Seahawks would own the 11th pick

November 13th, 2011 | Written by Rob Staton

After a 22-17 win over Baltimore this afternoon, the Seahawks would own the 11th overall pick in the draft if the season ended today. The top-16 can be viewed here courtesy of NE Patriots Draft.

Indianapolis (#1), Miami (#3), Washington (#6) and Cleveland (#10) would all pick before the Seahawks - potentially with an eye on the available group of quarterbacks. This could be a dangerous position for Seattle if you’re hoping the team will draft for the position next April. Depending on which underclassmen actually declare, you could be looking at a small pool of 2-3 quarterbacks worthy of a top-ten grade (Andrew Luck and Matt Barkley for sure – Robert Griffin III could join them). The Dolphins and Redskins are desperate at the position and have front offices or coaches that need to make a splash. A strikingly weak group on defense will push teams closer to the quarterbacks as well – I’ve not seen a single defensive lineman worthy of a top-ten grade this year. There’s a lot of strength at offensive tackle but Indianapolis, Miami, Washington and Cleveland have all recently drafted first-round left tackles. In Miami, Washington and Cleveland’s case – they’ve spent top-five picks on the position.

Make no mistake the Seahawks still need a quarterback despite a solid performance from Tarvaris Jackson today. He’s shown flashes of quality during this season, but also a lot of inconsistency and a higher number of turnovers than you’d ideally like. He’s an adequate stop gap who has proven one thing at least – he’s a viable option to start again next year if the Seahawks want to red-shirt a young quarterback rather than start a rookie. The idea that Pete Carroll would hang his hat on Tarvaris Jackson in his last big shot in the NFL still seems unlikely to me. The Seahawks and Carroll must think big at the most important position in football if they’re truly to realise their potential.

Without a lot of top-end defensive line talent in this group, picking later would be less of an issue for the Seahawks if players such as Barkley and Griffin III return to college for a final year. The Seahawks would still have to target other quarterbacks (such as Southern Miss star Austin Davis, a thoroughly under rated quarterback) but they could be forgiven for looking elsewhere in round one without a perceived large group of elite passers. Even so, it’ll be 19 years next April since the Seahawks drafted a quarterback in round one and that’s a run that has to end as soon as physically possible.

68 Responses to “Seahawks would own the 11th pick”

  1. Ryan says:

    Picking #11 won’t get you one of the top three QBs. It’s going to require a significant trade up, giving up a lot of draft capital, to out-compete Shanahan, Holmgren, and the Dolphins. And I have a feeling in my gut that Carroll won’t want to make that Julio Jones-esque sacrifice; he’ll take the BPA, and we’ll live with Tarvaris again next year and be in the exact same position. I hope I’m wrong.

    • Rob says:

      I’m not so sure – I think Carroll will appreciate the situation and it will come down to who’s available. Clearly if your Barkley’s and Griffin’s go back to school there’s really not much you can do. However, if they see a guy they really want I think they will be aggressive. The price for Charlie Whitehurst may not have been multiple first round picks – but they really went after him to make sure they snatched him from Arizona’s grasp. A third rounder and moving down nearly a whole round was a considerable outlay for a guy like Whitehurst. For a player with clear top-ten talents, I’m sure they’d consider a big move up the board.

      • Ryan says:

        I hope you’re right. I worry, is all.

        Another hope is to see Miami keep winning (they’re not THAT bad…), giving us a chance to trade with Carolina (non-QB-desperate, non-division-rival) to jump ahead of the Fins.

        • Rob says:

          Carolina will be in a great position. They have their QBOTF and a left tackle. They could test the water at #2 and still draft Kalil to play RT (alongside his brother, Jeff Otah IR’d twice last two years) or go for a big-time receiver like Jones or Blackmon.

          Would take a big trade deal, but worth it for the right guy.

  2. Matt says:

    Do you think Austin Davis would go in the 2nd round? Kinda like Andy Dalton. Also do you have any recent game tape on him? Thanks.

