Jeremiah Mock Draft 2.0

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"purplefaithful" said: Daniels at 6 would be surprising to put it mildly...Not everyone sees it the same, but I can absolutely see top 4 gone well b4 pick 11. 

If, big if...Kirk doesn't sign with us, you have to hope it's Atlanta to remove them from possibly drafting a QB as a team picking before us

why does that prevent them from going QB?   It shouldnt have prevented us from going QB after we drafted him, and shouldnt prevent them from taking a QB if they resign him ( well it should as they would be going all in and could use the pick better elsewhere,  but you get the drift.)

Because what is going to move Cousins from Minnesota to Atlanta (or whoever) is term length. 

and they are going to sign him to a contract that is longer than that of a first round rookie?  no way in hell,  despite your insistence that age is irrelevant,  Kirk is not going to last forever and every GM out there knows that he has a shelf life and should be ( should have been ) planning for his replacement already.  I would say its all about guaranteed money,  regardless of the length of contract,  and if ATL has the cap space and the team ready to contend,  why wouldnt they want to grab a QB to mentor under KC in the event the he isnt superman and is going to decline?

I don't know what you mean by a contract longer than that of a 1st round rookie. Am I misreading that? Or do you really think we're talking about 5 year deals here? 

Vikings are probably agreeable to 2 years. Cousins likely wants 3. Whoever is able to pull Cousins from Minnesota is going to do it by guaranteeing money in a 3rd year. If Atlanta signs Cousins for 3 years, it's extremely unlikely they're going to draft a QB at 8. 

why wouldnt they?  If Cousins goes there and things go as planned,  there are not likely to be drafting at 8 again in the near future, so if you take a first round QB and get 3 cheap years and 2 higher cost years out of him,  and you only sign Kirk for 3 years... how does that not work out for a team that is only a QB away from contending ( sound familiar ? )?

point is,  having a starting QB shouldnt preclude a team from making a real investment in the future,  failure to do so is exactly why the Vikings are in the shit boat they currently are in.  If I am ATL and one of the young QBs sparks and interest and he is available ( even with a trade up ) then I would think that is a perfect scenario,  your QB of today has the team in contention,  while the QB of the future learns from him.  Would have been ideal for us if they had gotten after QBs a few years ago instead of drafting and trading picks for immediate enjoyment.

Because the compulsion to add surround to their new investment will be too strong. At #8 they will likely be looking at the 2nd best WR and the very best defensive player in the draft. Could they draft the 4th or 5th best QB there and put him behind Kirk?? Sure, anything's possible. I just don't think it's very likely, given what we know about them.

The only reason we're even talking about those QBs in the top 8 is mostly due to urgency and desperation on the part of several QB-needy teams. An urgency that will not be there with Atlanta. What's more, part of their appeal to Cousins will be that they have the 8th overall pick to fortify his surround. You can pretty safely bet it will be used in negotiations. 

2 things IMO:

• If Atlanta signs Cousins, they won't draft a QB at #8.
• I think New England definitely will draft a QB unless Harrison falls to them. Doesn't matter what their state of talent is if they like a QB. But if they don't love a guy, then don't....because they'll probably be drafting top 5 again next year.

@"StickyBun" said: 2 things IMO:

• If Atlanta signs Cousins, they won't draft a QB at #8.
• I think New England definitely will draft a QB unless Harrison falls to them. Doesn't matter what their state of talent is if they like a QB. But if they don't love a guy, then don't....because they'll probably be drafting top 5 again next year.

Pats pick 3rd, I think there is a 98% (I did the math:) that Harrison is available.  

Spotrac has him valued at close to 40 million per year for a 3 year contract and I want no part of that dollar amount or years.

I would be happy with a 2 year 75-80 million and then draft a first round QB to groom.  

I am concerned that Kirk will not be 100% very soon if ever again.  It is a risky move for a 3rd year GM.

