The Sky is Falling...

[WildBB]

Wow...talk about over reaction.

We mostly knew that we were the outsiders going into the Cousins sweepstakes. And it was fairly evenly split pro/con for him coming here. Probably even more con, considering the $$.

Lets give them some time, and build this thing from the foundation and get some real solid players up in here.

Now we are on plan B. Not necessarily a bad thing, for a mid market franchise. Get some hard nosed athletes who put their hard hats on and go to work. Same with the coaching staff. Lets do this!

 

[Solar7]

Wow...talk about over reaction.

We mostly knew that we were the outsiders going into the Cousins sweepstakes. And it was fairly evenly split pro/con for him coming here. Probably even more con, considering the $$.

Lets give them some time, and build this thing from the foundation and get some real solid players up in here.

Now we are on plan B. Not necessarily a bad thing, for a mid market franchise. Get some hard nosed athletes who put their hard hats on and go to work. Same with the coaching staff. Lets do this!

The sky is still kind of falling, but Bradford is at least an umbrella. If he can stay healthy, we can be really good, but it's totally reliant on his knee. This is probably the best fit in terms of team/player that was out there this offseason.

 

[oaken1]

a signing like Bradford was expected. he is a bridge... the signing just means our future is in the draft... getting KC was a long shot anyway... its hilarious to see how many folks are bemoaning losing Cousins even more so than when we lost out on Manning, lol.

this means we will get a rookie,...and it is highly likely the rookie will play this season... for the long term health of the franchise, that is a good thing.

 

[Southpaw]

For what it is worth I like a healthy Bradford more than Kirk/Teddy/AJ/Keenum/et al.

 

[Solar7]

a signing like Bradford was expected. he is a bridge... the signing just means our future is in the draft... getting KC was a long shot anyway... its hilarious to see how many folks are bemoaning losing Cousins even more so than when we lost out on Manning, lol.

this means we will get a rookie,...and it is highly likely the rookie will play this season... for the long term health of the franchise, that is a good thing.

We've fought a long battle about what was happening at QB, and we finally have some kind of answer. I won't dwell on the Cousins thing too long - but Bradford puts us in a very interesting situation moving forward. I anticipate he'll play well enough in enough games to keep us from getting a top 5 pick, but poorly enough to make next year's pick somewhere in the top 10. Trading up remains just as much of a problem as it was before Bradford signed - too much to give up to compete with the other teams already in the area that want to move.

That means we're likely looking at someone like Lamar Jackson with our pick, or waiting into the further rounds of the draft... which, while Jackson's potential is sky high, do we want to commit to him and then feel like we're stuck next year if we have a bad season?

My biggest concern for the team is that we languish in that area of mediocrity we keep finding ourselves in.

 

[Cards_Campos]

For what it is worth I like a healthy Bradford more than Kirk/Teddy/AJ/Keenum/et al.

No offense....but that's like saying a sunny buffalo in December is Better then Miami

 

[Chopper0080]

Sam Bradford has not started a full season since 2012.

Sam Bradford started two games last year behind a better offensive line.

What happens WHEN he gets injured?

Do we start a rookie who we draft and is the 4th or 5th QB taken in the draft?

Do we spend more money that we don't have to sign a veteran backup to backup our bridge QB?

You can state garbage like the sky is falling, but how do you think this ends? Because history says we will need another QB during this upcoming season.

 

[Covert Rain]

With Cousins going bye bye, the Cards signing Bradford and taking themselves out of the running for Foles what would you call this?

If the sky isn't falling, there sure is some random crap raining down on our heads.....coincidentally.

 

[LoyaltyisaCurse]

The sky already fell...

 

[oaken1]

We've fought a long battle about what was happening at QB, and we finally have some kind of answer. I won't dwell on the Cousins thing too long - but Bradford puts us in a very interesting situation moving forward. I anticipate he'll play well enough in enough games to keep us from getting a top 5 pick, but poorly enough to make next year's pick somewhere in the top 10. Trading up remains just as much of a problem as it was before Bradford signed - too much to give up to compete with the other teams already in the area that want to move.

That means we're likely looking at someone like Lamar Jackson with our pick, or waiting into the further rounds of the draft... which, while Jackson's potential is sky high, do we want to commit to him and then feel like we're stuck next year if we have a bad season?

My biggest concern for the team is that we languish in that area of mediocrity we keep finding ourselves in.

I anticipated Bradford, but was hoping for Bridgewater just due to his age.

