Jump to content

Broncos QB Discussion Thread


AnAngryAmerican

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, thebestever6 said:

Haha if he's worth  the first pick in the 3rd siemian is worth a 5th easily. I would not mind Mccaron on a 1 yr 12 million dollar prove it deal with incentives. 

No he isn't. Tyrod Taylor is an infinitely better QB than Siemian, and I'm not sure it's in any way close. I don't understand why a guy who got neutered by his team's coaching and was still efficient and effective isn't more desirable.

That said, I would also not mind McCarron for a lower price coupled with a top pick. I also wouldn't mind Josh McCown to be honest with you. McCown is not a bad QB, all things considered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Color me shocked Hue didn’t get McCarron. Given Tyrod is a bridge for their rookie QB that’s awful to give up 3.1.     A bridge isn’t changing their 2018 fortunes.  Oh well that helps us.   

Gettng Randall for Kizer when he had no future in CLE was a good deal.  Paying 14M for Landry as a slot WR when they could have gone after Arob is iffy.

But the Taylor deal is brutal.   GM Dorsey is throwing away all the work that Sashi Brown did.   Man. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

Color me shocked Hue didn’t get McCarron. Given Tyrod is a bridge for their rookie QB that’s awful to give up 3.1.     A bridge isn’t changing their 2018 fortunes.  Oh well that helps us.   

Gettng Randall for Kizer when he had no future in CLE was a good deal.  Paying 14M for Landry as a slot WR when they could have gone after Arob is iffy.

But the Taylor deal is brutal.   GM Dorsey is throwing away all the work that Sashi Brown did.   Man. 

Does the acquisition of Kizer by GB put Hundley on the block?  No one has talked about him much and not necessarily as an option for the Broncos, but just in general. GB (similar to NE) isn’t afraid to move backup QBs.

Supposedly multiple teams last year tried trading for Hundley.

While Hundley didn’t blow it up in Rodgers absence, he wasn’t awful either.  For comparison purposes, PFF had Siemian graded at a 53 and Hundley at a 72, and Hundley is far more physically gifted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, germ-x said:

Does the acquisition of Kizer by GB put Hundley on the block?  No one has talked about him much and not necessarily as an option for the Broncos, but just in general. GB (similar to NE) isn’t afraid to move backup QBs.

Supposedly multiple teams last year tried trading for Hundley.

While Hundley didn’t blow it up in Rodgers absence, he wasn’t awful either.  For comparison purposes, PFF had Siemian graded at a 53 and Hundley at a 72, and Hundley is far more physically gifted.

 

From what I saw of Hundley he WAS awful. There’s a reason the Packers have gotten in early to go and upgrade the backup QB role. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

Color me shocked Hue didn’t get McCarron. Given Tyrod is a bridge for their rookie QB that’s awful to give up 3.1.     A bridge isn’t changing their 2018 fortunes.  Oh well that helps us.   

Gettng Randall for Kizer when he had no future in CLE was a good deal.  Paying 14M for Landry as a slot WR when they could have gone after Arob is iffy.

But the Taylor deal is brutal.   GM Dorsey is throwing away all the work that Sashi Brown did.   Man. 

I don't think they're looking for a bridge at all. I think they see Tyrod as their QBOTF. As far as giving up 3.1, what QB in the draft that's better than Taylor will be around then?

Looks to me like a given they draft Barkley at #1. I don't know much about their roster, but if they draft Nelson at 4 and Barkley at 1, with Tyrod at QB they've significantly improved their offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AKRNA said:

I don't think they're looking for a bridge at all. I think they see Tyrod as their QBOTF. As far as giving up 3.1, what QB in the draft that's better than Taylor will be around then?

Looks to me like a given they draft Barkley at #1. I don't know much about their roster, but if they draft Nelson at 4 and Barkley at 1, with Tyrod at QB they've significantly improved their offense.

 

I agree they take Barkley but I think QB at 4 is a lock. Tyrod Taylor is really just a bridge guy to have a vet presence in the QB room. Their rookie will probably be playing by mid season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, AKRNA said:

I don't think they're looking for a bridge at all. I think they see Tyrod as their QBOTF. As far as giving up 3.1, what QB in the draft that's better than Taylor will be around then?

Looks to me like a given they draft Barkley at #1. I don't know much about their roster, but if they draft Nelson at 4 and Barkley at 1, with Tyrod at QB they've significantly improved their offense.

