PDA

View Full Version : Broncos to host QBs Kyler Murray, Dwayne Haskins, Drew Lock and Daniel Jones for pre-draft visits: Real interest or smokescreen?



Denver Native (Carol)
03-25-2019, 09:37 AM
PHOENIX — Quarterbacks Kyler Murray, Dwayne Haskins, Drew Lock and Daniel Jones will make predraft visits to the Broncos, general manager John Elway confirmed Sunday during a break at the NFL’s annual meeting.

There are multiple ways to examine this news, which was expected when the Broncos did not meet with the quartet for 15-minute interviews at the scouting combine.

Call it a smokescreen to generate interest from teams picking below them who want to make a deal for the 10th pick.

Call it due diligence to make sure they are prepared to select Haskins in particular should he fall to them.

rest - https://www.denverpost.com/2019/03/24/broncos-hosting-quarterbacks-pre-draft-visits/

Cugel
03-25-2019, 09:44 AM
Since Kyler Murray is expected to be the #1 overall pick to the Cardinals, this can only be seen as due diligence. Interview the candidates who, if things go very different than expected, might be available at #10. They can't just say "OMG! We didn't interview Murray, and now he's on the board. What do we do? Do we take him? Do we trade down? What?"

But, nobody sensible thinks Elway is going to take a QB at #10. None of his other moves this off-season makes sense if he was going to do that. If you take a QB at #10 you have to play him. No point letting the dude sit on the bench when you're not strong enough to compete for a SB. This isn't like having Peyton Manning starting and Osweiler sitting on the bench.

Elway has his starter in Flacco and clearly believes Flacco is "in his prime." That means Elway expects him to start for more than 1 year. He only has a couple more years left on his GM contract, and wants to win now. It would be unsurprising if they took a developmental QB in the second or 3rd. They don't have one on the roster now, and need one.

But, at #10? No. It's simply doing their due diligence so that in case something wildly unexpected happens, they are prepared.

CoachChaz
03-25-2019, 09:56 AM
I'll disagree. Elway wants to win now AND later and I think if Lock is there at 10, he grabs him. The 2 other pressing needs are ILB and C/G and there is talent available at both positions later in the draft. If we have ANY success at all next year, the cost to move up for a QB would be insane, so I think the safe bet is getting Lock this year and not having to worry about moving up for a QB of the future next year.

TXBRONC
03-25-2019, 10:13 AM
I'll disagree. Elway wants to win now AND later and I think if Lock is there at 10, he grabs him. The 2 other pressing needs are ILB and C/G and there is talent available at both positions later in the draft. If we have ANY success at all next year, the cost to move up for a QB would be insane, so I think the safe bet is getting Lock this year and not having to worry about moving up for a QB of the future next year.

Agreed, Elway has many time he wants to win AND later. Whether or not that means he'll take Lock if he's there at 10 I'm not so sure. However, I do expect him to take him to take a quarterback I'm just not convinced it will be in the first round.

Cugel
03-25-2019, 10:15 AM
I'll disagree. Elway wants to win now AND later and I think if Lock is there at 10, he grabs him. The 2 other pressing needs are ILB and C/G and there is talent available at both positions later in the draft. If we have ANY success at all next year, the cost to move up for a QB would be insane, so I think the safe bet is getting Lock this year and not having to worry about moving up for a QB of the future next year.

If he loves Lock then he should draft him at #10 if he's available. If he thinks Lock is a future SB QB then he should even move up and get him. But, based on his moves so far there's no indication that he wants to draft a Qb in the first round this year or that he particularly loves Lock.

As for Flacco, all too many fans and media dismiss him as the future franchise QB of the Broncos. Just because YOU don't believe he can do it doesn't mean ELway believes that! HE clearly thinks Flacco can start for the team for several more years and he just said as much by saying that Flacco is "in his prime."

Well, you don't bench a SB winning QB who's "in his prime."

The fans' desire to draft a QB at #10 is to quickly get RID of Flacco, as a starter, as soon as possible, because the fans do NOT believe that Flacco is "in his prime."

In short you all disagree with Elway and want him to draft a QB and get him in there and develop him immediately and prefer not to wait until next year.

And the argument for doing it this year is that if the team wins 8 or 9 games this year, but doesn't make the playoffs, that's just going to make it harder than ever to move up into the top 3 picks to grab a QB next year, since they'd be picking at #18 or something.

But, is Elway convinced that he has to draft a QB in the top 3? Or does he think he can get a guy in the second or third round and develop him like Russell Wilson or Jimmy Garapolo or Kirk Cousins or Nick Foles, all of whom were taken in the second or later?

Cugel
03-25-2019, 10:20 AM
The view in the national media is that Flacco is mediocre and washed up, that he had one great season, but that was 7 years ago and he hasn't be very good since 2014 which is 5 years ago now.

From everything that Elway has said he views Flacco as a potential SB contending QB if he can build the rest of the team around him. He's still "in his prime." Personally, I think that Flacco's "prime" was long ago and we can't expect him to be very good in Denver and that they should draft a QB and get him ready to start as soon as possible.

But, I don't expect Elway to do it.

TXBRONC
03-25-2019, 10:37 AM
I think some people pay way to much attention to what people say than rather what they are doing. If Elway really believes that Flacco is in his "prime" then why not rework his contract and give Flacco some guaranteed money? I personally don't care what the national media thinks. I do expect that Elway is going to take a quarterback somewhere in this draft. Maybe not the first or second round but somewhere after that and at same time I would be shocked if drafts Lock at 10 if he's available.

