I agree @TNutZz 100%. In BH we trust lol.
2 Likes
I’m scared shitless of any QB. LOL.
Same - I"m scared of any QB. I see how it goes year after year. The chances of upgrading from our current guy are about 1 in 50. LOL. Holmes may dramatically increase the odds, but damn a lot of those cats flop in the NFL
1 Like
And yet they just resigned Geno to a 3 year deal. To be clear I’m not arguing, but it give Seattle a much more “flexible” development schedule if they did draft AR.
1 Like
Maybe, but that goes against the financial reality in the NFL. If you have a 30 million dollar top draft pick, team winning or not, he needs to play.
Say we draft AR at 6. Even if we win a playoff game next year, Goff gets traded before UFA and AR starts in 2024. That’s just the way it will be, for better or worse
1 Like
Drafting all these vet CBs feels more like a win now move. Holmes has a good history of getting starting caliber guys even in UDFA. Why pay for these 2 vet CBs unless you want ready solutions.
Getting a QB is a win later move and it doesn’t fit I don’t think…
1 Like
If Seattle drafts AR (or any QB) at 5 He’s the starter next year. The contract is basically a one-year deal. Only $27.3 million (1.2M base plus a $26.1M signing bonus) is guaranteed at signing. The rest of the agreement guarantees in stages after each season ends.
I suspect that’s how it’s going to play out too
The goal is to build a sustainable winner. DC has said this much before. It’s not win now or win later…both can be true.
And we have 3 more picks in the top 55. Drafting a QB at 6 is as unrisky as it’s ever going to be. No draft capital to move up, no prospect worth the pick. It makes perfect sense. Not saying I want it to happen, but I definitely understand and honestly think it’s smart.
So developing a QB for 1 extra year isn’t financially possible and can’t be worked out? That seems extreme, but then again I’m really not good with the numbers so I’ll take your word for it. It just seems really short sighted to me, but that’s just my opinion of course
Developing a QB can be a multi year endeavor that takes as long as a team wants or needs
Developing a 6OA QB carries the pressure, expectation and financial burden to be the starter and after one year the pick will have to be justified
A team simply doesn’t invest in a QB pick that high to indefinitely sit on the bench as a backup.
Additionally, Goff has two years left on his contract. If we have a 6OA QB waiting on the wings, we aren’t extending Goff. And if we want to get draft capital back for a PB QB still in his prime we have to deal him with a year left or we get nothing but a possible comp pick later
We can win
1 Like
I will say this…I’ve heard from all different areas that this draft is about long-term as much as it is is about right now. The lions are about winning a super bowl and then being shit again…they are going for the Chiefs 10 years of success model, the Steelers model, The Niners model…consistent year in and year out presence in the upper echelon of the NFL.
1 Like
If it’s purely financial I get it, but the pressure and expectation part of it is a choice from ownership, Gm to throw him into the fire. The whole idea of drafting a guy into our situation is that a lot of that pressure and short term expectation would be alleviated as long as we were winning games.
Again if it comes down to both QBs not being able to financially coexist and still able to keep a talented roster for potentially over a year then by all means don’t draft a QB at 6 not named Stroud or Young.
1 Like
If Bryce at 6 yes. If not we take one later in the draft imo
1 Like
Yea, or regardless of who they are. If they are drafted at 6OA, they are drafted to be the franchise QB who contributes sooner rather than later - not a developmental QB who may or may not be named starter or be traded
I’m still looking at it from the Philip Rivers/Aaron Rodgers school of thought where both those guys needed over a year to develop before they were ready. And both had really good QBs to learn from before they got their opportunity.
1 Like
We’re about to be in “win now” mode for the next 10 years.
It fits perfectly, cuz we are in “win now” AN D “win later” mode
2 Likes
Well, Deadstroke has explained why to not restructure now in other threads.
No need to extend him now, it’s a win for Goff but no urgency for Detroit to do so now, so don’t.
Rogers was a late first round pick. Way more flexibility there. The rookie contract for the 24th pick vs the 6th pick is significant
Philip Rivers is a good point, but he was still drafted to be their franchise quarterback and the plan was to move on from Brees. The only reason Rivers sat for one additional year is because Brees had a career year making the PB and was comeback player of the year.
Additionally, DB was a second round pick on his rookie contract so the financial strains of having a contract like Goff’s and a six overall pick overlapping wasn’t there
Two first round picks so maybe you have a win for future with the QB pick in the first while you still have Goff at a reasonable deal.
The DB’s, another one or two moves plus teh draft, allow you push forward with the win now, go for the division now with strong QB, offense and improved defense.
You take that extra 1st round pick, qb at six is the extra pick, to allow the team to sustain “win now” to later years and cap relief.
So all the rambling above to say that taking a QB doesn’t mean that you are preventing or slowing the win now momentum.
1 Like