Recommended Posts

53 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

Yes and No.  During this time before the draft pretty much every team within the top of the draft have said the same thing.  Giants, Browns, Broncos, and us.  It is because you are always going to try and drive the market up.  Would you take Chubb for sure, or would you entertain having the 12, 22, a second, and next year 1st or 2nd?  I mean you might have every hope to grab Chubb but if a team throws you everything you have to listen.  Still no guarantee CB takes any deal and just goes for Chubb.  But he is doing what everyone does at this time and drives up the value.  Pair teams against each other.  I will say this though...personally I believe we stay at #6 because teams moving up might look at Denver and Cle.

The Browns, Giants, Broncos, and Colts all have starting QB's.  The Browns just traded for one and the Broncos acquired one.  Of course they are open to drafting one if someone is there they really want but it's not like they all have to draft one with their 1st. pick.  We are probably the only one that is in the best *ition long term assuming Luck returns healthy.  So it makes sense they all would be interested in trading back and open to offers.  I think they would all take more picks in lieu of one of the top three field players especially if they received a good offer from a team that needs a QB like Buffalo.  It will be interesting to see how this plays out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how its wishful thinking to think the Giants would take a QB at #2?  If that happened then I could see Chubb falling to 6 because he and Barkley will be on the board at the same time when the Browns pick at #4.  I think the Browns pick Barkley out of the 2.   Seems like Broncos are going to end up trading out of the pick to somebody looking for a QB so that team won't pick a pass rusher either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

I just don't see Chubb falling to the Colts. I'm trying, but I just can't. 

I hear you. I've been trying to be *itive but the more I listen to Baker Mayfield the more I hear a guy that is trying WAY WAY to hard to talk himself up into that top 5 picks. I just don't see it. His attitude is off putting...his size is worrisome....I'm thinking more and more he falls into the 10-20 range. I honestly think NY should trade out and get a haul from Buffalo. Like two firsts this year and a future first next year. Buffalo leap frogs the Jets and gets their guy. NY still has a win now window I think of a 2-3 years with Eli. He isn't elite of course but with a supporting cast he can make enough plays to win you games. Stock up some OL help, ER, and RB and take another swing at it. Or stay put and draft Barkley and transition away from OBJ like Dallas did from Dez. Taking a qb though pretty much defeats the purpose of signing Solder who will only have a couple more prime years at LT anyways. I think they are trying to make a run now at it....and moving back would give them the ammo to do it....and possibly have a high pick in Buffalo's next year to use on a qb if they choose to move on from Eli.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, richard pallo said:

 For the Broncos and Colts to both being open to trading back tells me neither team team views the top rated players as absolute must haves. They would rather have more picks.  

 

I had read a while back where the Bucs trade to get JPP gives them ability to trade down too. Yeah, here...

 

https://www.floridafootballinsiders.com/buccaneers/trading-for-pierre-paul-now-allows-bucs-flexibility-to-trade-down-in-draft/

 

Today I heard him on NFL radio saying they have been entertaining offers... no details.

 

16 hours ago, DougDew said:

Yeah.  They never were in the QB market after they signed Keenum. 

 

And they still have High Ceiling (stuck on ground floor) Paxton Lynch they are trying to develop.

 

Quote

And yes, no reason why Cleveland or Denver wouldn't trade out of 4 or 5. 

 

And, as above, the Bucs at #7...

 

Quote

The idea that any team is going to turn down multiple picks to select Chubb, Barkley, or Nelson is laughable.

 

Hmmm...  arguable.  Dave Gettleman himself said when you have a chance to draft a Gold Jacket, you don't pass on it.

 

All this buzz is interesting, but this month is, as Gild Brandt puts it,  NFL month.  National Football Liars month.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see the Giants trading down from #2, because they will want too much and won't settle for what the Bills (or anyone else) will offer. I also don't see the NYG picking Chubb because he is a 4-3 DE and they are switching to a 3-4 defense in 2018. That's one of the reasons why they got rid of JPP. He does not fit their new scheme as an OLB. The Giants also could use Barkley more, especially to team up with Eli. However, rumor has it that they really want Sam Darnold (who is the consensus #1 QB in this draft) and know that Cleveland wants Barkley, but won't pick him first. So in order for the Giants to get Darnold and the Browns to get a QB and Barkley, Cleveland will have to reassure the Giants by picking a QB other than Darnold #1, then Darnold goes to to the NYG #2, the Jets pick a QB at #3 and Barkley goes to the Browns at #4. Then there is the Broncos at #5, who I see as the real wild card. They might pick a QB if the right one is there. They may trade down with the Bills (most likely) so they can get their QB or, worse case scenario for us, they pick Chubb. That's how I see the first 5 picks going down.

If Chubb is gone, then we pick either Edmunds or Smith. We won't be able to trade down to 11 or 12, because both of these LBs will be gone by then. However, if CB could settle for someone like LVE, then maybe a trade with the Bills for the 4th best QB would be possible.

Whatever happens, we must get quality LBs (more than one), a starting WR opposite TY, a good RB to compliment Mack and one or two O-lineman. Because of what we saw with CB picking Basham last year, I think we may be targeting one or more pass rushers in the latter rounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have went back and forth on this, but I don't want Barkley at 6 if he's there.  I don't think he can be that every down back that gives us tough yards and dynamic play making ability.  I am not sure he plays with a tough enough mentality and I believe we can get what we need in the 2nd.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Clem-Dog said:

 The premise of your scenario is quite similar to the time Polian traded up for Ugoh except he gave up a late 2nd and 1st the following draft in order to obtain an early 2nd.  I'd do something similar with one of our early 2nds.

 

He actually traded up from the 4th round for Ugoh...using the following year's 1st rounder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, richard pallo said:

The Browns, Giants, Broncos, and Colts all have starting QB's.  The Browns just traded for one and the Broncos acquired one.  Of course they are open to drafting one if someone is there they really want but it's not like they all have to draft one with their 1st. pick.  We are probably the only one that is in the best *ition long term assuming Luck returns healthy.  So it makes sense they all would be interested in trading back and open to offers.  I think they would all take more picks in lieu of one of the top three field players especially if they received a good offer from a team that needs a QB like Buffalo.  It will be interesting to see how this plays out. 

It will be very interesting to see how everything unfolds for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Caleb Randolph said:

I still think the giants take Chubb. 

I think if the Giants don't take Chubb at #2 that the Browns will at #4.

If the Giants do take Chubb at #2 then the Browns will take Barkley at #4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.