    • Rob says:

      I don’t unfortunately, but there will be access sooner or later with Southern Miss ranked and winning. I’m planning on investing in a weekend ESPN College Gameday Pass to watch a Southern Miss game. Not cheap, mind.

  3. Jay says:

    Pete Carroll is does more than Holgrem, but has no clue regarding talent unless he pays players like he did at USC,And is so set having Jackson being the QB he fails to look at the real needs of the Seattle Seahawks having a real QB that can give leadership to the Seahawks for the future!
    And by beating Baltimore on Sun he has taken the Seahawks out from getting type
    of real talent in the rich 2012 draft. And Carroll is also such a cheapskate he wouldn’t
    trade up to get any talent anyway.
    Sorry, Seahawk fans look forward to more mediocre football for years to come!

    • Rob says:

      Well, the Seahawks weren’t cheap skates when it comes to Charlie Whitehurst. That was an expensive trade for a career backup. And the Seahawks have found a fair amount of talent since Carroll took control – Okung, Chancellor, Thomas, Clemons to name a few.

  4. kevin mullen says:

    Picking 11th would probably be disasterous for the ‘Hawks for drafting a QB. Not only would we be too far of range for any of them to fall to us, but we’d have to give up way more just to move up for the 3rd best QB (assuming Luck and Barkley are off the board by #3).

    If there’s no top Def rushers worth of top10 picks, wouldn’t you say that a move down and accumulating more 2nd or 3rd round picks could be justified in stocking DLine talent? Clemons is close to end of contract, as with Bryant. I’m not sure where Branch sits but he’s having a pleasant season, nothing eye-popping.

    • Rob says:

      It’s too early to talk about trading down, and it’s an area of ‘rosterbation’ that I dislike. Trading down for more players sounds great on paper and teams that do it always get praised. Yet look at New England – permanently trading down in drafts and struggling to maintain any level of defensive talent. There last few drafts have been very poor. The Seahawks have to be pro-active, not reactive next April.

  5. Kyle says:

    With 2 Rams and 1 Cardinals game left, plus this weekend’s performance as evidence of improvement, I’m thinking this team will probably be closer to 16-18 in the first round. All speculation at this point.

    I understand the sentiment to draft a QB, but find the 19 year reference a bit funny. Most bloggers are on the young side and thus don’t have the institutional memory that middle-aged fans (unfortunately) like myself have. While I agree QB needs to be a priority, the “as soon as physically possible” could get us another Kelly Stouffer, Dan McGuire, or Rick Mirer. Or a Ryan Leaf, Jamarcus Russell, or even Alex Smith. We shall see.

    • Matt says:

      Or Payton Manning, Philip Rivers, Eli Manning, or Matt Ryan. If it never worked out, nobody would ever draft a QB in the first round. Sadly, most elite QBs are found there. Can’t be scared to fail, otherwise, you can just play it safe and enjoy 4 to 8 wins every year.

    • Kip Earlywine says:

      Despite a handful of noteworthy exceptions, statistically its very unlikely you will find a franchise QB after this first two rounds. I don’t have the chart handy, but its 10% or less odds in rounds 3,4,5,and 7. The odds spike to 15% in round 6, but that’s basically a small sample size anomaly. Similarly, the odds in round 5 are virtually 0%. You average out rounds 3-7 though, and you are pretty much talking a 6% or 7% success rate. By comparison, the first round is a 40% rate.

      • Kip Earlywine says:

        Or put another way, just because there are more disappointing 1st round QBs than outstanding ones doesn’t change the fact that drafting a QB in the first round is easily the best place to do so.

    • Rob says:

      As soon as physically possible doesn’t mean taking any QB, Kyle – it means taking the opportunity to be aggressive to get the right player. Any way we look at it, it’s been far too long since Seattle spent a R1 on a quarterback.

