I'm grateful we've got a top 5 pick and we get actually grab one of these blue chippers. I think you had a piece on this already but I wonder who the other 5th-10th picks in the past 10-20 drafts have been and what was said about them. Because Carter seems like the blue chipper that could elevate us. But he also scares the bejesus out of me that he won't take this seriously after he gets paid. But, when I think back, I remember Tunsil had his big slide but was a great prospect. So all in all, idk. But I am ready to be entertained
Hey, Joe, what about Zach Kuntz (I'll save my jokes for later, I don't want to be the first to break the ice) ??? Athletic freak. Potential is off the charts. Anyone else look at him? TE.
Hopefully someone will be able to clarify this for me: Isn't it totally normal and understandable that no-one has given Lamar an offer sheet at this point?
My thinking here is that the 2 R1 picks sacrificed as a result of signing him would be due from the next 2 drafts at the point the Ravens decline to match the offer. With that being the case, there is absolutely no incentive to offer him a contract before the draft, as you're giving up a valuable pick in a draft class you've spent a long time scouting and planning your FA approach around. Similarly, the 9ers, who I consider to be a fantastic fit for Jackson who could offer him an opportunity to compete for a championship over the next 5 years, literally CANT offer Jackson a deal because they can't meet the compensation requirements of the tag.
I raise this because Lamar would be the top QB in the NFC the second he changed conferences (top-3 at absolute worst) and, from a schematic standpoint, would fit really well in SF or ATL.
Lamar has not done himself any favors, but it does seem strange there isn't more interest with Lamar. I'm not especially a fan of that style of play, but he is fun to watch and effective when on the field.
If we ignore the fact that the Eagles wouldn't have won the Superbowl but for Wentz, then sure -- really bad pick. By that standard, I assert we'd have to say the Stafford trade was a really bad move by the Rams, but I digress.
I'm agnostic about selecting a QB. If Schneider feels he has someone he can groom to greatness, I'm alright giving it a shot. No guarantees. Maybe we fail miserably but wind up with another high first rounder as a result and hit it big next time.
Levis seems fairly destined for the Colts (luckily for us, no Mayo-Man is a big win). Assume Panthers do take Young #1 (as they should), how much do we buy in to the "Stroud isn't as good as we thought" vibes going around? Texans take Anderson (as they should). Cardinals take Wilson (realistic and reasonably smart for them). Colts stick with Levis. Stroud and AR are now both there at #5 along with Carter - ooh that's a very difficult decision.
Both QB's have high ceilings, but both need a year to sit. There'll be trade options, but maybe not outstandingly good ones. Then you have Carter, maybe the best talent in the entire draft.
Don't envy anyone that has to stake their job on making that call, but also I don't really see a "wrong" call there either. All three players would work for us, and there should be at least one trade offer with a '24 1st in there which also works for us.
I don’t think that Stroud would get past Pete and John. He may not have that big arm that Carroll likes, but Pete would love the accuracy and proven willingness to work within a system.
But I’m not holding my breath on anybody. Thanks to Seaside, I realize that there are plausible scenarios that make any of Anderson, Carter, Richardson, Stroud, or Young available under one set of circumstances or another, with a legitimate option at CB. Works for me.
All of the better QB's being in the AFC is none of our business. Our business is to win the NFC, and have the best team possible to win the NFC. If we don't win the NFC, what the AFC does or has is none of our business, because the AFC is only our business if we win the NFC.
I suppose I could have focused it on how the team with Jalen Hurts won the NFC in 2022, the team with Matt Stafford won the NFC in 2021, the team with Tom Brady won the NFC in 2020. We'll see how sustainable Hurts' success is. But I'll bank on a team with a good QB winning the NFC in 2023.
Geno is a good QB, and we'll see if he has improved, but we can certainly make life easier for Geno with one or two earlyish draft picks. Dawand Jones and Bijan for instance. The defense getting better will give the offense more opportunities, too.
I was mostly being a wise ass. Don't mind me. It's not that I don't look forward to hearing the latest and greatest thoughts from Seaside Joe.
Geno is an okay QB. The further we get from the season, the harder it is to remember how painful the second half of the season was. I don't think that's going to be fixed in 2023 with the 2023 draft picks. This isn't me advocating for a QB. It's more like, I've accepted that the Seahawks feel that Geno is the best that they have right now and Lock is the QB who they're comfortable developing.