BroncoJoe
03-25-2019, 10:41 AM
Elway traded for a QB with experience starting in this league for a long time. WTF do you expect him to say?

I would not find it surprising at all if one of the 4 QB's listed is available at 10, that Elway either pulls the trigger, or trades with another team picking up a bunch of draft picks.

Some of the comments here, as usual, is someone talking out of their ass pretending to know exactly what Elway is planning on doing.

Freyaka
03-25-2019, 11:22 AM
But, nobody sensible thinks Elway is going to take a QB at #10.

I consider myself a pretty sensible guy...

underrated29
03-25-2019, 11:27 AM
Fangio said he and Elway agreed that a young QB needs to sit and learn and wait. To me it adds up that they are selling flacco to us in his prime so that the chants for a rookie to play etc arent there. It also lets them "develop" their young QB while we roll with Flacco.

If we do take Lock for ex. He has little to no exp under center. It will take him a while to get that imo. Same for all of the QBs in the first round this year. Since that is the offense we are going to run we do need a vet QB that can take snaps under center and not suck balls like case does, and throw the ball downfield which they want to do. I guess flacco is as close as it gets to that.

I am not sure Lock will make it to us and I am not sure he is worth 10. But I can see it happening. I have a feeling he is the #1 on Elways board.

CoachChaz
03-25-2019, 11:59 AM
If he loves Lock then he should draft him at #10 if he's available. If he thinks Lock is a future SB QB then he should even move up and get him. But, based on his moves so far there's no indication that he wants to draft a Qb in the first round this year or that he particularly loves Lock.

As for Flacco, all too many fans and media dismiss him as the future franchise QB of the Broncos. Just because YOU don't believe he can do it doesn't mean ELway believes that! HE clearly thinks Flacco can start for the team for several more years and he just said as much by saying that Flacco is "in his prime."

Well, you don't bench a SB winning QB who's "in his prime."

The fans' desire to draft a QB at #10 is to quickly get RID of Flacco, as a starter, as soon as possible, because the fans do NOT believe that Flacco is "in his prime."

In short you all disagree with Elway and want him to draft a QB and get him in there and develop him immediately and prefer not to wait until next year.

And the argument for doing it this year is that if the team wins 8 or 9 games this year, but doesn't make the playoffs, that's just going to make it harder than ever to move up into the top 3 picks to grab a QB next year, since they'd be picking at #18 or something.

But, is Elway convinced that he has to draft a QB in the top 3? Or does he think he can get a guy in the second or third round and develop him like Russell Wilson or Jimmy Garapolo or Kirk Cousins or Nick Foles, all of whom were taken in the second or later?

I don't know...fixing the secondary...fixing holes on the OL...getting a legit veteran QB to take the reins for a year or two...

All kind of look like indications that he wants to put the team in a position where they don't have to draft for need (as stated by him and Fangio many times), and can draft a QB for the future. He's in a position right now where he can get Lock in the first and a guy like Mack Wilson or Blake Cashman in the 2nd and a good guard/center in the 3rd and then just draft for depth after that. Holes filled and future secured.

I'd almost say that everything he's done is an indication of going that route. Not to mention the countless stories of how he's "smitten" with Lock and bringing every QB in for a visit.

TXBRONC
03-25-2019, 12:42 PM
I consider myself a pretty sensible guy...

You have your moments. :D

Freyaka
03-25-2019, 02:15 PM
You have your moments. :D

My biggest flaw is I'm too easy to trust the QB we have on the roster simply because he's the starter and give him my full support. I've been burned enough on that one, I'm a tad more cautious about it these days.

HORSEPOWER 56
03-25-2019, 03:43 PM
Elway has always, always said that he likes to address needs in FA and BPA in the draft. QB is a need. Not just an immediate one he patched with Flacco but a long term one he could look to the draft to fill. Remember the funny thing about BPA, QBs don’t really fall out where other positions do in that ranking structure. QB is always the top priority. If you don’t have one, it’s your biggest need.

Lock or Haskins or whoever might not be the best overall player at 10, but if the BPA is an edge rusher, do you still take him with both Von and Chubb on the roster making big $ and go into the future with ??? At QB or do you get that QB that can develop behind Flacco so we can be competitive once Flacco (who is a short term rental) is gone?

It only makes sense to take a QB at 10 if one we like is there.

TXBRONC
03-25-2019, 04:13 PM
My biggest flaw is I'm too easy to trust the QB we have on the roster simply because he's the starter and give him my full support. I've been burned enough on that one, I'm a tad more cautious about it these days.

I give players at all positions the benefit of the doubt, but easier to some players than it is others.

SmilinAssasSin27
03-25-2019, 04:18 PM
I think Elway is doing his job

TXBRONC
03-25-2019, 04:27 PM
I think Elway is doing his job

:nod:

Jsteve01
03-25-2019, 08:38 PM
Fangio said he and Elway agreed that a young QB needs to sit and learn and wait. To me it adds up that they are selling flacco to us in his prime so that the chants for a rookie to play etc arent there. It also lets them "develop" their young QB while we roll with Flacco.

If we do take Lock for ex. He has little to no exp under center. It will take him a while to get that imo. Same for all of the QBs in the first round this year. Since that is the offense we are going to run we do need a vet QB that can take snaps under center and not suck balls like case does, and throw the ball downfield which they want to do. I guess flacco is as close as it gets to that.

I am not sure Lock will make it to us and I am not sure he is worth 10. But I can see it happening. I have a feeling he is the #1 on Elways board.

