Koufax

If he was better than those guys, NE would ask for more. They don't want a Brady injury to ruin their team, and they don't know how many more years Tom will actually play. I am sure he has learned a lot in his time with NE, but hasn't he been third on their depth chart in garbage time reps (i.e. when Gronk is breaking his arm on PATs)? Big arm is fun, but I don't think he has Barkley's football IQ, mid range accuracy, or decision making, and those are the traits we need most.

I think we pick a QB at #8, and I hope we do. I don't think that the 8th best player in this draft is a QB, but at a certain point the void needs to be filled, and the dice need to be rolled just like they are on every Whitner and Maybin non-QB. 1) Is you absolute favorite QB who doesn't get picked in the top 7 going to be available at #41? With a trade down? With a trade back into the first? While Geno could be gone and the lines pretty fine between Barkley/Nassib/Manuel, I think you don't risk it and get the guy you want most of that group. 2) Is the best QB available at #8 going to outperform Kolb in 2013? If you don't think this is more than 50/50, you can consider waiting for the 2014 draft and going with Kolb for a year, but I think there is a guy available at #8 who can outperform Kolb by week 9 of this season. 3) Is the best QB available at #8 going to outperform the best QB available in the 8-15 range of the 2014 draft in 2014? If you really think that this year's draft class is weak compared to next, and that a QB will be available when our pretty good team picks next year that as a rookie will outperform Barkley/Nassib/Manuel as a second year player, you could make a case for waiting and letting Kolb bridge to a stronger draft class. I think this is highly unlikely. 4) Do you need a week 1 starter? No, with Kolb and TJax, you clearly can let the best performing veteran break camp and start the season, waiting for the right moment to insert your draft pick after a little more practice experience. This in many ways lessens the Nassib advantage of knowing the coaches and playbook. There is no way that through training camp plus six or eight regular season games on the bench Barkley doesn't close that gap completely given his football IQ. I think that makes Nassib's familiarity an advantage from a scouting perspective, but not from a jumping right in perspective, and pushes things towards Barkley. It also gives a little more room to consider Manuel who is considered a project, because if you have your QB of 2014+ but he isn't ready to beat Kolb until later in the year or even his second year, that is fine if the long term progress is correct and the talent is there. All that said, I definitely hope to see a QB picked at #8, because that means that our scouting department thinks one of these guys is good enough. I read what others say and watch some highlights, but I don't really know in detail what our football guys do about any of these players, so I heavily trust their actual scouting and evaluations, while they can leave the big picture strategy to me :-). The #1 think I want out of our QB is medium range accuracy, hitting receivers in stride 10-20 yards downfield. The #2 thing I want out of our QB is vision and decision making, which are crucial to make #1 valuable. Arm strength, running ability, size and toughness, downfield touch, are all secondary to these #1 and #2 in my eyes. For me right now that puts Barkley as the top guy. I would still be very happy if Nassib/Smith/Manuel goes at #8 because that means that the coaching staff looked at all this stuff compared to Barkley, and decided that the other guy was better. But for now I am on the Barkley bandwagon, and hoping to hear a QB at #8. It wouldn't surprise me to see them try to get one with their second pick whether at #41 or trading up, and I could see Buddy going the Spiller route with Travon, but I think our QB void is too significant and that strategy risks missing the best signal caller for our team.

I think Nassib and Barkley are more similar than most people realize, and I see them both being successful in the NFL, and I would be happy with either. Both have the arm strength thing going against them, but I don't know that that will matter as much as release and accuracy or be the reason that either fail in the NFL. Two reasons I prefer Nassib to Barkley right now are the shoulder injury to Barkley, and the Syracuse connection where I think Nassib would be ready to start sooner. The fact that they are pretty similar in my book also means that it gives us a backup option to trade up/down and not reach at #8 if we don't think either of them are a lock at #8, and view them somewhat interchangeably. It would seem that one of the two will likely slide until late in the first round or into the second round, and also that both will be there still at #8. It is a little bit of a gamble, but waiting while they are both on the board, and then trying to trade up once one goes off the board (or even when both are on the board to get the first choice later in the round) could get us the QB we need and maximize the value of our draft. If however things don't play out that way, or the team doesn't view them as quite as similar and has a stronger preference, I am happy with them taking either (or Geno) at #8.

