Whether we get the first overall pick or not, I am of the opinion that we trade everything to get Luck. Having said that, if it comes down to a decision between Barkley, Jones or another who would be your choice? If other..... perhaps who?
Luck, Weeden, Tannehill, then and only then Barkley, Jones, and several others at #6 including RG3, depending which underclass actually declare. But top 2 for me as far as 100% ready from jump street are those 2, then Tannehill could be ready. After those Top 3, I am not as confident for any being ready come week 1 regular season for any of the Jr's that may declare, not by a large margin!
I totally agree, if we have any chance to trade for Luck, we need to take it. No matter what the price is.
It reminds me of the Indian epic "Mahabharata" in the sense of Arjuna having to decide to either have Krishna or all of his armies...
It's a tough one for me. I'd love Brandon Weeden. One of the most complete quarterbacks out there and showed it again tonight even in a tough loss.
Three picks at the college level against a team who had never beat a team ranked higher than a seventh ranked team. Weeden laid the proverbial egg.
Yes, I agree, for a person that didn't actually watch the game it may appear that way. Luckily NFL scouts don't scout off the stat line like you do.
I didn't like the 'mentally handicapped expression' Weeden had on his face the entire 4th quarter and OT. Looked like he was stunned that he could be beat by a bunch of kids.
Weeden isn't a bad option if we can get him late in the 1st round or later. The rookie salary cap makes it a much more palatable option to take an older Qb, we don't have to destroy our cap to take a Qb. The NFL draft is going to change because of the rookie salary cap, if it hasn't already. Taking a Qb in the first round is much easier against the cap and a much more likely gamble than before. Having to guarantee a guy between 20 and 50 million to play Qb is much different than 5 to 20 million with the salary cap. Weeden is going in the first 2 rounds despite his age IMO. He played pretty good against Iowa State, his defense laid the egg IMHO.
Because 5+ years of great QB play is better than no years of great QB play? Pretty simple logic if you ask me.
Who we do or do not draft as QB is less important as who is or is not our head coach next year and who is on that coaching staff. To spend a first round draft pick on a quarterback...without having a high quality quarterbacks coach such as John Ramsdell makes about as much sense as an elevator in an outhouse.
The average of of the starting quarterback in a Super Bowl is 26.89 years of age Dree Brees was 31 Peyton Manning was 33 Kurt Warner was 37 Big Ben was 26 Tom Brady was 30 Eli Manning was 27
It seems to me alot of people want to spend a top 5 pick on a QB just because we need one, regardless of whether there is one worthy of it or not. Since we have played our way out of the Luck Sweepstakes, I think best move is to trade for Matt Flynn (or sign him he could be an FA, not sure) and draft BPA (Justin Blackmon). We have plenty of holes to fill on this team. We don't have to reach for a QB at pick 2 or 3.
To me the difference is, all those guys you mentioned (Rapelisberger excluded) had all been in the league for a few years before winning. By the time Weeden gets used the speed of the NFL and ready to lead someone to the Super Bowl he'd be 33 or 34. And that's not even bothering with the debate about whether or not he's the next Chris Weinke.
I was being sarcastic more than anything. I'm not a fan of Weeden. I find your posts...interesting. It seems that you're of the mindset, with all the quarterback talent coming out in next year's draft that there's only one quarterback that's worth drafting and all others are garbage. I find that hard to believe and am willing to wager that Luck will not see NFL success before any of the others that come out. I reference you to the infamous Class of '83...where the LAST quarterback taken in the first round of that draft...Daniel Constantine Marino.....was the FIRST to go to the Super Bowl, not Elway, not Blackledge, not O'Brien, not Kelly, not Eason....the LAST one drafted. As analytical as I find some of your posts...your close mindedness on talent such a Jones, Barkely or Weeden completely negates your analytical objectivity. If you truly believe that Luck is THE only QB worth drafting and anyone else is a draft, you're far from objective. I said all the way back in July before anyone even started talking about the draft and QB's, I believe Landry Jones is going to be the next QB stud in the NFL. I could indeed be wrong, but somehow I don't think I am.