      • Kyle says:

        I think each of you took my statement as argumentative. It was not. I’m not a debater, or a blogger, but an historian, so I tend to take a more tragic view of these things. That is, even well-reasoned moves, even the right move when analyzed from all angles, can be wrong. I agree most of what Rob and Kip have argued on these and other blogs, but as a fan for 30 years I also know that history makes fools of most of us. So, yes, pick a quarterback, the right one, and hope it does work as we plan.

        • Kip Earlywine says:

          Well its true that if you draft a QB in the 1st round the historical odds say that you will be left holding the bag. But if you draft a QB anywhere else, you’re REALLY asking for it.

  6. shams says:

    Let’s not forget Denver. With four wins, they are currently just two spots behind us at #13. They are a virtual lock to go QB early as there’s no universe in which Elway will be happy with two pass completions a game. That makes six teams in contention for a first-round QB, all of them desperate to trade future picks to move up…

    • shams says:

      Cleveland also owns the Falcons’ pick, which is currently #18. Will Holmgren cut bait on McCoy?

      • Colin says:

        Holmgren didn’t waste time on the Jon Kitna experiment. I wouldn’t expect him to waste time on McCoy if he doesn’t believe in him.

        As for the Hawks, I want them to keep winning. If they win and lose draft position, it just reinforces the idea this team is really only a few components away from being a solid contender. If they just keep losing, then progress seems to not be happening.

        I like what I’ve seen the last few weeks. The offensive line is showing much progress and beginning to display their potential. The defense has been good despite almost a non existent pass rush. Richard Sherman is turning into a steal.

        I can’t see why Pete and John would wait so long for a QB if they did not think highly of the position.

  7. erik says:

    Winning this game was a complete disaster. This whole day went extremely well in so far as the positioning at the top of the draft. Miami, Arizona, JAcksonville, and St Louis all winning put the Seahawks in tie for the 2nd overall pick. This was a monumental bad day for the Hawks long term future. This team has been set-up for a legit franchise qb to take over. Without Luck or Barkley PC is pretty much doomed to habitual 8-8 to 9-7 pergatory. Griffin 3rd or Rob’s fav sleeper Davis are high risk projects. When I watched the game today and see on TV all those fools in the stands rooting to win I get physically ill. Winning is stupid when Jackson is the starter and surrounding talent suggests a lengthy stretch of winning. Today was incredibly frustrating to say the least.

    • Ryan says:

      Sometimes I think this way too, but am usually to chicken to say so.

    • Matt says:

      My fear is PC thinking he doesn’t need a top notch QB. A strong running game is great if you can get a lead. It’s getting the lead that will be the problem.

    • Colin says:

      I can’t agree with this thinking, Erik. If the Hawks were to lose out this season, wouldn’t that imply they are making no progress towards next year? And that if they did draft Barkley, it wouldn’t matter because they are so awful, right?

      It’s like Rob has said. Seattle just might have to get the guy they want, no matter the price.

      • shams says:

        The dream is to play well but lose a ton of close, flukey games. Not very realistic but fun when it happens.

        • Curt says:

          I have the same dream :-)
          It’s almost like we need the one good draft where we are in the POWER position to either take a QB of the future but also trade down to stock up more pick’s.
          Indy IMO smells in how their season is going. IMO they truly sucking for Luck. Denver as well but a funny thing has happened so far…. Tebo isn’t cooperating :-) I really think they were positioning themselves for Luck by trading (giving away) their best receiver and putting Tebo in thinking they could compete in the loss column with Indy for Luck.
          Just my $0.02

          • JDW says:

            I agree with this comment about Indy. Painter is ridiculously bad, and they have not even tried to come up with another answer. I feel bad for the rest of their team.

    • shams says:

      Guys, it’s time to face reality: there are six (bad) teams that badly need a QB and we are almost a mortal lock to draft either fifth or sixth. We have a home stretch coming up and too much talent to be in the mix for Luck or Barkley– that’s just rosterbation at this point. Erik, you have to be zen about this, buddy. Believe in Pete and John and the guys they’ve drafted who want to win right now. It’s a good sign when we play well!