You shouldnt freak so much about trading up...we continually draft in the middle, and Keim continually picks mediocrity in the middle...swapping some future firsts to get a starting QB wont hurt this team... he just needs to commit... truly be "aggressive" and get the #1 from cleveland. Bradford will start 4-6 games...would be nice to see Sam Darnold taking over for him when the injury happens

 

[BW52]

Well right now of the teams drafting before the Cards
-Cleveland-QBs Tyrod Taylor,Kevin Hogan,Cody Kessler
Denver-Case Keenum,Trever Semien,Paxton Lynch,Chad Kelly
Jets-Bryce Petty,Christian Hackenberg,Joel Stave
Miami-Ryan Tannehill,Brandon Doughty
Washington,-Alex Smith,Colt McCoy
Buffalo-Nate Petersen

teams that would need to trade up for 1st rd QB
Minnesota-Kirk Cousins
NO-Drew Brees,Taysom Hill

At first glance it looks like Denver ,Washington and NO are set with starting QBs
Jets,Browns,Miami,Buffalo all in 1st round QB sweepstakes .

 

[Cards Czar]

Sam Bradford has not started a full season since 2012.

Sam Bradford started two games last year behind a better offensive line.

What happens WHEN he gets injured?

Do we start a rookie who we draft and is the 4th or 5th QB taken in the draft?

Do we spend more money that we don't have to sign a veteran backup to backup our bridge QB?

You can state garbage like the sky is falling, but how do you think this ends? Because history says we will need another QB during this upcoming season.

This is why I was wanting Norwell. We have to get him (QB) a lot of protection in the OL and that hurts losing him to JAX.
They really need to upgrade the OL from what we have at this time.

 

[LoyaltyisaCurse]

New Orleans would be stupid to pass on drafting a QBOTF. Especially considering their amazing draft last season, they have the freedom to do it. Otherwise they risk being in the Cards situation.

 

[Solar7]

I anticipated Bradford, but was hoping for Bridgewater just due to his age.

You shouldnt freak so much about trading up...we continually draft in the middle, and Keim continually picks mediocrity in the middle...swapping some future firsts to get a starting QB wont hurt this team... he just needs to commit... truly be "aggressive" and get the #1 from cleveland. Bradford will start 4-6 games...would be nice to see Sam Darnold taking over for him when the injury happens

I’m going to be furious if we trade our pick and it ends up handing a top 5 pick away. That’s my biggest fear. If I were a Texans fan, I’d be spitting mad about their situation.

If we were just a player away, maybe I’d be okay with it. Maybe. The fact of the matter is that trade ups for QBs have not worked in the past 20 years with all but one exception, with the verdict still out on the last two draft classes.

 

[Chopper0080]

This is why I was wanting Norwell. We have to get him (QB) a lot of protection in the OL and that hurts losing him to JAX.
They really need to upgrade the OL from what we have at this time.

How? In order to sign a guy they have to cut a guy. Our salary saving players are offensive linemen. Draft...not in round 1 because we have to use that on a future QB.

Upgrading the offensive line is much easier said than done.

 

[BW52]

How? In order to sign a guy they have to cut a guy. Our salary saving players are offensive linemen. Draft...not in round 1 because we have to use that on a future QB.

Upgrading the offensive line is much easier said than done.

-Cut Mathieu .That saves some cash.Iupati too.

 

[oaken1]

I’m going to be furious if we trade our pick and it ends up handing a top 5 pick away. That’s my biggest fear. If I were a Texans fan, I’d be spitting mad about their situation.

If we were just a player away, maybe I’d be okay with it. Maybe. The fact of the matter is that trade ups for QBs have not worked in the past 20 years with all but one exception, with the verdict still out on the last two draft classes.

true. but generally it is bad teams trading up to grab the "top" guy in desperation.

we are not a bad team... and we dont need the top guy, we need "our" top guy... it is important to be sure the player is a fit.

IMO any of the top 4 QB's has a better chance of success with us than they do the Browns... do you agree?? the situation is important.

we are just a player away...if it is the right player... unfortunately rookie QB's usually take time to season...

but with our defense and running game... what do you think we could do with Aaron Rodgers? Would we be a legit contender?

I aint claiming Darnold is Arod.. but that confidence is what the right QB can bring to the team,... the good ones elevate the players around them and bump their play to another level when the chips are down... we need to identify and acquire one of those QB's if the team is ever going to be relevant in the playoffs

 

[oaken1]

How? In order to sign a guy they have to cut a guy. Our salary saving players are offensive linemen. Draft...not in round 1 because we have to use that on a future QB.