Actually even though I'm not a huge lock fan. I have to disagree on the fact that you stated he hasn't played a lot under Center. That was the entire reason he came back this year was to play in more of a pro-style offense and a play Under Center I think at least 30% of his pass sets this year were under Center if I remember correctly

WARHORSE
03-25-2019, 09:31 PM
I'll disagree. Elway wants to win now AND later and I think if Lock is there at 10, he grabs him. The 2 other pressing needs are ILB and C/G and there is talent available at both positions later in the draft. If we have ANY success at all next year, the cost to move up for a QB would be insane, so I think the safe bet is getting Lock this year and not having to worry about moving up for a QB of the future next year.

You like Lock over Haskins Coach?

Nomad
03-25-2019, 09:44 PM
I'll disagree. Elway wants to win now AND later and I think if Lock is there at 10, he grabs him. The 2 other pressing needs are ILB and C/G and there is talent available at both positions later in the draft. If we have ANY success at all next year, the cost to move up for a QB would be insane, so I think the safe bet is getting Lock this year and not having to worry about moving up for a QB of the future next year.


Do you agree with this assessment? It's from the latest Walter Football mock?

13924

Simple Jaded
03-25-2019, 10:14 PM
I like Lock’s experience over Haskins, that’s about it, from what I can gather.

Simple Jaded
03-25-2019, 10:20 PM
U_eZmEiyTo0

Good thing we have a Sicilian (or 5) in the battle of wits with death on the line.

Elevation inc
03-26-2019, 02:12 AM
I like Lock’s experience over Haskins, that’s about it, from what I can gather.

I think they are both safer bets then Murray or Jones. I'm with you though I like Lock's experience and the fact he improved consistently through his 4 years. I really like Haskins throwing ability though. I personally wouldn't be mad if we took either. I still don't believe we will, but I hope we do.

I'm pretty convinced the raiders are going to draft Haskins though, with Murray going number 1 to Arizona, I also think they should hold onto Rosen, but he really doesn't fit the kind of system they would have to install for Murray. I think he will probably get traded this summer during injury season.

We must remember as well though the Jets and Tampa have high interest in trading back, so a lot of movement can happen at the top now of the draft. we could get leapfrogged and miss out entirely, we could have interest in trading up, or we could just stand pat, and let the cards fall where they may.

There is talk about Looking at Stidham in a private workout as well.....so they could like Thorson or Stidham enough to go for one of those guys later or a guy like Rypien who they have met with already.

Elevation inc
03-26-2019, 02:14 AM
Actually even though I'm not a huge lock fan. I have to disagree on the fact that you stated he hasn't played a lot under Center. That was the entire reason he came back this year was to play in more of a pro-style offense and a play Under Center I think at least 30% of his pass sets this year were under Center if I remember correctly

This is correct, and another reason why teams like him. He cares about his craft and putting the time and work in.

CoachChaz
03-26-2019, 08:01 AM
You like Lock over Haskins Coach?

By a fairly slim margin, yes. I think if I saw Haskins do well for more than one season...or even if he did it in a system different from Meyer's, I'd have more faith in him. But, I couldn't tell you which one will be the better pro 5 years from now.

CoachChaz
03-26-2019, 08:06 AM
Do you agree with this assessment? It's from the latest Walter Football mock?

13924

I think 2nd round talent is a bit of a stretch. I'd say late first round. Somewhere along the lines of Paxton Lynch. Although I believe Lock has a much better football acumen than Lynch ever did and I think he'll be a better QB in the long run. Unfortunately, it's a fairly dry QB class this year, so all of their values are inflated a bit. To put it another way, if the top 3 this year had entered last year or next year, they'd rank as probably the 4th, 5th and 6th best QB's available, at best. My opinion.

Nomad
03-26-2019, 08:32 AM
I think 2nd round talent is a bit of a stretch. I'd say late first round. Somewhere along the lines of Paxton Lynch. Although I believe Lock has a much better football acumen than Lynch ever did and I think he'll be a better QB in the long run. Unfortunately, it's a fairly dry QB class this year, so all of their values are inflated a bit. To put it another way, if the top 3 this year had entered last year or next year, they'd rank as probably the 4th, 5th and 6th best QB's available, at best. My opinion.

It's about how I see it, but I also agree with the guy that Lock is a reach compared to the talent that will be available. Just me.....I still wouldn't pass up White for Lock. If White isn't there, I guess go for it, and hope Lock becomes a great QB.

Cugel
03-26-2019, 10:54 AM
I think some people pay way to much attention to what people say than rather what they are doing. If Elway really believes that Flacco is in his "prime" then why not rework his contract and give Flacco some guaranteed money? I personally don't care what the national media thinks. I do expect that Elway is going to take a quarterback somewhere in this draft. Maybe not the first or second round but somewhere after that and at same time I would be shocked if drafts Lock at 10 if he's available.

That makes no sense. Why would they re-negotiate Flacco's contract? He's under contract right now through 2021! And there's ZERO dead cap money, all his guaranteed money has already been paid! His contract is great for the Broncos as is!

So if they decide to get rid of him after this season, then no cap hit. But, they can simply keep him around at $20m next season, which is chump change for a good starting QB but is too much to pay an ageing veteran backup.

So, it depends on how Flacco does this year.

As for drafting a QB in the later rounds of the draft, you are making my point. Of course they need a developmental QB and don't have one. So, somewhere between the 2nd and 7th round they should draft one to develop the way they did Trevor Siemian and Chad Kelly.

It's just that Elway isn't interested in drafting a QB at #10.