Id also say that it’s not like the NFC winner was a big underdog to the top QB in the game. The eagles were a very good football team and if it weren’t for an ice rink of a field may have won. I think they were maybe 2-3 point underdogs?
You could probably say the same for the Niners had they been in the SB.
NFC may not have the QBs but it does have some talented teams.
Why do AFC teams keep being the worst teams in the NFL and are at the top of the draft? Because the AFC also has probably the best, top teams. The Chief, Bengals, and Bills are maybe the top three teams in the league notwithstanding that they are all in the AFC, and they beat up the rest of the conference.
But there are competing philosophies in building teams at play also, it seems. The LARs built a great team then grafted Stafford onto it. The Niners compete with the best D and many weapons for an average QB. The Eagles have superior lines both OL and DL and a "good enough" QB on a rookie contract.
We only ever know what has worked *in the past* and there is no guarantee that drafting a QB at the top of the draft will be the way to the conference championship and the SB. The Seahawks are probably one more great draft away from being competitive with the Niners for the NFCW and for the conference championship--with Geno and Drew!
However... if Bryce Young, or even Stroud, were to fall to #5 it would be almost be required for the Seahawks to pick them.
I have thought for awhile that Tom Brady has really skewed the NFL towards a group think where a bunch of teams keep trying to find the next “franchise” QB. “You need a franchise QB to win” <- proclaims many people. However, as you point out - it is actually not true. There are different routes to get there and I would rather go opposite the herd.
The one aspect of this strategy is you can’t let a star QB fall through your hands.
So, in my opinion, you either draft the QB at 5 because you truly believe he will be star, or (more likely) trade the pick down for a haul and let someone else chance the Brady strategy.
I don’t think the state of the QBs in the conference should affect the GMs decision on offense at all. It can affect defense but why would you care on offense?
Secondly, the QB decision in the draft is incredibly critical for the GM. Two outcomes could result in your firing: you take the QB and he is a bust or you pass (or trade the pick) on the QB and he turns into a star.
This is why the due diligence had to be made by the hawks. I don’t think they will take a QB as I continue to believe Lock is the QBOTF but I would also be stoked if they did because that would mean JS sees the potential.
I really think Kenneth is right about Seattle taking a defender on their first pick. I watched several games with AR at the QB spot and I was wondering as I watched, what all the hype was on this guy. Granted, he could run the ball really well but his passing accuracy was a red flag for me. I read an article during the season, when Russ was struggling in Denver and Geno was doing well, that posed the question about the QBs. The question was is it the QB or is it the coach? the point being that Geno struggled on his previous teams and Russ excelled in Seattle and how the tables had turned with their new gigs. It got me to thinking that perhaps the coaching, and the systems used, might be a major part of the equation of what makes a QB successful or a failure. That being said, If Hooker were to fall to the Seahawks at 37 I would be happy if they picked him. I'm not so sure I would be happy if they took the QB from UCLA or the one from Fresno State, unless the pick was in the very late rounds.
I’m wary of those “is it this or that” questions because they tend to pose a false dichotomy. (Also, this particular question doesn’t consider the overarching importance of team ownership.) Successful QB-Coach combos are a relationship that calls on the QB to be more than plug-and-play. Pete Carroll has a QB-friendly offense, no doubt. Even so, Russell was head-and-shoulders above TJ and Geno.
Let’s step back from a situation we’re invested in and consider the Patriots. Without Tom Brady, Bill Belichek is still a great coach. But no one fears his team, no matter how clever and prepared he is. On the other hand, Matt Stafford floundered for years until he landed with the right organization and the right coach.
Let’s keep in mind that Howie Roseman traded up for Wentz, Les Snead traded up for Goff, and they also both got extended. Both GMs won Super Bowls. You can make the QB pick and fail and still win a Super Bowl. Not advocating for a QB but I think there are many layers to the potential outcomes. If the Seahawks do choose a QB, I trust they are confident in the prospect.
It's worth noting that Wentz was a huge part of that Superbowl team. They would not have won without him. Early in his career, he looked great. Like a potential HOF. It was just that the style of play that made him great also led to injuries. He plays best when he's reckless. Or at least used to. He hasn't played well in a very long time. Maybe he's too spooked these days.