      We are looking at, at least, six wins. We have two games with the Rams and one with the Cards remaining. The Redskins are crap, and we get them at home. @ Chicago is probably a loss but we could easily give the Niners a game here at home. Six or seven wins, we draft 12th-15th and moving up for Luck or Barkley is off the table.

      • Ryan says:

        …and therefore looking at another year of Tarvaris Jackson. Zzzzz.

        • Rob says:

          I disagree it’d be off the table, shams. Atlanta got up to the #6 pick from the 20′s. Sometimes you just have to make things happen.

          • Rugby Lock says:

            Agree with Rob here… If the right guy is available (Barkley I think as Luck wold require the No1) then I think that PC & JS will trade up but it will be expensive..

          • shams says:

            Rob, I’m willing to spend big to make things happen but I doubt there were 4 other teams desperate for a Julio Jones. Atlanta spent big, but they did it in a vacuum.

          • Rob says:

            Fair point Shams.

    • Kip Earlywine says:

      I typically think in similar fashion, but there are three factors keeping me from using this kind of logic right now:

      1.) Seattle has options. To me, this is a 5 QB draft for the Seahawks, and I’m sure they know about QBs we haven’t even talked about (like Portis last year). Those 5 QBs are, in order: Luck, Barkley, Griffin, Davis, and Tannehill. Griffin and Tannehill wouldn’t be able to start right away, but Tarvaris Jackson’s presence accounts for that. Another option is to trade up. Seattle could pick as high as 20th and still have some potential ability to get their QB.

      2.) Seattle could have lost today, then lost all their remaining games to end at 2-14, and still potentially not drafted high enough for Luck/Barkley.

      3.) If Seattle had a 0-16 or 1-15 season, sure, they might have gotten Andrew Luck. But Pete Carroll would probably be fired, and John Schneider would be in close pursuit. Considering their combined eye for talent, ability to recruit free agents, excellent cap management, and ability to put players in position to succeed… losing that is a very heavy cost to pay. I’d rather pay three firsts then serve their heads on a platter.

      • Jay says:

        Kip and Rob, wondering what your opinions on Griffin and Davis is? And like what I asked Rob about Barkley, what are the ceilings for the two for the two of them?

        • Rob says:

          Griffin is unique Jay – it’s hard to judge what he could become because I’ve not seen a player like him before. He’s got a lot of potential, but he’s also a project. He could easily become a fantasy football dream – big yardage and scores. He’s the type who could keep you in a game permanently with big play making qualities – but he also has that game manager look to him at times too. There’s a lot to like, but also a lot to work on in terms of footwork, technique and managing something akin to a pro-style offense. He could be elite, but he could also be out of the league in five years. Still a mystery, but what an intriguing player.

          Austin Davis is a more modest player, someone who can come in and manage an offense. He’s athletic, he’ll extend plays and he’s accurate. He’s not restricted in any way, but neither is he going to be an explosive player who wins lots of games with his arm. But technically he’s good and a few years down the line, he could end up being suprisingly an established starter. He could be the next big QB sleeper. Very intelligent, incredible work rate.

          • Jim J says:

            THis is a deep QB pool. You aren’t even talking about Brandon Weedon, who may end up winning the Heisman if he keeps performing. There’s Landry Jones, the shorter QBs from Wisconsin and Boise. I would like to see us pick high. I have been figuring we would get the 3-4 QB off the board, so now I have to adjust back to 5-6. Youch. But they all have potential.

            I was happy to see Oregon beat Stanford. WHen will the sports experts learn that the number one QB is not god, and can’t single handedly bring a team back? Cam Newton is the best first pick I have seen lately , but what is Carolina’s record?

          • Matt says:

            Jim J-

            Brandon Weeden will be 29…same age as Tarvaris. That is a MONUMENTAL advantage in college but a huge detriment in the NFL. I know Brock and Salk use terms like “if he’s available” in the mid first round, but the reality is he will not sniff the top 2 rounds. And even the 3rd and 4th would be a reach for him. By the time he adjusts to a real, NFL offense, he will be 30+ years old.

