What % of people would be okay with/prefer a trade back? I know it'll matter what we get and where we trade back to, but in general would you be pleased with trading back?

---

I’m all about it.

---

No. I got my heart set on drafting Hockenson and I don't wanna do anything to miss out on him. He's not going to last passed pick #10, at the latest. If we trade down and he's off the board, I'd rather just trade out of the first round altogether.

---

If all of Murray/Bosa/Quinnen/Allen/Oliver are off the board (or if the team is just set on OT) then sure. Dunno why we work ourselves up for this every offseason though.

---

If all of Murray/Bosa/Quinnen/Allen/Oliver are off the board (or if the team is just set on OT) then sure. Dunno why we work ourselves up for this every offseason though.

Speak for yourself.

There's a slightly better chance this year of palatable offers than some of the previous scenarios, but I'm not worked up about it. 

Gleaning more picks would be a pleasant surprise, especially if the trade down still lands a Hockenson or Risner.

---

If all of Murray/Bosa/Quinnen/Allen/Oliver are off the board (or if the team is just set on OT) then sure. Dunno why we work ourselves up for this every offseason though.

Speak for yourself.

There's a slightly better chance this year of palatable offers than some of the previous scenarios, but I'm not worked up about it. 

Gleaning more picks would be a pleasant surprise, especially if the trade down still lands a Hockenson or Risner.

Hockenson will be gone by pick #10 and Risner will most likely still be on the board at #38, when we pick in round 2. If we miss out on Hockenson, we'll regret it.

---

I'd love to see a trade back.

But as we get closer, I'm convinced we take a defensive lineman.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Yes I want a trade back

---

No. I got my heart set on drafting Hockenson and I don't wanna do anything to miss out on him. He's not going to last passed pick #10, at the latest. If we trade down and he's off the board, I'd rather just trade out of the first round altogether.

I think your closing statement here is extreme.   If we traded to say 11 and missed out on Hockenson but still wound up with Sweat and an extra 2nd or 3rd I would be happy with that, even though my preference would be to stay at 7.  There are guys like Fant, Ford and Dillard that could be an upgrade for the team.  In such a deep draft, to preclude the possibility of trading down within reason works against our interests.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

What % of people would be okay with/prefer a trade back? I know it'll matter what we get and where we trade back to, but in general would you be pleased with trading back?

I would be in favor. Hock would be great, but if we move back and grab a Risner or Ford AND get an extra late first or second round pick out of the deal, that may be a net win.

If Haskins gets past NYG, I fully expect Dave to be fielding calls from WAS, CIN, or others to get a jump on Denver.

---

Speak for yourself.

There's a slightly better chance this year of palatable offers than some of the previous scenarios, but I'm not worked up about it. 

Gleaning more picks would be a pleasant surprise, especially if the trade down still lands a Hockenson or Risner.

Hockenson will be gone by pick #10 and Risner will most likely still be on the board at #38, when we pick in round 2. If we miss out on Hockenson, we'll regret it.

I would be quite surprised if this happened, short of pictures of him punching puppies released shortly before Thursday evening.

---

No. I got my heart set on drafting Hockenson and I don't wanna do anything to miss out on him. He's not going to last passed pick #10, at the latest. If we trade down and he's off the board, I'd rather just trade out of the first round altogether.

I think your closing statement here is extreme.   If we traded to say 11 and missed out on Hockenson but still wound up with Sweat and an extra 2nd or 3rd I would be happy with that, even though my preference would be to stay at 7.  There are guys like Fant, Ford and Dillard that could be an upgrade for the team.  In such a deep draft, to preclude the possibility of trading down within reason works against our interests.

I would love to get Ford, but if we took him in round 1, we'd probably play him at RT and that would be a mistake. He's a potential all-pro OG IMO. I'm not that high on Dillard. He's a pure finesse LT. I don't see him as a RT either. Fant is a fantastic receiver, but he's not that good of a blocker, which is problematic as well. Frankly, I don't care about getting a defensive lineman. As far as I'm concerned our defense is fine. It's the offense I'm worried about and missing out on perhaps the best TE to enter the draft in several years, is a mistake I'm not willing to take, especially since Foles relied so heavily on his TE's in Philly. Just adding a QB alone isn't going to fix this offense. Foles needs pieces around him to be successful. A key piece has to be a dual TE, because right now, our TE's suck!

---

What % of people would be okay with/prefer a trade back? I know it'll matter what we get and where we trade back to, but in general would you be pleased with trading back?

I would be in favor. Hock would be great, but if we move back and grab a Risner or Ford AND get an extra late first or second round pick out of the deal, that may be a net win.

If Haskins gets past NYG, I fully expect Dave to be fielding calls from WAS, CIN, or others to get a jump on Denver.

---

Hockenson will be gone by pick #10 and Risner will most likely still be on the board at #38, when we pick in round 2. If we miss out on Hockenson, we'll regret it.

I would be quite surprised if this happened, short of pictures of him punching puppies released shortly before Thursday evening.

Interior O-Linemen don't go that high and right now you have guys like Cody Ford and Garrett Bradbury who are seemingly locks for the first round and Chris Lindstrom is now being mocked into the late first round by many publications as well. With all the great defensive players in round 1, I'd be shocked if Risner wasn't there at #38.

---

It has been a relatively slow year, apparently either the use of the word has declined or the draftees level of play has not inspired using the word "beast" as often as in the past.

