Jump to content

2023 NFL Discussion


rico

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, btownqb said:

Probably so. 

I will also mention.. the Eagles, through a good portion of that game... had the EXACT recipe to beat KC. Keep Kelce and Mahomes off the field. 

I still think the Eagles are/were the better team. In that particular game, Hurts was the best QB on the field as well. No, I'm not saying Hurts is better than Mahomes, that's insane, but he played much better in the SB. 

With all of that said, while I still think that call at the end was BS, the Eagles lost because of the fumble TD and the big punt return. 

In the vein of still being a bitter fan, I've seen still images of the Hurts fumble and the KC defender had his hand in Hurts' facemask as he fumbled. Should have been a penalty negating the Chiefs TD. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

It is funny people think giving up 2 1st round picks and a second round pick is to much to get the top pick. In basketball Minnesota gave up 5 1st round picks for Rudy Gobert who is over 30 years old

Are we aspiring to be the Timberwolves of the NFL?

Can anyone point to an example of a team paying a lot of assets for a player and it working out long term in the NFL?

Even if there’s an example of that, we don’t actually know which of the four probably first round QBs is actually going to be the best. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

New York trades the rights to Philip Rivers (the fourth pick), the first pick in the third round (Nate Kaeding), a 2005 first round pick (Shawne Merriman) and a 2005 fifth round pick (Jerome Collins) to San Diego for the rights to Manning

This is what the Chargers got for Eli Manning trade

When you put it like that, seems like a terrible trade. I want no part of that type of move. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, KoB2011 said:

Are we aspiring to be the Timberwolves of the NFL?

Can anyone point to an example of a team paying a lot of assets for a player and it working out long term in the NFL?

Even if there’s an example of that, we don’t actually know which of the four probably first round QBs is actually going to be the best. 

Is it like a Minnesota thing? Didn't the Vikings give up an asinine amount of picks to get Hershel Walker? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, btownqb said:

Is it like a Minnesota thing? Didn't the Vikings give up an asinine amount of picks to get Hershel Walker? 

Yes they did. Trades like that are usually awful in the NFL.

The Chargers/Giants example… I’m not sure any of these QBs are as good as Rivers and Eli were. I definitely don’t want to pay all the other stuff that the Giants did (Shawn Merriman plus two more guys) to move up for that. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

It is just my opinion but the Colts have to come away with either Young or Stroud in this draft. Staying at 4 I don't see getting either because other teams like the Raiders or Panthers will trade up to 1 or 3 or both.

I think being desperate is a bad way to operate as an organization. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IU Scott said:

It is funny people think giving up 2 1st round picks and a second round pick is to much to get the top pick. In basketball Minnesota gave up 5 1st round picks for Rudy Gobert who is over 30 years old

I will say the Lions got 2 1st round picks, a 3rd round pick AND Jared Goff for Stafford. When it comes to the NFL and getting the QB a team wants nothing shocks me. The Bears will get a haul. Maybe the Bears absolutely shock everyone and keep trading back and back and back and get a bigger haul. I mean our roster needs some serious attention. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Seeking6 said:

I will say the Lions got 2 1st round picks, a 3rd round pick AND Jared Goff for Stafford. When it comes to the NFL and getting the QB a team wants nothing shocks me. The Bears will get a haul. Maybe the Bears absolutely shock everyone and keep trading back and back and back and get a bigger haul. I mean our roster needs some serious attention. 

Stafford was a much more sure thing, for a team that just needed that sure thing, than anyone who hasn't thrown a pass in the NFL.

These QBs are good, not great, QB prospects. They could end up great of course, but some of ya'll (and this talk started with the Bears camp and has continued with the Bears camp) are talking about them like they're a higher level of prospect than they are. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, KoB2011 said:

I don't believe in any way, shape, or form that the Giants won those Super Bowls as a result of having Eli Manning instead of Phillip Rivers. 