I'm still flabbergasted over the love affair with Luck after the game against Oregon. I argued in another thread waaaay back when that Stanford's schedule helps make Luck good...that Stanford plays....NOBODY!!! Luck goes against the number 8 ranked team in the nation and...LOSES. Put some true competition in front of him and he folded!! That's why my pick is Jones. OU plays a MUCH tougher schedule...had 5 ranked teams on said schedule and beat every one of them. One's been battle tested and prevailed. One was battle tested and failed. Andrew Luck...in my opinion...is going to be another Matt Leinart, overrated, undertested and ultimately...going to fail.
I think you're on an island there with your opinion on Luck. As for Jones, my concern is that he falls apart when pressured. In the NFL, he will be pressured and if he doesn't learn to handle it better than he has, he will fail. Jones has all the physical tools you could want, but that alone isn't enough.
Was Roger Staubach too old to join the Cowboys at age 28 years old? Was Jim Kelly too old to join the Bills just shy of 27 years old? Was Kurt Warner too old to be a valuable addition to the Rams at 28 years old? Was Warren Moon too old to be a valuable addition to the Houston Oilers at 28 years old? These are guys that played like 8 to 13 years in the NFL each, made 24 Pro Bowls between them. This age thing...people are making way too big a deal out of it. Your PRIMARY concern should be the talent. In this day and age if you're an NFL head coach or general manager, you can't worry about the great conundrum of having to replace Brandon Weeden a "mere" 6 years from now. You might be off the team 2 years from now, if you don't win. I'll take that Year 6 conundrum any day of the week, twice on Sunday. Now if you are concerned about the talent, that's fine. He plays in an Air Raid offense. As Alen has stated, there's a little bit of bad history of Air Raid quarterbacks in the NFL. But when I watch him I don't see a limited talent guy that's playing in a beneficial offense. I see a fantastic talent that could do whatever you want in any offense.
Yeah people are balking at his age like he's a RB or something. He could be in the league ten years. I say what's wrong with that if he's got what it takes.
Falls apart??? Jones vs 5 nationally ranked teams....5-0 (and breaking school records at the same time) Luck vs 1 nationally ranked team....0-1 One is winning against nationally ranked competition...and one is winning against teams that are scrimmage worthy. We'll just have to disagree there Rafael. You have your opinion...I have mine.
And unlike those guys, we're now in a time where QBs are protected at an unprecedented level. The number of hits (especially big hits) that a QB will take over his career will be much lower for a QB entering the league now than it would have been 5 or 10 years ago. It seems reasonable to conclude that QB longevity could increase going forward.
Landy Jones....0-1 vs Texas Tech this year. He disappointed in that game. Btw, Peyton Manning was known for not winning the big game in college and he turned out alright.
We'll agree to disagree, but understand that I'm not talking about team records. That is far too dependent on the surrounding talent and other factors. I'm talking about the QB's individual play. I had Jones rated higher early on, but as I watched his games, I noticed that when pressured his play (accuracy and decision making) dropped off considerably. Far more than the other QBs I listed above him. That's a major red flag for me. I'm not ready to say he will be a bust or anything, but it is a concern.
Exactly, we are seeing QBs protected and at the moment it would lead us to believe they will last longer. But then, that's just a theory. There could be more chess moves to be made on that front. For instance, Bill Parcells brought up earlier this year, there's been a dramatic shift to spread type principles which typically see QBs getting hit more. He brought up how much Sam Bradford was getting hit. We saw first hand how much Chad Henne got hit. I think there are several QBs out there that if you tracked how often they're getting hit on PFF, it would be alarming relative to the rate we saw QBs getting hit a year ago. So it could be that the greater protection has induced sort of a one-upsmanship of coaches putting QBs at greater risk, because they know there's greater protection, and it's hard to know where the equilibrium will come out on that. Either way, even if we don't assume ANY change to how much the QBs get hit and stuff...we're talking about four guys that entered the league at similar ages and played in the league 8 to 13 years or even longer (I think Moon played longer). They made plenty of Pro Bowls between them, appeared in plenty of Super Bowls, have been elected to the Hall of Fame (or will be, in the case of Kurt Warner) and I heavily doubt that if you ask fans of their team in retrospect if they would have given up a 1st round pick for anyo one of them, the answer would be "no".