I think now is the time to set a new direction with a much cheaper bridge vet QB and a rookie and sign all of our young studs - Hunter, Darrisaw, JJ

But I also don't think we are that close to contending for a SB.  

@"minny65" said:

@"StickyBun" said: 2 things IMO:

• If Atlanta signs Cousins, they won't draft a QB at #8.
• I think New England definitely will draft a QB unless Harrison falls to them. Doesn't matter what their state of talent is if they like a QB. But if they don't love a guy, then don't....because they'll probably be drafting top 5 again next year.

Pats pick 3rd, I think there is a 98% (I did the math:) that Harrison is available.  

Spotrac has him valued at close to 40 million per year for a 3 year contract and I want no part of that dollar amount or years.

I would be happy with a 2 year 75-80 million and then draft a first round QB to groom.  

I am concerned that Kirk will not be 100% very soon if ever again.  It is a risky move for a 3rd year GM.

I think now is the time to set a new direction with a much cheaper bridge vet QB and a rookie and sign all of our young studs - Hunter, Darrisaw, JJ

But I also don't think we are that close to contending for a SB.  

@"supafreak84" said:

Harrison will absolutely be there at #3, but I have a hard time believing the Patriots won't take a QB there, especially after they just witnessed the impact CJ Stroud had in Houston for a first year coach (who also happens to be a former LB). Also hearing a lot of talk on NFL Radio that Mac Jones has lost the locker room and will likely be on the move this offseason. Pats need a lot, but a good QB can cover a lot of stink and I think that's the direction they go in first. 

Everything has definitely pointed to NE going QB, however I have a feeling by draft time they may pivot, while Caleb Williams could be a generational talent, Maye and Daniels could potentially be Zack Wilson, both are far from being sure things, I think when they start getting some insane offers for the pick that they will seriously consider trading down and using the picks to totally rebuild their roster and then maybe go with a guy like Penix with their high 2nd round pick. I think Daniels is more likely the guy at 3 who I think is pretty risky at that spot, personally I would rather have a boatload of picks to build my roster and someone like Penix.

@"JR44" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

Harrison will absolutely be there at #3, but I have a hard time believing the Patriots won't take a QB there, especially after they just witnessed the impact CJ Stroud had in Houston for a first year coach (who also happens to be a former LB). Also hearing a lot of talk on NFL Radio that Mac Jones has lost the locker room and will likely be on the move this offseason. Pats need a lot, but a good QB can cover a lot of stink and I think that's the direction they go in first. 

Everything has definitely pointed to NE going QB, however I have a feeling by draft time they may pivot, while Caleb Williams could be a generational talent, Maye and Daniels could potentially be Zack Wilson, both are far from being sure things, I think when they start getting some insane offers for the pick that they will seriously consider trading down and using the picks to totally rebuild their roster and then maybe go with a guy like Penix with their high 2nd round pick. I think Daniels is more likely the guy at 3 who I think is pretty risky at that spot, personally I would rather have a boatload of picks to build my roster and someone like Penix.

@"pattersaur" said:

@"JR44" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

Harrison will absolutely be there at #3, but I have a hard time believing the Patriots won't take a QB there, especially after they just witnessed the impact CJ Stroud had in Houston for a first year coach (who also happens to be a former LB). Also hearing a lot of talk on NFL Radio that Mac Jones has lost the locker room and will likely be on the move this offseason. Pats need a lot, but a good QB can cover a lot of stink and I think that's the direction they go in first. 

Everything has definitely pointed to NE going QB, however I have a feeling by draft time they may pivot, while Caleb Williams could be a generational talent, Maye and Daniels could potentially be Zack Wilson, both are far from being sure things, I think when they start getting some insane offers for the pick that they will seriously consider trading down and using the picks to totally rebuild their roster and then maybe go with a guy like Penix with their high 2nd round pick. I think Daniels is more likely the guy at 3 who I think is pretty risky at that spot, personally I would rather have a boatload of picks to build my roster and someone like Penix.

