It is currently Mon Nov 25, 2024 5:42 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 278 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 10  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 9:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92050
Location: To the left of my post
The idea here isn't horrible. Glennon may actually be a good option for the right price given just how dysfunctional his previous organization was. If the decision is truly that "no quarterback is worth picking with the third pick in the draft" then you are pretty much rolling the dice with a fairly large failure rate in any round. It's compounded if you miss out on a quarterback in the second round.

It's possible that even by the second round pick the Bears have the Bears will be drafting the fourth best quarterback in the draft in a draft when people are falling all over themselves to say that there are no quarterbacks worth taking with a high pick. If they draft a quarterback in the third round they have such a low chance of success that we would be lucky if they become a starter for more than a few years.

You don't overpay besides offering incentives and you basically are giving him a shot to prove himself and if not you are in the same position next year and you can go out and get a potential franchise quarterback.

I think that is the thing that most aren't taking into account here. A third round quarterback is not a reliable answer to the future of the position. You can get lucky but almost all of them end up as backup material at best. If there is a run on quarterbacks in the first round after you pass on one at #3 you could really have no future and basically a year of waiting for the next qb to be drafted and then people will say next year "NO QUARTERBACK IS WORTH A FIRST ROUND PICK. LET'S GET A SAFETY WHO IS ONLY KNOWN BECAUSE HE RETURNED KICKS!".

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 9:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 82222
RFDC wrote:
America wrote:
Signing Glennon and drafting Mahomes in the 2nd round is a perfectly adequate situation going into next season. 1. Glennon 2. Shaw 3. Mahomes.

If Glennon gets hurt to start the year Shaw is a guy they liked last year. Or Mahomes wins the #2 job in camp, which is fine too. If Glennon just sucks Mahomes gets his shot. If Glennon is good the Bears will be able to groom and hype Mahomes and probably find a willing trade partner in 2-3 years. They could do this with a number of other guys in rounds 2-4 but Mahomes is the guy I like the most. Not drafting a QB at all is unforgivable at this point no matter what they do in FA.

I dont think you are getting Mahomes in the 2nd round.


Kizer should be there. I think he has the potential to be the best QB of the group.

The truth is, if you are picking a QB at #3 in the second round, you are better to trade up to the end of the first round in order to get the fifth year of control. I think that brings Mahomes back in to play.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 9:14 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
Glennon isn't the future though. You're paying a guy more than Cutler to be a bridge to the future. Why not keep Barkley or Hoyer and invest in other positions?

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 9:17 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
I would rather have Cutler for another year.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 9:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92050
Location: To the left of my post
Nas wrote:
Glennon isn't the future though. You're paying a guy more than Cutler to be a bride to the future. Why not keep Barkley or Hoyer and invest in other positions?
The general idea is that there is a chance that Glennon is better than he showed with that mess of an organization. I wouldn't bet money on it but I'm not betting money on any third round quarterback pick either or if we end up with the fifth best quarterback in the draft because there is a run on them.

Worst case scenario is we learn Glennon isn't good and we get to draft a quarterback in the first round next year.

It all comes down to the decision that drafting a quarterback with the third pick is not the right choice. This makes all options questionable at best.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 9:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 2:39 pm
Posts: 19521
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
The idea here isn't horrible. Glennon may actually be a good option for the right price given just how dysfunctional his previous organization was. If the decision is truly that "no quarterback is worth picking with the third pick in the draft" then you are pretty much rolling the dice with a fairly large failure rate in any round. It's compounded if you miss out on a quarterback in the second round.

It's possible that even by the second round pick the Bears have the Bears will be drafting the fourth best quarterback in the draft in a draft when people are falling all over themselves to say that there are no quarterbacks worth taking with a high pick. If they draft a quarterback in the third round they have such a low chance of success that we would be lucky if they become a starter for more than a few years.

You don't overpay besides offering incentives and you basically are giving him a shot to prove himself and if not you are in the same position next year and you can go out and get a potential franchise quarterback.

I think that is the thing that most aren't taking into account here. A third round quarterback is not a reliable answer to the future of the position. You can get lucky but almost all of them end up as backup material at best. If there is a run on quarterbacks in the first round after you pass on one at #3 you could really have no future and basically a year of waiting for the next qb to be drafted and then people will say next year "NO QUARTERBACK IS WORTH A FIRST ROUND PICK. LET'S GET A SAFETY WHO IS ONLY KNOWN BECAUSE HE RETURNED KICKS!".