"I'd be shocked if the Broncos draft a QB at #10." -- Broncos Insider Troy Renck.

That's basically the universal view. Of course he could still do it, but all his moves so far indicate that he thinks he can compete RIGHT NOW, with the team he's got (with a few upgrades at RT and CB to fill holes).

It makes no sense to draft a QB with the 10th pick of the first round unless you intend to start him as soon as possible. It's a waste of a draft pick.

CoachChaz
03-26-2019, 11:20 AM
It's about how I see it, but I also agree with the guy that Lock is a reach compared to the talent that will be available. Just me.....I still wouldn't pass up White for Lock. If White isn't there, I guess go for it, and hope Lock becomes a great QB.

There are probably 15 players I would take before Lock. But...God only knows what goes through Elway's head sometimes.

Cugel
03-26-2019, 11:40 AM
There are probably 15 players I would take before Lock. But...God only knows what goes through Elway's head sometimes.

Well, THAT's the truth! Last year for instance he didn't draft a QB at all because "we're not kicking Paxton to the curb!" This, about 4 months before they actually kicked Paxton to the curb, which any casual fan could have told you was blindingly obvious. :tsk:

TXBRONC
03-26-2019, 11:58 AM
That makes no sense. Why would they re-negotiate Flacco's contract? He's under contract right now through 2021! And there's ZERO dead cap money, all his guaranteed money has already been paid! His contract is great for the Broncos as is!

So if they decide to get rid of him after this season, then no cap hit. But, they can simply keep him around at $20m next season, which is chump change for a good starting QB but is too much to pay an ageing veteran backup.

So, it depends on how Flacco does this year.

As for drafting a QB in the later rounds of the draft, you are making my point. Of course they need a developmental QB and don't have one. So, somewhere between the 2nd and 7th round they should draft one to develop the way they did Trevor Siemian and Chad Kelly.

It's just that Elway isn't interested in drafting a QB at #10.


That's basically the universal view. Of course he could still do it, but all his moves so far indicate that he thinks he can compete RIGHT NOW, with the team he's got (with a few upgrades at RT and CB to fill holes).

It makes no sense to draft a QB with the 10th pick of the first round unless you intend to start him as soon as possible. It's a waste of a draft pick.

Cug, you highlighted Elway said that Flacco is in prime. I took from that you mean that Elway sees Flacco as a longer term solution than just next three years. If that is case, he might as well just rework his contract now. I for one don't think Elway sees Flacco as long term solution, if he did he would have reworked his contract.

Renck stating he would be shocked if Denver took a quarterback with 10th overall pick doesn't mean he knows Elway's exact thinking. My personal feeling is that Elway won't take a quarterback early (i.e. 1st and 2nd rounds) based on the fact he traded for Flacco. However, I can't completely discount, taking a quarterback with the 10th overall pick because on it's face is not a wasted pick. The Chiefs just three years ago took Pat Mahomes with 10th overall pick with the intention that he would sit behind Alex Smith for his rookie season.

Cugel
03-26-2019, 12:20 PM
Cug, you highlighted Elway said that Flacco is in prime. I took from that you mean that Elway sees Flacco as a longer term solution than just next three years. If that is case, he might as well just rework his contract now. I for one don't think Elway sees Flacco as long term solution, if he did he would have reworked his contract.

Renck stating he would be shocked if Denver took a quarterback with 10th overall pick doesn't mean he knows Elway's exact thinking. My personal feeling is that Elway won't take a quarterback early (i.e. 1st and 2nd rounds) based on the fact he traded for Flacco. However, I can't completely discount, taking a quarterback with the 10th overall pick because on it's face is not a wasted pick. The Chiefs just three years ago took Pat Mahomes with 10th overall pick with the intention that he would sit behind Alex Smith for his rookie season.

But, the Chiefs always intended to get rid of Alex Smith as soon as possible because he kept losing in the playoffs and the Chiefs couldn't win the SB with him. So, taking Mahomes was a brilliant move. But, Elway isn't sure whether he can win in the playoffs with Flacco or not. He has an amazing playoff winning percentage, but that was a long time ago, so who knows what he can do now?

For Elway "long term" does not mean the next ten years. He's not going to be here the next ten years. His contract expires in 3 years and it's expected that he wants to move into team ownership (not necessarily the Broncos) after that.

Besides, Joe Flacco is 34 now, which means he MIGHT last 3 years, but he might not too. Not every QB lasts until they're 40, its merely a hope of Elways' at this point. So, it makes ZERO sense to re-sign Flacco, especially since they don't have to because he's under contract for what will probably be the rest of his career.

Elevation inc
03-27-2019, 02:33 AM
There are probably 15 players I would take before Lock. But...God only knows what goes through Elway's head sometimes.

I am a big Lock fan but even I know from a straight value perspective 10 is to high for him. I agree he is pick 25-32 from a straight value perspective. He would be the 4th or 5th QB in last years class like you mentioned but ahead of both Jackson and Allen for sure. I do like him better then Rosen as a prospect but not better then Darnold or Mayfield. I liked Allen more as a prospect then Rosen last year as well though and like lock better then Allen....But calling Lock the 4th or 5th Best QB depending on your view of Haskins for last years class is pretty accurate.

kenoy28
03-27-2019, 05:10 PM
Haven't people compared Lock's ceiling to that of Patrick Mahomes? And his floor to Jay Cutler? I'd say that value puts him in top 15 consideration. I'd prefer Kyler Murray after watching his pro day, but no way he falls to 10. I think he's got the best arm in the class--I just question his leadership.