A mock someone posted the other day had us trading our 2024, '25, and '26 firsts for their third overall pick. If KAM truly offered that I have to think New England would accept it over taking the #3 QB available.

@"supafreak84" said:

@"pattersaur" said:

@"JR44" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

Harrison will absolutely be there at #3, but I have a hard time believing the Patriots won't take a QB there, especially after they just witnessed the impact CJ Stroud had in Houston for a first year coach (who also happens to be a former LB). Also hearing a lot of talk on NFL Radio that Mac Jones has lost the locker room and will likely be on the move this offseason. Pats need a lot, but a good QB can cover a lot of stink and I think that's the direction they go in first. 

Everything has definitely pointed to NE going QB, however I have a feeling by draft time they may pivot, while Caleb Williams could be a generational talent, Maye and Daniels could potentially be Zack Wilson, both are far from being sure things, I think when they start getting some insane offers for the pick that they will seriously consider trading down and using the picks to totally rebuild their roster and then maybe go with a guy like Penix with their high 2nd round pick. I think Daniels is more likely the guy at 3 who I think is pretty risky at that spot, personally I would rather have a boatload of picks to build my roster and someone like Penix.

A mock someone posted the other day had us trading our 2024, '25, and '26 firsts for their third overall pick. If KAM truly offered that I have to think New England would accept it over taking the #3 QB available.

Three first round picks to move up 8 spots would be brutal 

ESPN Draft analyst Matt Miller just came out with an article where he identifies only 16 prospects with "true first round grades" this year. Of the 16 are the top 3 QB prospects (doesn't consider the rest to have true first round grades). Dallas Turner and Jared Verse are the only edges. Byron Murphy the only DT. 

I’m not super paying attention to draft prospects anymore,
but I think I would rather draft whoever the best QB available is at our pick for
each of the next 3 years than spend 3 firsts to get the 3rd best QB
in this draft.

@"medaille" said: I’m not super paying attention to draft prospects anymore, but I think I would rather draft whoever the best QB available is at our pick for each of the next 3 years than spend 3 firsts to get the 3rd best QB in this draft.

Interesting if impractical strategy. I’d be fascinated to see a team try this someday. More likely by year 3 the GM who’s drafted two QBs deemed worthy of being upgraded in back to back years, would be looking for a job and not a third quarterback. 

EDIT: Draft Day 2 with Costner, anyone?

@"pattersaur" said:

@"medaille" said: I’m not super paying attention to draft prospects anymore, but I think I would rather draft whoever the best QB available is at our pick for each of the next 3 years than spend 3 firsts to get the 3rd best QB in this draft.

Interesting if impractical strategy. I’d be fascinated to see a team try this someday. More likely by year 3 the GM who’s drafted two QBs deemed worthy of being upgraded in back to back years, would be looking for a job and not a third quarterback. 

EDIT: Draft Day 2 with Costner, anyone?

@"medaille" said:

@"pattersaur" said:

@"medaille" said: I’m not super paying attention to draft prospects anymore, but I think I would rather draft whoever the best QB available is at our pick for each of the next 3 years than spend 3 firsts to get the 3rd best QB in this draft.

Interesting if impractical strategy. I’d be fascinated to see a team try this someday. More likely by year 3 the GM who’s drafted two QBs deemed worthy of being upgraded in back to back years, would be looking for a job and not a third quarterback. 

EDIT: Draft Day 2 with Costner, anyone?

The point of my statement was that spending 3 first round
draft picks to get the 3rd best QB in the draft was more dumb than
spending 3 consecutive first round picks on QBs.  That said, I strongly believe that your
chance of quality QB play is higher with more “good” prospects than it is with
one “better” swing, but 3 QBs back to back to back is probably excessive.  That said, I think the strategy wouldn’t be “replacing
failed QBs” as much as it would be “Take 3 and keep the best and trade the rest”

Looking at the Bears.  Assuming they take Williams or another QB, are
we thinking it’s because “Fields is a failed QB” and that the GM that took him
is a failure or are we thinking that “Williams is a potentially game changing
option and they can still get value out of Fields” and the GM is smart?

