PDA

View Full Version : Schefter predicts Caro to take Newton #1


HAT
03-25-2011, 08:03 PM
Good news for 'trade down' fans. I think there will be a lot more interest from teams wanting to come up to #2 to pass Buffalo for Gabbert than vice versa,

What say ye, Broncos fans?

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/25/schefter-predicts-cam-newton-will-be-no-1-overall-pick/

Schefter predicts Cam Newton will be No. 1 overall pick
Posted by Evan Silva on March 25, 2011, 5:44 PM EDT
Cam Newton, Warren Moon AP

Late last February, ESPN’s Adam Schefter got the ball rolling nationally when he predicted Oklahoma quarterback Sam Bradford would be the Rams’ No. 1 pick in the draft.

It took Schefter just over a month longer this year. In a Q&A for ESPN.com Insider, Schefter predicts that Auburn quarterback Cam Newton will be this April’s top overall selection.

“Last week, I sensed Blaine Gabbert,” writes Schefter. “… This week, I’m more on the Cam Newton bandwagon. The more I hear, the more it sounds like Newton is the player to beat for the No. 1 pick.”

In addition to Carolina’s quarterback need, Schefter explains that the Panthers “need to create buzz to sell some tickets.” A controversial prospect but with unquestioned physical tools, Newton gives Jerry Richardson’s organization the best chance to do just that.

OBF1
03-25-2011, 08:11 PM
I just do not see it, I might be in the manority here.

That One Guy
03-25-2011, 08:12 PM
I just do not see it, I might be in the manority here.

Manority - that puts you dead center between the minority and the majority. Well played.

oubronco
03-25-2011, 08:14 PM
You are definitely not in the minority but if they take him then hopefully Dareus will be a Bronco

Borks147
03-25-2011, 08:18 PM
You are definitely not in the minority but if they take him then hopefully Dareus will be a Bronco

I will shank something/one in the eye if Dareus is there and they don't take him.

*WARHORSE*
03-25-2011, 08:36 PM
No, if Carolina takes Cam, we will not be taking Dareus because we will be trading down.


Guaranteed.


3 Buffalo

4 Cincy

5 Arizona

6 Browns....will not move up

7 San Fran




One of these teams will move up to get Gabbert.


I believe Carolina has no choice, only Newton brings an element that gets them closer to winning simply because of his playmaking ability.


I can definitely see them taking Newton.

razorwire77
03-25-2011, 08:41 PM
If he's right, that's absolutely ****ing awesome news for us. Trade down to the 3, 4, 5, or 7 spots, net another 2nd rounder, and still get Peterson or the impact front seven player that slips (Dareus, Bowers, or Fairley).

RhymesayersDU
03-25-2011, 08:47 PM
This would be the best possible scenario for us. We'd have either our pick of the best defensive player on the board or we could be flexible and trade.

I agree with WARHORSE, teams 3-7 all will want a QB, which could make for a nice bidding war for the #2 pick.

I see it as a no-lose situation if Carolina takes Cam Newton, provided we don't **** it up.

HAT
03-25-2011, 08:58 PM
No, if Carolina takes Cam, we will not be taking Dareus because we will be trading down.


Guaranteed.


3 Buffalo

4 Cincy

5 Arizona

6 Browns....will not move up

7 San Fran




One of these teams will move up to get Gabbert.


Yup, and you can add Tenn, Wash & Minny to that list.

Tombstone RJ
03-25-2011, 09:12 PM
oh please, please, please, please let this be true...

NFLBRONCO
03-25-2011, 09:14 PM
This was the worst secret ever. The way Fig gets hyped we knew he'd go #1.

HAT
03-25-2011, 09:25 PM
Vikings coach Leslie Frazier made it "pretty clear" at the NFL owners meetings Tuesday that he wants to draft a quarterback and start him right away.

"(The idea) would be to get a young guy that could say, 'OK, we're going to ride with this guy. He's our [Joe] Flacco, he's our [Mark] Sanchez, he's our Matt Ryan,'" Frazier said. "He would step in as our starter." Beat writers Judd Zulgad and Tom Pelissero both came away from Frazier's Tuesday breakfast with the media believing that the Vikings will draft a QB in the first or second round. Whether he's "pro-ready" or not

Houshyamama
03-25-2011, 09:57 PM
How much could we get in return for trading down to 5 or 7?

