Peyton Manning or RGIII your choice

Agree with Dirtbag. For all the talk about how Tim Tebow couldn't throw a pro route tree, Cam Newton was actually worse than that in the preseason. Then he threw for four bucks in Week 1.

Cam's rookie year wasn't a historically great passing season for a QB or anything, but it was the kind of season you would expect from a guy who may become an all-time great, but isn't at this time. What Cam Newton -- very quietly, I might add -- did with his legs in 2011 is something we haven't seen in the history of the NFL.

Agreed GTripp.

That's part of his package and was definitely part of what I was referring to.

What if that one basket was named Andrew Luck?

Given the Shanahan era to date, if I said you could get Andrew Luck in a trade with the Colts, but it would cost you every pick in the 2012 draft and the 2013 first rounder, would you trade an entire draft for the guy?

I'd have to imagine you would, because there is a good chance the Colts would turn that offer down if it was actually made to them.

It depends on which team I was? The 49ers? Sure, I'd go all in to get him. The Skins? Probably not.

If I'm the Colts, the pick isn't even up for grabs regardless of how many picks you offered. I'm quite positive they would indeed turn down that trade scenario you mentioned.

Oh Cam wasn't pro ready at all. Even in the preseason he looked lost. Then for some reason he became a Pro Bowl QB. Now the Panthers are contenders in the NFC South.


Let's slow up with the contender talk...lol Granted the kid had a great rookie year, but it's too soon to anoint him as the next great thing.


Also, being a pro-bowler doesn't mean much of anything, and the reality of it is he only got in because other QBs declined.

If they offer two first rounders to the Rams/Vikings, neither is going to say "no", they would either have a better offer from the Browns or Dolphins, or they would do that trade in a heartbeat.

And personally, I don't really care if the target is Griffin or Blackmon, as both will hopefully improve your passing offense. I have Griffin rated a lot higher than Blackmon, but if you have Blackmon rated much higher than RG3, then he's probably the one worth trading up for.

It does look like the cost of improving the passing offense in the first round would be a trade up and costing your 2013 first rounder. But you could get Trent Richardson, (perhaps) Mo Claiborne, or Reily Reiff to improve your ground game or pass defense without moving anywhere.I'm sure there is a school of thought in the FO that is similar to the above.

I guess I'm too trade up averse to advocate trading up for anyone other then a QB.
WRs scare the beejesus out of me and I like our receiving corps at present at have hopes for Hankerson.
I like Richardson but I don't see an Adrian Peterson when I look at him.
I also struggle with whether Kyle's playcalling will ever lend itself to 'featuring' a running back enough to reap the benefits a back like Richardson could provide over our current stable of backs.

I do agree about the compensation and I think it would be reasonable to trade up for Griffin if the cost is next years 1st as opposed to this years 2nd + another pick.
Personally I would try to trade with the Vikes in hopes of lowering the compensation.

I like the idea of staying put for Reif, I believe a sure fire way to prove every aspect of our offense is through upgrading the OL.
I'm old school in the sense because I believe 'winning' at the POA makes any scheme or any set of X's and O's better.

I already know you don't like Tannehill as much as I do but..
I would have to think that there is an element in the FO that wants to take Tannehill.

Maybe 6 is too rich for Ryan and in my heart of hearts I would like to trade down and get Tannehill and the 3rd/4th rated OT Martin or Adams.
But trading down is huge risk when you're gambling on a QB unless they have other QBs that they like later on in the draft like Weeden or Foles.

Then there is always the question of what happens to McCoy should the Browns take Griffin.
I'm probably alone in this but I think McCoy would be a really good fit in Kyle's offense and would provide an instant and meaninful upgrade to Rex and would still have a good amount of to improve before reaching his potential.

I'm sure there is a school of thought in the FO that is similar to the above.

I guess I'm too trade up averse to advocate trading up for anyone other then a QB.
WRs scare the beejesus out of me and I like our receiving corps at present at have hopes for Hankerson.
I like Richardson but I don't see an Adrian Peterson when I look at him.
I also struggle with whether Kyle's playcalling will ever lend itself to 'featuring' a running back enough to reap the benefits a back like Richardson could provide over our current stable of backs.

I do agree about the compensation and I think it would be reasonable to trade up for Griffin if the cost is next years 1st as opposed to this years 2nd + another pick.
Personally I would try to trade with the Vikes in hopes of lowering the compensation.

I like the idea of staying put for Reif, I believe a sure fire way to prove every aspect of our offense is through upgrading the OL.
I'm old school in the sense because I believe 'winning' at the POA makes any scheme or any set of X's and O's better.