That DL in the first was NASTY though. Or maybe it was the 2nd? lol idk. 

One of those years their DL was disgustingly dominant and easily the best DL the Pats had faced all year. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, btownqb said:

That DL in the first was NASTY though. Or maybe it was the 2nd? lol idk. 

One of those years their DL was disgustingly dominant and easily the best DL the Pats had faced all year. 

It was the first one I think, when the Pats were undefeated heading into the game.

But honestly the Eli/Rivers thing is all the reason I need to say don't make a trade like that. Eli is a HOFer, but there is really nothing you can point to that says he is better than Rivers at all. And then throw in the fact that they had to give up Merriman too, no way man. Keep pick 4.

Even if QB goes first 4 picks and not trading up means we get Richardson instead of Young, we don't honestly really know that Young is going to be better than Richardson. Why would you give up some really good assets for what is essentially a flip of the coin anyway?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

It was the first one I think, when the Pats were undefeated heading into the game.

But honestly the Eli/Rivers thing is all the reason I need to say don't make a trade like that. Eli is a HOFer, but there is really nothing you can point to that says he is better than Rivers at all. And then throw in the fact that they had to give up Merriman too, no way man. Keep pick 4.

Even if QB goes first 4 picks and not trading up means we get Richardson instead of Young, we don't honestly really know that Young is going to be better than Richardson. Why would you give up some really good assets for what is essentially a flip of the coin anyway?

I literally couldn't agree more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

Stafford was a much more sure thing, for a team that just needed that sure thing, than anyone who hasn't thrown a pass in the NFL.

These QBs are good, not great, QB prospects. They could end up great of course, but some of ya'll (and this talk started with the Bears camp and has continued with the Bears camp) are talking about them like they're a higher level of prospect than they are. 

Agree and disagree. Never underestimate a teams desperation to overvalue in their thinking how important that one QB is. There are 5-6 GM's going I need to find that Mahomes (highly undervalued), Allen, Hurts, Burrow, or whomever, etc...

The league is desperate for getting the right QB. With desperation comes overpaying. Shoot if I were a diehard Colts fan I'd be demanding my team as a fan to do whatever it takes to get the QB they want given the years of limited success here recently. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Seeking6 said:

Agree and disagree. Never underestimate a teams desperation to overvalue in their thinking how important that one QB is. There are 5-6 GM's going I need to find that Mahomes (highly undervalued), Allen, Hurts, Burrow, or whomever, etc...

The league is desperate for getting the right QB. With desperation comes overpaying. Shoot if I were a diehard Colts fan I'd be demanding my team as a fan to do whatever it takes to get the QB they want given the years of limited success here recently. 

That's interesting. If I were a Bears fan, I'd be demanding they take Anderson or Carter, because that's the next most important thing and they desperately need it.

From my perspective the biggest mistake any GM can make in this upcoming draft would be the Bears getting too greedy and missing on one of those two guys, because those two are probably the most "sure thing" in the draft and are at a position of great need for the Bears.

The next biggest mistake would be for any of the QB needy GMs to go all in and miss. You can recover from picking the wrong guy, it's much harder to recover from mortgaging the future for the wrong guy. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

That's interesting. If I were a Bears fan, I'd be demanding they take Anderson or Carter, because that's the next most important thing and they desperately need it.

From my perspective the biggest mistake any GM can make in this upcoming draft would be the Bears getting too greedy and missing on one of those two guys, because those two are probably the most "sure thing" in the draft and are at a position of great need for the Bears.

The next biggest mistake would be for any of the QB needy GMs to go all in and miss. You can recover from picking the wrong guy, it's much harder to recover from mortgaging the future for the wrong guy. 

The Bears have about 10 needs along both lines, wide receivers, linebackers, etc..... Do I think Anderson or Carter are Aaron Donald? No I don't. Especially on Carter. I'd rather risk missing out on those 2 while gathering picks and bodies....because of how many holes we have.