That One Guy
03-25-2011, 10:01 PM
If you're gonna draft anyone available in the first or second and start him with no fallback plan... you're better served to trade for someone.

UltimateHoboW/Shotgun
03-25-2011, 10:08 PM
Good news for 'trade down' fans. I think there will be a lot more interest from teams wanting to come up to #2 to pass Buffalo for Gabbert than vice versa,

What say ye, Broncos fans?

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/25/schefter-predicts-cam-newton-will-be-no-1-overall-pick/

Schefter predicts Cam Newton will be No. 1 overall pick
Posted by Evan Silva on March 25, 2011, 5:44 PM EDT
Cam Newton, Warren Moon AP

Late last February, ESPN’s Adam Schefter got the ball rolling nationally when he predicted Oklahoma quarterback Sam Bradford would be the Rams’ No. 1 pick in the draft.

It took Schefter just over a month longer this year. In a Q&A for ESPN.com Insider, Schefter predicts that Auburn quarterback Cam Newton will be this April’s top overall selection.

“Last week, I sensed Blaine Gabbert,” writes Schefter. “… This week, I’m more on the Cam Newton bandwagon. The more I hear, the more it sounds like Newton is the player to beat for the No. 1 pick.”

In addition to Carolina’s quarterback need, Schefter explains that the Panthers “need to create buzz to sell some tickets.” A controversial prospect but with unquestioned physical tools, Newton gives Jerry Richardson’s organization the best chance to do just that.

Oh please may this be true. There's at least half dozen team that would trade half there draft for Blaine Gabbert.

tsiguy96
03-25-2011, 10:10 PM
denver should have the opportunity to trade down if they want to, depends if they want to give up the chance to take one of the elite D players. i think a guy like fairley at pick 5 would be perfect, AZ is apparently very big into gabbert.

yerner
03-25-2011, 10:27 PM
I wouldn't trade it. If Newton goes 1st the Broncos have a chance to pick the best player in the draft and their first choice.

HAT
03-25-2011, 10:32 PM
denver should have the opportunity to trade down if they want to, depends if they want to give up the chance to take one of the elite D players. i think a guy like fairley at pick 5 would be perfect, AZ is apparently very big into gabbert.

Not happening. Their beat writer put the odds at 70-1 that they won't draft a QB at #5. While I don't think it's THAT much of a longshot, I do agree that it makes no sense for them. And especially to trade up.

The Cards need way too much help to piss away their 2nd & 4th to move up and grab a QB who won't make an immediate impact. They already have Skelton to develop & will be better served with bringing in a vet or FA to compete with him once the lockout stuff is resolved.

HAT
03-25-2011, 10:36 PM
I wouldn't trade it. If Newton goes 1st the Broncos have a chance to pick the best player in the draft and their first choice.

And if they have a handful of guys rated roughly the same? They'd be nuts not to trade it if there is a market.

There are holes all over the place and the best way to fill them is by acquiring extra early round picks. It's not like they'd be trading out of the first round entirely....Just moving back 2-10 spots.

ant1999e
03-25-2011, 10:41 PM
Manority - that puts you dead center between the minority and the majority. Well played.

LOL Rep.

HAT
03-25-2011, 10:48 PM
I just do not see it, I might be in the manority here.

I was reading on a Caro board that they have given sample playbooks to Newton, Gabbert & Mallet so they can get a better feel on their smarts when they have them in over the next few months. Everything else I've read points to the fact that they like Mallet almost as much as the other two.

If they were picking at the top of round 2, I'd agree with you here. As it is, they don't have a 2nd round pick with which to take Mallet (or any other of the 2nd tier guys).

UltimateHoboW/Shotgun
03-25-2011, 10:54 PM
With a rookie cap. It should making trading easier, even with the #1 pick.

HAT
03-25-2011, 11:10 PM
IF, and it's a big if....The Panthers take Newton #1. I actually believe you can Buffalo to the list of potential trade partners. I would've scoffed at that notion a month ago but it's making more and more sense.

Denver supposedly got the jump on them for Tebow last year and if Elway plays his cards right, he might be able to pull it off.

If he can convince them that there's a solid offer on the table from one of the other QB needy teams, Buff might just go along with it to not lose their 'franchise QB' because of Denver for the 2nd year in a row.

How's this for a possible deal.

Denver gets: Picks #3, 34 & 99. (2,864 on the chart if you're into that)
Buff gets: pick #2 & 46. (3,040 on the chart)

Why it works for Buff:
They are #winning as far as chart value and still retain their 2nd rounder. Essentially only sacrificing a 4th round pick and moving back some in round 2 to get their QB and not get screwed by Denver 2 years in a row.

