Top 5 Draft Pick?

[GrimCoconut]

I take the better player, whether it's safety or cornerback. I don't care who. We took Ed Reed when Lito Sheppard was on the board. Is Ramsey the same talent? I don't think so since I love Ed Reed and he's arguably my favorite NFL player ever next to Lewis. The team will need to decide with information hopefully superior to our own.

[GrimCoconut]

I've been thinking and I know this may be controversial, but I wouldn't be against the idea of the team selecting Goff at all. That guy is really really good and while I like Joe, I wouldn't be opposed to this idea. It's not ideal, and I do want other guys. I'm just saying it wouldn't be a terrible idea.

[PurpleCity5]

I've been thinking and I know this may be controversial, but I wouldn't be against the idea of the team selecting Goff at all. That guy is really really good and while I like Joe, I wouldn't be opposed to this idea. It's not ideal, and I do want other guys. I'm just saying it wouldn't be a terrible idea.

That would be bold, imagine the reactions if we did that. I'd heavily lean towards just stacking up on picks, some team like the Saints, or Texans would send us a LOAD for Goff.

[GrimCoconut]

That would be bold, imagine the reactions if we did that. I'd heavily lean towards just stacking up on picks, some team like the Saints, or Texans would send us a LOAD for Goff.

Yeah. I don't know honestly. It's not something I love, but I wouldn't hate the idea if we did it. And I'm a big Joe Flacco fan. I wouldn't even want to get rid of Joe. I'd keep him until at least his contact was up.

I'd much rather go in a different direction, though.

[LosT_in_TranSlatioN]

I've been thinking and I know this may be controversial, but I wouldn't be against the idea of the team selecting Goff at all. That guy is really really good and while I like Joe, I wouldn't be opposed to this idea. It's not ideal, and I do want other guys. I'm just saying it wouldn't be a terrible idea.

The Flacco haters would be all over that. A certain poster might come back and rub it in all of our faces and the boards would end as we know it.

[Inqui]

The Flacco haters would be all over that. A certain poster might come back and rub it in all of our faces and the boards would end as we know it.

Apparently if his name appears three times in a thread he comes back and starts bashing Flacco. I've never had the courage to try it though.

[RaineV1]

I've been thinking and I know this may be controversial, but I wouldn't be against the idea of the team selecting Goff at all. That guy is really really good and while I like Joe, I wouldn't be opposed to this idea. It's not ideal, and I do want other guys. I'm just saying it wouldn't be a terrible idea.

If Joe was showing signs of wearing down, I'd considering. But he isn't. Joe probably has another five to ten years in him, barring injury. In general, QBs are one of those positions you draft only if you think you'll truly need one within the the next year or two.

[Inqui]

I've been thinking and I know this may be controversial, but I wouldn't be against the idea of the team selecting Goff at all. That guy is really really good and while I like Joe, I wouldn't be opposed to this idea. It's not ideal, and I do want other guys. I'm just saying it wouldn't be a terrible idea.

Personally I don't think I'd be too impressed if we did that, but I could at least see the reasoning. California colleges seem to produce some decent QBs, and hiring a QB coach to give Goff the Rodgers/Hundley treatment while we either shopped Flacco or got one hell of a compensatory pick for him could make sense in the long run.

[GrimCoconut]

If Joe was showing signs of wearing down, I'd considering. But he isn't. Joe probably has another five to ten years in him, barring injury. In general, QBs are one of those positions you draft only if you think you'll truly need one within the the next year or two.

 

 

Personally I don't think I'd be too impressed if we did that, but I could at least see the reasoning. California colleges seem to produce some decent QBs, and hiring a QB coach to give Goff the Rodgers/Hundley treatment while we either shopped Flacco or got one hell of a compensatory pick for him could make sense in the long run.

Yeah, I'm not saying we should do it, but I am saying I wouldn't hate this move at all. I honestly think it may be a good thing. I understand that you don't want to spend a high pick on a QB, but if a guy is there you really like and you think he could be a great player for your team, maybe it's not a bad idea? He just turned 21, so it's not like he's even an old rookie. He could even sit for a couple of years and learn and get ready, an opportunity not afford to young QBs today. Besides, we have no idea how long Joe can escape these injuries. One day it will catch up with him. It happens. It's life. 

