Sentences with phrase «taking qb»

That tells me they are taking the QB who might be the least NFL ready of the BIG 4, but who has the the most impressive physical attributes and the highest ceiling, and that guy is Josh Allen who looks like a John Elway clone; big, strong, mobile and an absolute cannon for an arm, but he needs time to work on his technique and accuracy.

The Browns don't have to give up any picks but there are opportunity costs involved at taking a QB at # 1 and passing on Barkley.

Them taking a QB isn't guaranteed as they have Eli for two more years and could take one later in the draft or just wait until next year.

That said, I really don't envision the Giants taking a QB if their intentions really are to stick with Eli for the next two years.

Taking a QB at # 2 where the only things people talk about are his size, intangibles, and needs to sit a year is a dumb reach.

Taking any QB early is a huge risk.

There are many people who argue for taking a QB with the # 1 pick.

Im not taking a qb for the sake of taking one if you are not sold on him.

They have to sell people on the idea they are drafting a QB to help inflate the value of their picks and / or urgency of trading for those picks, but I don't see them taking a QB in the top 5.

BTW, after this year's draft, I saw something that had us taking QB Foster from Clemson and the edge guy from Bama with our first round picks (they had the pick from Philly being in the top ten of next year's draft.

Most of the time, the team at # 1 is either taking a QB or is trading out of that spot because they feel they have their guy (like Tennessee did last year).

Jets, taking a QB at 3.

I guess what I would like to ask you is... Based on the aspect of projection, could this be the single greatest aspect that complicates the process of taking a QB?

If they did that then the Browns wouldn't have to worry about the Giants taking Barkley (since they apparently prefer Darnold) and the same would happen with the Jets taking a QB, essentially guaranteeing Barkley at # 4, instead of him going at # 2.

Denver is about the only trade that makes any sense to me, and that's only if we aren't taking a QB.

Passing on Barkley or Nelson or Chubb & taking a QB who never lives up to expectations would be a much more regretful decision in the long run.

The Browns are almost definitely taking a QB at 1 though Barkley makes that difficult.

You almost have to come up with «yeah, buts,» to argue with them taking a QB or the prospect of them taking a QB.

Assuming Jackson is the 5th QB taken and assuming no team to trades up to get him, in order for him to be available at # 17 three of these teams to pass on taking a QB: Browns, Giants, Jets, Broncos, Dolphins, Bills and Cardinals.

If Gettleman sees one of these QB's as a franchise QB then I believe he will be taking a QB at number 2.

Jets are taking a QB.

It's almost a foregone conclusion that the Patriots will be taking a QB in round 1, since they have no one in the development pipeline and apparently TB12 has yet to commit to playing this year.

If they love one of the QB's they are taking the QB at 1.

Taking a QB at 5 is great and all IF the one (or two) you like is there.

(if not taking a QB of course) I'd propose the Giants make a trade with Denver for whatever they can get.

If not taking a QB at 2, having seven 1st and 2nd round picks locked up with affordable contracts for 4 years is a much safer bet then one of Chubb / Barkley / Nelson plus the 34th pick.

Assuming a team like Denver is willing to trade up to the # 2 (not a foregone conclusion) and if the Giants don't plan on taking a QB then you have to make that trade.

If not taking a QB... Neither Barkley, Nelson, or Chubb alone are worth the 12, 22, 53, and 56 picks combined.

I wish the Cowboys followed the Ron Wolf belief of taking a QB in the mid to late rounds every draft.

My preference is still for them to take Darnold or Rosen at 2, but if they don't plan on taking a QB then work out a deal with Denver, grab some picks and still grab one of your top 2 non-Qbs on the board.

With the ridiculous haul the Giants could make with Buffalo or Miami, either of those trades would be worth missing out on Chubb, Barkley, and Nelson (again if not taking a QB at 2) In fact, if the Giants are open, they might be able to move down twice, still pick top 12, and end up with an even more ridiculous number of picks.

I agreed about taking QB due to how rare it is we get a pick that high.

I'm against taking a QB also — though the logic is different.

NY has the # 2 overall pick which they'll surely take a QB with.

I just don't get this insistence of certain experts that because the Browns have blown it / missed out on QB's in the past, and haven't had a franchise QB since Kosar, that they must take a QB at 1 this year.

There is a drop off but not as big as the drop off from Chubb to the next tier of pass rushers... so take chubb at 4 if he is there (If you take qb at 1).

Why wouldn't they take the QB and the best OL in the draft to go along with him?

I mean, I think if you take either one you are aiming low, but if you aren't going to take a QB, then who cares.

If the return isn't there, I take the QB (I can still trade him later).

Do I want them to take a QB this year?

After missing on Wentz, they just about have to take a QB at # 1.

Based on just that game, you have to take his productions with the same grain of salt you take QB and WRs coming out of an air raid offense.

If that doesn't happen, take your QB of the future.

I can also imagine a scenario where we take a QB at 2 that ends up stinking and having 5 less 1st and 2nd round picks that could have helped whomever the QB is have more success.

The dummest thing they could do is not take a QB at 2 and not at least try to trade down.

Giants take Darnold or trade to someone who takes a QB.

For example, if we take a QB at 2 then we are going to need to go OL or LB with our 2nd rounder.

I've been hearing lately that Cleveland is looking to take a QB, and that Saquon will end up with the Giants.

They were after an additional first round pick to move up to take a QB.

One idea I read that makes some sense is to take QBs completely out of salary cap calculations.