to be made. His drafts were not the greatest but his trades were up there with the best along with his Player lists that were used to win SB's. He left the team with all the draft picks it needed to rebuild. I think the team would have fared a lot better with him than without him over the years. Dan fired the wrong Person. Just my opinion and not trying to keep the Casserly talk going. 

[skinsfan66]

8 minutes ago, sjinhan said:

yeah i would agree that it would have to be a minimum 3rd this year and for next year it would be 2nd rounder or more value...  My case for this scenario is based on that we wont be able to develope ANY QB if we have a OL to protect them.  I think we need to basically replace 4 to 5 starters on the OL so we need to do what we can to make it a successful rebuild on the OL.

It would have to be a early 3rd with conditions to move up to a 1st if he panned out, for me. 

[JamesMadisonSkins]

This has been covered pretty extensively, and I am on the record as saying I will trust whatever our next front office wants to do. There isn't really a wrong path.

 

But IF I were the new GM, I think my preference would be to:

A. Build the team

B. Give Howell 2024 to prove himself

C. Acquire draft picks in 2025 to make moves if we need to come up for a QB (assuming we aren't Top 3-5 again).

 

The higher we pick, the better our odds are of getting that haul. If we pick #3 and either Maye or Daniels is there, I would think we could trade back and get a nice haul of picks.

 

We won't be able to address all of our holes this off-season, but having $100+ million in cap space, 6 picks in the Top 100 (assuming a trade-down gives us the 1st and 2nd or a 1st and 3rd this year) ... will go a long way to turning around the roster. 

[woodpecker]

12 hours ago, kingdaddy said:

When you haven't had a franchise QB since Sonny Jurgensen doesn't it make sense to draft one AND keep Howell until you find out which one is the future? For a team going nowhere for awhile, you could draft a QB, re-build the o-line and then find out who your guy is. The rookie could have the luxury of sitting and learning while we find out about Sam. Isn't this kind of how Favre was plucked from Atlanta by the Packers? It almost seems over cautious yet responsible at the same time. In other words, we'd better be damn sure that Howell is a franchise QB or we may blow a golden opportunity to draft a guy that is. 

I’m with this. Keep them both this year (cheap!) and you get two shots at it—50/50 the rookie QB hits, PLUS whatever chance you think there is of Howell becoming elite. One rookie tackle otoh is not going to fix the line. It’s a good start, but as we (should have) learned from the Chase pick, QB is not the only position that can bust on a top 5 pick, so there’s a decent chance said tackle fixes nothing. Best case he hits and we add some other parts and suddenly have a respectable line, but the upside of taking QB and hitting is a decade of winning.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

21 minutes ago, woodpecker said:

I’m with this. Keep them both this year (cheap!) and you get two shots at it—50/50 the rookie QB hits, PLUS whatever chance you think there is of Howell becoming elite. One rookie tackle otoh is not going to fix the line. It’s a good start, but as we (should have) learned from the Chase pick, QB is not the only position that can bust on a top 5 pick, so there’s a decent chance said tackle fixes nothing. Best case he hits and we add some other parts and suddenly have a respectable line, but the upside of taking QB and hitting is a decade of winning.

 

It's really TBD on how deep this QB class is depending on the transfer portal and who ends up declaring. But I do think we draft a QB in the middle rounds somewhere. That QB is much less likely to be "the guy" versus a cheap back-up option to Howell. But you never know! That's kind of splitting the middle here in regards to investing in the QB position without using high draft capital. There's a very unlikely chance a 4th round QB + Howell end up being the long-term solutions if Howell doesn't cement himself in 2024. It just sets you up to go QB again in the 2025 draft regardless. But at least it gives you options in 2024. 

 

2025 is way off, almost impossible to say for sure how the class will rank, especially with so many still deciding whether or not to enter the 2024 draft. But I do think J.J. McCarthy, Quinn Ewers, Carson Beck and Shedeur Sanders will highlight in 2025. If Ewers enters this year, I don't see how he doesn't end up as the QB3/QB4 in this draft. Likely another Top 10 pick ... currently the simulators have him and McCarthy in there, but both would likely be Top options in 2025 if they go back. 

 

I keep seeing McCarthy and Ewers going in the 2nd in these simulators, along with Sanders, Penix, Nix in some cases. But I have my doubts on McCarthy, Ewers and Sanders even being available. If Ewers is in there, I think he ends up going in the Top 15. 

Edited December 11, 2023 by JamesMadisonSkins

[JamesMadisonSkins]

Even though a lot went our way yesterday, it's still pretty unlikely that we end up higher than #3. The Giants are very likely to lose out. The Patriots are still ahead of us even if they win one more game. So if we lose out, Giants lose out, and Pats lose out or go 1-2, we're still stuck at #4. 

 

We really need the Giants to win 1 game and we really need the Patriots to win 2. The Cardinals need to win 1 game too, and they should have a shot against the Bears and even the Seahawks. In the NFL anything can happen, so not writing those scenarios off. 

[No Nonsense]

11 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

Even though a lot went our way yesterday, it's still pretty unlikely that we end up higher than #3. The Giants are very likely to lose out. The Patriots are still ahead of us even if they win one more game. So if we lose out, Giants lose out, and Pats lose out or go 1-2, we're still stuck at #4. 

