Thread: What's your worst-case plausible scenario at #5?

Originally Posted by MOtorboat

That's the only reason I can figure out.

How the hell do you know they won't trade up?

Originally Posted by slim

How the hell do you know they won't trade up?

I don't really see a viable reason for them to.

The only realistic option that I would abhor is a move up by using future #1.

I'm also still not sold on Chubb in a 3-4. But I wouldn't break the TV if we took him.

It'll be okay.

There are few, if any, ways to **** this up but I have absolute faith in their ability to find a way.

Trade up to #2 and draft McGlinchey, something like that.

I would be pissed if we try and get cute and move up from 5 or take Allen. I personally right now would like to trade back. I'm praying we can trade Lynch and Our first rd pick to Buffalo for there number 1's and a 3rd rd pick lol. if that happens I jump for joy just at Paxton being dealt lol. Then I would take a playmaker at 12 and Lamar Jackson at 22

Originally Posted by Jaded

There are few, if any, ways to **** this up but I have absolute faith in their ability to find a way.

Trade up to #2 and draft McGlinchey, something like that.

This. I’m most worried about them trying to get cute and either overdrafting someone or trading back and missing out on an impact player for lesser players who bust.

Originally Posted by chazoe60

Ive brought it up a ton but drafting a CB will piss me off. To dump Talib then turn around and spend the #5 pick on a CB will really annoy me.

I'm kind of to the point that any defensive player will basically bore and slightly annoy me. Our offense is so ******* bad that we have to start spending real asserts on fixing it, not just signing middling FAs and late round picks.

Joel Klatt has the Broncos taking Ohio State CB Denzel Ward at #5. Personally, I might just soil my pants if that happens. Why get rid of Talib only to take another CB at #5?

They need generational talent on offense, and that means Nelson or Barkley. If they go defense, then take Chubb.

Originally Posted by HORSEPOWER 56

This. I’m most worried about them trying to get cute and either overdrafting someone or trading back and missing out on an impact player for lesser players who bust.

The only way their screw it up at #5 is to reach on a QB who turns out to be the next . . . . Jake Locker.

Originally Posted by Elevation inc

I would be pissed if we try and get cute and move up from 5 or take Allen. I personally right now would like to trade back. I'm praying we can trade Lynch and Our first rd pick to Buffalo for there number 1's and a 3rd rd pick lol. if that happens I jump for joy just at Paxton being dealt lol. Then I would take a playmaker at 12 and Lamar Jackson at 22

so you would dump Paxton for another project who also wont see the field for years...makes sense in zero ways

LJ 2017....254 com...434 att.....59.1%....27 tds...10 ints

PL 2015.....296 com...443atts...66.8%...28tds...4 ints

Originally Posted by arapaho2

so you would dump Paxton for another project who also wont see the field for years...makes sense in zero ways

LJ 2017....254 com...434 att.....59.1%....27 tds...10 ints

PL 2015.....296 com...443atts...66.8%...28tds...4 ints

I wouldn't touch jackson with a 10 foot pole...I would dump Paxton as well...

Originally Posted by MOtorboat

I don't really see a viable reason for them to.

Yeah, like you have any idea what their FO is thinking.

Originally Posted by slim

Yeah, like you have any idea what their FO is thinking.

Welp, shut down the message board. Slim says there's no reason to talk about anything.

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

Calvin Ridley.

Probably not at 5, but I agree it would be. I would also have an issue with trading back to middle of the first and taking Ridley.

My worst case scenario is the guard being drafted. The hounds will be unleashed on me, even though it's a questionable move.