 

I wouldn't mind being prepared for the possibility. I know it's not a popular idea, and it's not even one I am advocating, but knowing how important a QB is, and being in the top-5 and having a shot at a guy like Goff wouldn't make selecting him a bad pick at all. 

[Jamal]

Flacco is still in the prime of his career. The only way I'd even entertain the idea of drafting a QB in the top 5 is if the prospect is on the level of an Andrew Luck or Cam Newton. Nobody in this class is on that level. On a team loaded with needs, I would have a huge problem with drafting a QB in the top 5 when your SB winning QB is only 30.

[GrimCoconut]

Flacco is still in the prime of his career. The only way I'd even entertain the idea of drafting a QB in the top 5 is if the prospect is on the level of an Andrew Luck or Cam Newton. Nobody in this class is on that level. On a team loaded with needs, I would have a huge problem with drafting a QB in the top 5 when your SB winning QB is only 30.

I agree that we shouldn't take a QB high unless we feel he's special, although I do think Goff is special. That said, I'd prefer we go in a different direction. I'm just not against the idea because I wouldn't hate it.

That said, it would be my last choice in all honesty. I'd rather go LT or DL before taking a QB.

It's good to see you back, btw

[JoeyFlex5]

Yeah, I'm not saying we should do it, but I am saying I wouldn't hate this move at all. I honestly think it may be a good thing. I understand that you don't want to spend a high pick on a QB, but if a guy is there you really like and you think he could be a great player for your team, maybe it's not a bad idea? He just turned 21, so it's not like he's even an old rookie. He could even sit for a couple of years and learn and get ready, an opportunity not afford to young QBs today. Besides, we have no idea how long Joe can escape these injuries. One day it will catch up with him. It happens. It's life. 

 

I wouldn't mind being prepared for the possibility. I know it's not a popular idea, and it's not even one I am advocating, but knowing how important a QB is, and being in the top-5 and having a shot at a guy like Goff wouldn't make selecting him a bad pick at all.

id rather we take advantage of this high pick to build our flacco led team, and when the day comes that we move on from flacco, we are inevitably gonna have horrible seasons, that will be the more appropriate time to use a high pick on a qb, I just see zero sense in it when we could get a superstar to play NOW and help push this team back into the mix

[GrimCoconut]

id rather we take advantage of this high pick to build our flacco led team, and when the day comes that we move on from flacco, we are inevitably gonna have horrible seasons, that will be the more appropriate time to use a high pick on a qb, I just see zero sense in it when we could get a superstar to play NOW and help push this team back into the mix

I'd rather build around Flacco as well. All I'm saying is if Goff is BPA, I wouldn't be upset if we took him even with our needs. He could have time to develop here.

My biggest issue would be QB controversy.

[January J]

I'd rather build around Flacco as well. All I'm saying is if Goff is BPA, I wouldn't be upset if we took him even with our needs. He could have time to develop here.

My biggest issue would be QB controversy.

absolutely not. Would be a waste and a huge mistake to not take advantage of the high draft position. We know flacco can take us to the promise land. Besides - if we keep adding peices to the defense we could eventually get back to the defense Baltimore used to be known for, and it can carry us regardless of who is qb even after flacco moves on. Denvers defense is single handedly getting it done this year, I honesty believe we're not too far off from that. ( with a new coordinator ofcourse) but if we can make that happen while flacco is still relatively young just imagine the possibilities. We won the Super Bowl in 2012 and even though we had a nasty hard hitting defense- they actually weren't even all that great and had regressed a bit. We need to get back to what we do best on defense , and let flacco be a game manager instead of expecting him to carry us.

I see where you were coming from and your reasoning, I just think we would be missing out on a big opportunity to nab that guy who becomes a staple in our defense. Although Ofcourse a lot depends on where we end up and who's available at the time.

Edited October 23, 2015 by January J

[GrimCoconut]

absolutely not. Would be a waste and a huge mistake to not take advantage of the high draft position. We know flacco can take us to the promise land. Besides - if we keep adding peices to the defense we could eventually get back to the defense Baltimore used to be known for, and it can carry us regardless of who is qb even after flacco moves on. Denvers defense is single handedly getting it done this year, I honesty believe we're not too far off from that. ( with a new coordinator ofcourse) but if we can make that happen while flacco is still relatively young just imagine the possibilities. We won the Super Bowl in 2012 and even though we had a nasty hard hitting defense- they actually weren't even all that great and had regressed a bit. We need to get back to what we do best on defense , and let flacco be a game manager instead of expecting him to carry us.

