Poll

23 votes were received.
All visitors can vote.

Plan named Moore and Weeden

	Yes
	No

---

Looks like RGIII is out of the question.

Peyton is probably not coming.

ASSUMING BOTH DON'T WORK OUT, I personally think that we should not draft Tannehill at number 8 but let him go to some other quarterback hungry team BEHIND US IN THE DRAFTING ORDER.

We should either draft WR or OL with number 8.

Maybe use on or more of the Brandon Marshall 3rds packaged with our own 2nd to assure getting Weeden.

Then just chill and go with Matt Moore and Weeden and see how things work out.

Yes or no. No other options.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/14/2012 06:35PM by ChyrenB.

At the rate things are going? We might have no other choice Chyren.

Matt moore alone..and let him get a 6 month cold this year. So we can put a DT to play qb...

Lets face it chren this year is a waste man. seriously bro.

I hope they do not waste a pick on a qb this year and concentrate on the other positions....IMO we need to draft OL, S, LB, and now that we lost marshall WR. TE too.

______________________________________________________________________

Mdiggy if you reading this now your prediction of drafting a OL in the first round sounds more logical but it sure didnt sounded too good when Robert griffin111 status was up for grabs.

Just saying man!!!

Guys, it's becoming so clear that even Stevie Wonder could see it, we're either gonna get Flynn at a reduced rate or we're drafting Tannehill. Get used to the idea of Tannehill........ I am

But Helen Keller might see it differently.

Sounds like more of the same to me no name coach searching the bargain bin for impact players and wasting his high picks on linemen. Hows that worked for us for...oh...THE LAST 10 YEARS!!!!! Ugh I'm sick of this.

Hey Chyren does the name Matt Ryan sound familiar? Lol

Not making the connection. Is Matty-Ball, in your analogy, Matt Moore or Weeden or "a lesser quarterback drafted high?"

he is saying the last time we had the chance to take the best QB in the draft was when we took Long #1 overall instead of Matt Ryan

Hasselbeck, Moore & Tannehill, Weeden or Keenum

Every once and awhile I slip and think of Marino but we drafted 23 or 24 or something and Elway, Kenny O Brien, Boomer Eisason, Tony Eason and another QB whose name escapes me now, were selected before Marino.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Every once and awhile I slip and think of Marino
> but we drafted 23 or 24 or something and Elway,
> Kenny O Brien, Boomer Eisason, Tony Eason and
> another QB whose name escapes me now, were
> selected before Marino.


We drafted Marino 27th, after Elway, Jim Kelly, Tony Eason, Todd Blackledge, and Ken O'Brien.

How many playoff wins has Matt Ryan led the Falcons to?

Hint, it's exactly the same number of playoff wins Chad Henne led us to. The main difference is that the Falcons paid $70M for those zero playoff wins.

I say we have to take a chance from today on on every QB available in the draft until we hit on the right player.

We should had been doing this for a while now.

Just look at it this way if we did this for the last 10 years we would have a qb superstar today.

and im so sure everyone here agrees with me except that retard who used to post here who was a jets fan...MIA1.

dolfanmark Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How many playoff wins has Matt Ryan led the
> Falcons to?
>
> Hint, it's exactly the same number of playoff wins
> Chad Henne led us to. The main difference is that
> the Falcons paid $70M for those zero playoff wins.

Say what you want. Ryan is a very good NFL QB and has made the Falcons competitive. Atl is a franchise that has never had back to back winning seasons. They are now going on their fifth. Henne was an average college QB who was an NFL joke I can't believe anyone can still defend him. At this point I'd be glad to pay $70 mil for four straight winning seasons and a couple play off appearances.

we should not waste a first round pick on a qb, none of those guys are worth it. No need to draft a blane gabbert just to be looking at drafting another qb in 2013...

There is absolutely a need to draft a Qb this year. There are TWO prospects out there one potentially above average, and one potentially great one. That alone is enough reason.

Tannehill has ALL of the tools and is an anthletic guy who can pass and run almost as good your boy RG. He's also disciplined, smart, and aware...

Wheeden is also a very good prospect that has more experience but less physical ability...

Neither one of these guys would be a waste, They would in fact give us viable quality options outside of Matt Flynn, who should absolutely be our next QB even if we have to pay more than we'd like to to get him.

A QB stable of Flynn, Moore, Tannehill (or Wheeden), and Devlin going into the off season program...is a great group with ton of future potential. Tannehill makes more sense than Wheeden however due to his added abilities and youth, Wheeden's window of oppotunity is smaller due to his age.

We are going to draft tannehill or weeden???????

Yeah i need some weed to just forget about everything. give me some weed and a nice bottle of boldka.

But I don't advocate taking Weeden at No. 8, berk. I say go elsewhere need-wise at no. 8 and try to get Weeden by packaging other draft picks (the BM picks) to get him before the NEXT team that wants Weeden drafts him.

One thing that makes that possible is that I sincerely doubt that anyone BEFORE US will draft Tannehill.

Therefore, Tannehill will be there AFTER no. 8, to satisfy anyone AFTER us who wants a QB.

Therefore, all we have to do is beat out the FOURTH TEAM TO WANT A QB.

Now the bottom line is that I would be very happy with drafting a WR or OL at number 8 and THEN BY HOOK OR CROOK getting Weeden NEXT. That way, we go into next year with Moore starting and Weeden backing him up.

One thing that mystifies me, however, since you assumed Weeden was my man, is how a great number of people on this board have no problem with an old man like Peyton Manning (how old 35?) coming to the team and consider a 27 year old TOO OLD to draft.

I don't want weedon at #8 either, but I'd have no problem with him at say 20-25 after a trade down that nets us a second round pick and more. He might go higher than that though.
I'd prefer that to Tannehill at #8 for sure

I know that you were not referring to me here CB. However, I don't think Wheeden is too old to draft and I'd take him a hot second IF Tannehill was alreay gone.

The difference for me between Tannehill and Wheeden is that IMHO Tannehill has more physical ability and more upside as a total package. That he's younger and would be viable for a longer period of time is icing on the cake. I agree though that I would not take him at #8. I'd do whatever I could to take Floyd at #8 (which some think is a reach) assuming Tannehill is gone. Then I'd package the picks necessary to move back into the bottom third of the first round (somewhere around #20) and take Wheeden there because I don't believe he'll still be around in the top half of the second round.

The problem with Adding Flynn (26) and then drafting Wheeden (28) is that if you give Flynn, let's say, just for the sake of argument, three years to prove he's the guy. Then Wheeden is 31 before he gets his chance. Then his window of opportunity is only around four years or so, give or take a couple.

I do like Wheeden I just think Tannehill is a better and more long term option for us. IMHO Wheeden would be a better fit for teams like New England, Pittsburgh, and Dallas, where he'd have a much better chance of seeing the field sooner.

Wheeden makes much more sense for us if we are going into next season with Moore as the starter. Then he'd have a very real chance to be the starter in season two.

dolphaholic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hey Chyren does the name Matt Ryan sound familiar?
> Lol

MATT RYAN is NOT that good at all. He went to a very solid team, and led them to zippo. They'd be playoff calibre w/him or w/o him. He's just not "clutch", and doesn't beat ANYONE good very often. I/m/o, he's an illusion, not the real deal.

Well, when I talked about the best QB in the draft, you are right, I should have been more specific.

I should have said the best QB in the draft that actually turned out to be a great QB.

I'd say drafting Jake Long and resisting Matty-ball was the smartest thing we did.