Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
Originally posted by 49ergenius:
Who passes on picking a QB just because you dont have proven WRs? Isnt that sort of self defeating and/or asinine? They picked Little in the 2nd last year and despite drops had decent numbers for a verrrrry raw rookie and there are a slew of FA WRs available. Tannehill isnt a bad idea at all at #4. With the lower salaries now, you saw Locker and Ponder both go a lot higher than they may have in years past. No difference here.
tannehill is a huge reach they dont have a WR an a great prospect is on the board where 2 QBs have gone and a late forst to early second qb prospect is there
youre reaching like 20 spots when an elite prospect at a position of need is sitting right there
Again, who's throwing him the ball? QBs more often make the WR rather than a WR making a QB successful.
And Blackmon, again, isnt that elite. There are no elite WRs this year. A lot even argue that Kendall Wright is as good a prospect as Blackmon. Look, I agree that Tannehill is a reach but, like I proved, Locker and Ponder and Gabbert were as well, no? Better to reach for a QB than a WR. WR isnt running your offense.
[ Edited by 49ergenius on Mar 11, 2012 at 8:59 PM ]