2024 - Way too early draft thread

The Giants already trade for Burns. If they use that #6 pick on a defensive player it will just about guarantee Daniel Jones is going to have a rough 2024 season - the team has no threats in the backfield with Barkley gone and their wide receivers are the worst group in the division.
 
It's funny. For no reason at all I'm now leaning more towards Maye again. It's probably the contrarian in me. That or I'm just too spooked about a thin running QB that doesn't know how to take a hit.
 
Last edited:
After a lot of watching full game footage (probably too much if I’m being honest) of both…I’m not sold on either one.

So I will defer to Peters, Quinn, etal to select their guy and I will then get totally on-board with the choice.
 
Oh, that goes without saying. I reserve the right to grumble if it doesn't work though lol

(Just like I'm grumbling about Howell)
 
If Peters knows his stuff, then a mass of picks is worth much more. If you have a weaker FO, then in many cases the higher picks end up being more heavily weighted (and then when your FO is really bad, you fail at 3 2nd round picks... ahem). I wouldn't give up picks until we have proven the formula and we are a handful of players away. I am excited because we *seem* to have coaches! They still have to prove themselves, but it definitely looks promising. The temper to all of this can easily be found in how strong the NFCE is these days. There are signs that the others, in particular the Eagles and Giants, may be taking a small downswing. The Eagles didn't end well last year, so we can hope that continues. My guess is the NFCE will be strong again, with the weakest being the Giants. I hope we will be in contention for a playoff spot this year.
 
Obviously the moves at staffing the OT position(s) are going to be paramount to the teams success this coming season. In the NFCE alone there are beasts on the 3 other teams in the division in their defensive fronts.

I don’t fault the FO for not adding a T in FA as the slim pickings there were…well…slim is being polite. They have to have a plan though and I’m certain that they do.🤞
 
tomwvr said:
What do you think about trying to get the chargers number 5 by giving up next years first and one of the 2s this year to grab one of the tackles?
Click to expand...
If they'd go for it I would love it.
 
I think we might see some mocks coming soon with us trading into the back half or even the mid first round to get that left tackle. Usually our media guys start the talk first and then the national guys get a hold of it. No way do they want instability there with a rookie qb.
 
Washington wouldn't have traded Howell if we were going to drop that far in the first round.

One would think the team has to stay in the top 5-6 to be able to take whoever may fall from the top 3 and/or McCarthy.

Unless the team really likes Nix or Penix and figures they are NFL starters and can be had later on, leaving the club with only Marcus Mariota signed after the draft would be a mistake.

Punting a decision on quarterback would look really bad if the team then waits until 2025 and we end up with candidates at quarterback in the draft that are lower rated than the current crop.

To me, a GM making a pick at #2 almost guarantees himself the length of that player's rookie contract (before option) in the job.

But not making the pick and going a more risky route as Ron did with veterans or the thought of a middle round pick becoming Kirk Cousins or Brock Purdy, is a sure way to continue to finish at or below .500 and punch a ticket out of town.
 
Bulldog said:
Unless the team really likes Nix or Penix and figures they are NFL starters and can be had later on, leaving the club with only Marcus Mariota signed after the draft would be a mistake.
Click to expand...
I would still say that if you are looking long-term (which Harris has said repeatedly he is), then it's possible you want to bring the "great" QB in last, not first. In the meantime, you can build up the team and make sure the structure for long-term success is in place. Throwing in a good or great QB in the early stages could be arguably a recipe for 8-8 records without the right other pieces. That just nets you some average draft position and may throw you into mediocrity. Such was the concept behind "the process" right? Don't go for it all until you've built the team with high draft picks. I am not saying that's what's happening, my guess is they are open to trading down with the right opportunity but they are leaning towards staying at 2. However, the HYPE Machine works two ways. If these guys get HYPED enough, maybe someone does offer a FRANCHISE-ALTERING trade?! If they think it's worth it.... go for it, that's what I think.
 