Why it works for Denver:
Works is selling it short! Epic win IMO. At # 3 they still get their top rated guy on D. Moving up 12 spots in the 2nd is huge and will open up all kinds of new options by having picks #34 & 36. And they go from not having a 4th round pick at all to having the 3rd overall pick in that round.

I hope Elway is a good poker player!

UltimateHoboW/Shotgun
03-25-2011, 11:18 PM
IF, and it's a big if....The Panthers take Newton #1. I actually believe you can Buffalo to the list of potential trade partners. I would've scoffed at that notion a month ago but it's making more and more sense.

Denver supposedly got the jump on them for Tebow last year and if Elway plays his cards right, he might be able to pull it off.

If he can convince them that there's a solid offer on the table from one of the other QB needy teams, Buff might just go along with it to not lose their 'franchise QB' because of Denver for the 2nd year in a row.

How's this for a possible deal.

Denver gets: Picks #3, 34 & 99. (2,864 on the chart if you're into that)
Buff gets: pick #2 & 46. (3,040 on the chart)

Why it works for Buff:
They are #winning as far as chart value and still retain their 2nd rounder. Essentially only sacrificing a 4th round pick and moving back some in round 2 to get their QB and not get screwed by Denver 2 years in a row.

Why it works for Denver:
Works is selling it short! Epic win IMO. At # 3 they still get their top rated guy on D. Moving up 12 spots in the 2nd is huge and will open up all kinds of new options by having picks #34 & 36. And they go from not having a 4th round pick at all to having the 3rd overall pick in that round.

I hope Elway is a good poker player!

I like how you think, Sir.

broncocalijohn
03-25-2011, 11:18 PM
How much could we get in return for trading down to 5 or 7?

I would hope a veteran defensive lineman could be included in that package.

Broncojef
03-26-2011, 02:12 AM
Just take Dareus should we be so lucky and
be done with it. Enough of the stupid trades
for a third. Get your guy and be done.

Cito Pelon
03-26-2011, 09:10 AM
Just take Dareus should we be so lucky and
be done with it. Enough of the stupid trades
for a third. Get your guy and be done.

Ah, it's intriguing to think about the possibility to acquire picks from QB-hungry teams.

And still be able to acquire a top D prospect or two, and maybe even a top TE.

ColoradoDarin
03-26-2011, 09:46 AM
If Carolina take Newton, the only trade I do is with Buffalo - this would be similar to the Cardinals-Chargers trade in 1998:

The Chargers gave the Cardinals a 1999 first-round pick, a 1998 second-round pick and veteran players Eric Metcalf and Patrick Sapp to go up one spot, to the No. 2 pick in the draft.

Swapping 1 spot while gaining a future 1st, a 2nd and 2 players would be awesome, heck I'd just take the 2 picks, but I doubt we get that much unless Buffalo panics. Then with 2 QB's off the board, we still can pick Dareus or Peterson and still have plenty of ammo to do whatever we want (move back up into the 1st). That's my ideal.

Doggcow
03-26-2011, 01:20 PM
Manority - that puts you dead center between the minority and the majority. Well played.

ROFL

Doggcow
03-26-2011, 01:22 PM
If Carolina take Newton, the only trade I do is with Buffalo - this would be similar to the Cardinals-Chargers trade in 1998:



Swapping 1 spot while gaining a future 1st, a 2nd and 2 players would be awesome, heck I'd just take the 2 picks, but I doubt we get that much unless Buffalo panics. Then with 2 QB's off the board, we still can pick Dareus or Peterson and still have plenty of ammo to do whatever we want (move back up into the 1st). That's my ideal.

That's a god damn prayer. Let's see how the FO plays it though.

BroncoMan4ever
03-26-2011, 10:41 PM
Ah, it's intriguing to think about the possibility to acquire picks from QB-hungry teams.

And still be able to acquire a top D prospect or two, and maybe even a top TE.

the only way i am for dropping back if Dareus is available, is if the Bills hear another team is interested in trading up with us to get Gabbert at 2 so they make a trade with us to move up 1 spot, and we can move back 1 slot and still get Dareus.

NFLBRONCO
03-26-2011, 10:51 PM
the only way i am for dropping back if Dareus is available, is if the Bills hear another team is interested in trading up with us to get Gabbert at 2 so they make a trade with us to move up 1 spot, and we can move back 1 slot and still get Dareus.