I already know you don't like Tannehill as much as I do but..
I would have to think that there is an element in the FO that wants to take Tannehill.

Maybe 6 is too rich for Ryan and in my heart of hearts I would like to trade down and get Tannehill and the 3rd/4th rated OT Martin or Adams.
But trading down is huge risk when you're gambling on a QB unless they have other QBs that they like later on in the draft like Weeden or Foles.

Then there is always the question of what happens to McCoy should the Browns take Griffin.
I'm probably alone in this but I think McCoy would be a really good fit in Kyle's offense and would provide an instant and meaninful upgrade to Rex and would still have a good amount of to improve before reaching his potential.I really wish someone could explain to me why Ryan Tannehill is such a favorite as a third QB in this draft. In terms of his components, he's not in the top three in any one thing (height, perhaps the exception after Osweiler), whether measured statistically or observationally. And it would seem logical, that if you break the quarterback class down into components and Tannehill comes out average or below average in most skills, that the fact that he combines all of those blah skills into one package shouldn't make a better prospect than guys (like Foles or Cousins) that do one or two things exceptionally well, but have obvious flaws in either their footwork or decision making.

It would seem that grading only on skill sets, Tannehill has absolutely nothing on Weeden or Osweiler, who are both more physically gifted quaterbacks. If grading him on the production he flashed in college, he's not Foles, he's not Cousins, and he's not 30% of Kellen Moore. I don't feel I'm being unfair to Tannehill at all by putting him solidly in the second round of a class I've already given five first round grades in. In doing so, I'm ranking him ahead of Weeden and Osweiler, who are two guys who can just do more with their arms.

I'm with you on Blackmon: he's my number one receiver in this class, but kind of like when Calvin Johnson came out and I couldn't see the separation between him and Dwayne Bowe (its more obvious now), I can't really tell you with any degree of certainty that he'll have a better career than Kendall Wright or Michael Floyd. Which is why I believe, ultimately, he isn't going to go second overall, even though the Rams need a receiver bad.

Man, this is the NFL draft we are talking about . Other than Luck who knows where the rest will be taken.

Let's slow up with the contender talk...lol Granted the kid had a great rookie year, but it's too soon to anoint him as the next great thing.


Also, being a pro-bowler doesn't mean much of anything, and the reality of it is he only got in because other QBs declined.

Pro Bowler might not mean much but 4,757 total yards, and 35 total TD's against 17 turnovers does especially for a rookie.

I'm sure there is a school of thought in the FO that is similar to the above.

I guess I'm too trade up averse to advocate trading up for anyone other then a QB.
WRs scare the beejesus out of me and I like our receiving corps at present at have hopes for Hankerson.
I like Richardson but I don't see an Adrian Peterson when I look at him.
I also struggle with whether Kyle's playcalling will ever lend itself to 'featuring' a running back enough to reap the benefits a back like Richardson could provide over our current stable of backs.

I do agree about the compensation and I think it would be reasonable to trade up for Griffin if the cost is next years 1st as opposed to this years 2nd + another pick.
Personally I would try to trade with the Vikes in hopes of lowering the compensation.

I like the idea of staying put for Reif, I believe a sure fire way to prove every aspect of our offense is through upgrading the OL.
I'm old school in the sense because I believe 'winning' at the POA makes any scheme or any set of X's and O's better.

I already know you don't like Tannehill as much as I do but..
I would have to think that there is an element in the FO that wants to take Tannehill.

Maybe 6 is too rich for Ryan and in my heart of hearts I would like to trade down and get Tannehill and the 3rd/4th rated OT Martin or Adams.
But trading down is huge risk when you're gambling on a QB unless they have other QBs that they like later on in the draft like Weeden or Foles.

Then there is always the question of what happens to McCoy should the Browns take Griffin.
I'm probably alone in this but I think McCoy would be a really good fit in Kyle's offense and would provide an instant and meaninful upgrade to Rex and would still have a good amount of to improve before reaching his potential.

Well iamsrk has already told us that we're getting Colt...so I don't know what you're worried about

I still think it's not Manning, not Orton, nor Flynn that we're getting in FA. My gut says we're adding one maybe two QBs before the draft. But not those guys mentioned above

Well iamsrk has already told us that we're getting Colt...so I don't know what you're worried about

I still think it's not Manning, not Orton, nor Flynn that we're getting in FA. My gut says we're adding one maybe two QBs before the draft. But not those guys mentioned above

Like who? Hoyer, Josh Johnson? Who are some of the under the radar guys?