@"medaille" said:

@"pattersaur" said:

@"medaille" said: I’m not super paying attention to draft prospects anymore, but I think I would rather draft whoever the best QB available is at our pick for each of the next 3 years than spend 3 firsts to get the 3rd best QB in this draft.

Interesting if impractical strategy. I’d be fascinated to see a team try this someday. More likely by year 3 the GM who’s drafted two QBs deemed worthy of being upgraded in back to back years, would be looking for a job and not a third quarterback. 

EDIT: Draft Day 2 with Costner, anyone?

The point of my statement was that spending 3 first round
draft picks to get the 3rd best QB in the draft was more dumb than
spending 3 consecutive first round picks on QBs.  That said, I strongly believe that your
chance of quality QB play is higher with more “good” prospects than it is with
one “better” swing, but 3 QBs back to back to back is probably excessive.  That said, I think the strategy wouldn’t be “replacing
failed QBs” as much as it would be “Take 3 and keep the best and trade the rest”

Looking at the Bears.  Assuming they take Williams or another QB, are
we thinking it’s because “Fields is a failed QB” and that the GM that took him
is a failure or are we thinking that “Williams is a potentially game changing
option and they can still get value out of Fields” and the GM is smart?

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"medaille" said:

@"pattersaur" said:

@"medaille" said: I’m not super paying attention to draft prospects anymore, but I think I would rather draft whoever the best QB available is at our pick for each of the next 3 years than spend 3 firsts to get the 3rd best QB in this draft.

Interesting if impractical strategy. I’d be fascinated to see a team try this someday. More likely by year 3 the GM who’s drafted two QBs deemed worthy of being upgraded in back to back years, would be looking for a job and not a third quarterback. 

EDIT: Draft Day 2 with Costner, anyone?

The point of my statement was that spending 3 first round
draft picks to get the 3rd best QB in the draft was more dumb than
spending 3 consecutive first round picks on QBs.  That said, I strongly believe that your
chance of quality QB play is higher with more “good” prospects than it is with
one “better” swing, but 3 QBs back to back to back is probably excessive.  That said, I think the strategy wouldn’t be “replacing
failed QBs” as much as it would be “Take 3 and keep the best and trade the rest”

Looking at the Bears.  Assuming they take Williams or another QB, are
we thinking it’s because “Fields is a failed QB” and that the GM that took him
is a failure or are we thinking that “Williams is a potentially game changing
option and they can still get value out of Fields” and the GM is smart?

I'm game! Get KAM on the phone and make it happen.

@"supafreak84" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"medaille" said:

@"pattersaur" said:

@"medaille" said: I’m not super paying attention to draft prospects anymore, but I think I would rather draft whoever the best QB available is at our pick for each of the next 3 years than spend 3 firsts to get the 3rd best QB in this draft.

Interesting if impractical strategy. I’d be fascinated to see a team try this someday. More likely by year 3 the GM who’s drafted two QBs deemed worthy of being upgraded in back to back years, would be looking for a job and not a third quarterback. 

EDIT: Draft Day 2 with Costner, anyone?

The point of my statement was that spending 3 first round
draft picks to get the 3rd best QB in the draft was more dumb than
spending 3 consecutive first round picks on QBs.  That said, I strongly believe that your
chance of quality QB play is higher with more “good” prospects than it is with
one “better” swing, but 3 QBs back to back to back is probably excessive.  That said, I think the strategy wouldn’t be “replacing
failed QBs” as much as it would be “Take 3 and keep the best and trade the rest”

Looking at the Bears.  Assuming they take Williams or another QB, are
we thinking it’s because “Fields is a failed QB” and that the GM that took him
is a failure or are we thinking that “Williams is a potentially game changing
option and they can still get value out of Fields” and the GM is smart?