            I doubt Russell Wilson or Kellen Moore get drafted before the 5th round and even then, that’s a reach. Physically limited QBs that play on dominant teams. No gracias.

            I would argue this is by no means a deep QB class at all. If Barkley and Griffin stay, it’s a pretty bad class. Landry Jones and Ryan Tannehill should not be first round picks. Put them in a real offense that doesn’t inflate stats, and nobody would be talking about them. Sam Bradford was a significantly better college QB than Landry and he’s not exactly setting the world on fire. Beware Big XII QBs in the basketball like offenses.

            This class goes from “top heavy” if RG3 and Barkley declare to “very poor” if they decide to stay. Either way, Hawks have to be aggressive to get a QB.

            And regarding Cam Newton…don’t be surprised when 2 or 3 years from now, Carolina is a perennial playoff contender while the Bengals are still trying to find a way into the playoffs. QB does make a huge difference.

          • Jim J says:

            I agree with you Matt. Cam Newton is a great player and I expect Carolina to do well. I’m only saying that one QB does not make a team. Except in Peyton Mannings case, ha ha.

          • Matt says:

            Jim – Totally agree on that. I just think we are close and I’d like us to be aggressive with the right guy. Obviously not just anybody, but if they have conviction with a certain QB, then go get him. That’s all I’d like to see because I think we have really good talent (albeit young) across the board.

          • Rob says:

            Hi Jim,

            I’m not talking about those players for a reason, unfortunately. I never purposely miss people out, but this is a process I undertook in June and I think we’re in a position where we can judge people with some degree of study. Jones just doesn’t fit any of the criteria I believe this team is looking for in a QB, based on who they’ve signed so far and the way they structured their draft board last year (#1 Gabbert, #2 Kaepernick, #3 Dalton, #4 Newton, #5 unknown, #6 Locker). As Matt correctly states, the situation with Weeden is he’ll be T-Jack’s age next year with no guarantee of even beating Jackson out. The maturity level in college is huge. I couldn’t have put it any better than Matt did.

            And Kellen Moore & Russell Wilson are both undraftable IMO. The Seahawks are looking at a smaller pool than some people think, at least in terms of early picks which is probably what’s required.

    • Jarhead says:

      Dear god, I could SWEAR I wrote this myself. You must have been reading my facebook posts. Hahaha As a Pre-Lime Mirer Survivor fan, watching all those morons on sunday in their green wigs made me sick. Like being 3-6 and simultaneously losing our one shot at becoming a legit contender was some great thing. Why are those hawks fans so content to be in the 6-8 win phrase every year? This is unacceptable! Am I the crazy one because I want our team seriously mentioned in the same breath as Green Bay, Chicago, and New Orleans and that I demand a quality product every sunday?!

      • Matt says:

        Right there with ya. Would rather be terrible for 2 years, then dominate over the perpetual 5-8 wins and no playoffs or eeking into them.

  8. Ryan says:

    What would it take to move from #11 to #2? Two firsts and two thirds? Or more?

    • shams says:

      When you say “two firsts” are you including our 2012 first?

    • shams says:

      Root for Minnesota, Carolina and Jacksonville to lose out. Every other team above us either needs a QB or is in our division and are unlikely to help us draft a QB.

      If it’s one of those three at the 2-spot, I think it would take something like (and I’m pulling this right out of my ass):

      2012: 1st 2nd 4th
      2013: 1st 4th

      That’s a hell of a lot to offer in exchange for moving up a dozen spots, but it’s Matt Barkley. Cleveland has an extra 2012 first-rounder, maybe they go even bigger.

      • Ryan says:

        I think I’d take that deal (two firsts, a second, two fourths). That’s the exact deal Atlanta gave up to move from #27 to #6 for Julio. Though I think they overpaid, I’m afraid it’ll take more to move to #2 (though outdated, the trade value chart has a bigger point discrepancy between #11 and #2 than between #27 and #6).

