SectionC3

It’s a fair point for sure. Personally I’d rather have the bird in the hand with the QB and buy the equivalent of a first round talent in FA with our cap space next year. My counter to your point (which, again, I respect) is that I’d rather have a a top end skill talent than a middle of the first round OL, LB, etc. This board debated the Sammy trade to death, but it’s inarguable that we acquired a $16/mil/year player for a CB and a C that I can’t even name. It was a big price to pay, but no nobody would flip Watkins for those two players.

I wonder if next year’s first might be the price. That would be my counter if I was the Giants. Personally I would give up next year’s one and try to dilute the back end of our offer (eg, include the lower picks in the second and third rounds). But even if it takes next years one without that dilution I would make the trade today. We have the cap space to buy players next year in lieu of that pick, but we likely won’t have the capital to get a QB then. I assume this was Beanes design, and it was brilliant.

Exactly right. They showed their hand and guaranteed themselves nothing more than the third best QB in the draft. They may may also have raised the price of the second pick of the draft. Maybe it costs us 12 + 22 + a two and a three this year + a 1 next year to get to 2. So be it if that is the case.

We aren't there yet. The Jets trade is not a great thing, but it's not the end of the world. It definitely raises the price for us to get to #2. It may also lock the Jets into the third best QB in the draft if they don't have the assets to move up again. The trade also puts the Giants in position to expedite their rebuild if they (a) believe in Eli; and (b) can live without Barkley. It also would help the Giants if (c) they are lucky enough that Cleveland loves Barkley. Assuming that those three things are true, Barkley is the key to the draft. Cleveland could take him at 1 and move into the Giants pick at 2 to take its QB. Or Cleveland could lock in its QB at 1 and move up for Barkley at 2. Based on the price to go from 3 to 6, it will be expensive for Cleveland to move up even two spots. Assuming Cleveland moves up into two (or that the Jets don't do it themselves), the Giants could move again from 3 or 4 - maybe dealing with us for 12, 21, and additional high picks (next year's 1, maybe a pair of twos, etc.). No matter, the Giants are the big winner today - they have the chance to add a lot of young talent to the roster in a very short period of time. And although the price went up today, we're still in the game for a QB at the top of the draft, and we have the benefit of the Jets showing their hand early and seemingly locking themselves into a spot (if we pay a king's ransom to the Giants) where they may not be able to jump us for our guy.

Im sorry but I think it's fair to question why McCarron never passed Dalton. If memory serves, Dalton was a 2d round pick, and his contract does not befit a franchise passer. Only about 20% of his money was guaranteed, and there were/are easy outs after years 2 and 4. I can't believe a frugal organization like Cincinnati wouldn't have preferred mccarron to dalton at about half of daltons cap hit if it thought the two are close in ability.

Easy come, easy go.

May be the case. The Tyrod third might be more attractive to philly today than it was yesterday.

Multi year deal and draft a guy. Doesn’t have to be Allen. If the rook looks good we can try to flip Bradford in camp or at the deadline if even next year for futures. Kind of like Philly did a few years ago ... with Bradford.

Joe dufek called and wants in on this.

Another Mike Brown trait, in addition to lethargy, is cheapness. I cannot believe that the Bengals would not have sent Dalton and his thick salary on his way if they thought McCarron could do a comparable job more cheaply. One more point. The bet here is that Foles is the target and the hint of interest in McCarron/Keenum/etc. is designed to leverage the Eagles. No matter the primary target though, McBeane seems way too sharp not to have something solid on the runway before trading Taylor.

Agreed. Andy Dalton . . . is who he is, the miracle in Baltimore notwithstanding. The Bengals saw both Dalton and McCarron in practice for years. And stuck with Dalton.

Yes. In Nick Foles. To help philly clear cap space to accommodate Bennett.

This. Perfect for what we do.

I highly doubt the Vikings organization would leak its offer inasmuch as there is no immediate benefit to it to drive up the price (e.g., the leak won’t make the Bears, packers, or Lions pay more). Could it be someone rogue in the organization who leaked (e.g., a head coach who disagrees w management and wants a different QB)? Absolutely. The tampering thing is immaterial. Sure it’s tampering. But unless Cousins reports it (that would be a good way to destroy his agent’s career), it won’t go anywhere. Maybe what I’m saying is that the concept of tampering does not cause me to believe that the leak isn’t from cousins. Cousins may want to go short and bet on himself. Imagine hitting FA again in three years if he plays well ...

They might not like any of the three “in house” options.

Maybe. Could be that cousins wants to get a little more leverage by leaking the terms of the offer and causing another team to up its offer (thereby prompting a reaction from the Vikings). I can’t believe this isn’t from the cousins side given who reported the information. And I can’t believe it would have been reported had cousins not consented to the release.

This was leaked for a reason. Probably by the cousins camp. Either cousins wants to shake more cash out of someone, or Minnesota is not his first choice.

I totally agree with this. I’ll also add that finally having decent coaching out us in a position where a lot of the coin flip games finally went our way.

Nope. And interesting that the news leaked before the combine swap meet. It’s nice that we have a front office that’s proactive and smart about this kind of stuff.

Maybe. It’s a reasonable approach. Also could be leverage relative to a hesitant trade partner.

McCarron was long gone from the Alabama program by the time Daboll arrived there.

I have no idea whether Gronkowski will retire, but you are dead on about everything. Tons of money, nothing to prove, and a chance to walk away somewhat intact.

When I think Keenum, I think of fitz. Keenum might be a bit stockier, and he might have a bit better of an arm, but he invokes a lot of fitz for me.

Not necessarily, right? Doesn't the roster bonus (or whatever bonus is owed) vest on the third or the fourth day of the league year? In that event, the trade could be accomplished after the opening of the league year but before the Bills would become liable for the roster bonus?

Wood is making the team retire him. He certainly won’t do it himself. Not with that kind of money at stake.