There are 55 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Which position should the 49ers use a 1st round pick on this year?

Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by TexasNiner84:
I can't believe how many people believe teams would let a guy picked in the top 10-15, sit for a year...

1.) There is no way a dude getting paid top 15 money is going to be paid to ride the bench (with the amount QB's are being paid these days, I just don't see it)

2.) "Sitting" and "Learning" for a year or two didn't really seem to help quarterbacks like Matt Leinart and Brady Quinn. (IMO he either has it or doesn't)

Quinn missed Camp, and Lienart was a miss.

Aaron Rodgers sat.

Aaron Rodgers wasn't a top 10-15 pick, and Quinn still sat the entire '07 season and most of the '08 season. Also you can't prove Aaron Rodgers is successful because he sat for a couple of years.
Originally posted by TexasNiner84:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by TexasNiner84:
I can't believe how many people believe teams would let a guy picked in the top 10-15, sit for a year...

1.) There is no way a dude getting paid top 15 money is going to be paid to ride the bench (with the amount QB's are being paid these days, I just don't see it)

2.) "Sitting" and "Learning" for a year or two didn't really seem to help quarterbacks like Matt Leinart and Brady Quinn. (IMO he either has it or doesn't)

Quinn missed Camp, and Lienart was a miss.

Aaron Rodgers sat.

Aaron Rodgers wasn't a top 10-15 pick, and Quinn still sat the entire '07 season and most of the '08 season. Also you can't prove Aaron Rodgers is successful because he sat for a couple of years.

aaron rodgers ws succesfull because he learned behind brett favre and inherited a talented 12-4 team with loads of talent anyone who denies this is neive

we have talent offensivly and if you want to do the right thing and win for the future we should ease in (if we get a qb other than luck) into the role rather than force him into the nfl really its 1 more year vs the future (can be next 15 years) and a rookie qb never does that good unless the team is led by a solid D
Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
Originally posted by TexasNiner84:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by TexasNiner84:
I can't believe how many people believe teams would let a guy picked in the top 10-15, sit for a year...

1.) There is no way a dude getting paid top 15 money is going to be paid to ride the bench (with the amount QB's are being paid these days, I just don't see it)

2.) "Sitting" and "Learning" for a year or two didn't really seem to help quarterbacks like Matt Leinart and Brady Quinn. (IMO he either has it or doesn't)

Quinn missed Camp, and Lienart was a miss.

Aaron Rodgers sat.

Aaron Rodgers wasn't a top 10-15 pick, and Quinn still sat the entire '07 season and most of the '08 season. Also you can't prove Aaron Rodgers is successful because he sat for a couple of years.

aaron rodgers ws succesfull because he learned behind brett favre and inherited a talented 12-4 team with loads of talent anyone who denies this is neive
we have talent offensivly and if you want to do the right thing and win for the future we should ease in (if we get a qb other than luck) into the role rather than force him into the nfl really its 1 more year vs the future (can be next 15 years) and a rookie qb never does that good unless the team is led by a solid D

By that theory, Matt Leinart should've been as successful as Rodgers. My point- Bottom line, they either have it or they don't. Having Favre sure helped Rodgers A LOT, but let's not sit here and act like the Packers were awesome when Rodgers took over. They're O-line was horrible and they have had little to no running game ever since. I think you may be denying Rodgers a little bit of credit here
  • Kolohe
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 33,169
Originally posted by TexasNiner84:
Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
Originally posted by TexasNiner84:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by TexasNiner84:
I can't believe how many people believe teams would let a guy picked in the top 10-15, sit for a year...

1.) There is no way a dude getting paid top 15 money is going to be paid to ride the bench (with the amount QB's are being paid these days, I just don't see it)

2.) "Sitting" and "Learning" for a year or two didn't really seem to help quarterbacks like Matt Leinart and Brady Quinn. (IMO he either has it or doesn't)

Quinn missed Camp, and Lienart was a miss.

Aaron Rodgers sat.

Aaron Rodgers wasn't a top 10-15 pick, and Quinn still sat the entire '07 season and most of the '08 season. Also you can't prove Aaron Rodgers is successful because he sat for a couple of years.

aaron rodgers ws succesfull because he learned behind brett favre and inherited a talented 12-4 team with loads of talent anyone who denies this is neive
we have talent offensivly and if you want to do the right thing and win for the future we should ease in (if we get a qb other than luck) into the role rather than force him into the nfl really its 1 more year vs the future (can be next 15 years) and a rookie qb never does that good unless the team is led by a solid D

By that theory, Matt Leinart should've been as successful as Rodgers. My point- Bottom line, they either have it or they don't. Having Favre sure helped Rodgers A LOT, but let's not sit here and act like the Packers were awesome when Rodgers took over. They're O-line was horrible and they have had little to no running game ever since. I think you may be denying Rodgers a little bit of credit here

And Jim Druckenmiller should've been successful too.
Originally posted by TexasNiner84:

By that theory, Matt Leinart should've been as successful as Rodgers. My point- Bottom line, they either have it or they don't. Having Favre sure helped Rodgers A LOT, but let's not sit here and act like the Packers were awesome when Rodgers took over. They're O-line was horrible and they have had little to no running game ever since. I think you may be denying Rodgers a little bit of credit here
1.there you can see why i want an qb with athletic abilities.
2.we dont know how hard leinart worked for his success...