The one problem with that approach is the general consensus is the 2024 class is better than what was available in 2022-23 or will be available in 2025 based on scouting reports.

So, you would have to go back to 2020 when Burrow, Tua, Herbert, Love and Hurts all came into the NFL to find a draft where there were 4-5 quality prospects to be had in Round 1 or early in Round 2.

What I want to avoid is being a team like Atlanta that has built up its roster overall but had a big hole at quarterback. Sitting at #8 there was no way they were going to be able to move up without mortgaging their future.

So, they reached out to a 36 year old quarterback who missed almost all of the 2023 season with a very serious injury and gave him a contract for $180M, despite the fact he has only won ONE playoff game in his 13 year career.

I don't want to be that desperate.

I want to find that franchise anchor at quarterback early on and then build around him just as the Cowboys did with Aikman, the Patriots did with Brady, the Giants did with Manning, etc.

Of course if you are the Chiefs sitting at #10 and have both the scouting talent but also the LUCK to draft the best quarterback of his generation you can do it another way, with a team coming off a 10-6 record.

The trouble is most teams that are in that position of having a 9-7 or 10-6 team with quarterback play that is average or a bit better than average rarely are able to draft that kind of impact player.
 
You aren't wrong there, those are good points - Aikman was a #1 pick and he was able to withstand a season of brutality and punishment, and the team did indeed build up around him. That's a really strong example of your point, and certainly a good lynchpin in a dynastic build. I think, though, that there are several problems that are unique now to the situation. I don't have the actual numbers in front of me, but I think now the QB inflation has tilted the salaries heavily after their rookie deals are done. So, if you can get a QB on the cheap, you are afforded strong ability to build and maintain a consistent winner; likewise, if you do NOT get that setup, you are struggling to build and maintain the team around them. Granted, the Ravens and a few others have so far managed to skirt this issue, so it can be done at least for some time. I think a big part of this is where the GMs and FO really earns their money, along with the coaches. Making the pieces fit well (GM), and getting the most out of the players (Coaches). We got an F or a D on both of those metrics in the past, and the fanbase is now hoping for that B to A range; well obviously we hope for A, but you know what I mean.

It's interesting to consider all of the options, certainly. I think they can formulate plans that fit almost any of the circumstances to be honest, drafting QB at #2, trading back, what have you. The proof will be in the execution. We'll see if whatever plan they come up with actually works out. I have definitely come further around to the QB at #2 with some of these conversations though!
 
I think the bottom line is whatever strategy you employ you better not make the mistake of giving a second contract or free agent deal to a quarterback who does not measure up to that level of play.

Look at the Cowboys now with Dak or the Vikings with Kirk.

These guys have been paid a fortune and still those teams didn’t win in the postseason.

Dallas is now having to let starters go in free agency because Dak counts $55M against the cap.

His restructure gave them an additional $4M to spend - whuppdy-doo 😟
 
Current MGM Bets lines-

IMG_3079.jpeg
 
Solitary Man said:
I think we might see some mocks coming soon with us trading into the back half or even the mid first round to get that left tackle. Usually our media guys start the talk first and then the national guys get a hold of it. No way do they want instability there with a rookie qb.
Click to expand...
Bram has been saying that's what he think they are going to do for weeks. Bram is the radio voice of the team. Now, he's also said he hasn't heard a peep from the team, so it's just conjecture. He's also dead wrong on a lot of his guesses. So take that for what it's worth.

Bram also thinks they're going to trade and pay big money for a CB. I don't.

Keim has said he thinks it's an option to trade back into the 1st for a tackle.

The thing to note, literally every beat guy has said out loud none of their sources either know or they're not talking. So everything is conjecture.

I'm putting 2+2 together: They're going to draft a QB + the only LT they have on the roster is Lucas = they are going to draft a starting LT. The answer I don't know, do they have a guy targeted at 36 they think can start, or do they have to move up to get somebody.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 4, Members: 0, Guests: 4)

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top