No doubt cough up #3 #34 and we'll swap places right now

Hercules Rockefeller
03-26-2011, 11:03 PM
IF, and it's a big if....The Panthers take Newton #1. I actually believe you can Buffalo to the list of potential trade partners. I would've scoffed at that notion a month ago but it's making more and more sense.

Denver supposedly got the jump on them for Tebow last year and if Elway plays his cards right, he might be able to pull it off.

If he can convince them that there's a solid offer on the table from one of the other QB needy teams, Buff might just go along with it to not lose their 'franchise QB' because of Denver for the 2nd year in a row.

How's this for a possible deal.

Denver gets: Picks #3, 34 & 99. (2,864 on the chart if you're into that)
Buff gets: pick #2 & 46. (3,040 on the chart)

Why it works for Buff:
They are #winning as far as chart value and still retain their 2nd rounder. Essentially only sacrificing a 4th round pick and moving back some in round 2 to get their QB and not get screwed by Denver 2 years in a row.

Why it works for Denver:
Works is selling it short! Epic win IMO. At # 3 they still get their top rated guy on D. Moving up 12 spots in the 2nd is huge and will open up all kinds of new options by having picks #34 & 36. And they go from not having a 4th round pick at all to having the 3rd overall pick in that round.

I hope Elway is a good poker player!

That's a terrible trade for Denver.

Buffalo has 0 incentive to trade up to take Gabbert if they don't think there are other teams out there trying to make move for him also. That means the Broncos would have multiple offers on the table if Buffalo is involved. Denver's not going to take an offer from Buffalo that includes giving up one of their own 2nds, just so they can move down a single spot.

QBs going 1-2 also means that Denver could move all the way down to #7 and still be guaranteed one of the top 5 defensive players in the draft, and most likely there would be at least 2 since AJ Green isn't making it past Cleveland.

And no, guaranteeing they get their guy at #3 still doesn't make up for how much they take it up the ass in that original proposed deal.

NFLBRONCO
03-26-2011, 11:20 PM
That's a terrible trade for Denver.

Buffalo has 0 incentive to trade up to take Gabbert if they don't think there are other teams out there trying to make move for him also. That means the Broncos would have multiple offers on the table if Buffalo is involved. Denver's not going to take an offer from Buffalo that includes giving up one of their own 2nds, just so they can move down a single spot.

QBs going 1-2 also means that Denver could move all the way down to #7 and still be guaranteed one of the top 5 defensive players in the draft, and most likely there would be at least 2 since AJ Green isn't making it past Cleveland.

And no, guaranteeing they get their guy at #3 still doesn't make up for how much they take it up the ass in that original proposed deal.

Good point because Buff like most others assume Denver going D won't need to move up to secure QB.

HAT
03-27-2011, 02:43 AM
That's a terrible trade for Denver.

Buffalo has 0 incentive to trade up to take Gabbert if they don't think there are other teams out there trying to make move for him also. That means the Broncos would have multiple offers on the table if Buffalo is involved. Denver's not going to take an offer from Buffalo that includes giving up one of their own 2nds, just so they can move down a single spot.



lolwut?

I didn't say Denver shoult take that deal over, say, one from Tennessee or SF. I said they might be able to bluff Buffalo into a deal like that instead of simply drafting Dareus or whoever at #2.

And I have no idea WTF you are talking about with the last sentence quoted above. I can only assume you didn't read my original post even though you quoted it.

Seriously, were you drunk when you responded?

That One Guy
03-27-2011, 08:24 AM
Good point because Buff like most others assume Denver going D won't need to move up to secure QB.

The concept isn't that Denver would take QB but that they would entertain trades from somebody else that's trying to jump Buff to take a QB.

That One Guy
03-27-2011, 08:26 AM
That's a terrible trade for Denver.

Buffalo has 0 incentive to trade up to take Gabbert if they don't think there are other teams out there trying to make move for him also. That means the Broncos would have multiple offers on the table if Buffalo is involved. Denver's not going to take an offer from Buffalo that includes giving up one of their own 2nds, just so they can move down a single spot.

QBs going 1-2 also means that Denver could move all the way down to #7 and still be guaranteed one of the top 5 defensive players in the draft, and most likely there would be at least 2 since AJ Green isn't making it past Cleveland.

