How mad will you be if...

I would've been upset but I see Goff dropping in many mocks, is it a coincidence? If Kap goes they must draft a QB early.

Originally posted by dsmith_49erz:

My take is no to Goff, he isn't that much better than the 1st through 3rd round QB, not a serious drop of in talent..

There are actually a lot of people that would disagree with that assessment. To me there are Goff and Wentz....and then you have a dropoff to Lynch and then an even bigger dropoff to the rest of the QBs in this draft.


It is why QBs picked outside of the first two rounds rarely succeed.

There are never any guarantees but the majority of the top QBs in football are guys who were picked early in the 1st round and for good reason, that is where the talent is.


For every Tom Brady that slips through the cracks you have like 20 other guys that won't amount to anything in the NFL.

Words won't describe how pissed I'll be! I'm happy with either Goff or Wentz. I've posted this before. This team needs a "face of the franchise", somebody to put some wind in our sails and fill the seats. Even if these guys sit a year, I'm ok with that as long as I know I have a budding savior coming soon. That's good enough for me and I'm sure our fan base would agree.

Even if a QB is not Baalke's first choice, I think he throws a bone at Chip and allows Chip to develop one of these kids to run his offense.

It makes so much sense, I'm afraid it won't happen LOL.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by dsmith_49erz:

My take is no to Goff, he isn't that much better than the 1st through 3rd round QB, not a serious drop of in talent..

There are actually a lot of people that would disagree with that assessment. To me there are Goff and Wentz....and then you have a dropoff to Lynch and then an even bigger dropoff to the rest of the QBs in this draft.


It is why QBs picked outside of the first two rounds rarely succeed.

I'm going to back Phoenix up on this.

And expand a bit with this thought:

I think there are basically two types of NFL teams. Ones who know for sure who their QB is one who don't. Knowing who QB is doesn't make you automatically good, but it means you can focus on fitting the rest of the pieces together and trying to give that QB a chance to win a superbowl.

If you are in the other camp though, worrying about the other pieces is just re-arranging the deck chairs on the titanic. Your NUMBER ONE MISSION IS TO GET A QB. Period. And in my view you take the best one you can possibly get. "Value" is out the window. Now, it's certainly possible that the guy you think is the best is not Goff (or whatever QB is at the top of the boards that year). And I have no problem with trying to get more out of the draft while still making sure you get your guy. That's what we did when we drafted Kap and I think that's a totally valid call. But if you're a GM with no certainty at QB and the QB you have the highest is there to be taken, you TAKE HIM.

Floyd isn't so much better than Correa that it's worth accepting less than you could have at the most important position on the field.

Originally posted by dsmith_49erz:

The real unknown here is franchise QB, just because you are drafted top 10 as a QB, does this mean you are a franchise QB?
History has repeatedly said no..ie...Browns , Bengals , Bears , Rams etc....
My take is no to Goff, he isn't that much better than the 1st through 3rd round QB, not a serious drop of in talent. If you miss at any other position it is easier to stockpile players or be scheme specific. This can't be done with a QB because it slows team progress. Remember Alex Smith, #1 pick who was and is a game manager, not a game changer. Taking Goff at 7 isn't a investment, it's a gamble.

It could turn out to be an investment, that's the unknown and I think calculated risk is probably a better description anyway. It's not like we'd choose our draftee QB by throwing darts at a board while blindfolded. Looking at the current scenario, my opinion is now is a good time to take that risk. New coaching regime coming in, questionable current options at the position and the opportunity to draft a guy who shows great promise. I say go for it.

Originally posted by FL9er:
Check this out Phoenix, if you have the time:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000649763/article/drafting-qb-might-not-be-smart-move-for-browns

I like how this report shows that Tackle has a bigger bust potential in the first round than QB, but hey, if we want another safety the odds are on our side!

It's ultimately up to Chip. Only he knows what he wants. Chip is the best Offensive mind we have had since McCarthy. If he thinks we can win with Blaine then we are going Defense. If he doesn't, then it will be a QB.

Need to also keep in mind that if the Eagles and or Rams end up with Goff, it likely means Bradford and or Foles are available.

Just so happens both played for Chip.

Originally posted by JR80Forever:
It's ultimately up to Chip. Only he knows what he wants. Chip is the best Offensive mind we have had since McCarthy. If he thinks we can win with Blaine then we are going Defense. If he doesn't, then it will be a QB.