Carson Wentz was a bad draft pick, doesn't matter if it's because he got hurt. Bigger point I was attempting to make and maybe not articulating well enough is that the Eagles survived not having Wentz workout as a long-term QB, getting back to the Super Bowl with his replacement.
I can't agree. They won a superbowl because they picked him (and Nick Foles got streaky hot at the right time). But for that pick, there's no Lombardi.
The "Who helped the Eagles win the Super Bowl five years ago" debate is so 2000-and-late, but I'm just talking about how Roseman survived the fact that Carson Wentz only had a two-year career and even managed to get the Eagles back to the Super Bowl. Just ignore the part where we disagree about Carson Wentz value to a team from 2017.
Yes ... I personally don’t think they will and shouldn’t draft a QB but if they do draft a QB I will be very excited for that means JS/PC believes in that guy.
I don’t think the Hawks should be dissuaded from drafting a QB ... I was just pointing out how critical a decision it is both directions. Drafting or passing could have big ramifications for a GM <- tough job.
Overall, they have to put in the effort into whether or not they believe in a QB whether they are passing or picking one
I really don't understand all of these strong takes by some fans about how they "need to be convinced". Sure, some picks don't pan out for various reasons, but even then it sure doesn't mean that some rando fan has more insight than the professionals do in an incredibly competitive environment.
I'm a fan because I enjoy the game, not because I think that I know more than the myriad folks that are actually involved in this stuff.
The big difference this year is the fact it’s a top five pick, the first time in fourteen years. Most NFL fans I know look at me bemused when I discuss the draft - a lot of them switch off in the off-season (no doubt the same way everywhere) so my gabbling about Richardson’s shortcomings or Cater’s possible suspect dedication seems rather manic.
I won’t be next year if we simply pick at 20+ again. But for the next ten days I remain obsessed!
No worries. I actually saw it in the notice I got in my inbox. Yes, I surely agree. This community that Kenneth has built does seem to get that. Alas, not all others do. Pity.
John Schneider seems to have a good eye for the QB's -So if he thinks one of these guys is a good pick ( long as it's not at 1-5) then I am all for the Hawks doing that. Can't wait for draft day!
You know I read a write up by College DT on the practice issue. His takes if guys like Carter push hard in practice they asking to get hurt. His take was going 70% was smart. His take the game for DT is it is a fight inside of phone booth often against two guys. His take is that Carter wins the fights on a play to play basis at an insane level. I don’t think the Seahawks are going to chop him because of the capers.
That’s a great point. Is a typical tendency among college DTs an issue with Carter only because he is so visible? Usually, these guys fly under the radar.
I’m of the “let’s build up the team and try for a qb next year” school of thought. Geno is good, and could be for a few years. If we load up this year, which I would also prefer to include someone else’s 2024 1st, well, I’d like that very much.
I completely agree. I even thought about how to add that particular scenario to my comment, but didn't because I figured I'd already met my max for making a point. Anything with a chance to be in the first half of the first round in 2024, and I'm there.
If we can load up the roster this year, I’d be happy to sell the house in the next two drafts to get our QBOTF. It might take even more than that to get Caleb Williams or Drake Maye, but there’s always Grayson!
I’d be very disappointed if we moved up this year to get any of them.
I'm grateful we've got a top 5 pick and we get actually grab one of these blue chippers. I think you had a piece on this already but I wonder who the other 5th-10th picks in the past 10-20 drafts have been and what was said about them. Because Carter seems like the blue chipper that could elevate us. But he also scares the bejesus out of me that he won't take this seriously after he gets paid. But, when I think back, I remember Tunsil had his big slide but was a great prospect. So all in all, idk. But I am ready to be entertained
I think Sam Darnold might be the best QB in the NFC in 2023.
Jeff Bezos is definitely NOT a hands off guy. But his level of involvement may vary.
Hey, Joe, what about Zach Kuntz (I'll save my jokes for later, I don't want to be the first to break the ice) ??? Athletic freak. Potential is off the charts. Anyone else look at him? TE.