While I agree that at minimum, if we assume nothing changes, that getting a good QB even as late as 29 has incredible value. But in regards to the hits, I think the bigger factor is the big hits. I always felt that the hits where you're driven into the ground were the worst b/c your body had no ability to give. IMO those are the hits that shorten careers. Those hits are so much less common now. I watch those D-lineman pull up most of the time now (Von Miller didn't the other night, but most do) and I know just a few years ago those QBs would probably have been out of the game or at a minimum spending a few more hours in the ice tub.
Aaron Rodger's had a bad last game at Cal in a bowl game nonetheless. Peyton Manning choked against Florida 3 straight times at Tennesee, throwing 4 picks in the 1996 game. But hey, if you want to use that and stats to make opinions on QB's instead of gametape, be my guest. In the end, you'll be the one wondering what happened when Jones is a backup in 5 years down the road and Luck is a pro bowler. And saying Jones plays a MUCH tougher schedule is quite a reach. The defenses he goes up against are no better than the ones Luck goes up against, that's for sure.
I don't think they are garbage at all. I'm just not sure I'd take any QB outside of Luck in Top 3-4. My main point is I'd way rather take a sure stud (Blackmon) with our top 3 pick and invest a mid round pick (or nothing at all) on Matt Flynn, who IMO, is no more of a risk then Weeden/Barkley/Jones. I'm by no means an expert, but here are my main concerns with the QB's we could take in the top 3-5. Weeden: Age. I really don't want to invest a top 3-5 pick on the QB who is on the wrong side of 30. Barkley: My fear is he is just the next Sanchez/Booty/Leinart. USC starters in 2000's. None of them inspire me. Jones: I know he's your personally fav. But I'm afraid he is a system QB who could stuggle in the NFL. Like I said, I'm no expert, but this is where I currently stand with what to do with our first pick.
We're probably drafting in the top 3 tho. So if we want Weeden that's where we'll have to draft him. Unless we trade down.
I think we'll be drafting around #8 or #9, personally. I really foresee us winning another 3 or 4 games... this team has confidence (after winning 2 in a row) and is playing their hearts out.
I would guess that Luck will go first overall, Barkley and Jones will go in the top five, Tannehill will end up top 10 and Weedon will go top 20. I would be fine taking Luck at #1 or trading up for him. I think Barkley and Weedon are worth top 5 picks. I think Tannehill and Jones are worth a top 10 - 15 picks. Jones is the only one that I see over rated relative to where I expect them to go. I still see Jones as most likely a very god pro, but I see his struggles with pressure as a red flag that increases the risk with him significantly.
It amazes me how many people want to trade up for Luck. Regardless of how good he is, to get him at this point we would need to trade our entire draft. We have way too many gaps to trade away our entire draft for 1 player and we would be worse off for doing it. I would have been happy with drafting Luck if we had the first pick, but the price will just be way too high and if we do it I will probably be more pissed off than when we drafted Pat White, at least then we only lost 1 draft pick. The one thing we should all be in agreement on is no draft pick is a lock, especially a quarterback. I'm not sold on Weeden's age either, but not because of how long he could play in the NFL. Bodies and minds mature a significant amount between 21 and 28. This maturity is significant for the quarterback position, and a quarterback is going to look better when he is 28 than when they are 21. Weinke/Beck/Weeden all looked better than their peers in college football because they were better at that time; but once they moved up to the NFL, they didn't have the growth potential that other NFL quarterbacks go through because of their age.