With that said Do I want us to miss out on those two though? No....but in weighing the which is worse department I'd easily say a team missing out on QB is far greater RISK vs the Bears missing out on Anderson or Carter. That's where the overpaying will happen.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Seeking6 said:

The Bears have about 10 needs along both lines, wide receivers, linebackers, etc..... Do I think Anderson or Carter are Aaron Donald? No I don't. Especially on Carter. I'd rather risk missing out on those 2 while gathering picks and bodies....because of how many holes we have.

With that said Do I want us to miss out on those two though? No....but in weighing the which is worse department I'd easily say a team missing out on QB is far greater RISK vs the Bears missing out on Anderson or Carter. That's where the overpaying will happen.

 

You've done a great job of laying out why what you want is great for the Bears, no doubt. I've still not really seen a compelling reason the Colts (or any other team) is going to give a boatload of assets to move up.

I mean if you honestly believe that Young is this good, you must be a little miffed the Bears aren't considering taking him right? If you think a guy like Fields is good enough at QB, then you can see why teams would be okay to wait around on Stroud, Levis, or Richardson.... 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

You've done a great job of laying out why what you want is great for the Bears, no doubt. I've still not really seen a compelling reason the Colts (or any other team) is going to give a boatload of assets to move up.

I mean if you honestly believe that Young is this good, you must be a little miffed the Bears aren't considering taking him right? If you think a guy like Fields is good enough at QB, then you can see why teams would be okay to wait around on Stroud, Levis, or Richardson.... 

Oh I absolutely get the poker game that's going on right now. Shoot for all I know Ballard had his buddy LaCanafora float the story today saying the Bears are open to trading Fields. 

And it's not that I think Young is that good...I believe Fields plus picks and bodies is better than just Young. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Seeking6 said:

And it's not that I think Young is that good...I believe Fields plus picks and bodies is better than just Young. 

I think you just highlighted why some teams may not be eager to move up for Young. The other QBs plus those assets is probably better than Young by himself, it's the same equation you just gave for the Bears.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KoB2011 said:

It was the first one I think, when the Pats were undefeated heading into the game.

But honestly the Eli/Rivers thing is all the reason I need to say don't make a trade like that. Eli is a HOFer, but there is really nothing you can point to that says he is better than Rivers at all. And then throw in the fact that they had to give up Merriman too, no way man. Keep pick 4.

Even if QB goes first 4 picks and not trading up means we get Richardson instead of Young, we don't honestly really know that Young is going to be better than Richardson. Why would you give up some really good assets for what is essentially a flip of the coin anyway?

If the top 3 QB's are gone at #4 then I would pick DE Anderson and not Richardson if I were the Colts.  To me Richardson is going to be a work out wonder but has a big bust factor.

Edited by IU Scott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KoB2011 said:

That's interesting. If I were a Bears fan, I'd be demanding they take Anderson or Carter, because that's the next most important thing and they desperately need it.

From my perspective the biggest mistake any GM can make in this upcoming draft would be the Bears getting too greedy and missing on one of those two guys, because those two are probably the most "sure thing" in the draft and are at a position of great need for the Bears.

The next biggest mistake would be for any of the QB needy GMs to go all in and miss. You can recover from picking the wrong guy, it's much harder to recover from mortgaging the future for the wrong guy. 

I guess Jason Lacafora reported that GM's at the senior bowl thinks the Bears will trade Fields and draft the top QB. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

If the top 3 QB's are gone at #4 then I would pick DE Anderson and not Richardson if I were the Colts.  To me Richardson is going to be a work out wonder but has a big bust factor.

I will eat my shoe if QB is taken 1-3. 

5 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I guess Jason Lacafora reported that GM's at the senior bowl thinks the Bears will trade Fields and draft the top QB. 

Lots of people think lots of stuff. I don't think anyone really has a great pulse on what anyone is going to do right now. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...