 

We really need the Giants to win 1 game and we really need the Patriots to win 2. The Cardinals need to win 1 game too, and they should have a shot against the Bears and even the Seahawks. In the NFL anything can happen, so not writing those scenarios off. 

At this point, I'd be satisfied with being in the top 5 and will be ecstatic with being in the top 4. We should be able to draft who we want to in either position. 

Edited December 11, 2023 by No Nonsense

[Riggo-toni]

Casserly was a good scout, but a dreadful GM...much like Norvo the Clown was an excellent OC but a horrible HC.  Before Haynesworthless, Casserly gave a record contract to miserable DT Blubberfield, traded a 1 and a 3 plus a big contract for an average DT in Wilkinson, and EVERY first rounder he picked prior to Bailey in his last year was a bust. When he left, we had the worst OL in the NFL.  Then he went to Houston, which ended up with the worst OL in the NFL.... coincidence?

[JamesMadisonSkins]

Here's what we need to happen:

Commanders: Lose Out

Giants: Win 1 against Packers, Saints, Eagles, Rams, Eagles

Cardinals: Win 1 against 49ers, Bears, Eagles, Seahawks

Patriots: Win 2 against Chiefs, Broncos, Bills, Jets

Titans: Win 1 more against Texans, Seahawks, Texans, Jaguars

Bears: Win 1 against Browns, Falcons, Cardinals, Packers

 

This will get us to the #2 pick. I think any of the above NOT happening locks us out of #2 completely. I have run a ton of scenarios and the Win % knocks us out of a lot of tie-breakers with the exception of Arizona. Their SOS is quite high, so we have the tie-break over them in every scenario I have run. 

 

The Bears SOS is really bad, so they'd have a tie-breaker over us, but they have several winnable games left and I assume they'll get one. 

Edited December 11, 2023 by JamesMadisonSkins

[JamesMadisonSkins]

If you go straight Chalk on the remaining games (likeliest outcome), and we lose to the Jets, here's your order:

1. Panthers (Bears): 1-16

2. Cardinals: 3-14

3. Patriots: 4-13 (.512)

4. Commanders: 4-13 (.536)* tie-break over Giants for going 0-2 against them

5. Giants: 4-13 (.536)

6. Titans: 5-12 (.522)

7. Chargers: 5-12 (.540)

8. Raiders: 6-11 (.495)

9. Jets: 6-11 (.505)

10. Bears: 7-10

 

If we beat the Jets, then:

1. Panthers (Bears); 1-16

2. Cardinals: 3-14

3. Patriots: 4-13 (.509)

4. Giants: 4-13 (.540)

5. Jets: 5-12 (.509)

6. Titans: 5-12 (.522)

7. Commanders: 5-12 (.533)

8. Chargers: 5-12 (.536)

9. Raiders: 6-11

10. Bears: 7-10

 

So we are likely still picking no lower than #7, and likely as high as #4. But to get higher a lot of things would have to come into play. There seem to be just as few opportunities for us to get to #2 as there are to get #3. Seems like we're basically holding the ground for #4, but even losing out doesn't guarantee us #4 if certain things fall into place. I think the one thing that would lock us into #3 is if the Cardinals beat the Bears, but the Bears beat someone else on their remaining schedule. That would be the one scenario I can find where we end up with #3.

1. Panthers (Bears): 1-16

2. Patriots: 4-13 (.512)

3. Commanders: 4-13 (.536)

4. Giants: 4-13 (.540)

5. Cardinals: 4-13 (.564)

6. Titans: 5-12 (.522)

7. Chargers: 5-12 (.536)

8. Bears: 6-11 (.471)

9. Raiders: 6-11 (.491)

10. Jets: 6-11 (.505

Edited December 11, 2023 by JamesMadisonSkins

[JamesMadisonSkins]

#2: Should net us a ransom with Maye and Daniels on the board.

#3: Should still net us some great trade-back opps. with one of them still there

#4: Starts to become less predictable. 50/50 one of the Top 3 QBs is there, depending on whether Harrison is off the board or not.

#5: Should be able to get the Top OT on our board

#6-7: Should be able to get the #2 OT on our board, Bowers or Nabers

 

So if we want to maximize trade-down opportunities #2 and #3 are where we want to be. That's also possible at #4, but we'd likely need to move back out of range of a top OT and might choose to stand pat and take one there. #5-7 we are sort of hoping and praying Fashanu or Alt are still there, or we get a good offer from someone to move back a bit so they can come get a premier player, but IMO this becomes debatable as it takes us out of premier pick range.

 

If we end up at #2 I would say there's a a 75%+ chance we trade down. The other 25% is we draft a QB.

If we end up at #3, I would say there's a 50%+ chance we trade down, but also a 25% chance we draft a QB, and a 25% chance we take Harrison, Jr.

If we end up at #4 it gets tricky. Is Daniels there? Then there's a 25% chance we draft him, and a 30-40% chance we trade back. But if QBs go 1-2-3, then I think there's a 95%+ chance we stick at #4 and take Harrison, Jr. or Fashanu.

 

Can you tell I am bored?