I agree with you that all things equal QB is more important. But between Bradford and Hill we have two guys are competent. With Wells and Barnes, we do not.
I don't agree with you.
I'm just stating the opposite side of the QB/OL draft debate. Why is my opinion "uncertain things as if they are the only possibilities" and yours is not? It's all uncertain, and we are all just stating our opinions.
The difference is the way in which you are stating scenarios. Everything is uncertain at this point so I have a hard time accepting your all or nothing scenario...if we draft a QB highly, we must trade up and won't be able to select OLs until the lower rounds. There's a difference between discussing options at this point and limiting options.
As I said before, addressing the QB position in the first round and still putting resources into repairing the OL are not mutually exclusive scenarios.
You may be looking for that guy no matter what you do. I assumed you're wanting Winston because you've been everything from his lawyer to his agent lately. You've talked about his arm talent and leadership in transcendent terms, comparing him pretty favorably to every recent draft pick from Luck to Bridgewater. And I think we'd have to burn draft picks to get him. I very much doubt I'm the only one who would come to that conclusion after being in the threads with you the last week. And that's not a put down or anything in any way. I don't want to be just good either. But you build a consistent winner by having a team in place that can support a young franchise pick. You don't put the cart before the horse and get the QB first. The Cardinals, Raiders, Browns, Jags and even the Rammies just a couple of years ago to my mind have proven this beyond a doubt. And you don't reach for a guy just because you need a young guy because everyone says so. The Jags, Bills, Redskins, Jets, Vikings, etc have proven this to me as well. . My opinion of the top 3 or 4 guys in this years draft isn't very favorable, so it's an easy choice for me to draft OL and LB, resign JB, and go forward with Bradford/Hill/maybe another veteran. Perhaps a guy will emerge that's a good chance in the low 1st/2nd round who will be who Snead likes, who knows.
Winston is one guy that I like. But he's not the only option.
I don't agree with you. Not having every position shored up before you take a QB is not putting the cart before the horse. This team is not the 2009 Rams. We have plenty of talent and not many needs left in the starting line-up(we do need depth). You say this has been proven beyond a doubt? I don't agree. The Colts, Panthers, Lions, Falcons, and Giants are all CURRENT examples of the contrary. And there are far more examples than just those teams if you go back further in the past.
There are many ways to build a consistent winner...but they usually involve a franchise QB. So if we don't get one this year...we gotta find one in the future. The better your team gets, the harder that is to do.
I also am curious as to how the Cardinals, Browns, and Raiders prove that. The Cardinals haven't drafted a QB highly since Matt Leinart and Kurt Warner did plenty well with the team they had in place...Leinart just wasn't a good QB. Raiders haven't drafted a QB highly since Russell...again, Russell was just a complete mess.(although the team did suck) The Browns haven't spent a top pick on a QB either. They settled for late first round picks like Brady Quinn and Brandon Weeden...guys who just weren't good picks. Derek Anderson almost led the Browns to the playoffs with Quinn's team.
If the point is that we need to draft a GOOD QB, sure. I don't think anyone disagrees. But I don't see how those teams lacked the personnel to make it work with a competent QB...now if you go back to Tim Couch...yea, the Browns definitely did. But again, there's a line in the sand. The 2009 Rams, the Couch Browns, the Carr Texans, and the current Jaguars...not good spots for a young QB. They just lack talent. It's why I thought the Jags should have given Bortles the year to develop on the bench. But we're not there anymore. We actually have talent. We just need a QB to help pull it all together.
So to sum up on the OP, yes I'm in favor of bringing Bradford back. I don't think he'll blink at a new one year $7 or $8 mil deal with incentives for PT.
I think he might. If he's going to take that sort of deal, I think he's going to demand 2 years with guarantees in the second year. If I were his agent, I'd do that. But we shall see.
