There are 189 users in the forums
Originally posted by SnakePlissken:
Even if we're at the 3rd/4th overall pick by January, I'd do whatever it takes to swap with (possibly) Buffalo to move up to #1. Bills want Luck, but if they could get something sweet, I'm FOR SURE they'd settle for Jake Locker at #3/#4.
-But this is IF Luck declares...
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Absolutely not. He is not worth that. This board severely overrates Andrew Luck. He's a tremendous prospect, but I would not trade away a pick. We need all the picks we can get, and there are far too many unbelievable players out there right now that could really help us.
No, no I would absolutely not trade it.
Originally posted by highway49:
If Luck declares...yes it's a risk, but trade the "farm" to get 'em
Originally posted by WillistheWall:Originally posted by highway49:
If Luck declares...yes it's a risk, but trade the "farm" to get 'em
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Absolutely not. He is not worth that. This board severely overrates Andrew Luck. He's a tremendous prospect, but I would not trade away a pick. We need all the picks we can get, and there are far too many unbelievable players out there right now that could really help us.
No, no I would absolutely not trade it.
Originally posted by SourdoughDan:u just don't get it, do u? we are talking about a draft prospect and not about a proven veteran like seymour...how stupid is that idea about trading our future 1st-rounder away for the 1st ovr? and the next problem is that the future 1st-rounder won't be enough...either u have to add a player or another draft-pick and we need all the picks from the 1st until the 4th-round of the next and the 2012 draft because we will have a lot of needs.Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Absolutely not. He is not worth that. This board severely overrates Andrew Luck. He's a tremendous prospect, but I would not trade away a pick. We need all the picks we can get, and there are far too many unbelievable players out there right now that could really help us.
No, no I would absolutely not trade it.
I won't pretend to be half of the prospect hound you are, but who do you suggest we get to solve our QB problem? I know you prefer a more mobile QB but Luck is no slouch and passing wise he appears to be far and ahead the best prospect. Don't you think we should get the best QB period? I don't care if a QB can avoid the rush if he can't make a pass after he does.
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Absolutely not. He is not worth that. This board severely overrates Andrew Luck. He's a tremendous prospect, but I would not trade away a pick. We need all the picks we can get, and there are far too many unbelievable players out there right now that could really help us.
No, no I would absolutely not trade it.
His release is slow and he is very stiff. But he throws an accurate ball if given LOTS of time. He's vastly overrated on this board IMO. Because he is a Bay Area player they are familiar with and like. Still he is a good prospect. Just not the sure thing Peyton Manning he is made out to be here on the 49ersWZ.
Originally posted by SunDevilNiner79:plz don't compare apples and oranges...we talk about humans and not machines. even if rodgers is similar to luck in some ways, one shouldn't compare them too much...plz don't forget that rodgers had got a lot of time to prepare himself for the starter job, behind one of the best quarterbacks of the last 10-15 years. u don't know how he would have performed/improved if he had to start immediately.
Yeah, like remember when this board over rated another Bay Area QB? You know, that scrub, whats his name, Andy Romers?
Luck is the best QB prospect I've seen since I've watched CFB intensely starting in 2003. Arguably Bradford and Palmer were better, but neither came out as a Sophmore.
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Absolutely not. He is not worth that. This board severely overrates Andrew Luck. He's a tremendous prospect, but I would not trade away a pick. We need all the picks we can get, and there are far too many unbelievable players out there right now that could really help us.
No, no I would absolutely not trade it.
His release is slow and he is very stiff. But he throws an accurate ball if given LOTS of time. He's vastly overrated on this board IMO. Because he is a Bay Area player they are familiar with and like. Still he is a good prospect. Just not the sure thing Peyton Manning he is made out to be here on the 49ersWZ.
Originally posted by communist:Originally posted by SunDevilNiner79:plz don't compare apples and oranges...we talk about humans and not machines. even if rodgers is similar to luck in some ways, one shouldn't compare them too much...plz don't forget that rodgers had got a lot of time to prepare himself for the starter job, behind one of the best quarterbacks of the last 10-15 years. u don't know how he would have performed/improved if he had to start immediately.
Yeah, like remember when this board over rated another Bay Area QB? You know, that scrub, whats his name, Andy Romers?
Luck is the best QB prospect I've seen since I've watched CFB intensely starting in 2003. Arguably Bradford and Palmer were better, but neither came out as a Sophmore.
like OTC has already told, it's not only about who is the best but what is the best for your system. and if you know that your o-line can't pass protect effectively then you have to draft a mobile QB.