6 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

They aren't giving up 2 picks 37,83 for 30 is only giving up 1 pick(the 83)

They are giving up 2 picks of players that could be used if the goal is immediate relevancy.

3 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

They are giving up 2 picks of players that could be used if the goal is immediate relevancy.

37,83 is 2 picks, we're giving them the 30,that is 1 pick difference not 2

6 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

I would hope they have 3 possibles. I'm just sitting here and looking at the CB's and there are 2 really good players in our range,but I still think we go line heavy. So,Joe you mentioned drafting players that sit. It's possible our first pick gets beat out by Jurgens for the RG spot. So we could be doing that also. If they win the job  then Jurgens sits and I believe he was a round 2 pick?. So either way your going to have a high draft pick sitting

Jurgens was drafted to replace Kelce.  I really don't care what he does until then.    That's my opinion.   Playing guard in 2023 is so irrelevant in the big picture.   

You get an OL that is considered a top guy...if Jurgens beats him out then fine...that other guy will then play guard when Jurgens moves to C. 

Also... it's arrogant ,cocky, dumb, stupid ...to assume all 5 OL are healthy and finish the season.  

If one of the other 4...besides Jurgens goes down... what happens?  Driscoll hasn't been able to stay healthy.  It's the last year of his contract.    

There is a need for OL... much more than CB... it's not even really close. 

4 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Jurgens was drafted to replace Kelce.  I really don't care what he does until then.    That's my opinion.   Playing guard in 2023 is so irrelevant in the big picture.   

You get an OL that is considered a top guy...if Jurgens beats him out then fine...that other guy will then play guard when Jurgens moves to C. 

Also... it's arrogant ,cocky, dumb, stupid ...to assume all 5 OL are healthy and finish the season.  

If one of the other 4...besides Jurgens goes down... what happens?  Driscoll hasn't been able to stay healthy.  It's the last year of his contract.    

There is a need for OL... much more than CB... it's not even really close. 

Right,but it was a high draft pick and he's been sitting,so it's not like we haven't done it before. I have a CB with pick 94

2 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

37,83 is 2 picks, we're giving them the 30,that is 1 pick difference not 2

Again...  A backup QB...doesn't make you relevant now.   So Seattle giving up 2 picks... because picks 37 and 83 would be sacrificed for the backup QB...   they absolutely can do it.... but it wouldn't be to be relevant in 2023.   The move to be relevant now would be to draft 2 players that would play now. 

1 minute ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Right,but it was a high draft pick and he's been sitting,so it's not like we haven't done it before

Right... but there is a difference between where Jurgen was picked...in the JJAW range...than pick 10..the elite range.

Jurgens I would still think might have to play... OL you need people.   The CB, we should assume wouldn't be in the plans until year 3?   Do you sit a top ten puck for 2 years?

Then the bigger issue... the lines are more important...do you sit a player drafted at 10...at a less important position?    That makes no sense.

22 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

I have no idea what Seattles plans are. If you are going to try and contend you need a solid BU QB and Hooker fits that bill

Did Shew really fit...or who were the backups in KC and Cincy?   You don't really necessarily need a backup QB to contend.  

4 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Again...  A backup QB...doesn't make you relevant now.   So Seattle giving up 2 picks... because picks 37 and 83 would be sacrificed for the backup QB...   they absolutely can do it.... but it wouldn't be to be relevant in 2023.   The move to be relevant now would be to draft 2 players that would play now. 

If they got to the playoffs and Geno went down Hooker would not be relevant?(remember how we won a SB with Foles?) So insurance could be very relevant and Like the high draft pick that still sat behind Arod???

Hi all!  Good stuff you all are posting. For Tonight, I just want them to get the right player(s) they are targeting. If all are gone by 10, then trade down and grab more capital.... Looking like they really want the DT from Georgia,,,, But the talk about a RB ay 10 is a smoke screen IMO

3 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Did Shew really fit...or who were the backups in KC and Cincy?   You don't really necessarily need a backup QB to contend.  

We won a SB with a BU QB???

Just now, GreenbleedinNC said:

If they got to the playoffs and Geno went down Hooker would not be relevant?(remember how we won a SB with Foles?) So insurance could be very relevant and Like the high draft pick that still sat behind Arod???

 

Would you agree...a vet QB is more for relevance now. ... a rookie is more future?

If Seattle needs a backup to contend... the vet is the better move for 2023.   If they invest picks 37 and 83 for a QB...that's for the future not 2023.

4 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Did Shew really fit...or who were the backups in KC and Cincy?   You don't really necessarily need a backup QB to contend.  

Shew didn't play like Hurts. Hooker plays like Geno

Just now, GreenbleedinNC said:

We won a SB with a BU QB???

Right... so did the Giants in 1990....who else out of the 57 Superbowl Champs won with a backup?

Just now, joemas6 said:

 

Would you agree...a vet QB is more for relevance now. ... a rookie is more future?

If Seattle needs a backup to contend... the vet is the better move for 2023.   If they invest picks 37 and 83 for a QB...that's for the future not 2023.

Right what if Geno gets hurt for a season,or they want to trade him. I'm merely pointing out that teams think differently than we do. GB used a round 1 on a QB that sat for how long???

1 minute ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Shew didn't play like Hurts. Hooker plays like Geno

And would you agree a proven NFL QB would be the move for NOW.  

The draft pick more for future?

Just now, joemas6 said:

Right... so did the Giants in 1990....who else out of the 57 Superbowl Champs won with a backup?

No way to know becuase their #1 didn't go down,so that point is moot

Just now, joemas6 said:

And would you agree a proven NFL QB would be the move for NOW.  

The draft pick more for future?

pick 83 is not going to hurt them at all,they have plenty of high picks and if Hooker is the BPA and they like him they will make the trade

Just now, GreenbleedinNC said:

Right what if Geno gets hurt for a season,or they want to trade him. I'm merely pointing out that teams think differently than we do. GB used a round 1 on a QB that sat for how long???

Right... I will say again....Seattle can absolutely give you a million reasons to draft a QB... for their future.

1 minute ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

No way to know becuase their #1 didn't go down,so that point is moot

Right... the backup QB is usually a moot point.    

How about lance sitting behind a round 7 pick in SF?

Just now, joemas6 said:

Right... I will say again....Seattle can absolutely give you a million reasons to draft a QB... for their future.

Right the future,so what is your argument? if they like Hooker as their BU and their future they will make the trade

Just now, GreenbleedinNC said:

pick 83 is not going to hurt them at all,they have plenty of high picks and if Hooker is the BPA and they like him they will make the trade

Agree... agree...

Agree....agree.    for the long term future.   Not giving up 2 players that could possibly evens start in 2023.

Seattle may be able to get Lance with the 37th pick

Just now, GreenbleedinNC said:

Right the future,so what is your argument? if they like Hooker as their BU and their future they will make the trade

My argument is you said..." Seattle might want to be relevant,  so they will take a backup QB"    that doesn't make sense.   The investment would be for future... not immediately being relevant. 

Is Minnesota going to take Hooker to be relevant now...or for future?  

2 minutes ago, stine said:

Seattle may be able to get Lance with the 37th pick

Right...get a vet...and keep a pick.  For now...that's a better move.   For future...Hooker may be better.