1) We just lost a very good LG because we don't value the difference of very good to good at that position a ton! Guards cannot make the difference that other positions can, and if a very angry and green Bruce Banner were available at #8, I would still pass. 2) I think our depth at guard is fine for the positional importance, and I would be fine to see a later round pick at the position. 3) And if there was a hall of fame punter I wouldn't take him at #8 just based on value added above a good player at that position. 4) Nasty is a reason he is a great guard, not a reason a great guard is worth a #8 pick. 5) Another reason he is a great guard is his SEC excellence. Still doesn't make me want a guard at #8.

I have some concerns about his accuracy and the likelihood he is a playoff winning franchise QB, but I don't follow college football as closely as many people here, so I am open to being wrong on that. What I take issue with is people talking about anybody being a reach at #8. There is no franchise QB who is a reach at #8. And if you are taking a guy you don't think will have a good shot at being a franchise QB he shouldn't be anywhere in the first or half of the second because that is too high for a backup QB. And thinking that a franchise QB is poorly enough thought of by the other 29 teams that he falls a full round really indicates some serious doubts of whether he really is a franchise QB. Manuel and Nassib are instead RISKS not REACHES. A reach is when you take a player who is useful but not valuable enough to warrant his round and he should have been picked later or not worried about because there is more value elsewhere with that pick. Manuel, Nassib, and Barkley are all either a great pick at #8, or a waste of a #41. I don't see any scenario where they are good enough for a #41 but not worth a #8. The only reason to wait is if you think the chances of them being a franchise QB are low enough that sure thing at another position is more valuable. I just don't see that at #8 and think the blue chip too valuable certainties to pass on are off the board at that point. Guys like Brees, Kaepernick, Dalton who are taken in the second round and succeed are all in the first four picks of the second round. Meaning those teams would have had to use a top four pick on them to pick them a round earlier, when a roll of the dice would be more costly. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see our franchise QB at #41, or see us trade back into the first or down within the first and still get our guy. But if there is someone who we think has any reasonable chance of being our franchise guy, waiting and hoping he slides instead of getting him at #8 is really dumb. And if we don't think someone will be our guy but are just rolling the dice or adding depth, I would rather not waste #41 on that either and settle for a 3rd round Mallet type. I will be very happy if the team picks Nassib, Manuel, Smith, or Barkley at #8, because it means that our coaching staff and talent evaluators think that guy has a good shot at being our franchise QB, and right now that is our black hole, and I trust their evaluation a lot better than mine. I won't care at all if he might have been available later, etc. Maximizing draft value is awesome across just about every position, but QB is something special, and if anybody seems like a reasonable chance at #8 take them. If not I don't know why we would spend #41 on them.

Who do you like at #8 that is more valuable to our team than a potential franchise QB? There are four reasons not to pick Geno at #8: 1) He is picked in the first seven picks 2) You think the % chance he becomes a playoff winning caliber starter is not very high 3) There is a monster player at another position ahead of him 4) You prefer Barkley apples to apples You are implying #3, and I'm wondering who that player is. Just like all the talk about wasting the spiller Pick, etc. I don't see the consensus Orakpo/Ngata here. I'm fine if our strategy to get our franchise QB involves drafting him with the #41 pick or in the 2014 draft, but only if we don't think there is a guy available at #8, which is our first choice. I happen to think both Geno and Barkley have a pretty good shot at becoming "playoff-winning caliber" eight year starter QBs. I would put the chances for Geno at about 70%, Barkley at about 50%, and Nassib at about 20%. Unless he is off the board or you think my numbers are way off, you take him at #8.

Seems like a really good football player. I don't see him falling to #41 though, so too bad we will miss him. I assume everyone here is enough in the 21st century to laugh at choosing a OG at #8 of course, and nobody would actually suggest that.

