2024 NFL Draft Position/Tracker - Final Pick #2

[redskinss]

18 minutes ago, MisterPinstripe said:

As long as we lose AZ doesnt matter. NE only matters because of potential SOS is so close. 

It does in the second and third round.

Certainly not as critical as the first round but every little bit helps and if new England and Arizona win we'll move up 2 spots in both those rounds as well.

[cakmoney61]

20 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Kyle Pitts, Drake London, Bijan Robinson.  All college studs.    All good players.  Yet their offense sucks because they don't have a QB.   it's not rocket science and its relevant IMO to some of the discussion on this thread.

 

 

 

What good are bunch of bullets if you don't have a gun to shoot them?

[Skinsinparadise]

2 hours ago, Number 44 said:

Here is our fundamental difference of opinion:  I think you are putting words into the mouths of those that disagree with you.  I, for example, am not pushing either of these ideas that you claim I am pushing.  

 

There is a reason why I said "some" and not "all." Everyone who doesn't want a QB have the exact same take.  I didn't said otherwise.  But some have exactly the take I explained.  I know because I've debated many of them especially on the QB thread.  And not because I've put those words in their mouths.  It's because they flat out said it.   Heck its not just me debating it with them, a host of others here have too.  It doesn't mean they are wrong.  But its certainly a real life debate.

 

2 hours ago, Number 44 said:

I certainly don't see football as being as simple as you lay out where it is a choice of either get the QB, then build the roster or build the roster, then get the QB.  To me, it's get the best damn football players. 

 

The simplest way for me to put it is if you really like a QB, you don't skip on that QB for another position with the idea of lets build the rest of the roster first and go get the QB later.  I am not saying you are saying otherwise.  I am just explaining my position as clear as I can.

 

2 hours ago, Number 44 said:

 

I look forward to Harris hiring a superstar GM who will, in turn, hire a superstar HC, a superstar staff, and superstar scouts.  I'll rely on them to build the team.  If the best player available at 1.2 is one of the QBs in their minds, then great!  But I certainly don't want them to yet again so the same old drafting by position thing that this team has continually been doing. 

 

I get the point.  But the way I see it is while I agree and have made the same point to death for years that this team's FO drafts too much to need -- they've played it differently with QB.  Ron Rivera gave a good under the hood view of how he saw the QB spot when he talked about the risks of Tua and the risks of Herbert and basically admitted that he didn't want to take chances on the QB spot.   

 

Ron's approach for roster building has been to be risk adverse.  For example, supposedly they liked Okereke and Martinez as FAs, but not at that kind of money so lets sign Barton and Mayo instead.  We can spend money on Seumalo in Fa to shore up LG -- or take a chance on Risner who was a FA through the summer until Minny signed him up -- but nope lets try to see if Charles can do it.   On and on.

 

At QB, Rivera admitted he didn't want Tua or Herbert because of injury concerns for Tua and Herbert wasn't a universally loved around the league prospect.  Goes with Fitz in FA. Toys with trading up for Fields but doesn't pull the trigger.  

 

While I agree he's a draft to need guy and that plays into their paint by numbers off season approach.  What do we need?  Lets get a guy at that spot and call it a day.  For the QB position, it was as uninspiring as anything else they did.  Their approach is to keep it medium.  Low risk.  Low reward IMO.

 

2 hours ago, Number 44 said:

 

 

The bottom line is that being a proponent of drafting the best football player is neither a desire to get a QB first nor a desire to get the rest of the roster first.  When I say that as of now the pick I would make is MHJ, it is certainly NOT because I have some type of weird fundamental opinion that QB should be the last position we fill.  It is because he is the best football player in the draft to my admittedly untrained eye.  He seems to have both the highest ceiling and the highest floor, IMO.

 

Chase Young seemed the obvious BPA in that draft.   As you said Ron went for BPA in theory in that draft.   Marvin Harrison feels the same way in this one.  That's cool.  I love the player.    But if you give me a lets say a 97 graded player at another spot versus a 94 graded QB -- IMO you take the QB.  