[ Edited by communist on Dec 2, 2010 at 15:47:30 ]
We have less needs than from five years before, but we need stars.

Here would be my board, as of today:
1) Andrew Luck
2) AJ Green
3) Patrick Peterson
4) Justin Blackmon
5) Adrian Clayborn
6) Nick Fairley
7) Da'Quan Bowers
Mark Ingram at RB @ Alamaba....



I wannnnaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Mark Ingram!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Originally posted by BuZzB28:
Mark Ingram at RB @ Alamaba....



I wannnnaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Mark Ingram!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i think he will be a bust, I don't know why, I just do
1) CB
2) RG
3) QB
4) NT
Originally posted by teeohh:
Originally posted by BuZzB28:
Mark Ingram at RB @ Alamaba....



I wannnnaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Mark Ingram!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i think he will be a bust, I don't know why, I just do

Not a bust, but he feels a bit like Mike Hart to me. A very good college player but a guy whose upside might have already been reached. Just a feeling.
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
We have less needs than from five years before, but we need stars.

Here would be my board, as of today:
1) Andrew Luck
2) AJ Green
3) Patrick Peterson
4) Justin Blackmon
5) Adrian Clayborn
6) Nick Fairley
7) Da'Quan Bowers

getting one of the top 3 would be awesome, if we cant get luck i would love to add green to our offense
Originally posted by communist:
Originally posted by nickbradley:

QB trumps all other positions. We do fairly well vs. #1 WRs, but get shredded by the #2 and #3, statistically. So take a CB in the 2nd round.

And the pass rush complaints are overblown. According to footballoutsiders, we are 9th in the NFL in pass rush, adjusted for opponents and the situation.
i dont care about some stats from some homepages...look at our pass-rush with your own eyes und you will see that we need a natural pass-rusher badly. neither lawson, nor haralson can fill that hole...justin smith is the ONLY dependable rusher...it's too few imo.
i wouldnt take an olb with our 1st-round pick IF we pick in the top10 or in the top5...but we need one.

Spot on dude. Everyone seems to be ignoring that WE HAVE been drafting (and signing) CB's for years, yet the end result remains the same (we get torched through the air) because it's the pass rush. We don't have a CONSISTENT threat to the QB and instead have been relying on scheming and it DOES NOT work.

Defenses like Pittsburgh, Baltimore, and New England (from a few years back) have already showed everyone the mold for a successful defense.That's an aggressive front seven with someone(s) that the defense has to look out for on EVERY down.

All-Pro corners are a luxury, not a need.

[ Edited by baltien on Dec 2, 2010 at 13:35:24 ]
  • dmax
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 7,343
Originally posted by baltien:
Originally posted by communist:
Originally posted by nickbradley:

QB trumps all other positions. We do fairly well vs. #1 WRs, but get shredded by the #2 and #3, statistically. So take a CB in the 2nd round.

And the pass rush complaints are overblown. According to footballoutsiders, we are 9th in the NFL in pass rush, adjusted for opponents and the situation.
i dont care about some stats from some homepages...look at our pass-rush with your own eyes und you will see that we need a natural pass-rusher badly. neither lawson, nor haralson can fill that hole...justin smith is the ONLY dependable rusher...it's too few imo.
i wouldnt take an olb with our 1st-round pick IF we pick in the top10 or in the top5...but we need one.

Spot on dude. Everyone seems to be ignoring that WE HAVE been drafting (and signing) CB's for years, yet the end result remains the same (we get torched through the air). It's the pass rush. We don't have a CONSISTENT threat to the QB and instead have been relying on scheming and it DOES NOT work.

Defenses like Pittsburgh, Baltimore, and New England (from a few years back) have already showed everyone the mold for a successful defense (an aggressive front seven).

All-Pro corners are a luxury, not a need.

ALL TRUTH....WE HAVE ZERO PASSRUSH
my board:

1) Luck
2) Peterson
3) Prince
4) Bowers

/thread
Originally posted by dmax:
ALL TRUTH....WE HAVE ZERO PASSRUSH

Do you guys think it's buy chance that offenses started homing in Patrick Willis?

The rest of the NFL has figured our defense out. They know they can send an extra lineman or tailback his way every down because we don't have anyone that can get to the QB. All of our d-lineman and OLB's are generally neutralized with single coverage.

The sad thing is, the 49ers still haven't figured this out yet.

Brooks, Haralson, and (to a lesser extent) Lawson make decent #2 options, but we are still in dire need someone that can bring the heat on every down. There are NO 49ers in the top 15 for sacks. Hell, there are no 49ers in the top 30 (P Willy and Justin Smith have 5 each, tied for 31st).

That's not going to cut it.

[ Edited by baltien on Dec 2, 2010 at 13:55:26 ]