And check out some mock drafts
I’ve seen a bunch that have 4 of the top6 being a QB
Rosen & Darnold, for sure
Then Mayfield to either Denver or NyJ
And either Allen or Jackson going to the other

Not saying it WILL happen
But if we want a particular guy,
the we will have to move into the top10 to make sure we get him
- jdfitz77

Some QB's always fall because they are analyzed to death and flaws are found or they are enhanced and teams see other needs and think they can get a steal in round 2 or later. I doubt this year will be any different.

Some QB's always fall because they are analyzed to death and flaws are found or they are enhanced and teams see other needs and think they can get a steal in round 2 or later. I doubt this year will be any different.
- GilPerreault11

That may be true
But if there’s a certain guy we want
Then we are gonna have to get in the top10 to make sure we get him

I personally don’t wanna do that

And getting a steal in round 2 (Falk) or later (Ferguson?) is NOT something we can depend on

I’m ok if that’s the route we go...
but we better sign a starter for at least the next 2-3 years then

Julio LTE v 2.0 right on cue.

I would have felt better if we lost 27-20

Happy for both Guhle and Ulmark to get the call up. They both deserve it. However, if they play too well and they start getting us some points in the standings, Botts needs to ship em' both back down again. The season is lost. Might as well finish 30 or 31. Any of the top 5 picks this year are going to be great.

Happy for both Guhle and Ulmark to get the call up. They both deserve it. However, if they play too well and they start getting us some points in the standings, Botts needs to ship em' both back down again. The season is lost. Might as well finish 30 or 31. Any of the top 5 picks this year are going to be great.
- SabreWest

It's halfway through the season

It's halfway through the season
- washedup20

Yup, exactly.
Watch for other teams to start their tank, with respect of course.

If Ullmark plays tonight I'll watch....otherwise..imma spare myself the headache.

Browns are taking Josh Allen or Barkley
- GERBE!!!75PTS

RB?

no way.

RB?

no way.
- thatsapickle

I can see them taking QB at 1 and Barkley at 5. Instant offence revival.

If Ullmark plays tonight I'll watch....otherwise..imma spare myself the headache.
- feetontheair22

I would obviously never wish injuries on people, but the forwards have been healthy for the past 20 games or so which sucks for seeing the kids play. I just want 10 games of smith-eichel-baptiste

I'm so done with Eichel with girgs/pommer/okposo

I can see them taking QB at 1 and Barkley at 5. Instant offence revival.
- Matthews_Auston

No way they take a RB at 1 (like you said). If they are not taking a QB at 1, they should trade down (to like 2-4) and gain more picks. If they were smart, they would consider taking a QB at 1 then trade pick 5 for like 10-20 and a boat load of other picks.

No way they take a RB at 1 (like you said). If they are not taking a QB at 1, they should trade down (to like 2-4) and gain more picks. If they were smart, they would consider taking a QB at 1 then trade pick 5 for like 10-20 and a boat load of other picks.
- Lilroot9

If they don't pick a QB at 1, that's a slap in the face to the season ticket holders who paid for 0-8

If they don't pick a QB at 1, that's a slap in the face to the season ticket holders who paid for 0-8
- jcragcrumple

I can buy into Barkley at 4 or 5, but you're right. They need to set the franchise with either Rosen, Mayfield, Darnold, or whomever they feel is the right choice.

I can see them taking QB at 1 and Barkley at 5. Instant offence revival.
- Matthews_Auston

This is the browns we're talking about lol

I can buy into Barkley at 4 or 5, but you're right. They need to set the franchise with either Rosen, Mayfield, Darnold, or whomever they feel is the right choice.
- thatsapickle

All the reports have them all in on Josh Allen

No way they take a RB at 1 (like you said). If they are not taking a QB at 1, they should trade down (to like 2-4) and gain more picks. If they were smart, they would consider taking a QB at 1 then trade pick 5 for like 10-20 and a boat load of other picks.
- Lilroot9

Where did I say to take a running back at 1???

I can buy into Barkley at 4 or 5, but you're right. They need to set the franchise with either Rosen, Mayfield, Darnold, or whomever they feel is the right choice.
- thatsapickle

I don't know exactly how to phrase this point, but this is a year where a team might prefer to pick 2nd instead of 1st because there's not a consensus on the first overall QB. It takes pressure off the organization to not have to make that choice

I don't know exactly how to phrase this point, but this is a year where a team might prefer to pick 2nd instead of 1st because there's not a consensus on the first overall QB. It takes pressure off the organization to not have to make that choice
- jcragcrumple

I get it.

It's not like it's Andrew Luck.

You're looking for a systemic, or cultural, fit. Rosen probably doesn't want to go to Cleveland, so someone is going to draw that straw and either be a hero or added to the list.

All the reports have them all in on Josh Allen
- GERBE!!!75PTS

That's probably the "safe" pick, but I don't know if any of these guys will be an upper echelon QB.

I don't know why I thought this, but I thought Ian Cole was like 37.

If they don't pick a QB at 1, that's a slap in the face to the season ticket holders who paid for 0-8
- jcragcrumple

After trading away the 1st overall a couple years ago (Wentz), they need to take a QB at 1. No question about it. Dont be afraid to take the wrong guy, they need to.

On a side note, I said this to a friend and he laughed at me but later in the night ended up agreeing. If you dont have a top QB, you should take one with your 1st round pick every year until you do (unless you have one that you feel could get you there, then you can skip that year). No other position means more. Let's take the Browns for instance, last year they took the "no brainer" top DE on the board, and went 0-16. If they took any of the top 3 QB's on the board, I think they win at least one game, if not more. Having a top end Defensive player means absolutely nothing without the QB. They will never win enough games each year to make it worth it (unless you already have a top QB). (I know Browns are a bad example as they are always bad)

Where did I say to take a running back at 1???
- Matthews_Auston

I meant "No way they take a RB at 1, as you stated as well."

Sorry, I was agreeing with you, I guess you could read that two ways.

After trading away the 1st overall a couple years ago (Wentz), they need to take a QB at 1. No question about it. Dont be afraid to take the wrong guy, they need to.

On a side note, I said this to a friend and he laughed at me but later in the night ended up agreeing. If you dont have a top QB, you should take one with your 1st round pick every year until you do (unless you have one that you feel could get you there, then you can skip that year). No other position means more. Let's take the Browns for instance, last year they took the "no brainer" top DE on the board, and went 0-16. If they took any of the top 3 QB's on the board, I think they win at least one game, if not more. Having a top end Defensive player means absolutely nothing without the QB. They will never win enough games each year to make it worth it (unless you already have a top QB). (I know Browns are a bad example as they are always bad)
- Lilroot9

Everything you said is spot on imo, but i'm just hung up on that 1st sentence. I completely forgot they did that. Dear god, they are a tire fire

After trading away the 1st overall a couple years ago (Wentz), they need to take a QB at 1. No question about it. Dont be afraid to take the wrong guy, they need to.

On a side note, I said this to a friend and he laughed at me but later in the night ended up agreeing. If you dont have a top QB, you should take one with your 1st round pick every year until you do (unless you have one that you feel could get you there, then you can skip that year). No other position means more. Let's take the Browns for instance, last year they took the "no brainer" top DE on the board, and went 0-16. If they took any of the top 3 QB's on the board, I think they win at least one game, if not more. Having a top end Defensive player means absolutely nothing without the QB. They will never win enough games each year to make it worth it (unless you already have a top QB). (I know Browns are a bad example as they are always bad)
- Lilroot9

They believed in Kizer though.

He was still a high round pick that didn't pan out/wasn't ready/got injured.