I see where you were coming from and your reasoning, I just think we would be missing out on a big opportunity to nab that guy who becomes a staple in our defense. Although Ofcourse a lot depends on where we end up and who's available at the time.

Don't get me wrong here. I prefer other guys to us essentially blowing a top-5 pick or whatever on a guy where we don't have a glaring need, but I don't think it would be the worst pick in the world, either. I would much rather have Bosa, Ramsey, Hargreaves, and probably Tunsil or Stanley. I need to look and figure out which one of them I like better. I've been lazy with OL prospects this year, and haven't had a chance to even see Tunsil on the field due to his suspension. 

 

With that said, I think we could do worse than taking Goff. If he was BPA, though, I would rather trade back and get some nice picks. If he made it to us again after trading back, I would probably think even more about taking him; it just depends on who is there. I will say that we are definitely done if Joe ever goes down. There's no doubt about that, and while I admire your idea that the defense can carry the offense, we never won a Super Bowl until we got a real QB in Flacco. Don't use the 2001 team, because that defense was beyond special--it was dirty and the rules are way different now. 

[Clmraven]

I agree that we shouldn't take a QB high unless we feel he's special, although I do think Goff is special. That said, I'd prefer we go in a different direction. I'm just not against the idea because I wouldn't hate it.

That said, it would be my last choice in all honesty. I'd rather go LT or DL before taking a QB.

It's good to see you back, btw

if Ozzie sees Goff as a luck type talent and he's available to us I'd hope we take him develop him for 1-2 years and then trade flacco for a 1st and 2nd or maybe even 2 first rounders (yes I truly believe a team would give that much for him) the biggest thing for me is that Goff doesn't run a pro style offense like luck did.

[January J]

if Ozzie sees Goff as a luck type talent and he's available to us I'd hope we take him develop him for 1-2 years and then trade flacco for a 1st and 2nd or maybe even 2 first rounders (yes I truly believe a team would give that much for him) the biggest thing for me is that Goff doesn't run a pro style offense like luck did.

there's a reason teams would give that much for him. It's bc they know it'd be idiotic to get rid of him and that it takes decades to find a franchise qb and 80% of the ones they think are going to be out of college don't pan out. Focus on the defense. I'd much rather bring back Rynner and keep developing him behind joe. And coconut I hear what your saying- if he basically falls in our lap even after passing on him then it wouldn't be the worst move in the world and would be something to consider. I'd still probably pass and just get the second BPA though.

[RaineV1]

If Bosa, Ramsay, and Nkemdiche are off the board, I'd use Goff as trade bait. Get as much as possible from some qb desperate team that's also picking in the top ten (Browns, Redskins, Chiefs, maybe even the Saints). Ravens could walk away with an extra 2nd, and an extra 3rd round pick. Or maybe a 1st round next year.

[GrimCoconut]

If Bosa, Ramsay, and Nkemdiche are off the board, I'd use Goff as trade bait. Get as much as possible from some qb desperate team that's also picking in the top ten (Browns, Redskins, Chiefs, maybe even the Saints). Ravens could walk away with an extra 2nd, and an extra 3rd round pick. Or maybe a 1st round next year.

I think we should be able to get more than that. We should be able to get at least a 2016 & 2017 1st Round Pick, and a 2016 2nd Round Pick with another pick somewhere in there. Trading up that high has a serious price, even if it's only a few spots back. 

[RaineV1]

I think we should be able to get more than that. We should be able to get at least a 2016 & 2017 1st Round Pick, and a 2016 2nd Round Pick with another pick somewhere in there. Trading up that high has a serious price, even if it's only a few spots back. 

I doubt you'd get a couple first rounders from it. Not as many GMs are willing to go all in the way the Redskins did. I'd be pretty happy with just an extra 1st and a couple extra 2nd round picks. Though there is always the chance of a bidding war.

[GrimCoconut]

I doubt you'd get a couple first rounders from it. Not as many GMs are willing to go all in the way the Redskins did. I'd be pretty happy with just an extra 1st and a couple extra 2nd round picks. Though there is always the chance of a bidding war.

I think we're on the same page. I didn't mean we would get 3 1st round picks, but I'm thinking we could get 2. I think we're on the same page there. 