HEIGHT: 6-7 (93%*) WEIGHT: 255 (54%*)
HANDS: 10 1/4 (70%*) ARM: 34 (74%*) SPAN: 83 1/8 (97%*)
FORTY: 4.55 (C) (93%*) SHUTTLE: 4.12 (C) (94%*) TEN YARD: 1.57 (C) (88%*)
VERTICAL: 40 (C) (99%*) BROAD: 128 (C) (98%*)
THREE CONE: 6.87 (C) (92%*) BENCH: 23 (C) (74%*)
Crazy numbers. Compare to Colby Parkinson:
Height 6' 7" 95
Weight 252 lbs 48
Arm Length 33¼" 59
Hand Size 9⅝" 34
40 Yard Dash 4.77s 50
Vertical Jump 32½" 42
Broad Jump 109" 14
3-Cone Drill 7.15s 51
20 Yard Shuttle 4.46s 31
Bench Press 18 reps 31
Sorry I couldn't use the same format. Zach Kuntz is a physical freak with scary potential.
Hopefully someone will be able to clarify this for me: Isn't it totally normal and understandable that no-one has given Lamar an offer sheet at this point?
My thinking here is that the 2 R1 picks sacrificed as a result of signing him would be due from the next 2 drafts at the point the Ravens decline to match the offer. With that being the case, there is absolutely no incentive to offer him a contract before the draft, as you're giving up a valuable pick in a draft class you've spent a long time scouting and planning your FA approach around. Similarly, the 9ers, who I consider to be a fantastic fit for Jackson who could offer him an opportunity to compete for a championship over the next 5 years, literally CANT offer Jackson a deal because they can't meet the compensation requirements of the tag.
I raise this because Lamar would be the top QB in the NFC the second he changed conferences (top-3 at absolute worst) and, from a schematic standpoint, would fit really well in SF or ATL.
Lamar has not done himself any favors, but it does seem strange there isn't more interest with Lamar. I'm not especially a fan of that style of play, but he is fun to watch and effective when on the field.
Kenneth, what does 2000-and-late mean?
If we ignore the fact that the Eagles wouldn't have won the Superbowl but for Wentz, then sure -- really bad pick. By that standard, I assert we'd have to say the Stafford trade was a really bad move by the Rams, but I digress.
If you have to ask, you obviously don't have the boom, boom, boom. Gotta get that. Boom, boom, boom.
I'm agnostic about selecting a QB. If Schneider feels he has someone he can groom to greatness, I'm alright giving it a shot. No guarantees. Maybe we fail miserably but wind up with another high first rounder as a result and hit it big next time.
I can’t see PCJS taking Levis. They might have to think long and hard about Richardson, though.
Levis seems fairly destined for the Colts (luckily for us, no Mayo-Man is a big win). Assume Panthers do take Young #1 (as they should), how much do we buy in to the "Stroud isn't as good as we thought" vibes going around? Texans take Anderson (as they should). Cardinals take Wilson (realistic and reasonably smart for them). Colts stick with Levis. Stroud and AR are now both there at #5 along with Carter - ooh that's a very difficult decision.
Both QB's have high ceilings, but both need a year to sit. There'll be trade options, but maybe not outstandingly good ones. Then you have Carter, maybe the best talent in the entire draft.
Don't envy anyone that has to stake their job on making that call, but also I don't really see a "wrong" call there either. All three players would work for us, and there should be at least one trade offer with a '24 1st in there which also works for us.
I don’t think that Stroud would get past Pete and John. He may not have that big arm that Carroll likes, but Pete would love the accuracy and proven willingness to work within a system.
But I’m not holding my breath on anybody. Thanks to Seaside, I realize that there are plausible scenarios that make any of Anderson, Carter, Richardson, Stroud, or Young available under one set of circumstances or another, with a legitimate option at CB. Works for me.
You missed Bijan on that list, but i'll forgive you ;)
LOL! I just don’t seem him going at #5. I can see Schneider attempt a trade that would land Robinson later should he be available.
All of the better QB's being in the AFC is none of our business. Our business is to win the NFC, and have the best team possible to win the NFC. If we don't win the NFC, what the AFC does or has is none of our business, because the AFC is only our business if we win the NFC.
I suppose I could have focused it on how the team with Jalen Hurts won the NFC in 2022, the team with Matt Stafford won the NFC in 2021, the team with Tom Brady won the NFC in 2020. We'll see how sustainable Hurts' success is. But I'll bank on a team with a good QB winning the NFC in 2023.
Geno is a good QB, and we'll see if he has improved, but we can certainly make life easier for Geno with one or two earlyish draft picks. Dawand Jones and Bijan for instance. The defense getting better will give the offense more opportunities, too.
I was mostly being a wise ass. Don't mind me. It's not that I don't look forward to hearing the latest and greatest thoughts from Seaside Joe.
