NFL Draft 2017 thread

[Thomkal]

So the draft starts Thursday (still not a fan of that) and I'm wondering who you think "your" team will take in the first couple rounds? My beloved Cardinals were/are up against the salary cap hard this year, so had to let a lot of their younger talent fly elsewhere in free agency, especially on the defensive side of the ball. As a result they have a lot of holes to fill right now. But where they need to go I think is offense the first couple picks.

This is very likely the last season for Palmer and Fitz. With the departure of Michael Floyd, and the inability to develop any younger QB talent, They almost have to go QB in the first couple rounds. The only problem is this is not a strong QB draft class. Should they not get a QB of the future in this draft, I think we are going to start hearing grumbling about a coaching change sooner rather than later.

The head coach loves speed and character in his high picks, so would not surprise me at all to see them go with WR John Ross in the first round if there is a run on QB's before their pick. Going to need to find some defensive talent in the mid-rounds where they have had some success of late.

I'm also curious to see if RB De'Angelo Henderson out of Coastal Carolina gets drafted or not-was invited to the combines after setting a college football record for consecutive games with a TD, but is short (5'8") so that might hold him back.

[NobodyHere]

So exactly how bad is having a "diluted sample" such as Jabrill Peppers? As far as my understanding goes it means he didn't have any banned substances in his system although he could've been trying to hide some.

Do we have any odds from past players with diluted samples? For example how many players with diluted samples went on to have a problem with any banned substances vs how many players with diluted samples did not?

[Kodos]

I guess this is how far my NFL fanship has fallen. I wasn't even aware that the draft was this week, although I knew it's always in April. Ever since they moved it from Saturday morning, I've just found it hard to care.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Do we have any odds from past players with diluted samples? For example how many players with diluted samples went on to have a problem with any banned substances vs how many players with diluted samples did not?

Well, there's Josh Gordon & Dion Jordan. (the link is from 2015)
Dilute tests are indeed positive tests | ProFootballTalk

Which are a couple of cases that seem to dispute today's claim by Joe Thomas that active players aren't failed for providing a dilute sample (he's suggesting that prospects shouldn't be failed either).

[Atocep]

I don't get the Fournette hype. Great college back, but the NFL doesn't seem to have learned that these huge backs with average vision are very line dependent in the NFL. Definitely not worthy of a 1st round pick.

[Chief Rum]

Rams traded away their first and third in last year's Goff deal, so their options are limited. I would guess all things being equal, they would select a speedy WR type, but since a lot can happen a round or two into the draft, I am guessing they will pick the BPA from among three position groupings: WR, OL (T if possible), DB (S more likely).

Their other picks are 4th round and down, so can't count on getting starters there.

[Simbo Klice]

Hoping for the Titans to come out of the first round with a WR/TE and a CB/S. Jamal Adams and Mike Williams are the names I see attached to us most often, but now it's a question on Adams of if he could go 3 or 4 even. I love Jonathan Allen and he'd be a great pickup if he fell to 5 (and he's actually freefalled on some mock sites) but imo you'd be leaving either the WR or DB core short, they both really warrant adding a 1st rounder right now.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

So exactly how bad is having a "diluted sample" such as Jabrill Peppers? As far as my understanding goes it means he didn't have any banned substances in his system although he could've been trying to hide some.

Do we have any odds from past players with diluted samples? For example how many players with diluted samples went on to have a problem with any banned substances vs how many players with diluted samples did not?

The problem is that you enter the league in step one of the drug program so you don't have any leeway to start.

If Jabril Peppers was named James Pierson he doesn't sniff a Heisman invite and doesn't get any 1st round hype. He's too slow to cover WRs and isn't big enough to cover TEs. Good agility, will be a good kick returner in the pros but any team planning on slotting him into its starting secondary on day 1 is insane.

Would have been better off playing RB in college.