Upgrading the offensive line is much easier said than done.

I agree... guys like Hernandez, Wynn, Ragnow, or Miller can be had between rounds 2 and early 4... any one of them would help... we are fortunate that this draft has some nice depth for interior linemen

 

[WildBB]

Sam Bradford has not started a full season since 2012.

Sam Bradford started two games last year behind a better offensive line.

What happens WHEN he gets injured?

Do we start a rookie who we draft and is the 4th or 5th QB taken in the draft?

Do we spend more money that we don't have to sign a veteran backup to backup our bridge QB?

You can state garbage like the sky is falling, but how do you think this ends? Because history says we will need another QB during this upcoming season.

You AND others over reacted guy.

We would have been one and done with Cousins, IF that. That's how it would have ended, imo.

What if Cousins tore something this year?

At least if something happens to Bradford it won't hamstring them for years! Fact not fiction.

 

[Solar7]

You AND others over reacted guy.

We would have been one and done with Cousins, IF that. That's how it would have ended, imo.

What if Cousins tore something this year?

At least if something happens to Bradford it won't hamstring them for years! Fact not fiction.

Saying we would have been one and done with Cousins is a lot more of a stretch than saying that Bradford might get reinjured. I'm alright with the Bradford signing, but let's call it what it is - Cousins took a bad team to the playoffs one time, didn't win. Plenty of young QBs have lost their first playoff start. He had two years with a bad team, didn't make it to the playoffs, but still had good seasons.

Bradford's never played a full season. Not once. The history points toward us needing a competent backup if this is going to be a winning season. Probably one past the 5th or 6th rookie taken. Chopper has a point.

 

[wit3card]

Saying we would have been one and done with Cousins is a lot more of a stretch than saying that Bradford might get reinjured. I'm alright with the Bradford signing, but let's call it what it is - Cousins took a bad team to the playoffs one time, didn't win. Plenty of young QBs have lost their first playoff start. He had two years with a bad team, didn't make it to the playoffs, but still had good seasons.

Bradford's never played a full season. Not once. The history points toward us needing a competent backup if this is going to be a winning season. Probably one past the 5th or 6th rookie taken. Chopper has a point.

Wrong 2012 he played a full season oh and preseason.

 

[Solar7]

true. but generally it is bad teams trading up to grab the "top" guy in desperation.

we are not a bad team... and we dont need the top guy, we need "our" top guy... it is important to be sure the player is a fit.

IMO any of the top 4 QB's has a better chance of success with us than they do the Browns... do you agree?? the situation is important.

we are just a player away...if it is the right player... unfortunately rookie QB's usually take time to season...

but with our defense and running game... what do you think we could do with Aaron Rodgers? Would we be a legit contender?

I aint claiming Darnold is Arod.. but that confidence is what the right QB can bring to the team,... the good ones elevate the players around them and bump their play to another level when the chips are down... we need to identify and acquire one of those QB's if the team is ever going to be relevant in the playoffs

Point out to me the "bad" teams that are moving up out of desperation. Go back and look at the history. Normally, it's teams that think they have the rest of their roster in place, besides a rookie. Normally I like to go with a 20 year outlook, but I wasn't able to find a chart quickly enough compared to this.

http://www.footballperspective.com/teams-traded-up-for-a-1st-round-qb-16-times-from-2005-to-2017/

2006: Broncos were 13-3, still traded up for Cutler... didn't work out.
2007: Browns were 4-12, were considered an up and coming team with their FA class but faltered with Charlie Frye, traded up for Quinn... didn't work out, but the team was a winner his draft year, with DA at QB.
2008: Ravens had a bad year at 5-11, but were coming off of a 13-3 campaign a year prior. With Willis McGahee, the only glaring problem seemed to be QB... they traded back and then forward again for Flacco... which worked out.
2009: Buccaneers went 9-7, traded up for Freeman... didn't work out.
2009: Jets went 9-7, traded a #1, #2, and three solid players for Sanchez (backing up the dump truck)... didn't work out.
2010: Broncos went 8-8, traded up for Tebow... didn't work out.
2011: Jaguars went 8-8, traded up for Gabbert... didn't work out.
2012: Redskins went 5-11, traded 2 1sts, and a 2nds (!) to move up four spots for Griffin... didn't work out.
2013: No trades up.
2014: Vikings went 5-10, traded up for Bridgewater... didn't work out.
2015: No trades up.
2016: Broncos went 12-4, won the Super Bowl, traded up for Lynch... didn't work out.
2016: Rams went 7-9, traded two second round picks, and a third in 16. Plus another first and third in the 2017 draft (!!) to move up for Goff... undecided.
2016: Eagles went 7-9 after 10-6 the year before, traded two players to move up to 8, a third and a fourth in 2016, a 2017 first, and a 2018 second (!!!) to pick Wentz... undecided, since his backup won them the Super Bowl, and he's got an ACL tear.
2017: Bears went 3-13, traded up for Trubisky... undecided.
2017: Chiefs went 12-4, traded up for Mahomes... undecided.
2017: Texans went 9-7, traded up for Watson... undecided and an ACL tear.