 

As to you accusing others of putting words in the mouths of those who disagree with you.  lol, you like to do the same thing.   No one said you have some weird fundamental opinion that the QB is the last spot we fill.

Edited January 3 by Skinsinparadise

[mistertim]

1 hour ago, Number 44 said:

Teams that tend to always take good football players seem to contend year after year.

 

This is demonstrably false when it comes to every position other than QB. There is ONE team that has been a contender year after year without a top notch long term franchise QB and that's SF. They're the exception, not the rule, because they have one of the most creative offensive minds in football as well as consistently dominant defenses.

 

The teams that are contenders year in and year out have top QBs. That's the common denominator, and that's why you always weigh QB higher than any other position when grading draft prospects.

[HigSkin]

This is funny because it's how I feel and appropriate for these QB discussions

 

 

[@DCGoldPants]

5 minutes ago, HigSkin said:

This is funny because it's how I feel and appropriate for these QB discussions

 

 

 

Well, while I want to trust this new group to make the right move. We need to see them do it first. Right? So, we're hopefully that do build the right Front Office to do it with the right coach and right plan. And if that plan is the opposite of what a PFF or PFT or OPP is saying about how to do this.....and it works. Those sites are still going to post the same **** next year too. 

25 minutes ago, mistertim said:

The teams that are contenders year in and year out have top QBs

 

Yep. Only thing to note is.....where they got their Top QBs. Some were top draft picks. Others were the very last pick of the 1st round, like Lamar Jackson. Jalen Hurts was a 2nd rounder. Mahommes was 10th overall. Dak was a 4th rounder 

 

And yeah, Goff was 1.01, so was Stafford.

 

Maybe the message is.....A.B.L. (Always Be Lookin'........for that QB). 

[kingdaddy]

4 hours ago, skinsfan66 said:

You left out part of the equation It would be Kyle Pitts/Ridder versus Fields or Mac Jones. They Passed on Zach W. and Trey L too in a trade up.  That was the Only time they had a top 4 pick. No Trever L. without a RG3 type trade if that was possible. They passed on 4 QB's in the 1st. rd. that have not lived up to it.

I agree at 2/3 you have to take a QB at that spot if you think one is the real deal but you do not if you like another player better. You point was QB only is the right way to go, (just look at Atlanta). My point is QB is not the only choice and the Falcons were right to pass even though they have no QB. My point using MHJ since you listed him could be a better choice than the other 2, They have him rated as the best in 10 years or? Look what T.Hill does for Tua. 

 

Good points. I agree and am on board with taking MHJ IF, IF we feel like we can get a QB prospect somewhere else in the draft and IF we feel someone like Daniels or Penix or Nix has as good a chance as being a stud franchise QB as whomever falls to us at pick #2. If Maye or Williams, in our scouts view, are decidedly better than the other QB prospects, and Sam Howell of course, then take the QB at #2 or 3. 

There are so many factors in this debate...I keep going back to Cleveland and how they took Tim Couch, Baker Mayfield and God knows who else (Brady Quinn?) very high in the draft and whiffed on all of them. My fear is that being desperate for a franchise QB makes you ignore the Hall of Fame WR or LT sitting right there for you. That's the crapshoot of the draft though isn't it? 

We should all go back and study the 1983 NFL draft and the QB's that went in the 1st round that year. Elway, Blackledge, Jim Kelly, Eason, Ken O'Brien, Dan Marino....all 1st round QB's, 3 hits, 3 misses. Sprinkled in between them were a few hall of famers who were staples on their teams for many years. This was probably the best QB class ever....

[mistertim]

22 minutes ago, @DCGoldPants said:

 

Well, while I want to trust this new group to make the right move. We need to see them do it first. Right? So, we're hopefully that do build the right Front Office to do it with the right coach and right plan. And if that plan is the opposite of what a PFF or PFT or OPP is saying about how to do this.....and it works. Those sites are still going to post the same **** next year too. 

 

 

Yep...trust but verify. Though to be honest, it would be quite difficult to not be better than the old ownership and current FO.