There is no guard at #8 who is good enough to be our best value there. We really need to roll the QB dice, but if we don't like what is there / trust Kolb for a year / think there will be a Dalton/Kaepernick bunching when we pick later, then they need to get a better and more impactful player here. I like good guards, I liked Levitre, and I hope we find a good guard to replace him. I also like gook punters, and I like good equipment managers, and I like good fullbacks. It is just that none of those positions have enough difference between great and good to use a #8 pick on. I really hope that careful scouting and draft evaluations and the first seven picks set us up to smartly pick a QB at #8, but if not we need to take a LB or WR or DE or position where the difference between good and great is more significant to the win total of a team. If there is a QB that you would be disappointed using a 3rd round pick on, then he probably isn't the QB you want and not likely to be better than what we have on the roster. Later round QBs are for depth or taking a small chance on a jackpot, but if there is a guy you think can be your QB and you pass on him to keep a 3rd round draft pick, I think that is a mistake. If you think he isn't worth a third rounder or even a second rounder, then I think you are probably looking at a backup QB which isn't a position to get "thrilled" about anyway.

I like this, but we also need to be prepared that we draft someone who needs some time and need a starter for half a year or a whole year. In that case I am fine with the winner of the Kolb / Tavaris battle in camp, and think it would likely be Kolb.

A lot of assumptions. As I mentioned before, Kolb has never started 10 games, thrown for 10 TDs or 2000 Yds. Fitz is coming off three straight 13 game, 3000 YDs, 22 TD seasons. So expecting Kolb to be better than Fitz seems like a little too much speculation. I think he could be, but the odds are less than 50/50. However, we had no chance to have Fitz at the cap and dollar numbers we paid for KK, and there would be the always disruption and controversy element of demoting a three year starter to backup, no matter how much Fitz might have agreed. And I agree that the likely difference between the two is not significant enough (neither would win likely win us a playoff game before our 2013 pick is the starter, and neither would be so terrible as to hold back the team). I am very happy with the Kolb signing, for depth, competition, backup potential, and potentially biding time for a draft pick to develop, but anybody who preorders their Officail Kolb Jersey is probably going pretty far out on a limb.

If by "dilemma" you mean picking Geno Smith at #8, and deciding who to release between TJ and KK at the end of camp, then yes, that would be a "dilemma". There is no way we should pass on Geno at #8 for a less important position. We need a franchise QB more than anything else, and an amazing guard or a talented linebacker or any other need can't interfere with that. Kolb gives us much more flexibility not to reach at #8 if we think there is only #41 talent on the board, or if the chips fall badly, even push our QB pick to 2014. But it does not give us any chance of passing on a QB we think could be (50/50 or greater, not a Luck lock) a playoff caliber starter. I think Geno is very clearly in that "could be" category, and Barkley might very well be as well. I think everybody else falls into the less than 50/50 chance hope or project and would be fine with taking at #41 or later in the first, but I would be very skeptical about taking at #8.

I am quite excited to add Kolb who can compete to be the backup if we get a star in the draft and can be our John Kitna if our QB of the future isn't game ready or isn't there until the 2014 draft. But the Drew Brees comparison is completely unreasonable. He was coming off two Pro Bowl caliber years in a row, and his numbers were pretty similar to his first years in NO other than NO didn't have Tomlinson and his pass attempts went up. Kolb has never had a 2000 yard or 10 touchdown season or played 10 games in a season despite being 28 years old. Those are thresholds that Tavaris Jackson and even Trent Edwards have reached, and Fitzpatrick just put up three 13+ game 3000+ yds, 23+ TD seasons in a row. I like Kolb's potential with a strong O-Line, and I like having Aaron Corp slide down the depth chart. But we can't get ahead of ourselves with expectations.

+1. There is no season you should think of full on tank mode in November much less March. Play to win, build a foundation, but work on getting to the playoffs this year. This roster is more talented than you seem to think, and a good QB and WR plus some solid but not star additions at LB and OG and we are quickly a very good team. The key piece of that is obviously a good QB. I don't know that I go all Ditka on this draft, but anybody I think is a good chance of being a very good NFL QB I happily take at #8, and anybody I really like I seriously consider moving up to get if needed (although weighing the price, since in recent years most move ups are overpriced). As for who will be available next year, I remember all the Brady Quinn and Jimmy Claussen excitement once upon a time...