[rjolley]

The Bears should go for more defensive help and grab Jamal Adams, safety out of LSU. They should also get a project QB at some point, maybe Mahomes from Texas Tech or Peterman out of Pitt.

Overall, they need to get back to the Chicago staples: a good running game, a good to great defense, and a passing game that won't lose the game for you.

[Vince, Pt. II]

The 49ers have holes everywhere, and with a new GM and Coach there isn't a track record to go on at all. Lynch knows the safety position like nobody's business, so S Jamal Adams out of LSU wouldn't be a surprise. But he's also got Stanford ties, so Stanford DL Solomon Thomas wouldn't be a surprise either (though they do have a ton of similar players already). QB is a very loud vacancy, so possibly Trubisky? Or maybe it's Fournette?

Who knows. I don't even know who I want them to pick.

[Suicane75]

Seeing a lot of Corey Davis to the Eagles scuttlebutt. I might need to change my underpants if that happens. I really believe he's a generational type talent.

[CrescentMoonie]

Redskins obviously need front 7 help and secondary depth. Hopefully they stick with BPA in the 1st round though, and grab someone like a Dalvin Cook to add another weapon to the offense for Kirk's last season. Reuben Foster would be a perfect fit at ILB even with the red flag for his combine issues. Despite the huge DL need, I'll be disappointed in lazy Malik McDowell at 17.

The starting DL is Ziggy Hood, Terrell McClain, and Stacy McGee. The top backups are Matt Ioannidis, Anthony Lanier, and the hopes of a recovery by Phil Taylor. Nothing higher than a 5th round pick used on DL (that actually played DL in the NFL) since 2011.

Other than that, edge rusher is a huge need after Kerrigan. Smith had a bad second season, Trent Murphy's sudden improvement landed him with a 4 game suspension to start this year, and Achilles Galette was recently in another fight in public and hopefully never wears the jersey in a regular season game. There's a chance that Houston Bates would be the backup at OLB in week one.

ILB is a need as Compton and Foster are decent backups and Brown was only given a 1 year deal making them all UFAs after this season. If Reuben Foster slides to 17, and they're okay with his "diluted sample," then I'm fine with that at 17.

So, overall, I expect/hope to see DL, edge rusher, ILB, offensive playmaker, and wild card in the first 4 rounds (5 picks). I've seen several people mocking Josh Dobbs late to the Redskins. If they're right, kudos to them but it makes no sense with his complete lack of consistent accuracy and Gruden's offense that works best with guys like Dalton, Cousins, and McCoy.

[revrew]

BRONCOS

Conventional wisdom seems right - Broncos desperately need OLine help, and they'll take it at G or T.

Yes, they also need a slot receiver and kick returner, but I don't see McCaffrey falling to #20 or the Broncos trading up to get him.

Forrest Lamp would be a good G pickup and probably target #1, but he may be gone by then. If Elway wants to win now (which I suspect he does), then Ryan Ramczyk out of Wisconsin makes sense at LT. If he's willing to roll the dice on developing a player with better upside, Garett Bolles out of Utah is the man. Alabama's Cam Robinson is a consolation prize.

My prediction: Ryan Ramczyk, T, Wisconsin

[Coffee Warlord]

Originally Posted by rjolley

Overall, they need to get back to the Chicago staples: a good running game, a good to great defense, and a passing game that won't lose the game for you.

It's this line of thinking that has made Chicago mediocre to awful for years and years.

[Butter]

I really wanted the Bengals to take Reuben Foster, and then he went nuts and failed a drug test, now I'm afraid the Bengals will still take Reuben Foster. I would be ok with him in the 2nd round.

[mckerney]

Just please let someone take Joe Mixon before the Vikings pick so they don't take him after they finally got rid of Adrian Peterson.

I really hope this is Rick Spielman's last draft as GM, I have no idea how he's stuck around as long as he has.