I don't mind your comment, I take it to heart.
Geno is an okay QB. The further we get from the season, the harder it is to remember how painful the second half of the season was. I don't think that's going to be fixed in 2023 with the 2023 draft picks. This isn't me advocating for a QB. It's more like, I've accepted that the Seahawks feel that Geno is the best that they have right now and Lock is the QB who they're comfortable developing.
Agreed.
Id also say that it’s not like the NFC winner was a big underdog to the top QB in the game. The eagles were a very good football team and if it weren’t for an ice rink of a field may have won. I think they were maybe 2-3 point underdogs?
You could probably say the same for the Niners had they been in the SB.
NFC may not have the QBs but it does have some talented teams.
At this point I'm going to be disappointed if the Hawks don't get Carter.
Yea, it was always a longshot, but seems at least possible. I can baby sit him if that's what it takes.
Why do AFC teams keep being the worst teams in the NFL and are at the top of the draft? Because the AFC also has probably the best, top teams. The Chief, Bengals, and Bills are maybe the top three teams in the league notwithstanding that they are all in the AFC, and they beat up the rest of the conference.
But there are competing philosophies in building teams at play also, it seems. The LARs built a great team then grafted Stafford onto it. The Niners compete with the best D and many weapons for an average QB. The Eagles have superior lines both OL and DL and a "good enough" QB on a rookie contract.
We only ever know what has worked *in the past* and there is no guarantee that drafting a QB at the top of the draft will be the way to the conference championship and the SB. The Seahawks are probably one more great draft away from being competitive with the Niners for the NFCW and for the conference championship--with Geno and Drew!
However... if Bryce Young, or even Stroud, were to fall to #5 it would be almost be required for the Seahawks to pick them.
These are some good points.
I have thought for awhile that Tom Brady has really skewed the NFL towards a group think where a bunch of teams keep trying to find the next “franchise” QB. “You need a franchise QB to win” <- proclaims many people. However, as you point out - it is actually not true. There are different routes to get there and I would rather go opposite the herd.
The one aspect of this strategy is you can’t let a star QB fall through your hands.
So, in my opinion, you either draft the QB at 5 because you truly believe he will be star, or (more likely) trade the pick down for a haul and let someone else chance the Brady strategy.
I hope Bezos drops in the draft and we get a quiet sleeper.
I don’t think the state of the QBs in the conference should affect the GMs decision on offense at all. It can affect defense but why would you care on offense?
Secondly, the QB decision in the draft is incredibly critical for the GM. Two outcomes could result in your firing: you take the QB and he is a bust or you pass (or trade the pick) on the QB and he turns into a star.
This is why the due diligence had to be made by the hawks. I don’t think they will take a QB as I continue to believe Lock is the QBOTF but I would also be stoked if they did because that would mean JS sees the potential.
Looking forward to the draft.
I really think Kenneth is right about Seattle taking a defender on their first pick. I watched several games with AR at the QB spot and I was wondering as I watched, what all the hype was on this guy. Granted, he could run the ball really well but his passing accuracy was a red flag for me. I read an article during the season, when Russ was struggling in Denver and Geno was doing well, that posed the question about the QBs. The question was is it the QB or is it the coach? the point being that Geno struggled on his previous teams and Russ excelled in Seattle and how the tables had turned with their new gigs. It got me to thinking that perhaps the coaching, and the systems used, might be a major part of the equation of what makes a QB successful or a failure. That being said, If Hooker were to fall to the Seahawks at 37 I would be happy if they picked him. I'm not so sure I would be happy if they took the QB from UCLA or the one from Fresno State, unless the pick was in the very late rounds.
I’m wary of those “is it this or that” questions because they tend to pose a false dichotomy. (Also, this particular question doesn’t consider the overarching importance of team ownership.) Successful QB-Coach combos are a relationship that calls on the QB to be more than plug-and-play. Pete Carroll has a QB-friendly offense, no doubt. Even so, Russell was head-and-shoulders above TJ and Geno.
Let’s step back from a situation we’re invested in and consider the Patriots. Without Tom Brady, Bill Belichek is still a great coach. But no one fears his team, no matter how clever and prepared he is. On the other hand, Matt Stafford floundered for years until he landed with the right organization and the right coach.
