Re: NFL Chat 3 : Tue Jan 26, 2010 10:35 am  

ST_CONROY wrote:

Like the Lions last year you need a QB and if there is a franchise one available you don't pass up on them. Say you go Suh and in your own words end up near competitive then you miss out on Locker and are poor again with nobody in the future to lead your team.

Not only from a playing standpoint is a QB more important but financially it's important to have a "face of the franchise" and with the Rams being touted as one of the potential teams to move to LA since they wouldn't require re-aligning an LA franchise they could just put them in the NFC West having Clausen is that much more important. Likewise first round (top 10?) money on 3 D-lineman is a really high amount.

I really like Suh, he is excellent, but if the organisation thinks Clausen is going to make it as a QB (all indications are he will) then you'd be crazy not to take him.

That all makes sense but remember there are plenty of 1st round, heck even 1st overall, QBs that are massive busts.

I bet the Raiders don't want Russell as the face of their Franchise.

Re: NFL Chat 3 : Tue Jan 26, 2010 12:01 pm  

G1 wrote:

That all makes sense but remember there are plenty of 1st round, heck even 1st overall, QBs that are massive busts.

I bet the Raiders don't want Russell as the face of their Franchise.

All the time Al Davis is breathing, no player will ever be the face of that franchise.

Re: NFL Chat 3 : Tue Jan 26, 2010 12:30 pm  

ST_CONROY wrote:

Like the Lions last year you need a QB and if there is a franchise one available you don't pass up on them. Say you go Suh and in your own words end up near competitive then you miss out on Locker and are poor again with nobody in the future to lead your team.

Not only from a playing standpoint is a QB more important but financially it's important to have a "face of the franchise" and with the Rams being touted as one of the potential teams to move to LA since they wouldn't require re-aligning an LA franchise they could just put them in the NFC West having Clausen is that much more important. Likewise first round (top 10?) money on 3 D-lineman is a really high amount.

I really like Suh, he is excellent, but if the organisation thinks Clausen is going to make it as a QB (all indications are he will) then you'd be crazy not to take him.

I suppose the other option is to take Jason Campbell and draft Suh. Is Campbell a guy for the future, could you win the division with him? I don't know.

It'll certainly be an interesting decision and one which will have serious long term ramifications. If you go Suh and Clausen ends up as a top 10 QB you'd want him. If you go Clausen and Suh turns out like Sapp Mk. II then you'd want him.

We seem to keep coming back to this argument

My opinion is that if we pick at 1, we pick Suh. If we trade down a couple of places, we take Clausen. You mentioned in an earlier post about Stafford being taken at number 1 despite being rated 3rd overall in the draft. However, Stafford was seen as a legitimate number 1 choice for a team in need of a QB. There is no QB entering the draft this year that meets the value of a top overall draft choice. Locker might have had he declared for the draft, Bradford probably would have been had he not got the injury to his shoulder.

In the 6 years I've been watching the NFL, I don't think I've seen (or at least can't recall) a draft where there has been one player who has been called the out and out best player entering the draft. This year is different.

Re: NFL Chat 3 : Tue Jan 26, 2010 12:33 pm  

chico's nose wrote:

[/b]

All the time Al Davis is breathing, no player will ever be the face of that franchise.

One other way of saying is that the Oakland Raiders will only get somewhere when Al Davis pops his clogs. He should leave the drafting of players to his coaching staff and not just pick the top player out of the draft.

Re: NFL Chat 3 : Tue Jan 26, 2010 12:46 pm  

ST_CONROY wrote:

Not only from a playing standpoint is a QB more important but financially it's important to have a "face of the franchise"

If that face of the franchise spends most of his playing time either face down on the turf or throwing picks out of desperation because he's being protected by a swiss cheese line it won't matter how many shirts he sells, he'll be a bust.

Re: NFL Chat 3 : Tue Jan 26, 2010 2:43 pm  

WTF? Where are The Pats!? Thats my Super Bowl team, thought they got there every year or summink? Who can I like this time then?

Re: NFL Chat 3 : Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:01 pm  

Bang wrote:

WTF? Where are The Pats!? Thats my Super Bowl team, thought they got there every year or summink? Who can I like this time then?

They were owned by the Ravens. There's only Indianapolis and New Oreleans left so take your pick.

Re: NFL Chat 3 : Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:44 pm  

G1 wrote:

That all makes sense but remember there are plenty of 1st round, heck even 1st overall, QBs that are massive busts.

I bet the Raiders don't want Russell as the face of their Franchise.

Oh yeah i agree. Both could bust. Clausen could bust and Suh could be beyond excellent. Likewise Suh could be a bust and Clausen could be the re-incarnation of Peyton Manning.

My points are conditional upon the franchises believing that they can both be as good as they are supposed to be. Obviously if the Rams don't think Clausen is good enough then they will take Suh (and vice versa).

Andy Gilder wrote:

If that face of the franchise spends most of his playing time either face down on the turf or throwing picks out of desperation because he's being protected by a swiss cheese line it won't matter how many shirts he sells, he'll be a bust.

Again i agree but the Rams spent a top 3 pick last year on a LT. How about giving him somebody worth protecting.

Re: NFL Chat 3 : Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:50 pm  

Dead Man Walking wrote:

They were owned by the Ravens. There's only Indianapolis and New Oreleans left so take your pick.

I hear Brady played with a leg missing and half his chest caved in? Or soemthing.

GO SAINTS!

Re: NFL Chat 3 : Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:53 pm  

Adamjk wrote:

You mentioned in an earlier post about Stafford being taken at number 1 despite being rated 3rd overall in the draft. However, Stafford was seen as a legitimate number 1 choice for a team in need of a QB. There is no QB entering the draft this year that meets the value of a top overall draft choice. Locker might have had he declared for the draft, Bradford probably would have been had he not got the injury to his shoulder.

In the 6 years I've been watching the NFL, I don't think I've seen (or at least can't recall) a draft where there has been one player who has been called the out and out best player entering the draft. This year is different.

Stafford was rated as the 13th best player by Mayock not 3rd.

Clausen is better than Stafford. Clausen had one of the best if not the best seasons of a junior QB to enter the draft (obviously that doesn't neccesarily translate to being an NFL standard QB). You need a QB. It's pretty simple.

As for players being called the best, the only one i can think of is Reggie Bush.