        If it’s three firsts, I’m not sure I want to pull that deal. But you might have to to beat out Cleveland. And even then, I don’t know, since Holmgren’s extra #1 is in 2012, not 2014.

        Perhaps the most practical approach would be to trade up for Griffin instead of Barkley, and take that risk.

      • Don says:

        It would have been a lot easier to lose today and be tied for the 2nd pick. Indi is tanking it. While everyone else was rooting to win I was rooting to lose. How hard would it have been for Schneider to call PC on the sideline and remind hm of the scores, and the long term consequences of calling a conservative game today. I am still upset with winning.

        It is amazing how some years a QB like Aaron Rogers can go at #25 when nobody else in the NFL needs a QB, but now there are so many teams who are desparate for one. This cheap thrill of a win today will have long lasting effects for years to come.

        • Tom says:

          A lot easier to lose? Those players are fighting for their jobs and future contracts. No coach is going to tank games for draft picks.

          The cheap thrill of winning will instill belief in the direction of the team and will give confidence. When was the last time our O controlled the last 5 minutes of a game and against a battle tested squad like the Ravens and ran out the clock?

          With 7 games left, I’m not sure why anyone would bother trying to figure out where we’ll draft. It’s fruitless. SOS will change and there’s no way to predict where anyone of the teams from 2 through 11 will end up, so why bother?

          With 2 games left, it becomes a bit clearer but worrying about it with 7 left?

  9. Aaron says:

    Honestly the talk of losing for future wins is starting to piss me off very much. Who in their right mind would want to play for a team who wants to lose for the sake of gaining higher draft picks? I seriously doubt that the free agents we have gotten would have joined us if we did not win the playoffs last year.

    I think Pete Carroll will either pull off a Jet by trading high for their intended QB or stay put and reach for a QB (Raven style).

    • Rob says:

      I don’t think anyone expects Seattle to lose on purpose. Undoubtedly the easiest way to solve a QB crisis is to have a top five pick and if the goal is to eventually win a Super Bowl and become a regular contender, having that pick is a route to success if it works out. We can all sympathise with that concept, even if we don’t ‘want’ the team to lose. The end goal is the same among every fan, getting there is a discussion. I see both sides of the story.

      • Rugby Lock says:

        I think that people are forgetting that there is one factor IMO that outweighs the wins & losses… Peyton Manning health… If his is able to come back and Indy does draft No1 then that pick is definitely in play… Probably three first rounders and maybe some more but for Luck… Oh yeah…

        • shams says:

          Maybe, but Manning is 36 with three neck surgeries under his, uh…collar. I doubt even the Colts would be inept enough to let Luck go through their fingers in these circumstances.

    • Ryan says:

      Nobody wants them to lose on purpose.

      But I’m rooting for them to lose incidentally.

  10. Jarhead says:

    See, I want a QB as much as the next fan. And true Carroll has had an eye for talent. Also, our line is a juggernaut. The Ravens didn’t get a sniff of Jackson (who is STILL going for that NFL all-time record of longest time spent holding the ball before passing) and they push the Ravens D-Line around. BUT, and hear me out here, we are all ASSUMING that PC and JS believe we NEED a new qb. Jackson was their guy. And he does just enough to not embarrass us EVERY week. So what if they believe we have everything in place to make their run, and resign Jackson and Lynch, which would be absolutely crippling long term, instead of going out for new blood at qb and rb in the draft? Maybe they’re not even looking to trade up, but are completely ecstatic that Claiborne or Coples (2 incredible busts in my eyes) would perhaps be available with the pick they already have, because the hawks FO thinks we are just one small piece away? I’ve been a hawks fan for too long to not expect something horrifyingly disappointing come draft day. I am not rooting for the Hawks to lose, but I feel that in not trying harder to land a legit QB they have not done enough to compete and they ought to lose. You don’t fill the most important spot on your team with a very talented guy, well we get what we look at now every sunday… Just be ready. Cause there is a strong possibility that NONE of us are getting what we want in April, and by the transitive property, next season and the season after that and the season after that…