With the #3 pick and no quarterbacks with a first round grade according to many scouts it quite a risk to overdraft one given the failure rate of the position. With the third pick of the second round they might be able to trade up into the first to get one of the guys.

Is it weird that I don't like Kizer because Mulligan is all over him, and I can't remember the last time Mulligan said anything relevant about football. He broke the story that Fangio was leaving. Then it didn't happen.

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

The Missing Link wrote:
For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 9:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92050
Location: To the left of my post
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
With the #3 pick and no quarterbacks with a first round grade according to many scouts it quite a risk to overdraft one given the failure rate of the position. With the third pick of the second round they might be able to trade up into the first to get one of the guys.
It can be a big risk. People can't even come up with an obvious choice at #3 this year though. However, I understand if there really is no quarterback available that wouldn't be a major reach and not doing it. He may prove me wrong but I can't imagine that a team wins the Super Bowl because they get Peppers.

It still changes all of the reasoning on who you want and makes the Glennon stuff more palatable. If this is really a weak qb class then why should we expect a second round pick, who is probably the third or fourth best option this year, to be a franchise quarterback either?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 9:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:15 am
Posts: 27591
pizza_Place: nick n vito's
Nas wrote:
I would rather have Cutler for another year.




Why? Jay is due 12.5 and another 2.5 for roster bonus, you want that turd for 15 million to play 9 games and play poorly, get hurt and he can't mentor a young QB he has no value.

_________________
The Original Kid Cairo wrote:
Laurence Holmes is a fucking weirdo, a nerd in denial, and a wannabe. Not a very good radio host either.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 9:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 11:19 am
Posts: 23915
pizza_Place: Jimmy's Place
what a disaster. the most important position on the field by a factor of 10. you need to be on the hunt for your next QB 365 days/year, not at the last minute when you realize you don't have one anymore.

_________________
Reality is your friend, not your enemy. -- Seacrest


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 10:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 2:39 pm
Posts: 19521
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
With the #3 pick and no quarterbacks with a first round grade according to many scouts it quite a risk to overdraft one given the failure rate of the position. With the third pick of the second round they might be able to trade up into the first to get one of the guys.
It can be a big risk. People can't even come up with an obvious choice at #3 this year though. However, I understand if there really is no quarterback available that wouldn't be a major reach and not doing it. He may prove me wrong but I can't imagine that a team wins the Super Bowl because they get Peppers.

It still changes all of the reasoning on who you want and makes the Glennon stuff more palatable. If this is really a weak qb class then why should we expect a second round pick, who is probably the third or fourth best option this year, to be a franchise quarterback either?


I have not seen Peppers to the Bears. I've seen Allen and Adams. Adams is the top guy on some team's board. He's been called a 10-year position solver. I would like to try that rather than draft a quarterback at 3, when most of the scouts do not have first round grades on any of them. If Pace can trade for someone he thinks will be great or acquire assets for the future that would work too.

As to the subject of this thread, I don't see how signing a "game manager" type does anything other than try to get Fox in the playoffs.

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

The Missing Link wrote:
For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 10:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 4:54 am
Posts: 22704
pizza_Place: A few...
I agree with GD on Kizer. Hope they get him.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 10:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2006 1:50 am
Posts: 11242
Location: Schaumburg
pizza_Place: Palermo's
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
Is it weird that I don't like Kizer because Mulligan is all over him, and I can't remember the last time Mulligan said anything relevant about football. He broke the story that Fangio was leaving. Then it didn't happen.


Both Hub and Mulligan think Kizer is the most NFL ready of the QBs in this draft. Jim Miller thinks he is one of the least NFL ready. I generally don't put much stock in the opinions of Hub or Mulligan but haven't heard a whole lot of Jim Miller, although he did spend quite a bit of time with these guys at the combine and someplace else, I think. Does Miller seem like a good judge of talent?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 10:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2015 1:15 pm
Posts: 41377
Location: Small Fringe Minority
pizza_Place: John's
Dan Durkin is also high on Kizer


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 10:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92050
Location: To the left of my post
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
I have not seen Peppers to the Bears. I've seen Allen and Adams. Adams is the top guy on some team's board. He's been called a 10-year position solver. I would like to try that rather than draft a quarterback at 3, when most of the scouts do not have first round grades on any of them. If Pace can trade for someone he thinks will be great or acquire assets for the future that would work too.
I'd say that is an over exaggeration. There are some people doubting the strength of the qb class but those mock drafts are still having multiple quarterbacks going in the first round.

WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
As to the subject of this thread, I don't see how signing a "game manager" type does anything other than try to get Fox in the playoffs.
The idea is to give him a chance to prove he isn't a "game manager". He's played 21 games in his career for an organization that was a mess. When you take into account what you are saying which is basically that there aren't really any good quarterbacks in this draft, and you can give Glennon a short term deal and let him prove himself AND keep that pick instead of overdrafting in the first or second or third round it at least makes some sense.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 10:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2015 1:15 pm
Posts: 41377
Location: Small Fringe Minority
pizza_Place: John's
Also you take Solomon Thomas before you take Jonathan Allen. Thomas might not even be there at #3 now.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 10:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:32 pm
Posts: 13865
Location: France
pizza_Place: Baranabyis
So if the Bears draft Chad Kelly at #3 he has a better chance of succeeding than if the Bears drafted him in the 7th round? Get the fuck out of here with this bullshit. Why do people let Brick get away with spouting retarded nonsense all the time?

The would-be NFL MVP this year (until the injuries) was a 2nd round QB drafted by the Raiders, who until about 8 months ago were tied with the Browns in long-term futility. The Seahawks found Russell Wilson in the 3rd round the same year they acquired Matt Flynn. Cousins (who isn't great but goddamnit I'd gladly take him) was taken as insurance the same year the Redskins, another disaster of a franchise, drafted Robert Griffin.

This isn't the New England the Bears are trying to replicate, its Washington and Oakland. Could signing Glennon and drafting a QB in R2 or R3 fail anyways? Yes. So could drafting Watson or Kizer at #3. But you'd have a hell of time convincing me after the likes of Gabbert, Tannehill, Locker, Bortles etc. being draft in the top 10 that the Bears odds are better either way.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 10:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 11:19 am
Posts: 23915
pizza_Place: Jimmy's Place
America wrote:
Why do people let Brick get away with spouting retarded nonsense all the time?


b/c it's not worth arguing with him.

_________________
Reality is your friend, not your enemy. -- Seacrest


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 10:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92050
Location: To the left of my post
America wrote:
So if the Bears draft Chad Kelly at #3 he has a better chance of succeeding than if the Bears drafted him in the 7th round? Get the fuck out of here with this bullshit. Why do people let Brick get away with spouting retarded nonsense all the time?
What? If you are going to throw stones don't be so completely off that it cannot even be responded to. That is not anywhere close to what I was saying.

America wrote:
The would-be NFL MVP this year (until the injuries) was a 2nd round QB drafted by the Raiders, who until about 8 months ago were tied with the Browns in long-term futility. The Seahawks found Russell Wilson in the 3rd round the same year they acquired Matt Flynn. Cousins (who isn't great but goddamnit I'd gladly take him) was taken as insurance the same year the Redskins, another disaster of a franchise, drafted Robert Griffin.
The start of the second round has some success you can at least consider with a realistic chance of success. The third round and later is almost all quarterbacks who do nothing more than become decent backups or fringe starters at best. There are exceptions to that rule but they come around roughly once every 5 years past the second round with the first round having a large majority of the quarterbacks you actually would be happy with having as your quarterback.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 10:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92050
Location: To the left of my post
Hatchetman wrote:
America wrote:
Why do people let Brick get away with spouting retarded nonsense all the time?


b/c it's not worth arguing with him.
I'll keep that in mind the next time you call me a bigot.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 11:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 11:19 am
Posts: 23915
pizza_Place: Jimmy's Place
You didn't back away from your assertion and neither did I!