[QuikSand]

Hearing a lot of buzz about Ole Miss TE Evan Engram inching into the first round, possibly to Pittsburgh. I don't know much about him, but a move TE who runs a 4.42!?!??!? How bad do his hands have to be to not already be one of these saliva-inducing "matchup nightmare" guys that teams dream about?

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

Hearing a lot of buzz about Ole Miss TE Evan Engram inching into the first round, possibly to Pittsburgh. I don't know much about him, but a move TE who runs a 4.42!?!??!? How bad do his hands have to be to not already be one of these saliva-inducing "matchup nightmare" guys that teams dream about?

7 drops on 73 catchable targets so pretty bad.

[rjolley]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

It's this line of thinking that has made Chicago mediocre to awful for years and years.

Maybe. But with the weather in Chicago in the winter, playing that way has a lot of benefits. As does ball control and a good defense.

Yes, throwing the ball often is the way a lot of the league is going, but controlling possession with a good run/pass mix and stopping the other team from scoring still has its place.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by rjolley

Maybe. But with the weather in Chicago in the winter, playing that way has a lot of benefits. As does ball control and a good defense.

Yes, throwing the ball often is the way a lot of the league is going, but controlling possession with a good run/pass mix and stopping the other team from scoring still has its place.

Every year the league is becoming more QB driven. There's still a place for power running games and good defense, but you're unlikely to have consistent success without a top 10 QB and a passing game capable of winning games when called upon.

IMO it wouldn't be a terrible idea to double down on the QB position and draft the top QB on their board at 3 if he's still there. You simply aren't going anywhere in the NFL until you get the ability position sorted out and that would give them a year with Glennon to see what they have and a year with the drafted QB. If Glennon is the guy they could move the QB next year and get a 1st back. If Glennon isn't the guy they're a year ahead on developing his replacement.

[EagleFan]

Just a few more hours until the Browns ruin some poor kid's career.

[Butter]

As a Clemson fan, I would love Watson with the Bears. I am not sure how you guys would feel about it though.

[Coffee Warlord]

Originally Posted by Butter

As a Clemson fan, I would love Watson with the Bears. I am not sure how you guys would feel about it though.

That sounds like a Bears pick if I ever heard one.

[albionmoonlight]

Things looking good for the Saints.

Should be a good edge guy (Barnett, Harris, Reddick) there at 11.
Should be a good CB there at 32.
And if they trade 42 to the Pats for Butler, that seems ideal.

Also, Cleveland picks at 12, so if a team wants to leapfrog them for Trubisky, the Saints could get a decent trade down haul. Although trading down seems like a buyer's market (like its been for as long as I can remember).

[Neuqua]

I really hope the Bears stay away from QB at #3. There are just significantly better players available at other positions.

Take a QB later, and let's see what Glennon's got.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Neuqua

I really hope the Bears stay away from QB at #3. There are just significantly better players available at other positions.

Take a QB later, and let's see what Glennon's got.

I would prefer DLine or Lattimore, but outside of those 2 if they have a QB on their board they really like I wouldn't be against pulling the trigger.

I guess my point is I don't think NFL teams take the correct approach to finding a QB. Teams lacking a QB put all their eggs in one basket and when that basket is empty they move on to the next basket. Seems like an incredibly inefficient way to find your guy.

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Things looking good for the Saints.

Should be a good edge guy (Barnett, Harris, Reddick) there at 11.
Should be a good CB there at 32.
And if they trade 42 to the Pats for Butler, that seems ideal.

Also, Cleveland picks at 12, so if a team wants to leapfrog them for Trubisky, the Saints could get a decent trade down haul. Although trading down seems like a buyer's market (like its been for as long as I can remember).

Trubisky probably won't be there at 12. It's likely Cleveland will use some of their extra picks to move up to 5 or 7 to get Trubisky if he makes it past SF and Chicago.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

Trubisky probably won't be there at 12. It's likely Cleveland will use some of their extra picks to move up to 5 or 7 to get Trubisky if he makes it past SF and Chicago.

