And that is your opinion, obviously. But like I said in the piece, apparently the Rams set the price and we were the first ones to match it. It would have been the same for the Browns to move up from #4 and that tells me that it would have been the same for us to move up from #3 had we been there instead of #6. I just don't see that as arguable.I disagree, there is no way we pay as much with a #3 pick in the mix as we do with a #6. not even close, and frankly if we had the Number 3 pick and we KNOW someone else is going to sell the farm to move up to get Rg3, then with a 3 we get potentially the third best player in the draft and move ahead with our number 2 option, given the draft this year and the crazy depth at certain spots, I think that would have been far better than risking everything on one player. too many eggs in one basket here.
I think we could have won a couple more, sure. But generally I agree with you on finishing outside the Top 10. All indications I have seen are that the Rams definitely wanted to stay in that range with their first pick this year so a move lower likely would have been more expensive.Good thread Neo. That being said, and please don't invest time in the research, but I wonder how badly another one or two wins would have hurt us in getting RG3? Maybe we would have been dead if outside the top 10.
It's possible that we won the perfect amount, and lost the perfect amount in this pursuit.
And Flynn will cost a lot more money too making it much harder to part ways with him if he really doesn't have what it takes to get the job done outside of Green Bay. Remember, for all that we have seen him in two NFL games and has been successful, he might never do that game in and game out after teams plan specifically for him.Samuels was a good LT but he was never an elite LT. Kalil apparently is a stud LT prospect.
Williams is decent, nothing more, and likely to get suspended again. but Grossman and beck are bad, no doubt, I thought Flynn would have been a good option and he wouldnt have cost us multiple firsts for a potential upgrade.
He went to six pro-bowls in ten years. The chances of drafting a LT of that calibre is about the same as the chances of drafting a six-time pro-bowl QB ...We will also have to agree to disagree about Samuels. He might not be HoF but he was an elite LT.
If this front office knows what it's doing, we're just about to draft a franchise QB, surround him with hard-working, high-value FAs, supplement that with a nice draft in rounds 3-7, and turn this team into a perennial winner and won't look back.If this front office knows what it's doing, drafting low won't matter.
If this front office doesn't know what it's doing, drafting high won't matter.
Either way, we may as well win the games in front of us. Worry about the offseason in the offseason.
Pretty much Heaven or Hell, huh.Well, if there were 4 solid QBs in the draft we'd likely not have had to trade up to get one, or if we did the price would have probably been lower.
I still have to go with what I said when this was being discussed during the season:
If this front office knows what it's doing, we're just about to draft a franchise QB, surround him with hard-working, high-value FAs, supplement that with a nice draft in rounds 3-7, and turn this team into a perennial winner and won't look back.
If this front office doesn't know what it's doing, we just mortgaged our future for a huge bust at QB and will be mired in suckage for the next five years.
Either way, the Seattle game doesn't matter, except in the record books.
But that's the problem my brother. You can't make anything pay off.In my own mind, and many disagree no doubt, if you're going to *uck anyway...make the *uckage pay off downstream