Cugel, I'm confused why you can't sit a QB to learn if they are a top 10 pick? It takes most guys time to learn, and if they are thrown to the wolves too early, it can really hurt their development--even if they are a blue chipper

SmilinAssasSin27
03-27-2019, 05:28 PM
Haven't people compared Lock's ceiling to that of Patrick Mahomes? And his floor to Jay Cutler? I'd say that value puts him in top 15 consideration. I'd prefer Kyler Murray after watching his pro day, but no way he falls to 10. I think he's got the best arm in the class--I just question his leadership.

Cugel, I'm confused why you can't sit a QB to learn if they are a top 10 pick? It takes most guys time to learn, and if they are thrown to the wolves too early, it can really hurt their development--even if they are a blue chipper

A top 10 guy can sit. Just look at Cleveland. It took an injury for their first overall to play. He likely would have eventually regardless, but likely much later in the season

TXBRONC
03-27-2019, 05:51 PM
But, the Chiefs always intended to get rid of Alex Smith as soon as possible because he kept losing in the playoffs and the Chiefs couldn't win the SB with him. So, taking Mahomes was a brilliant move. But, Elway isn't sure whether he can win in the playoffs with Flacco or not. He has an amazing playoff winning percentage, but that was a long time ago, so who knows what he can do now?

For Elway "long term" does not mean the next ten years. He's not going to be here the next ten years. His contract expires in 3 years and it's expected that he wants to move into team ownership (not necessarily the Broncos) after that.

Besides, Joe Flacco is 34 now, which means he MIGHT last 3 years, but he might not too. Not every QB lasts until they're 40, its merely a hope of Elways' at this point. So, it makes ZERO sense to re-sign Flacco, especially since they don't have to because he's under contract for what will probably be the rest of his career.

Wait a minute, you're saying it was ok for the Chiefs because they had intended to get rid of Smith as soon as possible but it would be a waste for Denver? If the Broncos take a quarterback with the 10th overall their goal would be the same, to get their drafted quarterback on the field asap.

Cugel
03-27-2019, 07:58 PM
Haven't people compared Lock's ceiling to that of Patrick Mahomes? And his floor to Jay Cutler? I'd say that value puts him in top 15 consideration. I'd prefer Kyler Murray after watching his pro day, but no way he falls to 10. I think he's got the best arm in the class--I just question his leadership.

Cugel, I'm confused why you can't sit a QB to learn if they are a top 10 pick? It takes most guys time to learn, and if they are thrown to the wolves too early, it can really hurt their development--even if they are a blue chipper

Because you invested a top 10 pick in the guy and get zero return on that investment in his first year. It's like buying a Ferrari for $250,000 and keeping it in the garage and never driving it! Picking a Qb in the second is like buying a used Chevy Truck as a spare vehicle for hauling, and keeping it in the garage.

That "sit a guy for a year" almost never happens in the NFL anymore. That's old hat. It happened with the Chiefs because they had a playoff team with Alex Smith, but he had disappointed in the playoffs before. So, they were planning on getting rid of Alex Smith when they drafted Mahomes. Yet Alex Smith had a good season so they didn't want to just bench him. They actually gave him a chance in the playoffs. Then they traded him for a 2nd rounder.

But, Joe Flacco has NOT disappointed in the playoffs, and clearly Elway thinks Flacco could have a renaissance in Denver and lead them to a SB. Or at least get into the playoffs and have a decent chance to advance.

I don't agree, and you probably don't either.

But, if you accept Elway's premise it makes no sense to draft a QB at #10 or higher - because you might want to commit to Flacco for the next 3 years. In which case, you need a backup QB, not a starter. And you can get a backup in the second or later round.

It would be exactly like drafting Osweiler when they had Peyton. He didn't start and hardly played until his 4th season. Well, you can do that if its the 56th pick of the second round, but sure as Hell not at #10 of the first!

Jsteve01
03-28-2019, 07:12 PM
The debate goes back and forth. But I honestly think ideally for most of these guys a year watching a solid that is the best bet for them. Andrew Luck was ready to play when he came in, Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers. But beyond those guys how many young guys are really ready to get knocked in the mouth and to deal with the speed and the scheme flexibility that they'll see at the NFL level? I would contend that there are a lot of guys that could have been good NFL quarterbacks like say a David Carr or an Andrew Walter that got thrown into the fire too fast behind poor offensive lines and the rest of their careers suffered because of it

Simple Jaded
03-28-2019, 07:48 PM
I’d let the 1st overall pick sit if I had competent-to-better play at that position already.

There’s all kinds of good reasons to let a player sit.

Jay Cutler (also a Top 10-ish pick) should’ve sat for at least a season, even though he was the better player, his teammates weren’t ready for the move. That could conceivably be the situation again (not comparing Flacco to Plummer).

Davii
03-28-2019, 10:55 PM
Because you invested a top 10 pick in the guy and get zero return on that investment in his first year. It's like buying a Ferrari for $250,000 and keeping it in the garage and never driving it! Picking a Qb in the second is like buying a used Chevy Truck as a spare vehicle for hauling, and keeping it in the garage.

That "sit a guy for a year" almost never happens in the NFL anymore. That's old hat. It happened with the Chiefs because they had a playoff team with Alex Smith, but he had disappointed in the playoffs before. So, they were planning on getting rid of Alex Smith when they drafted Mahomes. Yet Alex Smith had a good season so they didn't want to just bench him. They actually gave him a chance in the playoffs. Then they traded him for a 2nd rounder.