If this comes to fruition, IMO it's a red flag either for Trubisky himself or the Browns in general (obviously the much more likely scenario).

You either believe he's your franchise QB or you don't. If you do, you take him at 1 (or pay a king's ransom to go from 12 to 2 after taking Garrett) and you don't risk someone else jumping in and grabbing your guy. And if you don't, you shouldn't be trading premium assets for someone you aren't sure of. At that point, just move up into the back of round 1 for the right spot to take a flier on a QB.

[QuikSand]

The best (every year) is speculating about the quarterbacks. This draft reminds me of 2011, when we had three guys (under Cam Newton) expected to go in the first, but no clear picture who or where. (Locker, gabbert, Ponder)

A team taking a QB in the first is just a "big" moment, even if it isn't your team, right? A bit less so if it's New Orleans or Arizona, as that basically means it's a let's-wait situation, but the list of teams who would suddenly look/feel different the instant they draft a QB tonight is fairly long, isn't it? CLE, SF, CHI, JAX (yes, JAX), NYJ, BUF, WAS, KC, and most of all (in my opinion) HOU.

I don't know what the Texans are thinking, but if they have their eye on one guy here (Mahomes?) wouldn't it be pretty alluring to really push in to trade up with, say, New Orleans to get ahead of Arizona and get it done (assuming that got the job done)? Could save them a season or more ahead with a more than solid roster overall but... oh good heavens... either Savage or maybe Cutler (?). I'd be tempted, even if I'm not totally sold that Mahomes is ready to play (he likely isn't).

Fun stuff.

Personally, I'm guessing the Browns are smart enough to lay off QB at 1.1, but they probably overpay a bit to move up (to 5?) to get Trubisky, then Mahomes goes at either 11/12, and then there's high drama on what happens with Watson - until someone moves up to get him between 13 and 20.

By the way, if Tennessee trades down and still comes out of this night with TE Howard and WR Ross, that could be a very exciting night for the Titans' faithful.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by Logan

You either believe he's your franchise QB or you don't. If you do, you take him at 1 (or pay a king's ransom to go from 12 to 2 after taking Garrett) and you don't risk someone else jumping in and grabbing your guy. And if you don't, you shouldn't be trading premium assets for someone you aren't sure of. At that point, just move up into the back of round 1 for the right spot to take a flier on a QB.

Yes, this.

After all this talk about the Browns trading UP to get their QB... I wouldn't be surprised at all if they were the team who makes a significant move DOWN from 12 tonight.

As a semi-fan, I really just hope they don't overplay their hunch and pass on Garrett.

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by Logan

If this comes to fruition, IMO it's a red flag either for Trubisky himself or the Browns in general (obviously the much more likely scenario).

You either believe he's your franchise QB or you don't. If you do, you take him at 1 (or pay a king's ransom to go from 12 to 2 after taking Garrett) and you don't risk someone else jumping in and grabbing your guy. And if you don't, you shouldn't be trading premium assets for someone you aren't sure of. At that point, just move up into the back of round 1 for the right spot to take a flier on a QB.

Or they think he's the best QB in the draft and that the extra picks allow them to justify moving up to a certain range but don't have him rated higher than Garrett. It could be that he's the 15th best player on their board, with Garrett being their runaway #1, and they think it's worth a move to 5 if he's still there just because of how high QBs typically get drafted relative to their actual ability.

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

The best (every year) is speculating about the quarterbacks. This draft reminds me of 2011, when we had three guys (under Cam Newton) expected to go in the first, but no clear picture who or where. (Locker, gabbert, Ponder)

A team taking a QB in the first is just a "big" moment, even if it isn't your team, right? A bit less so if it's New Orleans or Arizona, as that basically means it's a let's-wait situation, but the list of teams who would suddenly look/feel different the instant they draft a QB tonight is fairly long, isn't it? CLE, SF, CHI, JAX (yes, JAX), NYJ, BUF, WAS, KC, and most of all (in my opinion) HOU.