 

It's sort of like the difference between going into a back alley to get a surgery from a dude name Wayne who has an online advertisement saying "Totally a doctor, trust me" vs going to a hospital. Going to the hospital doesn't guarantee you an upper echelon surgeon, but at least you know you'll be in the hands of someone who actually has a clue what they're doing.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

Ravens are starting Tyler Huntley against the Steelers this weekend. Makes that game all the more winnable for the Steelers, giving us one of the 3 stars we need.

[clskinsfan]

4 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

Ravens are starting Tyler Huntley against the Steelers this weekend. Makes that game all the more winnable for the Steelers, giving us one of the 3 stars we need.

I think New England is going to beat the Jets anyways. You know Bill wants to send a big FU to ownership who apparently wants to go a different direction. He isnt playing for HIS draft pick. 

[JamesMadisonSkins]

6 minutes ago, clskinsfan said:

I think New England is going to beat the Jets anyways. You know Bill wants to send a big FU to ownership who apparently wants to go a different direction. He isnt playing for HIS draft pick. 

I agree, but an insurance plan of that game no having to matter would be nice. Granted, I think they'd all be happening simultaneously. But if the Pats were down big to the Jets, I'd feel much better knowing our 3* needed were in good hands.

 

Game times:

*Pittsburgh @ Baltimore - Saturday, 4:15

*Houston @ Indianapolis - Saturday, 8:15

**Atlanta @ New Orleans - Sunday, 1:00

*Chicago @ Green Bay - Sunday 4:25

*Denver @ Las Vegas - Sunday 4:25

Jets & Patriots - Sunday 1:00

 

Would be nice going into the 1pm games Sunday only needing 1 star or a Jets loss. If PIT beats BAL and NO beats ATL, we may not even need to pay attention to the 4pm slate, even if the Jets beat the Pats

Edited January 3 by JamesMadisonSkins

[mhd24]

2 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

I agree, but an insurance plan of that game no having to matter would be nice. Granted, I think they'd all be happening simultaneously. But if the Pats were down big to the Jets, I'd feel much better knowing our 3* needed were in good hands.

I don't think Baltimore lays down against Pittsburgh.  IMO, they beat them.  

 

Indy beating Houston is a big one on Saturday night.  Hope the Colts win that one.  Then hopefully the Saints beat Atlanta and we control our own destiny for the #2 pick.

 

Also, NYG beating Philly would be great.  Knocks down the giants in the draft pool while cementing us as the last team in the division for a last place schedule next year (we'll be at Arizona and home against the last place NFC North team (either Minnesota or Chicago).

Edited January 3 by mhd24

[Rufus T Firefly]

3 hours ago, redskinss said:

Don't we want new England to win?

 

I thought a patriots and cardinals win on top of our loss was good because it would improve our picks in rd2 and 3 also.

Yeah, man. Look, if you don't understand what I mean when I say the opposite of it, isn't that on you?

 

I'm pretty sick right now, so my normal 50-50 rate of typing things that make sense might be off a bit. 

[Darrell Green Fan]

22 hours ago, illone said:

Chicago has played great with Fields the past 6-7 games, not sure I am quick to assume they will move on.  Eberflus might be safe, too. Plus it seems like Bears players like Fields and support him sticking around, that has to be considered by the Bears decision makers... no?

 

 

 

 

In a word no Front offices do not and should not select players based on what the other players want.  He has played better but if you look at his numbers during this streak they aren't winning because of Justin Fields. 

[HTTRDynasty]

Nothing we don’t already know, but interesting to see the national focus on this story:

 

 

[clskinsfan]

1 hour ago, @DCGoldPants said:

Always Be Lookin'........for that QB

Agree with this completely. Gotta keep drafting them until you find one. 

 

Interesting stat. The only top 5 QB to win a Super Bowl with his original team in the past 25 years is Eli Manning. Stafford is the only other top 5 QB to win one. But he had to get beat to death in Detroit then moved to do it. A top 5 QB doesnt necessarily guarantee you anything. But you have to keep taking a swing at it. 

8 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

I'm pretty sick right now

 Hope you feel better man. I have had Covid for the past two weeks. And even vaxxed it sucks real bad. 