_________________
Reality is your friend, not your enemy. -- Seacrest


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 11:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:32 pm
Posts: 13865
Location: France
pizza_Place: Baranabyis
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
America wrote:
So if the Bears draft Chad Kelly at #3 he has a better chance of succeeding than if the Bears drafted him in the 7th round? Get the fuck out of here with this bullshit. Why do people let Brick get away with spouting retarded nonsense all the time?
What? If you are going to throw stones don't be so completely off that it cannot even be responded to. That is not anywhere close to what I was saying.

America wrote:
The would-be NFL MVP this year (until the injuries) was a 2nd round QB drafted by the Raiders, who until about 8 months ago were tied with the Browns in long-term futility. The Seahawks found Russell Wilson in the 3rd round the same year they acquired Matt Flynn. Cousins (who isn't great but goddamnit I'd gladly take him) was taken as insurance the same year the Redskins, another disaster of a franchise, drafted Robert Griffin.
The start of the second round has some success you can at least consider with a realistic chance of success. The third round and later is almost all quarterbacks who do nothing more than become decent backups or fringe starters at best. There are exceptions to that rule but they come around roughly once every 5 years past the second round with the first round having a large majority of the quarterbacks you actually would be happy with having as your quarterback.

Am I crazy or do the Bears have a high second round pick?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 11:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92050
Location: To the left of my post
America wrote:
Am I crazy or do the Bears have a high second round pick?
:lol: So you are so off on your statement and you then return with this?

I've said all along the second round pick could work out well assuming there isn't a run on quarterbacks in the first round and early second. The odds are still much higher in drafting a quarterback higher that he will be good to great.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 11:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92050
Location: To the left of my post
Hatchetman wrote:
You didn't back away from your assertion and neither did I!
I feel sorry for you if you can't handle discussion that doesn't fit with your world view.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 11:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 11:19 am
Posts: 23915
pizza_Place: Jimmy's Place
I can handle any discussion. What do you want to talk about? How I do a disservice to my children by raising them Catholic? The floor is all yours.

_________________
Reality is your friend, not your enemy. -- Seacrest


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 11:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92050
Location: To the left of my post
Hatchetman wrote:
I can handle any discussion. What do you want to talk about? How I do a disservice to my children by raising them Catholic? The floor is all yours.
:lol: I thought it was not worth arguing with me, and yet, here you are!

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 11:17 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
The third round and later is almost all quarterbacks who do nothing more than become decent backups or fringe starters at best.

Image
:D

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 11:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92050
Location: To the left of my post
Frank Coztansa wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
The third round and later is almost all quarterbacks who do nothing more than become decent backups or fringe starters at best.

Image
:D
That's pretty much the truth. I wouldn't expect any quarterback drafted after the second round to surpass his career and most in the second round won't either but at least there is some pattern of success you can reliably point to.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 11:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 3:40 pm
Posts: 16486
pizza_Place: Boni Vino
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Worst case scenario is we learn Glennon isn't good and we get to draft a quarterback in the first round next year.


Silver lining would be that Fox, Pace and hopefully Phillips would be launched if Glennon turned out to be terrible and the Bears went 3-13 again.

_________________
To IkeSouth, bigfan wrote:
Are you stoned or pissed off, or both, when you create these postings?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 11:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 4:11 pm
Posts: 57239
I dont think kizer or mahomes are there in 2nd round but it would be great if they are. Kizer at the end of 1st or top of 2nd would be perfect.

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."


Frank Coztansa wrote:
I have MANY years of experience in trying to appreciate steaming piles of dogshit.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 11:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:32 pm
Posts: 13865
Location: France
pizza_Place: Baranabyis
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
America wrote:
Am I crazy or do the Bears have a high second round pick?
:lol: So you are so off on your statement and you then return with this?

I've said all along the second round pick could work out well assuming there isn't a run on quarterbacks in the first round and early second. The odds are still much higher in drafting a quarterback higher that he will be good to great.


Quote:
If there is a run on quarterbacks in the first round after you pass on one at #3 you could really have no future and basically a year of waiting for the next qb to be drafted and then people will say next year "NO QUARTERBACK IS WORTH A FIRST ROUND PICK. LET'S GET A SAFETY WHO IS ONLY KNOWN BECAUSE HE RETURNED KICKS!".

Or..........they sign Glennon, draft Solomon or Adams at #3 then take a QB in the high second round and everything is fine (or as fine as everything can be). That's according to you.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 278 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 10  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group