Search results

That said, it's not a given that other options are going to have a better chance of landing a good QB.

Which means the Pats got more. They straight up got a 6 and didn't eat any of his remaining contract.

Older, lefty, not very mobile, and injury prone. What's not to love?

I forgot, somehow PFF also seems to be the runnerup for worst draft, too. [Reminder: when the JEST moved up from 6 to 3 a few years back, they coughed up two seconds that year and one the next.] 9. NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS (FROM CHICAGO): QB BO NIX, OREGON Projected trade: Giants receive Pick No...

It's been a while, but PFF sneaks in under the wire with possibly the worst draft of all. TRADES: Patriots trade #3 to Denver for #12, #76, and a 2025 first Patriots trade #34 to Pittsburgh for #51, #98, and #119 12. (VIA BRONCOS): QB MICHAEL PENIX JR., WASHINGTON 51. (VIA STEELERS): WR KEON...

TBF, almost everyone who's saying a Pats rookie QB would need to sit is saying that because of the quality of the offensive roster.

Seth W. contributed to it. . . .

Any team that needed a QB and didn't send scouts to multiple games of all the top QBs committed malpractice.

Edelman was definitely a masterwork of player development by the Patriots. This is what he looked like at Kent State:

In Penix's case, for definitions of "viable" including "risky AF."

Especially since it's not exactly the same group deciding.

What I said the CBA does is make it hard to trade drafted rookies after they've been selected, which is true. That is something Belichick never did in NE. I think there's been maybe one trade involving a drafted rookie in his rookie season in the last decade.

Can it be done? Yes. But the "penalty" would have to be future picks. Edit: to clarify, the penalty for breaking the stipulations would have to be future picks.

To the best of my knowledge, the last time that happened was the "I'm too much of a wuss to go to SD" trade. In any case, the CBA makes that very difficult today: the rookie cap allotment is based on the draft slots a team uses, not the players they end up with.

The only reason to take a non-QB at 3 is if they think that player is so good that he's better than all the combined players they could get from a trade down AND vastly better than any QB available.

There's a difference between GRONK's health issue and a QB having four season-ending injuries in his first 20 games, including tearing the same ACL twice. Plus he's going to take more hits and sacks in the NFL than he did the last two years at UW. There's no way I'd hand him a $30M+ contract...

The problem with this, especially at QB, is this: Right now, the Patriots are guaranteed to have two of the top 4 QBs [Williams, Maye, Daniels, and McCarthy, in whatever order] available when they're on the clock at 3. If they trade down, that guarantee goes away. Yes, it is not a given that...

A local reporter on Milton: https://www.knoxnews.com/story/sports/columnists/blake-toppmeyer/2024/03/06/nfl-draft-2024-joe-milton-combine-drake-maye-caleb-williams-bo-nix-tennessee-vols-football/72835444007/

I am not willing to risk that a guy who had four season-ending injuries in his first 20 games is going to be "the guy" when he's going to get hit a lot more in the NFL than he did the last two years.

That's why I'm worried about Penix. No matter where he goes he's going to take a lot more hits in the NFL than he did at UW.