Troup and Williams join Whitner over Ngata and Maybin over Orakpo as four examples where this forum clearly outperformed our front office. Could we all pitch in and buy the team like the Green Bay Packers, but with actual fan voting on moves? I'm just kidding, but I think we would have outperformed the "professionals" over the last decade.

+1, and after this case closed. Excellent player and great guy to root for, stronger in pass blocking than run blocking, but in one of the most fungible positions in the NFL where the drop from excellent to solid isn't as severe as other places. Financial flexibility aside, I would have loved to have him back, but I'm happy he gets his huge payday on somebody else's nickel so we can run a team where we look for elite players at more important positions, and try to plug in solid value at other positions. Although there is a guard some people would eye at #8, I hope and expect we will pass on him and look for a solid blue collar replacement at a good price.

Levitre will be missed, and his replacement will be inferior, but I think at this price this is a good move. As to your comments about an extra million, I don't think that is the real financial picture. And as for RB numbers up or down, Levitre is more highly regarded as a pass protector than a road grader run blocker. Truly a dedicated and talented player, and I wish him nothing but the best, and I am happy he got his payday with the Titans, but I am also happy that our front office isn't inclined to spend $46m on one of the more fungible positions in the NFL. Addressing our needs at QB, WR, LB are more crucial, and taking a slight downgrade at OG in the process is a reasonable sacrifice to make.

This. The only place I am willing to "reach" based on "need" is moving up a single round or less on a QB when we think he is capable of being a franchise QB. I think for now Nassib at #8 without trading down from #8 or trading up from #40 is a reach and allocates too much of our finite resources to the amount of value. If that changes and he is a legitimate top 15 pick then I take him at #8. If he is a 40-50ish pick then we don't have to hope he is there at 40, but can happily trade up to the second half of the first round to get him at lest cost than our #8. If at #8 there isn't a QB who we would love to have at that point, what we need to do is get the best football player we can. I would love if that were a linebacker, and we should pass if it is a RB, but everywhere else I am fine getting the most talented and valuable football player we can. If there is a DT that is better than a LB, get him. If there is a CB that really is the best value, get him. You need to weight talent evaluations of quality at the position and the importance of the position, with QB obviously being the position where a good player makes more of a difference than guard, etc, but other than our need of a QB and our non-need of a RB, this is really just part of the BPA calculus rather than a deviation from BPA. What I don't think we can do is make it through the first two rounds without picking a QB unless we think that there is not a single QB from 8-40 who has franchise upside, and solid starter downside. Last year Weeden and Osweller were the only QB picked between #8 and the end of the 2nd. 2011 Gabbert, Ponder, Dalton, Kaepernick, 2010 Tebow and Claussen 2009 Freeman and White 2008 Flacco, Brohm, Henne 2007 Quinn, Kolb, Beck, Stanton 2006 Leinart, Cutler, Clemens, T-Jax There are a handful of guys we would like to have there, but more backups since 2004-2005 When Big Ben and Rodgers were taken in that range in back to back years, and Brees a few years before that. It is tough to see right now if this year has guys in that range available. It is easy to like a guy now, and there are several I find intriguing, but my hope is that Nix & co can identify a real talent available from 8 to 40 (including trade up or trade down in that range). Trading up to the top 7 is a possibility too, and I would be very open to it if the guys who will go there are projected to be a lot more likely to star than the later guys.

As always, I prefer the BPA weighted to positional importance. Not positional need of our current team, but positional importance. If there is a QB we really like and think can be our QB over the next 5+ years, then I have no problem picking him at #8. If you don't like a QB enough to trade your #8 for a #40 (what you are doing if you grab him in round 1 instead of round 2), than it is unlikely you really think he is likely to be the guy. I would love to see the draft shape up that we get a great WR or LB of QB as BPA at #8, and I also think it is fine to draft a QB at #40 if you think he is the guy, but his perceived value by the rest of the league, or development time means he will really be there and there is also someone you like more at #8 anyway. But as eball said, if there is a QB who they think is the guy, they should not pass on him at #8 hoping to catch him later. There is a poker game on maximizing value relative to the expected selections of others which includes passing on players for a round, and trading down or trading back into the first. That doesn't make any sense for us if there is a guy we think can wil be our QB and there is a chance he would be gone if we overplay our hand.