This year's "beast" mentions:
   - FLgatorsandjags- this year's clear winner with at least 6 mentions. His best: "DK Metcalf, beast". Simple and to the
                               point
   - Upper- a couple of mentions
   - OLineMatters, Jagjohn, RFC17 and Jords808 have also used the word "beast"
   - Bullseye sort of did but it was in quoting someone else

In the 15 years that I have been quietly tracking the "beast" use here at draft time, this has been the least ever. Not even JF24 or NH3 have used it but...Time Will Tell.

No need to beat me up, I know there are plenty of other hobbies.

---

Season Ticket holder since 2004.

 

        

If we trade back and Hockenson is gone I think Ferrell is a real possibility in a trade back to say the Dolphins at 13 who need a QB. Ferrell is your prototypical 4-3 end who I good see Tom loving especially after the whoopin he but on Jonah Williams in the championship game

---

If we trade back and Hockenson is gone I think Ferrell is a real possibility in a trade back to say the Dolphins at 13 who need a QB.  Ferrell is your prototypical 4-3 end who I good see Tom loving especially after the whoopin he but on Jonah Williams in the championship game

3 pressures , 0 sacks and 2 tackles in the biggest game of the year

---

It has been a relatively slow year, apparently either the use of the word has declined or the draftees level of play has not inspired using the word "beast" as often as in the past.

This year's "beast" mentions:
   - FLgatorsandjags- this year's clear winner with at least 6 mentions. His best: "DK Metcalf, beast". Simple and to the
                               point
   - Upper- a couple of mentions
   - OLineMatters, Jagjohn, RFC17 and Jords808 have also used the word "beast"
   - Bullseye sort of did but it was in quoting someone else

In the 15 years that I have been quietly tracking the "beast" use here at draft time, this has been the least ever. Not even JF24 or NH3 have used it but...Time Will Tell.

No need to beat me up, I know there are plenty of other hobbies.

might be my biggest pet peeve. glad it's dead, or at least on life support.

---

If we drop to 11/13 and net an additional 2nd/4th I would do it...I would assume this would be to grab one of the QBs.

Murray/Lock/Haskins/Jones (some combo of 3 out of the 4) would be off the board.
Bosa/Allen/Q.Williams/D. White would all likely be off the board as well.

That would be 7 of the 10/12 picks before 11/13...so one of the following would still be there at 11/13:
TE: TJ Hockenson
DL: Ed Oliver
DL: Montez Sweat
DL: Rashan Gary
DL: Brian Burns
OL: Jawaan Taylor
OL: Jonah Williams
OL: Andre Dillard
OL: Cody Ford
TE: Noah Fant
WR. DK Metcalf


Maybe it shakes out to:
8 - Detroit : DL - Sweat/Burns
9 - Buffalo: OL - Dillard/Taylor/Williams or WR - Metcalf
10 - Denver: Whichever QB is left of Jones/Haskins/Lock
11 - Jacksonville: Still has their choice of Oliver/Hockenson

---

Speak for yourself.

There's a slightly better chance this year of palatable offers than some of the previous scenarios, but I'm not worked up about it. 

Gleaning more picks would be a pleasant surprise, especially if the trade down still lands a Hockenson or Risner.

Hockenson will be gone by pick #10 and Risner will most likely still be on the board at #38, when we pick in round 2. If we miss out on Hockenson, we'll regret it.

Hockenson is not an exceptional athlete. He's just the most complete TE in the class. He'll likely be solid, but he'd be pure need as opposed to BAP so actually we'll probably ending up kicking ourselves for taking need over BAP in the long run.

---

"I am only an average man, but by George, I work harder at it than the average man." - Teddy Roosevelt

If we trade back and Hockenson is gone I think Ferrell is a real possibility in a trade back to say the Dolphins at 13 who need a QB.  Ferrell is your prototypical 4-3 end who I good see Tom loving especially after the whoopin he but on Jonah Williams in the championship game

3 pressures , 0 sacks and 2 tackles in the biggest game of the year

Don't look at the stat sheet and watch the game

---

If we drop to 11/13 and net an additional 2nd/4th I would do it...I would assume this would be to grab one of the QBs.

Murray/Lock/Haskins/Jones (some combo of 3 out of the 4) would be off the board.
Bosa/Allen/Q.Williams/D. White would all likely be off the board as well.

That would be 7 of the 10/12 picks before 11/13...so one of the following would still be there at 11/13:
TE: TJ Hockenson
DL: Ed Oliver
DL: Montez Sweat
DL: Rashan Gary
DL: Brian Burns
OL: Jawaan Taylor
OL: Jonah Williams
OL: Andre Dillard
OL: Cody Ford
TE: Noah Fant
WR. DK Metcalf


Maybe it shakes out to:
8 - Detroit : DL - Sweat/Burns
9 - Buffalo: OL - Dillard/Taylor/Williams or WR - Metcalf
10 - Denver: Whichever QB is left of Jones/Haskins/Lock
11 - Jacksonville: Still has their choice of Oliver/Hockenson

There is zero chance Oliver will be there at 11.  It wouldn't be a surprise if he goes before William's.  If you want to add Oliver you should add Allen and William's too

DJs latest mock has him going to the Jets


https://amp.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000...AEA&sr=amp

---

What % of people would be okay with/prefer a trade back? I know it'll matter what we get and where we trade back to, but in general would you be pleased with trading back?

i was, until i saw Hockenson projected at 8, but was told 7 maybe to high to draft a TE.  Take TJ at 7 and on to rd 2.

---

Season Tix, Section 409

2023 and still counting.....SB will finally be ours soon enough.
TLaw aka 'the prince that was promised' supporter.