Quote:
Originally Posted by rm1369
To me there is almost no price too high for a great QB. The issue is of course the risk in moving up and being wrong, but a really good team will likely be wasted without having a QB so to me standing pat carries substantial risk as well. I do agree that they need to look at shoring up OT. If they don’t move up for a QB this year (or take one at 13) solidifying the line is probably the next best thing they can do for the QB position long term.
As far as letting guys compete, QB is the one position I’m not a fan of having a competition for. If you have 3 guys battling for the starting QB job, you simply don’t have a starting quality QB.
|
I take your points here as well. I'm not saying that if we somehow managed to trade up (more or less two years worth of picks) to get Burrow, he would be demolished behind this line, as that is not likely to be the case, but:
1. He will have a defense that is not remarkably improved
2. He will have questions at OT with Constanzo and Smith
3. He will have the same WR questions that Brissett had
4. He will have thin depth at TE with Ebron's departure
My $0.02 uninformed scenario:
1. Address OT with our first, and pick up a reasonable OT from free agency also. If Costanzo re-ups, we will get improvement at guard with Smith moving inside (Nelson, Smith and Kelly in the middle of our line would be fantastic.
2. Address DE with our first second and see if Eason lasts to our second second, if not, use our second second for WR.
3. Get best QB with our third
4. Get WR or TE with 4th.
I don't like how my scenario fails to address WR until the 4th (or perhaps late 2nd).
I think at the end of the day when fans think stuff like this through you have to admit that we have zero idea of what Ballard will actually do.
I just don't want to see us trade two years worth of development to get a franchise QB that we cant keep upright or cant support with an improved defense.