I don't know what the Texans are thinking, but if they have their eye on one guy here (Mahomes?) wouldn't it be pretty alluring to really push in to trade up with, say, New Orleans to get ahead of Arizona and get it done (assuming that got the job done)? Could save them a season or more ahead with a more than solid roster overall but... oh good heavens... either Savage or maybe Cutler (?). I'd be tempted, even if I'm not totally sold that Mahomes is ready to play (he likely isn't).

Fun stuff.

Personally, I'm guessing the Browns are smart enough to lay off QB at 1.1, but they probably overpay a bit to move up (to 5?) to get Trubisky, then Mahomes goes at either 11/12, and then there's high drama on what happens with Watson - until someone moves up to get him between 13 and 20.

By the way, if Tennessee trades down and still comes out of this night with TE Howard and WR Ross, that could be a very exciting night for the Titans' faithful.

It feels like the teams around the 11/12 pick area like Watson over Mahomes and Houston is the team that has him rated higher than anyone else does. They might be the only team that has him higher than 3rd on their QB board. I'm hoping he's there at 17 and Washington does the trade down with them while using a pick on Nathan Peterman later on.

[Arles]

My hope for Green Bay at 29 is CB Kevin King from Washington. If he's gone, my list would be pass rushers like TJ Watt, Charles Harris and Takkarist McKinley or CB Chidobe Awuzie if they really want to go CB (their biggest need).

I just hope they don't go RB here as there are many other options in the 2-4th round. The top end talent at CB and pass rusher will be dried up by their pick in the 2nd.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

Or they think he's the best QB in the draft and that the extra picks allow them to justify moving up to a certain range but don't have him rated higher than Garrett. It could be that he's the 15th best player on their board, with Garrett being their runaway #1, and they think it's worth a move to 5 if he's still there just because of how high QBs typically get drafted relative to their actual ability.

I stand by what I originally said. Once you pass on him at 1, or don't try to get him at 2, you've acknowledged that you have questions about his ability to be a franchise QB because QB needy teams don't pass on franchise QBs. Maybe you think he's 90% of the way there, and that's fine. But you probably think another guy or two is 80% or 85% of the way there. Why pay such a significant premium for basically the same degree of uncertainty?

[rjolley]

Originally Posted by Atocep

I would prefer DLine or Lattimore, but outside of those 2 if they have a QB on their board they really like I wouldn't be against pulling the trigger.

I guess my point is I don't think NFL teams take the correct approach to finding a QB. Teams lacking a QB put all their eggs in one basket and when that basket is empty they move on to the next basket. Seems like an incredibly inefficient way to find your guy.

I think they should draft a QB high, maybe even trade back into the 1st round to get one. However, they need help all over and safety is one of the big need spots. Adams seems like a natural fit.

I also wouldn't mind seeing them trade back, pick up some extra picks, and still pick up that QB to develop late first/early second.

The question is, do they have the coaches to develop young QBs?

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by rjolley

I think they should draft a QB high, maybe even trade back into the 1st round to get one. However, they need help all over and safety is one of the big need spots. Adams seems like a natural fit.

I also wouldn't mind seeing them trade back, pick up some extra picks, and still pick up that QB to develop late first/early second.

The question is, do they have the coaches to develop young QBs?

I don't see safety as a big need. Both Demps and Amos have been above average the last 2 years. I just don't see a reason to take a limited impact position at #3. Mitch Unrein as a projected starter on the DLine? That's a big concern.

Trading back would be ideal but I don't see a fit. Someone will either trade up to 2 to get a qb or 5. The bears aren't in a spot other teams seem to want.

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by Logan

I stand by what I originally said. Once you pass on him at 1, or don't try to get him at 2, you've acknowledged that you have questions about his ability to be a franchise QB because QB needy teams don't pass on franchise QBs. Maybe you think he's 90% of the way there, and that's fine. But you probably think another guy or two is 80% or 85% of the way there. Why pay such a significant premium for basically the same degree of uncertainty?

