mayock says if clausen is at 17, we take him

Originally posted by crabman82:
i like mayock, but he is out to lunch on this one, the 49ers wll not be taking clausen, right or wrong decision they are going with the qb's they already have on their roster, if they were going to do a qb move they would have went for mcnabb, they have 3 of the top 49 picks and had the ammo to do that trade, they jumped the gun in getting carr before mcnabb's price dropped and they are sticking with what they have

Yeah, Im not sure what he is thinking on this. In his defense he is more of a draft guy and obviously doesnt know the Niners in detail like we do. With that said I can see why the outsiders keep suggesting we take a QB.

[ Edited by Dominate on Apr 9, 2010 at 12:59:43 ]

I think they would take him 13 before he even gets to 17. I don't see why folks are so against it. Maybe I missed the part where the niners have a proven stable qb on the roster.

Originally posted by lamontb:
I think they would take him 13 before he even gets to 17. I don't see why folks are so against it. Maybe I missed the part where the niners have a proven stable qb on the roster.

If Smith plays very well this year and looks like a long term answer then what? We have 2 QB's who will be expensive to carry while 1 actually plays?

Originally posted by lamontb:
I think they would take him 13 before he even gets to 17. I don't see why folks are so against it. Maybe I missed the part where the niners have a proven stable qb on the roster.

are we trying to win the div this year or are we trying to bring along another qb?

Originally posted by lamontb:
I think they would take him 13 before he even gets to 17. I don't see why folks are so against it. Maybe I missed the part where the niners have a proven stable qb on the roster.

1) Other needs

2) Starting qb in place. Development qb in place. Backup qb may in in place. Draft pick goes where?

3) see (1). O line. No develoment on O line, no qb.

4) 2 first round picks. 2 starters. That would be good.

You know this. You know we won't take him in the first. It just wouldn't make sense this year.

Nate will be groomed if Alex stumbles and leaves.

I don't think Mayock said that. I'm trying to remember, as I'd watched this conversation on NFLN this morning, but he said that Clausen won't fall farther than #17... but he never said that SF would take him.

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by lamontb:
I think they would take him 13 before he even gets to 17. I don't see why folks are so against it. Maybe I missed the part where the niners have a proven stable qb on the roster.

1) Other needs

2) Starting qb in place. Development qb in place. Backup qb may in in place. Draft pick goes where?

3) see (1). O line. No develoment on O line, no qb.

4) 2 first round picks. 2 starters. That would be good.

You know this. You know we won't take him in the first. It just wouldn't make sense this year.

Well said, I concur Robin. Now go fetch me an iced tea!

for me if clausen is sitting there at 17. GRAB him!we only have smith under contract for another year. he can sit behind smith and carr for a year. learn the playbook. then come in and rock.

Originally posted by jreff22:

Originally posted by lamontb:
I think they would take him 13 before he even gets to 17. I don't see why folks are so against it. Maybe I missed the part where the niners have a proven stable qb on the roster.

If Smith plays very well this year and looks like a long term answer then what? We have 2 QB's who will be expensive to carry while 1 actually plays?

Worked out well for SD, except they got nothing for Brees. How much confidence does anyone have that Smith will play very well this year? Because of an OK half a season last year? I'm not saying I'm for it and we don't have other needs, but it's far from the worst idea ever.
The logic I don't get is it's perfectly reasonable to draft Spiller that high, at a position of lesser importance, when we actually DO have a guy at his position that IS a proven pro bowler. How does that make sense, but not a QB?

what if he is there in the 2nd round

Originally posted by TX9R:

Originally posted by jreff22:

Originally posted by lamontb:
I think they would take him 13 before he even gets to 17. I don't see why folks are so against it. Maybe I missed the part where the niners have a proven stable qb on the roster.

If Smith plays very well this year and looks like a long term answer then what? We have 2 QB's who will be expensive to carry while 1 actually plays?

Worked out well for SD, except they got nothing for Brees. How much confidence does anyone have that Smith will play very well this year? Because of an OK half a season last year? I'm not saying I'm for it and we don't have other needs, but it's far from the worst idea ever.
The logic I don't get is it's perfectly reasonable to draft Spiller that high, at a position of lesser importance, when we actually DO have a guy at his position that IS a proven pro bowler. How does that make sense, but not a QB?

Because Spiller and Gore can both be on the field at the same time and be effective.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/04/09/jimmy-clausen-enjoys-solid-pro-day/

Originally posted by jreff22:

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by lamontb:
I think they would take him 13 before he even gets to 17. I don't see why folks are so against it. Maybe I missed the part where the niners have a proven stable qb on the roster.

1) Other needs

2) Starting qb in place. Development qb in place. Backup qb may in in place. Draft pick goes where?

3) see (1). O line. No develoment on O line, no qb.

4) 2 first round picks. 2 starters. That would be good.

You know this. You know we won't take him in the first. It just wouldn't make sense this year.

Well said, I concur Robin. Now go fetch me an iced tea!

No Homo, Robin?