And no, guaranteeing they get their guy at #3 still doesn't make up for how much they take it up the ass in that original proposed deal.

So... you'd be more worried about some draft value chart than just what essentially amounts to a free draft pick? If it's clear that the team you're trading for wants a QB and you REALLY want your guy, you take whatever you can get to ensure you get both. I don't care if it's a fourth round pick if there's only a single guy that the FO decides they want and taking such a low offer is the only way to trade yet ensure they still get their guy. It's free at that point... who argues about how much you're getting when it's free?

oubronco
03-27-2011, 09:00 AM
I'll laugh my ass off if they take Gabbert and then i'll be pissed as hell that they passed on Dareus

Beantown Bronco
03-27-2011, 09:11 AM
So... you'd be more worried about some draft value chart than just what essentially amounts to a free draft pick? If it's clear that the team you're trading for wants a QB and you REALLY want your guy, you take whatever you can get to ensure you get both. I don't care if it's a fourth round pick if there's only a single guy that the FO decides they want and taking such a low offer is the only way to trade yet ensure they still get their guy. It's free at that point... who argues about how much you're getting when it's free?

Seriously. I can only assume Herc didn't fully read or understand the scenario presented.

We get the guy we wanted at #2 anyway, but actually save a little money on the signing because we get him at #3.
We also get a fourth rounder and get a better second rounder.

There is literally no downside to that scenario.

Hercules Rockefeller
03-27-2011, 10:16 AM
Oh JFC, that entire post went over people's heads.

1. Buffalo doesn't offer up that terrible deal if they're trying to trade to the 2nd overall spot. Buffalo doesn't need to trade up for Gabbert unless they feel beleive some other team has put an offer on the table to jump them and snag Gabbert. Denver's not going to bluff them into anything.

2. Denver is not giving up 2B in the same deal where they're trading down from the 2nd overall. Denver is actually in a position of strength if Newton goes 1st, Buffalo wants Gabbert at #3, and teams want to try to get ahead of them.

3. Yeah, I don't like this deal because Denver gives up points on the DPVC. It's not like I've sat here for 5+ years calling out how retarded the chart is and the people that put forward unrealistic deals that they think work because the points match or are similar.

4. Just like every year, you guys put way too much emphasis on the fact that Denver has to get "their guy." They have multiple guys they'd be willing to take. There's not a Suh in this year's draft. You're telling me that if the Buffalo deal is on the table and Arizona calls up and offers #5, #38, and a 2012 1st, the Broncos are going to turn that down in favor of a free 4th and moving up in the 2nd just so they can get their guy? No, they're not.

Again, the deal was terrible. It's not something Buffalo would offer up if they thought Gabbert wouldn't last until 3, and it's not something Denver would take either.

Tombstone RJ
03-27-2011, 10:35 AM
The Bills better watch out... I could see Denver orchestrating a trade with AZ or SF who are desparate for QB help....

HAT
03-27-2011, 10:46 AM
Oh JFC, that entire post went over people's heads.

1. Buffalo doesn't offer up that terrible deal if they're trying to trade to the 2nd overall spot. Buffalo doesn't need to trade up for Gabbert unless they feel beleive some other team has put an offer on the table to jump them and snag Gabbert. Denver's not going to bluff them into anything.

I disagree. Newton going 1 and Buff being in love with Gabbert are big assumptions at this point but if that were the case, it wouldn't be too hard to sell them that the phone was ringing off the hook even if it wasn't. Especially if you believe the reports that Buffalo was going to take Tebow LY.

2. Denver is not giving up 2B in the same deal where they're trading down from the 2nd overall. Denver is actually in a position of strength if Newton goes 1st, Buffalo wants Gabbert at #3, and teams want to try to get ahead of them.

Yes, that is the premise of the thread.

3. Yeah, I don't like this deal because Denver gives up points on the DPVC. It's not like I've sat here for 5+ years calling out how retarded the chart is and the people that put forward unrealistic deals that they think work because the points match or are similar.

Not all that into the chart either.

4. Just like every year, you guys put way too much emphasis on the fact that Denver has to get "their guy." They have multiple guys they'd be willing to take. There's not a Suh in this year's draft. You're telling me that if the Buffalo deal is on the table and Arizona calls up and offers #5, #38, and a 2012 1st, the Broncos are going to turn that down in favor of a free 4th and moving up in the 2nd just so they can get their guy? No, they're not.

