We have our QB, and I wouldn't trade him for Barkley.

 

I'm close to as big a Barkley fan as you'll find but I don't see how you take Tannehill one year and turn around and take Barkley the next year.

 

Close as in distance wise, or close as in emotional?....bromance? Does he have a fathead room? :shifty:

 

I think you take Barkley if he falls far enough in the draft that you view him as a value pick. He could be viewed as Moores replacement and competition or insurance for THill. If THill fails you have another young stud waiting for an opprtunity and with the rookie cap its fincially managable. The biggest sacrafice is that pick used on him could of been used to improve the team elsewhere. Im not saying they should absolutely do it but I do see a reasonable scenerio where it would be reasonable to draft him.

 

I'm sorry but I strongly disagree. Firstly, the lowest he'll fall is the 2nd round, and even though it might represent good value in general it'd be irresponsible move to use a high pick on a backup. Secondly, you don't draft Tannehill under any expectations that he might fail. He's the man until proven otherwise, and until then you don't stir the pot and create controversy by adding Barkley to the mix. Find a talented mid-late round guy you can develop and let that 2nd rounder go to someone whom you're pegging to see a significant amount of snaps.

 

Well, in all fairness, Jim, this is the draft forum of the Dolphins. :lol:

 

Your point is a fair one and I do not disagree. I was only saying that if I were the coach and I had concerns about THill I would not be opposed to using a late 2nd rounder say for Barkley as insurance in case THill does not continue to improve. We need to replace Moore anyhow so bringing in another stud prospect would not be the worst move we could make.

I do agree that it uses a pick that could be used to try and fix another hole. That holds true if the QB postion is in tact under THill which is an unknown at this point.

 

I'd rather take Charles Barkley. Or Iran Barkley. At least they can get it down the field and wither the camera work.

 

Jim, I can barely remember what day it is. My wife's birthday, by the way. If I forget that she'll kill me. But anyway, try not to get offended if I can't remember your position on certain players.

I wasn't even insinuating that I think you're suggesting we draft Barkley. I was just nodding agreement to Todd's statement.

 

Fun day. You know what she'd love?! Go get a really nice custom picture frame.... something that elicits memories of the first day you hit her over the head with a Mallett, and stuff it with your dearest picture.... of Olivia Munn licking your face.

 

Barkley has a Ck fathead room

This is a good example of pre draft hype, if he had come out last yr he'd have been a #1 pick

 

Could Matt Barkley play in Mike Sherman's system? What about in Mike McCarthy's? Josh McDaniels'? Or Ken Whisenhunt's?

 

Didn't mean it that way. I was acting stupid and twisting his sentence definition around emphasizing the "I'm close to" part, with particular emphasis on "close to". But of course you troglodites didn't get it. lol

 

I'm just really appreciating the hilarity of the thought of Matt Barkley having a CK fathead in his room. What would my pose be? It would probably be surprised, like "What are you taking that photo for?"

 

I remember when, I remember, I remember when I lost my miiiiiiind.

 

I don't see why not if your current QB situation looks like garbage..... but is he the guy you'd actually want to build your team around? Personally, I think not. As a 2nd rounder I'd draft him to upgrade what I have (especially if I'm Zona) until I can find a permanent solution, but as a 1st rounder he's a trap IMO b/c you'd likely be using his cost of investment as an excuse to not upgrade the position for at least a handful of years. I just feel he has a better chance of having a Sanchez type career than a Brees one b/c I don't think he has enough combined elite traits to become a top 10 QB. The brains are obviously there, but nothing else seems obviously elite IMO..... so I personally would cap his ceiling at somewhere around Chad Pennington, but with a floor of Sanchez.

 

yes, but what are you wearing?

 

Arizona is on the list.

The key with Barkley will be what he sees before the snap opposed to after it -- that will be the deciding factor in a successful (or not) career IMO.

 

Too bad the Broncos spent a 2nd on Osweiler. Barkley would be a better option behind Manning.

 

After the 4 year bout of Sanchez botulism I'd be shocked to see the Jets order off the USC pizza menu again.
The toppings might be a lil' different but it still looks like a 12" pie.




..... and with the speed they have a WR paired with the weather in NY? Not a good fit. Not as much need for precision as there is an ability to quickly get the ball downfield to these fast receivers before windows close IMO. Add the run element to help create even more space. Geno Smith would be ideal.

 

I understand what you're saying but, WADR, you missed the meaning, which was clear in the analogy. You can't simply take this stuff out of context as if we're talking about 2 entirely different QBs. These two share a bunch of traits which alone should be enough to turn NY away. Factoring in the USC association should then be enough to elicit a gag reflex. It's only natural. That's why I said the toppings might be a little different but it still looks like a 12" pie. Please stop intentionally being a contrarian.

 

Barkley and Sanchez share enough in common that anyone who just made the mistake of drafting Mr. I-Should've-Been-In-a-Boyband
should be turned off from Mr. I-Peaked-As-a-Senior-In-High-School.

 

IMO most of the physical intangibles are quite similar. Same less than preferred size. Same frame. Similar athleticism. Similar mobility. Similar limited arm. Sanchez was more of a mental guy at USC who played smart and seemed to understood situational football <at least at the college level>. He was a good leader, played mature, played with poise, could carve up college level defenses, and seemed to be NFL ready in a similar to Barkley fashion. Basically, the reason Sanchez was drafted so high wasn't b/c of outstanding natural talent like a Tannehill, RG3, or Locker..... just as outstanding talent won't be the reason for Barkley being drafted high either.

I agree entirely about the "game manager" aspect, but you can't visually see their brains per se, and it's not like Sanchez was a poor game manager in college. He was quite good at it if my memory serves me well. However, you can see the other stuff, the physical stuff, and IMO there's mentally enough of an association link created between the 2 players to where you watch Barkley and go "blehhh" after having already drafted Sanchez. After 4 years of Mark I wouldn't want anything remotely close to resembling him. JMO.

 

just a real hot pic"

 

I don't believe he will hit 6'2 at the combine.

 

wasn't a part of that hype, would of taken Kaepernick before..

 

You would Ckap before Barkley?

 

So it has been shot from behind?

 

I still think Barkley is the best QB in the draft. And that KC should take him number one overall. JMO.

 

You Mysterious man you, I was touting Ckap to us when mostly everyone was telling me he was a bust, 3 rd 4 th round value.

Yes I would take Ckap over Barkley.