Aaron Rodgers.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

Aaron Rodgers.

That was in the context of their scouting (presumably) failing to ID Trubisky as a franchise QB worthy of going #1 overall. Which team(s) graded out Rodgers as a franchise QB? Do you think the 49ers didn't think Alex Smith was a franchise QB when they decided to take him over Rodgers?

[Arles]

Lance Zierlein just reported that he believes the Titans already have a deal in place to trade down from 5.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by mckerney

Just please let someone take Joe Mixon before the Vikings pick so they don't take him after they finally got rid of Adrian Peterson.

I really hope this is Rick Spielman's last draft as GM, I have no idea how he's stuck around as long as he has.

I'm not tied into the MIN sports scene, but this surprises me a little. It seems to me that the Vikings have made some pretty solid moves the past few years and kept themselves competitive and a playoff contender, even though they lost their best player to injury one year and suspension another year, and they lost their starting QB last year.

Off of the top of my head, the only boner move I can remember was trading so much for Bradford. That was dumb. But given that they had been a strong playoff contender prior to Bridgewater's injury, I understand what led them to do that.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Arles

Lance Zierlein just reported that he believes the Titans already have a deal in place to trade down from 5.

Hope it isn't with the Saints . . .

Seems like Cleveland moving up for a QB would be the play.

And if this is true, I LOVE what Tenn is doing. Get the QB, then maximize quantity of draft picks.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Atocep

IMO it wouldn't be a terrible idea to double down on the QB position and draft the top QB on their board at 3 if he's still there. You simply aren't going anywhere in the NFL until you get the ability position sorted out and that would give them a year with Glennon to see what they have and a year with the drafted QB. If Glennon is the guy they could move the QB next year and get a 1st back. If Glennon isn't the guy they're a year ahead on developing his replacement.

Theoretically, I agree with you. But the reality is your scenario doesn't seem to happen. Highly drafted QBs are expected to play. If they don't start right away, everyone asks what is wrong with them. Or if it is accepted that the starting QB in place is better at the moment, the pressure to throw the kid in grows with every loss. And there will be losses--teams that don't lose often don't draft #3 overall.

And how often are these kids who are drafted and seem pretty good then flipped for a #1 down the road? That almost never happens. More like a 4th round pick. Hell, the Cowboys had a proven vet on the block and couldn't find a taker, much less a kid.

[Simbo Klice]

Originally Posted by Arles

Lance Zierlein just reported that he believes the Titans already have a deal in place to trade down from 5.

I'm betting there is a Cleveland deal contingent on Trubisky being there at 5... Only team I've seen him mocked to at all is SF at 2 and I think they're just posturing in the hopes Cleveland is dumb enough to have it force their hand and pick him 1st overall so Garrett falls. 12 is such a perfect spot for Tennessee, I may be suffering from fan delusion but I think our GM Jon Robinson is showing he might be the 2nd best football mind in the league right now.

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

I'm not tied into the MIN sports scene, but this surprises me a little. It seems to me that the Vikings have made some pretty solid moves the past few years and kept themselves competitive and a playoff contender, even though they lost their best player to injury one year and suspension another year, and they lost their starting QB last year.

Off of the top of my head, the only boner move I can remember was trading so much for Bradford. That was dumb. But given that they had been a strong playoff contender prior to Bridgewater's injury, I understand what led them to do that.

Spielman has been around for 11 years and they've won 1 playoff game during his tenure, and that was because Brad Childress and Darrell Bevell talked Favre out of retirement.

The Bradford trade would game made sense to give up what they did if the team was actually a QB away from making a room at the Super Bowl like Spielman believed, but I don't see how he could have come to that conclusion. The offensive line was terrible even before the injuries, there was a shortage of weapons in the passing game. Unless Peterson was going to return to 2012 form he wasn't going to be closer to enough to carry the offense, and whole the defense was good it wasn't going to be good enough to carry a mediocre offense to Super Bowl contention.