Don't count me in that group. While my preference is Peterson, I don't care how far they trade back if the value is there. Most people here hoping for a trade would prefer staying in the top 8 or so. I would be fine with Wash at 10, Minny at 12, or even Miami at 15. And again, this wasn't about taking a buffalo deal over a better one. It's about working a Buffalo deal in lieu of simply picking #2.



In red.

That One Guy
03-27-2011, 11:06 AM
Oh JFC, that entire post went over people's heads.

1. Buffalo doesn't offer up that terrible deal if they're trying to trade to the 2nd overall spot. Buffalo doesn't need to trade up for Gabbert unless they feel beleive some other team has put an offer on the table to jump them and snag Gabbert. Denver's not going to bluff them into anything.

2. Denver is not giving up 2B in the same deal where they're trading down from the 2nd overall. Denver is actually in a position of strength if Newton goes 1st, Buffalo wants Gabbert at #3, and teams want to try to get ahead of them.

3. Yeah, I don't like this deal because Denver gives up points on the DPVC. It's not like I've sat here for 5+ years calling out how retarded the chart is and the people that put forward unrealistic deals that they think work because the points match or are similar.

4. Just like every year, you guys put way too much emphasis on the fact that Denver has to get "their guy." They have multiple guys they'd be willing to take. There's not a Suh in this year's draft. You're telling me that if the Buffalo deal is on the table and Arizona calls up and offers #5, #38, and a 2012 1st, the Broncos are going to turn that down in favor of a free 4th and moving up in the 2nd just so they can get their guy? No, they're not.

Again, the deal was terrible. It's not something Buffalo would offer up if they thought Gabbert wouldn't last until 3, and it's not something Denver would take either.

Nothing went over our head. It was in response to this sentence, particularly for me, that made the post seem silly.

And no, guaranteeing they get their guy at #3 still doesn't make up for how much they take it up the ass in that original proposed deal.

Denver currently is in position to probably get their top choice. Some people quite value that - hence the reason having a high draft pick can be beneficial. IF they're going to get their guy BUT they can convince Buffalo to make the trade, it's a free pick. There's no downside to that.

The original post you responded to suggested part of the win for Denver was that they still get their #1 guy. Obviously if you throw that out and say they don't care who they get, they can get a lot better value for the pick by trading back further. The premise originally proposed though was that Denver would still get their pick of the litter because only QBs would be taken before their pick.

Oh, and if you discount draft value chart, how in the world does one even claim Denver takes it in the ass?

HAT
03-27-2011, 11:14 AM
The Bills better watch out... I could see Denver orchestrating a trade with AZ or SF who are desparate for QB help....

The most likely suitors, IMO, should this scenario unfold...

Minny:
See Fraziers earlier quotes. If they are serious about taking a QB early and rolling with him from day 1....Gabbert makes the most sense. When making the comparison, he dropped names like Sanchez, Flacco & Ryan. I don't think he had the Ponders & Kaepernicks of the world in mind. They're in a weird spot where Locker is probably a reach at #12 and a lot of the tier 2's could be gone by the time they pick next at #43.

SF:
Even though the NFC is improved, they won't be in position for Barkley or Luck next year and the 2011 tier 2 guys don't seem to fit. Harbaugh recruited Gabbert.

Buff: Given how unlikely I think any team below here makes the move...This is where the bluff comes into play if Minny & SF aren't interested.

Wash:
They need a QB big time but will Shanny being willing to deal with Elway & Bowlen? Waiting until the 2nd round seems likelier.


Tenn:
I can't see them trading up for Gabbert when they should easily be able to get Mallet in round 2. It's not like they are a team to shy away from character concerns.

Cincy:
Seems like the staff wants a new QB but ownership is determined to call Palmer's bluff.

Miami:
All star ownership group would love to make a big splash but they'd have to give up the most and have the least ammo. We already have their 2nd this year & the NFL has said that while trading future picks is allowed, they are telling teams to do so at their own risk since the draft as we know it may be a casualty of the labor situation.

Az:
Gabbert's ceiling is probably higher than Skelton's but they're not much different QB's at this point. They'll bring in a vet to compete with Skelly when they can.

HAT
03-27-2011, 11:22 AM
Also....As ****ty as this whole labor deal is, it is helping the cause for those of us who prefer to trade down.

Orton, Kolb, Palmer, McNabb, Bulger, etc. would have likely filled some teams QB needs prior to draft day if allowed.

cmhargrove
03-27-2011, 02:33 PM
The Bills better watch out... I could see Denver orchestrating a trade with AZ or SF who are desparate for QB help....

