Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

I don't really want Flynn either. In my pre-combine draft rankings I have Tannehill and Foles 3rd and 4th respectively with Tannehill getting a late 1st round grade and Foles getting a mid 2nd round grade. Now last year we missed out on Andy Dalton an Colin Caepernick, (Not mad about that at all) this year is very similar to last year exception being there is no Christian Ponder reach-esque QB (YET) Although Tannehill maybe that guy, In my view you can't take Tannehill at 6. Too much reach and pressure. Now no one including me believes RGIII will last until pick six, so lets say we take Blackmon or Claiborne. Now it's pick 20, Tannehill is still on the board, do you trade up to get him or fall back and take Foles as a "consilation" prize? So basically it's Tannehill vs. Foles, do you give up a potential 1st rd pick in 2013 for Tannehill now?

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=NM Redskin;873851]What would we be giving up for Flynn? A 3rd?[/quote]

Nothing. He is a unrestricted FA.

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=EARTHQUAKE2689;873852]I don't really want Flynn either. In my pre-combine draft rankings I have Tannehill and Foles 3rd and 4th respectively with Tannehill getting a late 1st round grade and Foles getting a mid 2nd round grade. Now last year we missed out on Andy Dalton an Colin Caepernick, (Not mad about that at all) this year is very similar to last year exception being there is no Christian Ponder reach-esque QB (YET) Although Tannehill maybe that guy, In my view you can't take Tannehill at 6. Too much reach and pressure. Now no one including me believes RGIII will last until pick six, so lets say we take Blackmon or Claiborne. Now it's pick 20, Tannehill is still on the board, do you trade up to get him or fall back and take Foles as a "consilation" prize? [B]So basically it's Tannehill vs. Foles, do you give up a potential 1st rd pick in 2013 for Tannehill now?[/B][/quote]

absolutely not. i'd be happy with taking blackmon at 6 if RG3 isnt there, and trading into the late 1st to get foles or tannehill, but absolutely not for a future 1st. id give up the 2nd and maybe a 4th or something. trading into the back end of the 1st shouldnt require a future 1st.

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

Has anyone mentioned the possibility of acquiring TJ Yates?

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=Dirtbag59;873855]Has anyone mentioned the possibility of acquiring TJ Yates?[/quote]

hes been very average on a team with a hell of a lot more weapons that we have, in the same system. i didnt think he was any good in college, and i dont think he will be more than a backup in the pros.

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=EARTHQUAKE2689;873853]Nothing. He is a unrestricted FA.[/quote]

I guess a lot depends on GB getting Finley signed and GB using the franchise tag on Flynn. I just cant imagine GB letting Flynn go for nothing.

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=Big C;873854]absolutely not. i'd be happy with taking blackmon at 6 if RG3 isnt there, and trading into the late 1st to get foles or tannehill, but absolutely not for a future 1st. id give up the 2nd and maybe a 4th or something. trading into the back end of the 1st shouldnt require a future 1st.[/quote]

Doesn't require it but to jump from 38-40 to 20 might. So you would sit back and hope Tannehill is there at 38-40 (Which is doubtful with Matt "Charles" Barkley and Dawan LaRon Landry Jones Drew Bledsoe returning to school.) From what I see I think Foles COULD be the 2nd best QB in this draft but also has the highest bust potential in the draft at QB too.

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=Dirtbag59;873855]Has anyone mentioned the possibility of acquiring TJ Yates?[/quote]

Should we acquire TJ Yates??

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

Blackmon will be gone before 6 and Tannehill won't last beyond 12 IMO.

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=Lotus;873862]Blackmon will be gone before 6 and Tannehill won't last beyond 12 IMO.[/quote]

So you just had to rain on my parade huh? And on Wild Card weekend too? For shame "Praying" Lotus.

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=EARTHQUAKE2689;873859]Doesn't require it but to jump from 38-40 to 20 might. So you would sit back and hope Tannehill is there at 38-40 (Which is doubtful with Matt "Charles" Barkley and Dawan LaRon Landry Jones Drew Bledsoe returning to school.) From what I see I think Foles COULD be the 2nd best QB in this draft but also has the highest bust potential in the draft at QB too.[/quote]

i wouldnt give up a future 1st for tannehill or foles, bottom line. neither of them are worth that kind of investment imo.

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=EARTHQUAKE2689;873865]So you just had to rain on my parade huh? And on Wild Card weekend too? For shame "Praying" Lotus.[/quote]

Sorry, my bad. :) I could be wrong. Just an opinion.

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=Big C;873867]i wouldnt give up a future 1st for tannehill or foles, bottom line. neither of them are worth that kind of investment imo.[/quote]

Neither would I but if we don't take him at 6-12 it could cost us that to get him. (Tannehill)

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=EARTHQUAKE2689;873869]Neither would I but if we don't take him at 6-12 it could cost us that to get him. (Tannehill)[/quote]

true, but i dont want us to overpay/reach for him. if we give up a future 1st, id rather give it up for RG3

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=NM Redskin;873858]I guess a lot depends on GB getting Finley signed and GB using the franchise tag on Flynn. I just cant imagine GB letting Flynn go for nothing.[/quote]


This isn't like the Matt Cassell situation. Cassell took the team to a 11-5 record that year Brady went down, and was the only reason they franchised him so they could be protected in case Tom didn't come back healthy. Green Bay isn't going to guarantee him a 14mil salary by hitting him with the franchise tag. Also, no other team is going to pay him that type of salary either.