But, Joe Flacco has NOT disappointed in the playoffs, and clearly Elway thinks Flacco could have a renaissance in Denver and lead them to a SB. Or at least get into the playoffs and have a decent chance to advance.

I don't agree, and you probably don't either.

But, if you accept Elway's premise it makes no sense to draft a QB at #10 or higher - because you might want to commit to Flacco for the next 3 years. In which case, you need a backup QB, not a starter. And you can get a backup in the second or later round.

It would be exactly like drafting Osweiler when they had Peyton. He didn't start and hardly played until his 4th season. Well, you can do that if its the 56th pick of the second round, but sure as Hell not at #10 of the first!

Does the Ferrari have a chance at learning how to be a better car by sitting in the garage for a little while?

Jsteve01
03-29-2019, 06:19 AM
I’d let the 1st overall pick sit if I had competent-to-better play at that position already.

There’s all kinds of good reasons to let a player sit.

Jay Cutler (also a Top 10-ish pick) should’ve sat for at least a season, even though he was the better player, his teammates weren’t ready for the move. That could conceivably be the situation again (not comparing Flacco to Plummer).

He was more gifted but didnt give them abetter chance to win. Also Heimerdinger and Shanny hamstrung Plummer by shelving roll outsand boot action. Very few rookie qb are being prepared at the collegiate level to jump in immediately

broncofaninfla
03-29-2019, 10:49 AM
I personally am convinced Lock will not be a Bronco or at least not at the number 10 spot. I saw the same Senior Bowl practices that Elway and company saw, that kid is absolutely not a top 10 player. I'd even argue not a first round talent. If Elway truly does stick with a BPA approach to the draft Lock will not be a Bronco.

TXBRONC
03-29-2019, 10:58 AM
The debate goes back and forth. But I honestly think ideally for most of these guys a year watching a solid that is the best bet for them. Andrew Luck was ready to play when he came in, Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers. But beyond those guys how many young guys are really ready to get knocked in the mouth and to deal with the speed and the scheme flexibility that they'll see at the NFL level? I would contend that there are a lot of guys that could have been good NFL quarterbacks like say a David Carr or an Andrew Walter that got thrown into the fire too fast behind poor offensive lines and the rest of their careers suffered because of it

I agree that sitting is helpful but I don't think helps with dealing with speed of the game. Experience is what helps a quarterback more with that aspect.

CoachChaz
03-29-2019, 11:12 AM
I agree that sitting is helpful but I don't think helps with dealing with speed of the game. Experience is what helps a quarterback more with that aspect.

Yeah...the sitting happens because they have some mechanics that need to be fine tuned and they can work them out in practices. But inevitably, the hope is that by going through that, they are more prepared for the next level of competition once they get their chance. But no...nothing prepares them for games like actual games do.

Cugel
03-29-2019, 01:00 PM
A top 10 guy can sit. Just look at Cleveland. It took an injury for their first overall to play. He likely would have eventually regardless, but likely much later in the season

Sitting Baker Mayfield to start the season was so stupid they had to fire Hue Jackson. Then they did the sensible thing and started Mayfield and the rest is history. Now they have OBJ and are favored to win their division over a stumbling Steelers, Ravens with a QB who can't throw and the Bengals, who are the Bengals.

Team won how many games the previous two seasons, and they can't start the rookie? Why? Because they are in "win-now" mode? It made no sense then or now.

If you draft a top 10 QB you have to play him, because a pick that high is your future franchise QB - for the next 10 years (hopefully). The sooner he gets experience the better. You're not sacrificing anything by starting him because you're not ready to compete for anything now anyway.

Cugel
03-29-2019, 01:04 PM
Quote Originally Posted by TXBRONC View Post
I agree that sitting is helpful but I don't think helps with dealing with speed of the game. Experience is what helps a quarterback more with that aspect.


OK, we have a winner! A rookie QB needs experience and the sooner he gets it the sooner he will get good. IF they team isn't competing for the playoffs anyway there's no point starting a veteran and denying your future franchise QB experience!

That was the mistake the Broncos made with Paxton. He wasn't ready, so they sat him and he never developed. I'm not saying Paxton would have been any good if they DID start him, but if you draft a QB in the first, you have to develop him, and they didn't do that.

They were under the delusion that they could compete for playoff wins without Peyton because they were SB champions.

But, the instant Peyton walked out the door and Osweiler went to Houston, that SB window closed. They just weren't willing to admit it. They were immediately in rebuild mode.

TXBRONC
03-29-2019, 01:51 PM
Sitting Baker Mayfield to start the season was so stupid they had to fire Hue Jackson. Then they did the sensible thing and started Mayfield and the rest is history. Now they have OBJ and are favored to win their division over a stumbling Steelers, Ravens with a QB who can't throw and the Bengals, who are the Bengals.

Team won how many games the previous two seasons, and they can't start the rookie? Why? Because they are in "win-now" mode? It made no sense then or now.

If you draft a top 10 QB you have to play him, because a pick that high is your future franchise QB - for the next 10 years (hopefully). The sooner he gets experience the better. You're not sacrificing anything by starting him because you're not ready to compete for anything now anyway.

Cleveland didn't fire Hue Jackson for sitting Baker Mayfield. They fired him because continued to lose games not because started Taylor. In fact, Taylor expected to start this past season, even though they were going draft a quarterback with one of their two first round picks.

TXBRONC
03-29-2019, 02:17 PM
OK, we have a winner! A rookie QB needs experience and the sooner he gets it the sooner he will get good. IF they team isn't competing for the playoffs anyway there's no point starting a veteran and denying your future franchise QB experience!