Let’s keep in mind that Howie Roseman traded up for Wentz, Les Snead traded up for Goff, and they also both got extended. Both GMs won Super Bowls. You can make the QB pick and fail and still win a Super Bowl. Not advocating for a QB but I think there are many layers to the potential outcomes. If the Seahawks do choose a QB, I trust they are confident in the prospect.
It's worth noting that Wentz was a huge part of that Superbowl team. They would not have won without him. Early in his career, he looked great. Like a potential HOF. It was just that the style of play that made him great also led to injuries. He plays best when he's reckless. Or at least used to. He hasn't played well in a very long time. Maybe he's too spooked these days.
Carson Wentz was a bad draft pick, doesn't matter if it's because he got hurt. Bigger point I was attempting to make and maybe not articulating well enough is that the Eagles survived not having Wentz workout as a long-term QB, getting back to the Super Bowl with his replacement.
I can't agree. They won a superbowl because they picked him (and Nick Foles got streaky hot at the right time). But for that pick, there's no Lombardi.
The "Who helped the Eagles win the Super Bowl five years ago" debate is so 2000-and-late, but I'm just talking about how Roseman survived the fact that Carson Wentz only had a two-year career and even managed to get the Eagles back to the Super Bowl. Just ignore the part where we disagree about Carson Wentz value to a team from 2017.
Whoops... posted in wrong spot:
Yes ... I personally don’t think they will and shouldn’t draft a QB but if they do draft a QB I will be very excited for that means JS/PC believes in that guy.
I don’t think the Hawks should be dissuaded from drafting a QB ... I was just pointing out how critical a decision it is both directions. Drafting or passing could have big ramifications for a GM <- tough job.
Overall, they have to put in the effort into whether or not they believe in a QB whether they are passing or picking one
Yes, they should just pick the player who they believe improves the team the most.
And I'd be good with that!
I really don't understand all of these strong takes by some fans about how they "need to be convinced". Sure, some picks don't pan out for various reasons, but even then it sure doesn't mean that some rando fan has more insight than the professionals do in an incredibly competitive environment.
I'm a fan because I enjoy the game, not because I think that I know more than the myriad folks that are actually involved in this stuff.
The big difference this year is the fact it’s a top five pick, the first time in fourteen years. Most NFL fans I know look at me bemused when I discuss the draft - a lot of them switch off in the off-season (no doubt the same way everywhere) so my gabbling about Richardson’s shortcomings or Cater’s possible suspect dedication seems rather manic.
I won’t be next year if we simply pick at 20+ again. But for the next ten days I remain obsessed!
Reply failed. When I posted it double posted so I deleted one of them and both got deleted. Sheesh.
No worries. I actually saw it in the notice I got in my inbox. Yes, I surely agree. This community that Kenneth has built does seem to get that. Alas, not all others do. Pity.
Cheers -
John Schneider seems to have a good eye for the QB's -So if he thinks one of these guys is a good pick ( long as it's not at 1-5) then I am all for the Hawks doing that. Can't wait for draft day!
You know I read a write up by College DT on the practice issue. His takes if guys like Carter push hard in practice they asking to get hurt. His take was going 70% was smart. His take the game for DT is it is a fight inside of phone booth often against two guys. His take is that Carter wins the fights on a play to play basis at an insane level. I don’t think the Seahawks are going to chop him because of the capers.
That’s a great point. Is a typical tendency among college DTs an issue with Carter only because he is so visible? Usually, these guys fly under the radar.
I’m of the “let’s build up the team and try for a qb next year” school of thought. Geno is good, and could be for a few years. If we load up this year, which I would also prefer to include someone else’s 2024 1st, well, I’d like that very much.
I'd be right there with you if we were likely to have a high first round pick.
I completely agree. I even thought about how to add that particular scenario to my comment, but didn't because I figured I'd already met my max for making a point. Anything with a chance to be in the first half of the first round in 2024, and I'm there.
Cheers -
GENO! GENO!GENO! Give him the best OL, a great defense and off we go!
That would be AFC "East" not AFC "West" where Aaron is going. Too many "West".
Thanks!
If we can load up the roster this year, I’d be happy to sell the house in the next two drafts to get our QBOTF. It might take even more than that to get Caleb Williams or Drake Maye, but there’s always Grayson!
I’d be very disappointed if we moved up this year to get any of them.
Not likely considering Carolina just traded a haul to get the first pick. If he slides to 2 for some reason? Then it could be on the table.