[January J]

It all depends on how this season pans out and which teams are desperate for a qb. Who do you think is a top candidate ? Nobody really comes to mind really. The saints? May even the niners if kaepernick keeps regressing. I'm not sure.

[BmoreBird22]

Yeah, I'm not saying we should do it, but I am saying I wouldn't hate this move at all. I honestly think it may be a good thing. I understand that you don't want to spend a high pick on a QB, but if a guy is there you really like and you think he could be a great player for your team, maybe it's not a bad idea? He just turned 21, so it's not like he's even an old rookie. He could even sit for a couple of years and learn and get ready, an opportunity not afford to young QBs today. Besides, we have no idea how long Joe can escape these injuries. One day it will catch up with him. It happens. It's life. 

 

I wouldn't mind being prepared for the possibility. I know it's not a popular idea, and it's not even one I am advocating, but knowing how important a QB is, and being in the top-5 and having a shot at a guy like Goff wouldn't make selecting him a bad pick at all. 

Philip Rivers sat behind Drew Brees for three years and Aaron Rodgers sat behind Brett Favre for three years. I'd say those two players have worked out pretty well. 

 

I'd be 100% behind it if the Ravens were going to be 100% committed to letting him sit and learn, not make him go into the fire because Joe has some struggles.

[BmoreBird22]

I think we're on the same page. I didn't mean we would get 3 1st round picks, but I'm thinking we could get 2. I think we're on the same page there. 

What did the Browns get- like a first and fourth for the Bills to move up to four from eight?

[GrimCoconut]

Philip Rivers sat behind Drew Brees for three years and Aaron Rodgers sat behind Brett Favre for three years. I'd say those two players have worked out pretty well.

I'd be 100% behind it if the Ravens were going to be 100% committed to letting him sit and learn, not make him go into the fire because Joe has some struggles.

This is my thinking as well. It's been proven that letting a QB sit really helps in their development and I see no reason why he wouldn't be able to sit. I'm not here advocating or pounding the table for us to take him, but I don't think it would be a bad idea at all. It's hard to find a franchise QB and we're lucky to have one of our own, but if we draft Goff there's less pressure to extend Joe. It's also proven to be easier to find other positions besides QB. That's the hardest position to find, period.

Also, Goff and Aaron are both from Cal.

Edited October 24, 2015 by GrimCoconut

[GrimCoconut]

What did the Browns get- like a first and fourth for the Bills to move up to four from eight?

It was something like that. They gave up a decent amount. I know they lost two first round picks

[BmoreBird22]

This is my thinking as well. It's been proven that letting a QB sit really helps in their development and I see no reason why he wouldn't be able to sit. I'm not here advocating or pounding the table for us to take him, but I don't think it would be a bad idea at all. It's hard to find a franchise QB and we're lucky to have one of our own, but if we draft Goff there's less pressure to extend Joe. It's also proven to be easier to find other positions besides QB. That's the hardest position to find, period.

Also, Goff and Aaron are both from Cal.

Some area scouts have said he's the best thing since Luck. I'd be fine with him if Bosa and Nkemdiche are gone

[BmoreBird22]

It was something like that. They gave up a decent amount. I know they lost two first round picks

You'll always pull well. The Browns gave up a third jus to get from four to three

[GrimCoconut]

Some area scouts have said he's the best thing since Luck. I'd be fine with him if Bosa and Nkemdiche are gone

Would you take him over Hargreaves or Ramsey? That's where I'm just not sure, man. Tunsil and Stanley are other guys who makes it tough. I need to watch them very closely.

As for Nkemdiche, I'm just not as sold on him as others but I haven't watched much Ole Miss this year. I only watched Ole Miss for their offense in Treadwell.

I think right now I'd take Hargreaves, Ramsey, Bosa, before Goff, and I would need to really look at Tunsil, Stanley, Treadwell and Boyd more. I do think it's possible he could be BPA, though. I love what I've seen from him. I think he has what it takes to be very very special. His ball placement is really damn accurate. I dare say he does remind me of Rodgers.

[LosT_in_TranSlatioN]

It would be a waste of a pick to get a QB for a multitude of reasons. We're not far away from being good again. And honestly, Haragreaves, Ramsey, Bosa, Nkemdiche, would all be game changers for us. I'd be estatic with all of em.

Now you could trade Goff in the future but if you're in a position where all of them are gone and Goff is the BPA you trade back.

QB is the least of our worries