(11-16-2017, 01:27 PM)BlueEyedJag Wrote:

(11-16-2017, 01:13 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: It's not like those teams are going all in on those QB's they added. They only spent 2nd round picks in those trades and Garoppolo isn't even signed long term. This is more like an audition and passing on a potential franchise QB in the draft, when Jimmy G. might not work out could be catastrophic for the Niners. As for Cleveland, why wouldn't they double down? They have a ton of draft picks and if they pass on another franchise QB in the draft, those fans might riot. Personally, I can pretty much assure you as someone who lives in the Cincinnati area, A.J. McCarron is not the answer. He's a solid backup with limited potential.

---

I think Cleveland def goes QB #1...I don't think they go for McCarron for a 2nd round pick.  They are already loaded with guys that are just "meh" at the position...Kizer (2nd rounder) Kessler (3rd rounder)...Rookie QB (1st rounder)...how many guys do you need at QB?

For San Fran I can guarantee Garoppolo gets a long term deal (minus injury)...I think they go Saquon Barkley because Cleveland will go QB #1....

Cleveland can't risk  Rosen/Rudolph/Jackson going picks #2 - #8...NYG/Cin/Den/LAC could all easily go QB and then TB sitting at #8 is a prime trade partner for someone wanting to jump Cleveland if they don't go QB #1.

As many as it takes to finally find a true franchise starter and if they make the moves I predict, Kessler would be released, leaving them with McCarron, Kizer and their rookie. Kizer would then probably be relegated to 3rd string where he belongs. 

You say Cleveland will go QB, but when I said they would go QB, you said they wouldn't? The Browns and Bengals already had a deal done for McCarron that got messed up, why wouldn't the same deal get done after the season? Why would the Browns not add the concensus best player in the draft at a need position (Barkley) and still get one of the top QB's in the draft with their other top 10 pick? I could easily see the Giants drafting a QB, but since I have them trading for Cousins, I negated that. They have HUGE problems on the O-Line, so I just can't see them sticking a rookie back there without fixing the O-Line first. A veteran like Cousins would make much more sense, but if they didn't deal for him, I believe they would take a LT. The same goes for Denver. I believe they fix a depleted O-Line before placing yet another young QB behind that O-Line. The Chargers make the most sense as a landing spot for a rookie QB. In any case, I believe Kirk Cousins will land somewhere with one of the teams mentioned here. Washington has to get some compensation for him, because it's highly unlikely he re-signs after all the waiting they've made him do for a long term deal. They seem completely non-committal to him anyway. Tagging him yet again, would just be delaying the inevitable and this would be a good draft class to find his replacement.

Cincinnati will absolutely not take a QB. I live in the Cincinnati area and the local sports radio shows here are laughing at the idea that people think believe they'll take a QB. Their O-Line is trash and that is where the problem lies. They must come out of this draft with at the very least, a new LT and a new Center, but they could use so much more.

---