[RWJ]

27 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

I agree, but an insurance plan of that game no having to matter would be nice. Granted, I think they'd all be happening simultaneously. But if the Pats were down big to the Jets, I'd feel much better knowing our 3* needed were in good hands.

 

Game times:

*Pittsburgh @ Baltimore - Saturday, 4:15

*Houston @ Indianapolis - Saturday, 8:15

**Atlanta @ New Orleans - Sunday, 1:00

*Chicago @ Green Bay - Sunday 4:25

*Denver @ Las Vegas - Sunday 4:25

Jets & Patriots - Sunday 1:00

 

Would be nice going into the 1pm games Sunday only needing 1 star or a Jets loss. If PIT beats BAL and NO beats ATL, we may not even need to pay attention to the 4pm slate, even if the Jets beat the Pats

Those are strong "IFs" too. Just don't want the Saints knowing the score of the TB game.  😁

[Skinsinparadise]

32 minutes ago, clskinsfan said:

I think New England is going to beat the Jets anyways. You know Bill wants to send a big FU to ownership who apparently wants to go a different direction. He isnt playing for HIS draft pick. 

 

I think NE has a good shot but considering the Jets for their faults has a very good defense which can create turnovers and Zappe is a pick waiting to happen -- I am not relaxed about that game, its winnable for the Jets.

[Rufus T Firefly]

3 hours ago, markmills67 said:

Is that even if we beat Dallas?

Yes. More precisely it is especially true if we beat Dallas. 

 

The Chargers are the closest to us in the tiebreaker now. Our 17 opponents have a combined 140 Ws, while theirs have 143. Since each team could get 3 additional wins added to that total apart from the ones already locked in (ie, we played everyone in the NFC West, so those 4 teams playing each other adds a 2-2 to our total regardless of which teams win, etc), that means technically LA could tie us this week if everything broke right for them. However, us winning and them losing (which would obviously be necessary for us to tie them int he overall standings) means they would get two more Ws from losing to a divisional opponent (KC) while we wouldn't, since Dallas doesn't win in that scenario. 

 

So, there is no way we could tie with LA, Tennessee or Arizona and lose the tiebreaker to any of them.

[Rufus T Firefly]

17 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said:

Nothing we don’t already know, but interesting to see the national focus on this story:

 

 

So, Kornacki is just copying our work in this thread? What a jackass. 

[Ball Security]

21 minutes ago, clskinsfan said:

Agree with this completely. Gotta keep drafting them until you find one. 

 

Interesting stat. The only top 5 QB to win a Super Bowl with his original team in the past 25 years is Eli Manning. Stafford is the only other top 5 QB to win one. But he had to get beat to death in Detroit then moved to do it. A top 5 QB doesnt necessarily guarantee you anything. But you have to keep taking a swing at it. 

 Hope you feel better man. I have had Covid for the past two weeks. And even vaxxed it sucks real bad. 

Peyton Manning? 

[clskinsfan]

2 minutes ago, Ball Security said:

Peyton Manning? 

Ah yes. You are right he did it in 2006. My bad. So one in 18 years.....:)

[Skinsinparadise]

Just listened to a NY Giants reporter, he has the vibe that the team wants a QB and he goes Schoen is aggressive when he wants a player and don't be surprised if they trade up.  He mentioned Drake Maye.

 

I know this draft season the Giants kept sending armies of scouts along with Schoen going personally to watch Maye

 

 

[clskinsfan]

3 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Just listened to a NY Giants reporter, he has the vibe that the team wants a QB and he goes Schoen is aggressive when he wants a player and don't be surprised if they trade up.  He mentioned Drake Maye.

 

I know this draft season the Giants kept sending armies of scouts along with Schoen going personally to watch Maye

 

 

Thats fine. Then we get Williams. 

[method man]

6 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Just listened to a NY Giants reporter, he has the vibe that the team wants a QB and he goes Schoen is aggressive when he wants a player and don't be surprised if they trade up.  He mentioned Drake Maye.

 

I know this draft season the Giants kept sending armies of scouts along with Schoen going personally to watch Maye

 

 

Their fans are all clamoring for an aggressive trade up