I don't think being close to being a contender if everyone has stayed healthy is good enough for someone who has seen the team go 86-89-1 and 1-4 in the playoffs after 11 years.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

And how often are these kids who are drafted and seem pretty good then flipped for a #1 down the road? That almost never happens. More like a 4th round pick. Hell, the Cowboys had a proven vet on the block and couldn't find a taker, much less a kid.

This is because teams that have promising young qbs hold onto them. Garoppolo would have pulled a 1st if the Pat's had moved him. Bradford pulled a first. Kevin Kolb pulled a 2nd. Folks was traded for Bradford and I'm sure he could have pulled at least a 2nd. Osweiler probably could have pulled a 1st if he had been traded at the right time.

Young-ish qbs can definitely be moved. Most teams just choose not to.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Atocep

This is because teams that have promising young qbs hold onto them. Garoppolo would have pulled a 1st if the Pat's had moved him. Bradford pulled a first. Kevin Kolb pulled a 2nd. Folks was traded for Bradford and I'm sure he could have pulled at least a 2nd. Osweiler probably could have pulled a 1st if he had been traded at the right time.

Young-ish qbs can definitely be moved. Most teams just choose not to.

The only actual example you have is Kolb, and he got a 2nd, not a 1st (and on top of that, it was a bad trade).

Rumors had the Pats evaluating Garappolo as worth a first. Clearly the league did not agree. Bradford is not a kid, but a proven vet (proven mediocre, IMO, but still...). Osweiler and Folks may have pulled those, but they didn't, and they have also both proven to suck since then.

You may be right that teams could get more if they just traded young QBs, and that isn't happening, but the fact is, the "secondary market" on backup QBs with starter potential is a rather tough trick to pull off and get value from for a seller.

[Izulde]

I'd love the Dolphins to grab Lamp if he's still there, but could see them going DL/LB or CB.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by mckerney

Spielman has been around for 11 years and they've won 1 playoff game during his tenure, and that was because Brad Childress and Darrell Bevell talked Favre out of retirement.

The Bradford trade would game made sense to give up what they did if the team was actually a QB away from making a room at the Super Bowl like Spielman believed, but I don't see how he could have come to that conclusion. The offensive line was terrible even before the injuries, there was a shortage of weapons in the passing game. Unless Peterson was going to return to 2012 form he wasn't going to be closer to enough to carry the offense, and whole the defense was good it wasn't going to be good enough to carry a mediocre offense to Super Bowl contention.

I don't think being close to being a contender if everyone has stayed healthy is good enough for someone who has seen the team go 86-89-1 and 1-4 in the playoffs after 11 years.

Okay, I get that. Definitely you should have gotten more out of your investment in 11 years. I didn't realize it was that long.

That said, I think some of your fandom is feeding into your over the top to desire to see him dismissed. Spielman maybe has not built a Super Bowl defense, but it is still a damn good one and he did it almost entirely through the draft. He drafted , what, the fourth or fifth QB in Bridegwater's draft, and prior to his injury, Bridgewater was probably the best or second best from that draft. I don't know what the opinion is on Zimmer, but from what I have seen from afar, he seems to have been a pretty solid hire in a league where a lot of doofuses are getting top jobs.

I would say Spielman is mediocre. Good at some things, not so good at others. You can find better, but you can also end up worse. After 11 years, probably time to try a change, but not sure he deserves that much hate.

I support a team which ridiculously kept Jeff Fisher employed. Now that guy was a ton of lard, and it's amazing he built the losingest career in head coach history off of one early Super Bowl visit.

[Suicane75]

If anyone drafts Trubisky in the first round they should be fired tomorrow.

[Coffee Warlord]

As long as that means the ENTIRE front office, up to and including ownership, then can the bears draft him please?