    • Rob says:

      I highly doubt the Seahawks see Jackson as their guy – more likely he was the guy for the time given the lockout and his familiarity with OC Darrell Bevell. He’s on a modest two-year deal worth $4m per year. Let’s look at this bluntly – Pete Carroll is not investing his final shot in the NFL on Tarvaris Jackson leading him there. They know they need a QB, I’m quite sure of that. Whether they can get one or not is the big question for me.

  11. Scott says:

    Rob,
    I know this is a draftblog, but couldn’t it be possible that the Hawks are simply trying to do as best they can this year with the idea of NOT making a run at a QB in the draft? Perhaps they are targeting a soon-to-be FA next year such as Matt Flynn, QB, GB? The downside is he’ll be 27 by the time next season comes around. I believe the Hawks acquired Hasselbeck when he was 25 or 26 and he still had the best career of any Hawk QB to date. I’m not arguing that they should be going this route by any means. I’d love for this team to be able to hang their hat on a young franchise QB in the draft. I’m just wondering if the team feels like they can improve more offensively by going this route (assuming they feel Flynn is a better QB than Tarvaris)?

    • Tom says:

      The players are out there to win football games. The coaches are game planning to win football games. The Seahawks aren’t going to try to tank games in hope of having a better draft selection. So yes, the Hawks are “simply trying to do as best they can this year” without considering anything about the draft spot.

      Matt Flynn isn’t the answer and would be just another stop gap guy to try out. Jackson has been a recent surprise and has played the stop gap game managing QB better than expected especially when he gets some protection.

    • Rob says:

      I’m sure the Seahawks are trying to do their best and would never argue anything to the contrary. However, I think the concept is take each game at a time and think about the draft when it happens at the end of the season. The plan of this team is almost certainly not just to target someone like Matt Flynn as some kind of solution to this dilemma. Flynn is a passing fad – we’re only talking about him because of the GB connections to JS and because of one game vs the Patriots where he didn’t stink. Carroll and Schneider are not daft and Schneider knows full well the benefit of a proper franchise quarterback (Favre, Rodgers). They won’t fudge this because they can’t.

  12. Ralphy says:

    Rob. Can I just get a little love from you since I was the only one touting Brandon Weeden as the best QB in college before the season started? Come on Rob. You’ve got to at least like him enough to warrant a third round pick.

    • Jim Q. says:

      Anybody ever hear of a QB named George Blanda? I believe he played until he was 48 years old. Where is the “old guy” love?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Blanda

    • Jim J says:

      I’m wondering if Brandon wins the Heisman, what would be a good round to pick him in? And before you say he is too old, lets just say he is our QB for 5-6 years, that’s plenty of time from a late rounder.

    • Rob says:

      I’m happy to give you credit Ralphy for praising Brandon Weeden, but in fairness you never got an argument from me about his qualities as a college passer. I wouldn’t spend a third rounder on the guy because the NFL isn’t college. He’s as old as Tarvaris Jackson is, but without the obvious and necessary learning curve that nearly every quarterback faces at the next level. I still maintain that if he saw the NFL as a viable option he would’ve declared last year. This is going to be the crowning moment of his football career IMO – potentially taking OKSU to the BCS game if they beat Oklahoma.

      But I see Jackson as a stop gap and Weeden would be the same. Third rounders shouldn’t be stop gaps, not for this team. Perhaps someone with a bit more proven talent (Green Bay?) sees him as a long term fit as a backup? Maybe someone believes he can be Andy Dalton – low ceiling, mature guy and offer a shorter term fix? I don’t know, but I’ve been honest and open about Weeden from day one and nothing has changed for me. I’m not going to apologise for not falling in love with a guy who will be a 29-year-old rookie and the issues of time/development being against him at that age are relevant.