Compared with the OC where Marrone will have a larger hand in the cookie jar, I think it is much more important to have someone with experience, and a guy who had a top D in our division is definitely a plus. I'm leary about the 3-4 aspect, especially since the Giants' 4-3 is what beat Brady twice so I think it is a wiser scheme as well as our personnel matching better, but I'm open to it. What we have to be very careful of (Troup in the second!) is not getting inferior talent in the draft because we really need that position in our new scheme. Play with the guys we have, draft the best players, and fill in some gaps in free agency. By the way, in our first year of officially being a 4-3, we allowed 362Yds/G (22nd) and 27.2PPG (26th) Compare that to two years ago in the 3-4 without Mario and Dareus when it was 361Yds/G (24th) and 26.6PPG (28th) and I don't think our better fit scheme and two big name players really made things much different. I similarly don't think making the guys we have play a 3-4 would be a huge failure and expect a step forward on talent and coaching even if our personnel isn't a perfect fit and BJ Raji and Aldon Smith aren't miraculously added to our team.

Marrone is growing on me as I read more, and I'm happier than the retreads I have heard of and initially wanted (my starting pick was Lovie). As for Hacket, remember that Marrone is a former OC under an offensive head coach who was really in charge. I think Marrone will have a large hand on the offense, and in Hacket having someone where understanding and communication is excellent is a better fit than brining in a Mike Martz figure.

I hadn't seen him play much until last night, but obviously he had a really bad game against the best team he had played. I would be very disappointed with him at #8, and think we will have better talent available there than him, even if at another position. I am still if favor of a weighted BPA (meaning not just how good you are at your position, but how important it is to have an above-average player at that position) with only a slight factoring in on positional need, or else you end up drafting less total talent and spread out over the first five years of a player have less total talent on your roster. Needs change year to year while your draft picks hopefully stick around over that span. Nix reached on Troup positionally, but he has generally gone with the player he thought was best (and failed in talent evaluation rather than strategy). I hope and expect that to be our strategy under the new regime with Nix still the GM.

+1. Remember, Spiller got 74 rushes as a Rookie, 107 in his second year, and even this year still just 207. That's 388 in three years, while Alfred Morris got 325 this year as a rookie 6th rounder. People thought Spiller was a bust after two full seasons (I wasn't one of them). Hard to know, but I think that our roster is a lot more talented than when Nix got here. I'm happy to turn over the GM duties to a stud HC if needed, but I'm very open to Nix staying otherwise.

Troup over Gronk is an obvious one, a reach possibly forced by the switch to the 4-3, but taking the millionth case of taking anything other than the best player really hurting the long term strength of roster talent. I'm with you on Dalton/Kaepernick over Williams and a few others, but the later round ones are nitpicking and no team hits on them consistently. He also has a lot of good picks in there, and hasn't been here long enough to have a final verdict on some. I'm indifferent on him right now. I'm not really confident that his substitute will do a better job than he will and I value a little stability. I think he gets it conceptually, I think his overall talent judging is actually pretty good. I think he probably went with needs a couple of times, and he probably thought that Dalton/Kaepernick were not much better than Fitz over a few seasons, and while I disagreed at the time and clearly still do, it doesn't seem like an impossible evaluation of two QBs who every team in the NFL decided were not first round talent (while Ponder and Gabbert and Tebow were across other drafts).

After watching San Diego keep AJ and Norv against the popular sentiments, and then have a disastrous season follow before them both being fired tomorrow, I think firing too soon is much better than too late, and Chan has to go. Nix I can go either way on, but at the moment I prefer him to be retained to provide some continuity unless there is a great fit ready to step in (including a HC/GM total power situation).

I don't watch as much college football as many here, but I don't like Glennon's 57% completion and 14 picks. Jones is the guy I'm most interested in right now, but I think there are a lot of guys that are going to have a chance to be good and available at #8 or #40 for us, without any Andrew Luck we are sad to miss out on in this draft.