I'm game! Get KAM on the phone and make it happen.

KAM is tied up on line 1 seeing if he can get Brad Holmes to move up to #11 for a whopper with cheese and a fancy new purple tie

@"supafreak84" said:

@"medaille" said:

@"pattersaur" said:

@"medaille" said: I’m not super paying attention to draft prospects anymore, but I think I would rather draft whoever the best QB available is at our pick for each of the next 3 years than spend 3 firsts to get the 3rd best QB in this draft.

Interesting if impractical strategy. I’d be fascinated to see a team try this someday. More likely by year 3 the GM who’s drafted two QBs deemed worthy of being upgraded in back to back years, would be looking for a job and not a third quarterback. 

EDIT: Draft Day 2 with Costner, anyone?

The point of my statement was that spending 3 first round
draft picks to get the 3rd best QB in the draft was more dumb than
spending 3 consecutive first round picks on QBs.  That said, I strongly believe that your
chance of quality QB play is higher with more “good” prospects than it is with
one “better” swing, but 3 QBs back to back to back is probably excessive.  That said, I think the strategy wouldn’t be “replacing
failed QBs” as much as it would be “Take 3 and keep the best and trade the rest”

Looking at the Bears.  Assuming they take Williams or another QB, are
we thinking it’s because “Fields is a failed QB” and that the GM that took him
is a failure or are we thinking that “Williams is a potentially game changing
option and they can still get value out of Fields” and the GM is smart?

The Bears have worked their rebuild into the absolute best case scenario. I think they draft Williams, flip Fields to Vegas or Pittsburgh for more picks, and take either Rome Odunze or Brock Bowers at #9. They are going to put young weapons around Williams that he can grow with and use free agency to address defense. If that team isn't much better next season, I'd be shocked

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"medaille" said:

@"pattersaur" said:

@"medaille" said: I’m not super paying attention to draft prospects anymore, but I think I would rather draft whoever the best QB available is at our pick for each of the next 3 years than spend 3 firsts to get the 3rd best QB in this draft.

Interesting if impractical strategy. I’d be fascinated to see a team try this someday. More likely by year 3 the GM who’s drafted two QBs deemed worthy of being upgraded in back to back years, would be looking for a job and not a third quarterback. 

EDIT: Draft Day 2 with Costner, anyone?

The point of my statement was that spending 3 first round
draft picks to get the 3rd best QB in the draft was more dumb than
spending 3 consecutive first round picks on QBs.  That said, I strongly believe that your
chance of quality QB play is higher with more “good” prospects than it is with
one “better” swing, but 3 QBs back to back to back is probably excessive.  That said, I think the strategy wouldn’t be “replacing
failed QBs” as much as it would be “Take 3 and keep the best and trade the rest”

Looking at the Bears.  Assuming they take Williams or another QB, are
we thinking it’s because “Fields is a failed QB” and that the GM that took him
is a failure or are we thinking that “Williams is a potentially game changing
option and they can still get value out of Fields” and the GM is smart?

The Bears have worked their rebuild into the absolute best case scenario. I think they draft Williams, flip Fields to Vegas or Pittsburgh for more picks, and take either Rome Odunze or Brock Bowers at #9. They are going to put young weapons around Williams that he can grow with and use free agency to address defense. If that team isn't much better next season, I'd be shocked

The Bears are going to get better. As Poles says, they are making progress. There's no doubt about that. 

But it's all about the QB.  And they still don't have that. I liken it to building a car, where Poles has added some nice features...a great suspension, frame and tires, but there's no engine. 

They'll probably draft Caleb Williams, who looks like a generational talent, and if he is, look out for the Bears. But we've seen players like this fail before. The last five QBs taken #1 overall have been Baker Mayfield, Kyler Murray, Joe Burrow, Trevor Lawrence and Bryce Young. Lawrence and Burrow are both hits, but many are now questioning Lawrence, and Burrow has had his season end due to injury twice in four seasons.