That was the mistake the Broncos made with Paxton. He wasn't ready, so they sat him and he never developed. I'm not saying Paxton would have been any good if they DID start him, but if you draft a QB in the first, you have to develop him, and they didn't do that.

They were under the delusion that they could compete for playoff wins without Peyton because they were SB champions.

But, the instant Peyton walked out the door and Osweiler went to Houston, that SB window closed. They just weren't willing to admit it. They were immediately in rebuild mode.

Cug, it's not a black and white issue. There are advantages and disadvantages to sitting a quarterback that just been drafted. There isn't right or a wrong answer to it.

Cugel
03-29-2019, 02:46 PM
Cug, it's not a black and white issue. There are advantages and disadvantages to sitting a quarterback that just been drafted. There isn't right or a wrong answer to it.

Well, if they DON't start the QB in a season when they are not competitive, they are just wasting time. They will have to start him sometime, and of course in his rookie year he's almost certainly not going to be great.

Maybe they wait 8 games, but they have to get him in there or he'll never develop.

As for Hue Jackson, I repeat: Not starting Baker Mayfield is UNIVERSALLY, and I mean UNIVERSALLY regarded as blithering stupidity. They were the Browns, losers of 31 games in two years.

And yes, they DID fire Hue because he sucked worse than Vance Joseph, but not starting Mayfield was the worst of his many coaching offenses.

Cugel
03-29-2019, 02:50 PM
Cleveland didn't fire Hue Jackson for sitting Baker Mayfield. They fired him because continued to lose games not because started Taylor. In fact, Taylor expected to start this past season, even though they were going draft a quarterback with one of their two first round picks.

Taylor expected to start? By who? Taylor's mom? Nobody in the media or the fans thought that. The minute they drafted Mayfield the only question was how soon could he get ready. A one-eyed man is better than Tyrod Taylor. The Chargers are crossing their fingers that Phillip Rivers doesn't get hurt so they have to use him.

TXBRONC
03-29-2019, 03:32 PM
Taylor expected to start? By who? Taylor's mom? Nobody in the media or the fans thought that. The minute they drafted Mayfield the only question was how soon could he get ready. A one-eyed man is better than Tyrod Taylor. The Chargers are crossing their fingers that Phillip Rivers doesn't get hurt so they have to use him.

Who expected him to start? The Browns, not Taylor's mom, the fans, or media. Just because they put some drivel doesn't mean anything. As I said Taylor was expected start that was a well-known fact. How long he would remain the starter was up for debate.

I have no idea why you mentioned Chargers situation this year it has nothing to do with Browns situation last year.

Cugel
03-29-2019, 05:10 PM
Who expected him to start? The Browns, not Taylor's mom, the fans, or media. Just because they put some drivel doesn't mean anything. As I said Taylor was expected start that was a well-known fact. How long he would remain the starter was up for debate.

I have no idea why you mentioned Chargers situation this year it has nothing to do with Browns situation last year.

Um, Tyrod Taylor signed a two year contract with the Chargers to be Phillip Rivers' backup QB? Did you not know that?


Sportrac: Tyrod Taylor signed a 2 year, $11,000,000 contract with the Los Angeles Chargers, including a $5,000,000 signing bonus, $6,000,000 guaranteed, and an average annual salary of $5,500,000. In 2019, Taylor will earn a base salary of $1,000,000 and a signing bonus of $5,000,000, while carrying a cap hit of $3,500,000 and a dead cap value of $6,000,000.

YOur statement that he could potentially have beaten out the top #1 pick of the draft is just impossible, unless Mayfield would have sucked like JaMarcus Russell or Ryan Leaf of course. Otherwise he was going to be given the starting job.

Nobody but nobody invests the #1 overall pick in a QB and doesn't name him the starter at some time his rookie year. I believe that Paxton was the only 1st round QB in NFL history not to ever start for his team other than Johnny Manziel.

Taylor's a career backup of course. So, Sashi Brown might have wanted him, but obviously John Dorsey did not because he ain't there: not even as a backup. And at $6m guarantee they certainly could have.

Davii
03-30-2019, 05:09 PM
Well, if they DON't start the QB in a season when they are not competitive, they are just wasting time. They will have to start him sometime, and of course in his rookie year he's almost certainly not going to be great.

Maybe they wait 8 games, but they have to get him in there or he'll never develop.

As for Hue Jackson, I repeat: Not starting Baker Mayfield is UNIVERSALLY, and I mean UNIVERSALLY regarded as blithering stupidity. They were the Browns, losers of 31 games in two years.

And yes, they DID fire Hue because he sucked worse than Vance Joseph, but not starting Mayfield was the worst of his many coaching offenses.

Bullshit. Not everything is black and white, not every QB is the same, not every situation is the same.

SmilinAssasSin27
03-30-2019, 05:26 PM
Taylor expected to start? By who? Taylor's mom? Nobody in the media or the fans thought that. The minute they drafted Mayfield the only question was how soon could he get ready. A one-eyed man is better than Tyrod Taylor. The Chargers are crossing their fingers that Phillip Rivers doesn't get hurt so they have to use him.

Just watch Hard Knocks. Media was asking Mayfield how he felt about getting no real chance to battle for the starter spot. TT got all the 1 reps.

TXBRONC
03-30-2019, 07:13 PM
Um, Tyrod Taylor signed a two year contract with the Chargers to be Phillip Rivers' backup QB? Did you not know that?