What @paul-mac said.  Taylor as a bridge to let a rookie develop is fine if it was just a matter of $.   If they really saw Taylor as the future it could be justified. But CLE already said they were drafting a rookie but also looking for a vet bridge - Jackson said he didn’t want a rookie starting week 1, they’d get a vet to pair with a rookie.  Given Hue tried to trade 2.1 for McCarron it was widely assumed (myself included) that stopgap was McCarron.   I’m not a believer at all but he also only would have cost money.   Given the role being acquired this is much worse. 

So paying 3.1 to have Taylor be the bridge while their rookie QB develops, it’s a horrible use of resources.  The 65th pick overall will get a really good player - if he’s purely a 1-year (or less stopgap) that’s a huge overpay.   Plus with CLE cap wealth they could have got a similarly priced vet and given up no draft picks.   

SMH. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, paul-mac said:

 

I agree they take Barkley but I think QB at 4 is a lock. Tyrod Taylor is really just a bridge guy to have a vet presence in the QB room. Their rookie will probably be playing by mid season. 

We'll just have to disagree here. We'll find out soon enough though.

He's been a solid QB with excellent ball control for quite a while now. There's not a rookie available that will give them a better chance of winning than Taylor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, germ-x said:

Does the acquisition of Kizer by GB put Hundley on the block?  No one has talked about him much and not necessarily as an option for the Broncos, but just in general. GB (similar to NE) isn’t afraid to move backup QBs.

Supposedly multiple teams last year tried trading for Hundley.

While Hundley didn’t blow it up in Rodgers absence, he wasn’t awful either.  For comparison purposes, PFF had Siemian graded at a 53 and Hundley at a 72, and Hundley is far more physically gifted.

 

19 minutes ago, paul-mac said:

 

From what I saw of Hundley he WAS awful. There’s a reason the Packers have gotten in early to go and upgrade the backup QB role. 

Yeah that’s what I saw too.  Which given he had 2.5 years to develop and looked AWESOME in preseason the last 2 years - was eye opening.  

Slow in read progression.   Didn’t look the defenders off. Locked into guys.   Eyes down with pressure.  Limited pocket awareness.  

The lesson I learned (again) - preseason success means nothing.   Huntley vs. preseason D with vanilla base few blitzes and inferior talent - didn’t translate despite the fact he had 3 preseason s and 2 where he was the highest rated QB. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, AKRNA said:

We'll just have to disagree here. We'll find out soon enough though.

He's been a solid QB with excellent ball control for quite a while now. There's not a rookie available that will give them a better chance of winning than Taylor.

Understand we aren’t talking about Taylor’s abilities alone but what CLE is acquiring him for.  CLE has made it clear they are going with one of the top 3 rookie QB’s.

You said you didn't know CLE's lineup - maybe this will convince you - CLE has Joel Bitonio and Kevin Zeitler as their G's - two top-10, young G's.  Bitonio is argued as perhaps the best young G around.   They just paid in FA to get JC Tretter last year, who is also a top 10 C (he's a little older at 30).  They are all in their prime, and in Zeitler & Tretter's case, they have so much dead money, they aren't going to get moved.   The only real weakness CLE has is RT Shon Coleman, and he's actually strong in run blocking - and still raw, now in his 3rd year.  LT Joe Thomas is likely coming back.  I do think CLE will get a T in this draft, because they need to think succession for Thomas.  But they have 2.1 and 2.4 to get that done.    I always advocate to go BPA - but again, CLE's belief that a franchise QB is one to target this year.   It's why they passed last year.

I know you think highly of Taylor but CLE has made it clear they were getting a bridge vet QB and a top rookie.   Maybe they change their mind but I really doubt it.   I don't see a scenario where they go Nelson at 1.4.  Barkley at 1.1 for sure, but QB at 1.4 is very locked in.  I suppose they could think about Chubb - but consider the final point - they passed up on 1.13 QB last year to get this year's HOU 1st...in an attempt to lock up a QB pick, in this class.    That pick was Deshaun Watson.   They loaded up this year to get QB guaranteed - and HOU's decline made it so they can get Barkley AND one of the top 3 QB in this class.  They've been transparent on this since Day 1, before Barkley did well enough to make them think about QB 1.4 instead of 1.1.    But it's hard to seem them come off QB at 1.4...some still think they'll go 1.1 (which to me is dumb, if you can get the overall BPA 1.1 and still get one of the 3 guys you see as similar at 1.4, you do that).  But the CLE org realizes they have to get their young QB now.   So while anything can happen, I don't see anything but QB 1.4 (and 1.1 wouldn't shock me - it would be the wrong call, but wouldn't shock me lol).   We'll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...