Need to also keep in mind that if the Eagles and or Rams end up with Goff, it likely means Bradford and or Foles are available.

Just so happens both played for Chip.

I think Foles will be available no matter what. Kelly had him and he got rid of him. No reason to think that Kelly would want him back.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by JR80Forever:

It's ultimately up to Chip. Only he knows what he wants. Chip is the best Offensive mind we have had since McCarthy. If he thinks we can win with Blaine then we are going Defense. If he doesn't, then it will be a QB.

Need to also keep in mind that if the Eagles and or Rams end up with Goff, it likely means Bradford and or Foles are available.

Just so happens both played for Chip.

I think Foles will be available no matter what. Kelly had him and he got rid of him. No reason to think that Kelly would want him back.

Good point

not mad one bit.i dont care for cook that much. But seriously, experts have been saying kellys offense wont work in the nfl. so why give him a qb who can only offer him what hes had his few years in the nfl. give him someone who can be that dual threat for him. plus oline is a bigger need than qb-fact

Originally posted by Zealot:

Originally posted by dsmith_49erz:
The real unknown here is franchise QB, just because you are drafted top 10 as a QB, does this mean you are a franchise QB?
History has repeatedly said no..ie...Browns , Bengals , Bears , Rams etc....
My take is no to Goff, he isn't that much better than the 1st through 3rd round QB, not a serious drop of in talent. If you miss at any other position it is easier to stockpile players or be scheme specific. This can't be done with a QB because it slows team progress. Remember Alex Smith, #1 pick who was and is a game manager, not a game changer. Taking Goff at 7 isn't a investment, it's a gamble.

It could turn out to be an investment, that's the unknown and I think calculated risk is probably a better description anyway. It's not like we'd choose our draftee QB by throwing darts at a board while blindfolded. Looking at the current scenario, my opinion is now is a good time to take that risk. New coaching regime coming in, questionable current options at the position and the opportunity to draft a guy who shows great promise. I say go for it.

so buckner or jack are a better calculated risk then goff period

see in my eyes period if hargreaves is there at 7 with goff or buckner or jack you have to go for them over goff. you have two, especially hargreaves... instant starter instant impact. goff is still unknown

Originally posted by fan49:

. instant starter instant impact. goff is still unknown

Every player in the draft is an unknown. Nobody comes with a product guarantee.

Originally posted by fan49:

Originally posted by Zealot:

Originally posted by dsmith_49erz:

The real unknown here is franchise QB, just because you are drafted top 10 as a QB, does this mean you are a franchise QB?
History has repeatedly said no..ie...Browns , Bengals , Bears , Rams etc....
My take is no to Goff, he isn't that much better than the 1st through 3rd round QB, not a serious drop of in talent. If you miss at any other position it is easier to stockpile players or be scheme specific. This can't be done with a QB because it slows team progress. Remember Alex Smith, #1 pick who was and is a game manager, not a game changer. Taking Goff at 7 isn't a investment, it's a gamble.

It could turn out to be an investment, that's the unknown and I think calculated risk is probably a better description anyway. It's not like we'd choose our draftee QB by throwing darts at a board while blindfolded. Looking at the current scenario, my opinion is now is a good time to take that risk. New coaching regime coming in, questionable current options at the position and the opportunity to draft a guy who shows great promise. I say go for it.

so buckner or jack are a better calculated risk then goff period

You could well be right friend. It's just my personal opinion that we need a QB. Grabbing one that offers good potential at a time when we can mold him from scratch in a new regime and when we're otherwise in a position to do so makes sense to me.

Originally posted by fan49:
not mad one bit.i dont care for cook that much. But seriously, experts have been saying kellys offense wont work in the nfl. so why give him a qb who can only offer him what hes had his few years in the nfl. give him someone who can be that dual threat for him. plus oline is a bigger need than qb-fact

Agree, I have always pointed out that our O line is terrible and putting a Goff or a Wentz behind that line is a wasted pick. Kapernicks best seasons came from playing behind a top 5 offensive line, there is a connection here.
We must start up front on the O line and pass rushers, QB at 7 isn't wise considering Blaine will start this year even if Krapp stays, he's the better QB at this time. JMO, but there is too much Goff chatter and would love Miles over Goff at 7 or any other player for that matter, just not a QB. Roster cuts will flood the market with QB too so why not pick from that as well.