YOur statement that he could potentially have beaten out the top #1 pick of the draft is just impossible, unless Mayfield would have sucked like JaMarcus Russell or Ryan Leaf of course. Otherwise he was going to be given the starting job.

Nobody but nobody invests the #1 overall pick in a QB and doesn't name him the starter at some time his rookie year. I believe that Paxton was the only 1st round QB in NFL history not to ever start for his team other than Johnny Manziel.

Taylor's a career backup of course. So, Sashi Brown might have wanted him, but obviously John Dorsey did not because he ain't there: not even as a backup. And at $6m guarantee they certainly could have.

Cug, what does Taylor signing a contract with the Chargers this year have to do with his signing with the Browns last year? Absolutely nothing from what I tell.

You are incorrect, teams invest picks in players based on potential all the time. Apparently you didn't follow Browns situation at all. Taylor was expected to start and did until such time as Mayfield was ready. That is a fact Cug.

Lynch did start a few games for the Broncos so I have no idea what you're talking about.

TXBRONC
03-30-2019, 07:19 PM
Just watch Hard Knocks. Media was asking Mayfield how he felt about getting no real chance to battle for the starter spot. TT got all the 1 reps.

I didn't watch hard knocks, but one didn't have too, it had been reported that Taylor was going to start until their prize was ready to go.

JPPT1974
03-30-2019, 08:30 PM
Yeah but it seems that Tyrod Taylor is good at best as a backup. And really they the Browns felt resting Baker Mayfield would help him out like it did Chiefs Patrick Mahomes. But Mayfield kind of quieted his doubters last season. He will possibly have to get used to a new system with the new coaches.

TXBRONC
03-30-2019, 08:55 PM
Yeah but it seems that Tyrod Taylor is good at best as a backup. And really they the Browns felt resting Baker Mayfield would help him out like it did Chiefs Patrick Mahomes. But Mayfield kind of quieted his doubters last season. He will possibly have to get used to a new system with the new coaches.

I don't think you'll get any argument from anyone on what roll Taylor is best suited for being a back up quarterback. But fact is, Taylor was going start in the immediate future and Mayfield would eventually overtake him.

SmilinAssasSin27
03-30-2019, 09:03 PM
TT is a solid QB. Led Buffalo to the playoffs. Cleveland was showing signs with him at the helm. He's not Baker, but he was the starter and was going to remain the starter until he got hurt.

Simple Jaded
04-01-2019, 11:46 PM
He was more gifted but didnt give them abetter chance to win. Also Heimerdinger and Shanny hamstrung Plummer by shelving roll outsand boot action. Very few rookie qb are being prepared at the collegiate level to jump in immediately

Cutler was better from the second he put on a Broncos helmet, and I’m A huge Plummer fan.

Shanatan lost that team when he scapegoated Plummer, imo, so I would agree that their handling of Plummer was criminal.

Cugel
04-02-2019, 11:29 AM
Cug, what does Taylor signing a contract with the Chargers this year have to do with his signing with the Browns last year? Absolutely nothing from what I tell.

You are incorrect, teams invest picks in players based on potential all the time. Apparently you didn't follow Browns situation at all. Taylor was expected to start and did until such time as Mayfield was ready. That is a fact Cug.

Lynch did start a few games for the Broncos so I have no idea what you're talking about.

Lynch was never named the Broncos starter. He never won the starting job, which makes him almost unique in NFL history. He did start some games, but only due to Trevor Siemian being injured, sucking, etc.

They named Brock Osweiler the starter for a game too, and if he had done great, they could have continued to keep him around and possibly named him as the starter. OF course he sucked. . . . But he was never named the Broncos starter like Case Keenum was last year or Joe Flacco this season.

Cugel
04-02-2019, 11:35 AM
Cutler was better from the second he put on a Broncos helmet, and I’m A huge Plummer fan.

Shanatan lost that team when he scapegoated Plummer, imo, so I would agree that their handling of Plummer was criminal.

From a locker-room perspective there's no doubt you're right. The players universally hated the move. THey had just gone 13-3 and beat the Patriots and Tom Brady in the playoffs to advance to the AFC Championship.

But, Shanny was right in thinking that was delusion. That 2005 team was a one-hit wonder that immediately self-destructed. Just like the 2015 Broncos SB team did.

The Broncos lost a bunch of ageing veterans like Courtney Brown, Gerrard Warren got his big contract and then mailed it in. Al Wilson's injury prevented him from being the player he was, they felt the loss of Rod Smith.

Jay Cutler was expected to go in the top 10 but fell due to teams taking Vince Young and Matt Leinart ahead of him. He had the talent of a Hall of Fame QB, he just didn't care.

TXBRONC
04-02-2019, 12:44 PM
TT is a solid QB. Led Buffalo to the playoffs. Cleveland was showing signs with him at the helm. He's not Baker, but he was the starter and was going to remain the starter until he got hurt.

He's solid back up quarterback nothing more. He started all of two games I wouldn't say that was enough to say they were showing signs of improvement.

CoachChaz
04-02-2019, 12:55 PM
He's solid back up quarterback nothing more. He started all of two games I wouldn't say that was enough to say they were showing signs of improvement.

Not to give him too much credit, but if I recall...he would have had them 2-0 if not for their kicking woes.

SmilinAssasSin27
04-02-2019, 04:35 PM
He's solid back up quarterback nothing more. He started all of two games I wouldn't say that was enough to say they were showing signs of improvement.

If you watched their games it did. 1-1-1 is worlds better than prior seasons. OT vs Pittsburgh was a strong game for them. As was OT at New Orleans. IIRC...kicker botched both