Just a point of order, but what's to keep Chan Gailey from "cashing in" on this draft for picks as well? What if the Bills like Mallett, and would trade out of the #3 spot?

This could be a very interesting draft, and with finances being a big issue for some teams, trading out of the top five might be a desirable option.

Just sayin'

tsiguy96
03-27-2011, 02:34 PM
Just a point of order, but what's to keep Chan Gailey from "cashing in" on this draft for picks as well? What if the Bills like Mallett, and would trade out of the #3 spot?

This could be a very interesting draft, and with finances being a big issue for some teams, trading out of the top five might be a desirable option.

Just sayin'

rookie salary cap will be in effect if/when CBA is done.

NFLBRONCO
03-27-2011, 02:40 PM
The concept isn't that Denver would take QB but that they would entertain trades from somebody else that's trying to jump Buff to take a QB.

I know but, Buff has to believe that is the case if not no need too.

strafen
03-27-2011, 09:45 PM
If Newton does go first, we will have the chance to get the BPA or the best player that fits our needs. I don't think Newton is the best player of the draft.

The chance to grab the very best would be wide open for us
I can only see us trading down a spot or two and still be able to grab our man.

So, if Newton goes first and Buffalo decides to trade spots + picks with us to get Gabber per-se, we would still have all of our men on the board plus extra picks.

That would be too good, but hey, it's not too far-fetched...

HAT
03-27-2011, 10:13 PM
**** off dragster.

UltimateHoboW/Shotgun
03-27-2011, 10:36 PM
Guys. You act like we hold the cards. We don't! We hold the chip. Its up to the team of who they want and what they are willing to give to get there guy.

strafen
03-27-2011, 10:41 PM
Guys. You act like we hold the cards. We don't! We hold the chip. Its up to the team of who they want and what they are willing to give to get there guy.

Why not?
We do hold the cards if Newton goes first, even if he didn't we could stand pat and pick second and be happy with what we'd get.
Trading down if Newton goes first will give us some bargaining leverage too...

fdf
03-27-2011, 10:50 PM
I like how you think, Sir.

Why would Buffalo do this. They know Denver isn't selecting a QB at number 2. Therefore, they have no incentive to trade up--they get the QB they want with no trade at all.

UltimateHoboW/Shotgun
03-27-2011, 10:53 PM
Why not?
We do hold the cards if Newton goes first, even if he didn't we could stand pat and pick second and be happy with what we'd get.
Trading down if Newton goes first will give us some bargaining leverage too...

Yes. you sad it yourself. We could use the chip ourselves. They key is to get Bills to think a team like the Cards want Gabbert and get them to give us an arm and a leg to move up one spot so Cards don't jump ahead of them to get their guy.

Orange4Life
03-27-2011, 10:56 PM
Because if they believe we could trade out of the second spot to a team that wants a QB, the said team trading to #2 could take 'their' guy (Buffalo's) before they get the chance at #3.

strafen
03-27-2011, 10:56 PM
Yes. you sad it yourself. We could use the chip ourselves. They key is to get Bills to think a team like the Cards want Gabbert and get them to give us an arm and a leg to move up one spot so Cards don't jump ahead of them to get their guy.

Exactly. Besides Buffalo there are at least 3 other teams that need a QB.
Can Bufflao take a chance?

UltimateHoboW/Shotgun
03-27-2011, 11:20 PM
Why would Buffalo do this. They know Denver isn't selecting a QB at number 2. Therefore, they have no incentive to trade up--they get the QB they want with no trade at all.

Your really not worried about teams that pick ahead of you. Your worried about teams that might jump ahead of you and how much you value the guy you want.

Cito Pelon
03-28-2011, 10:32 AM
Well, the draft is gonna be interesting no doubt. Just about 30 days away. The top drafting teams are working out the Qb's extensively. There's certainly some QB-hungry teams, and some decent QB prospects in this draft.

How much the QB-hungry teams want to fight it out to see who gets one of the top three will be interesting.

mhgaffney
03-28-2011, 12:09 PM
Let's hope it develops into a bidding war.

In that case we stand to win.

UltimateHoboW/Shotgun
03-28-2011, 12:30 PM
Thing is we need to get on the Cards and Bills message boards and start rumors that Bills want Gabbert and Cards are willing to sell the house to get him.