Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ
but then you are sacrificing your chance of drafting let's say, a Lavonte David type of impact player, in order to have 4 roster spots tied up in the QB position. That would be two second round picks tied up in two QBs who will never see the field unless Manning goes down, and if they do end up starting because Manning is hurt, the season just went to crap anyway. I dunno, maybe, just maybe Brocko can come in and not completely suck. But the point is that you'd have Manning, Brock, Dysert and another high round QB eating up roster space when you could have had LAVONTE DAVID. 'Nuf said.
First, so you like Lavonte David huh?
Second, personally I would have no issue with us taking a QB in round 2.
Enhances the trade bait, hell Brock hasn't shown anything in real game action and teams were calling about him.
You take the best player, if that's a QB,RB,OL then you take it.
It wouldn't shock me if we took a RB high in this draft, I don't expect it but I would not be surprised by it.
Originally Posted by SonOfLe-loLang
I don't agree. QB is probably the one position where you shouldn't stockpile considering there's only one guy to do the job. If the Broncos are confident about Osweiler and Dysert, drafting Bridgewater with a number 1 seems like a huge waste of resources.
If you think he is a franchise QB then you have to take him unless the package is insane to trade down.
With that said, my stance was using a 2nd or 3rd on a QB, not a 1st.
Short of Carr falling I do not think there is a chance in hell we take a QB in round 1.
No one is locked into this position once Peyton retires.
We have seen many times before what happens when you pass over or ignore the QB position because you have a great one.
It is better to have 2-3 that you can trade or have compete for the job than 1.
We have already seen from the Texans and Chiefs what happens when you do not.
Heck, even the Packers.