So... in 15 instances of trades up, only 7 teams were under .500. Only 4 were "bad," meaning not hovering around .500.

The vast majority of teams are moving up because they think the last piece to their puzzle is the QB - and only one of them actually hit.

 

[oaken1]

Point out to me the "bad" teams that are moving up out of desperation. Go back and look at the history. Normally, it's teams that think they have the rest of their roster in place, besides a rookie. Normally I like to go with a 20 year outlook, but I wasn't able to find a chart quickly enough compared to this.

http://www.footballperspective.com/teams-traded-up-for-a-1st-round-qb-16-times-from-2005-to-2017/

2006: Broncos were 13-3, still traded up for Cutler... didn't work out.
2007: Browns were 4-12, were considered an up and coming team with their FA class but faltered with Charlie Frye, traded up for Quinn... didn't work out, but the team was a winner his draft year, with DA at QB.
2008: Ravens had a bad year at 5-11, but were coming off of a 13-3 campaign a year prior. With Willis McGahee, the only glaring problem seemed to be QB... they traded back and then forward again for Flacco... which worked out.
2009: Buccaneers went 9-7, traded up for Freeman... didn't work out.
2009: Jets went 9-7, traded a #1, #2, and three solid players for Sanchez (backing up the dump truck)... didn't work out.
2010: Broncos went 8-8, traded up for Tebow... didn't work out.
2011: Jaguars went 8-8, traded up for Gabbert... didn't work out.
2012: Redskins went 5-11, traded 2 1sts, and a 2nds (!) to move up four spots for Griffin... didn't work out.
2013: No trades up.
2014: Vikings went 5-10, traded up for Bridgewater... didn't work out.
2015: No trades up.
2016: Broncos went 12-4, won the Super Bowl, traded up for Lynch... didn't work out.
2016: Rams went 7-9, traded two second round picks, and a third in 16. Plus another first and third in the 2017 draft (!!) to move up for Goff... undecided.
2016: Eagles went 7-9 after 10-6 the year before, traded two players to move up to 8, a third and a fourth in 2016, a 2017 first, and a 2018 second (!!!) to pick Wentz... undecided, since his backup won them the Super Bowl, and he's got an ACL tear.
2017: Bears went 3-13, traded up for Trubisky... undecided.
2017: Chiefs went 12-4, traded up for Mahomes... undecided.
2017: Texans went 9-7, traded up for Watson... undecided and an ACL tear.

So... in 15 instances of trades up, only 7 teams were under .500. Only 4 were "bad," meaning not hovering around .500.

The vast majority of teams are moving up because they think the last piece to their puzzle is the QB - and only one of them actually hit.

all 8 of those teams are either historically bad teams or teams who were bad at the time. the broncos in 2016 were still desperate after Peyton..and they still are

thats 8 teams over 11 years... and lets not forget the iggles were a disaster in 2015 and many thought 7-9 was over achieving ... the 2016 Broncos are an example of what happens when you do not fully commit to trading up... they could have had #1, but they waited and had to settle for trading up for Lynch... thats the mistake I dont want Keim to make, he should trade now

 

[SissyBoyFloyd]

IMO any of the top 4 QB's has a better chance of success with us than they do the Browns... do you agree??

I don't necessarily agree with that. We have a better chance at remaining a team just good enough to be irrelevant. They are in a situation where, if their cards are played correctly, could quickly become very relevant and a playoff team for most of the next decade. Only time will tell though, or maybe I should say, this draft will tell.

 

[TJ]

For what it is worth I like a healthy Bradford more than Kirk/Teddy/AJ/Keenum/et al.

Bingo. Bradford is talent wise better than everyone, including Cousins. Obviously the mitigating factor is his penchant for getting injured.