If Kyler Murray is sitting there at pick #11, then I would take him & Trade Dalton

[XsandOs]

(03-26-2019, 08:48 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Absolutely nothing wrong with using the #11 pick on a young QB if we see value. You sign for need; you draft for talent. 

If Murray is there at 11, you take him. Mike Brown wants stability at QB, so Dalton won’t be dealt in this scenario.

I acknowledge the fact that cover LB is a real need, but passing on Murray at 11 would be regrettable.

You can address the LB need in round 2 and 3.

But all this is a moot point. Murray won’t be there at 11.

[*bfine32*]

(03-26-2019, 09:11 PM)XsandOs Wrote: If Murray is there at 11, you take him. Mike Brown wants stability at QB, so Dalton won’t be dealt in this scenario.

I acknowledge the fact that cover LB is a real need, but passing on Murray at 11 would be regrettable.

You can address the LB need in round 2 and 3.

But all this is a moot point. Murray won’t be there at 11.

Personally I hope he's not, because I don't like his mentality; but admittedly, I suck at scouting QBs.

I simply disagree with taking a top talent QB at 11 is a "waste". There's no more risk of success or failure than there is any other position. 

Just imagine in 2017 if we didn't think WR opposite AJ was such a need and instead thought about taking a talented QB

[BengalChris]

(03-26-2019, 04:54 PM)Au165 Wrote: The Casserly stuff has been debunked since then. Casserly does pre draft "training" on interviews and used it as a chance to plug his services. Since then others have reported his meetings were fine. 

In terms of Murray, he is a phenomenal thrower of the ball. His accuracy and arm strength are both plus rated. He can read defenses and use his legs to make new and better throwing lanes. When you watch his adjustments in the 2nd half against Alabama you see you are getting an NFL level talent. 

All that said I don't see him making it to us at 11, but if he did trading the pick to Washington to take him could net a nice haul.  

I don't want Murray and I believe Casserly over the media and their race pushing agenda.

[fredtoast]

(03-26-2019, 09:25 PM)BengalChris Wrote:  I believe Casserly over the media and their race pushing agenda.

Oh please.

Casserly is the media.  This is total BS.

[Au165]

(03-26-2019, 09:25 PM)BengalChris Wrote: I don't want Murray and I believe Casserly over the media and their race pushing agenda.

...Casserly is part of the media. You literally contradicted yourself haha.

[fredtoast]

(03-26-2019, 09:40 PM)Au165 Wrote: ...Casserly is part of the media. You literally contradicted yourself haha.

Posts like that are "a product of our society".

[McC]

(03-26-2019, 09:02 PM)Au165 Wrote: The Bama O line took over really in the first quarter. Adjustments heading into half on the last couple drives included Murray using his legs to get outside away from inside pressure but also manipulating the safeties away from Lamb. Obviously part of it is play design, but his decision making from late 2nd quarter threw the rest of the game evolved. He got back into an  attacking downfield mindset.

Also let’s be clear, that defense lost that game early.

OU put up ten points in the first half.  They obviously weren't doing their defense any favors.  And why did they wait an entire half to adjust?  Why did they wait until it was too late?

[Au165]

(03-26-2019, 10:12 PM)McC Wrote: OU put up ten points in the first half.  They obviously weren't doing their defense any favors.  And why did they wait an entire half to adjust?  Why did they wait until it was too late?

In many games 10 points in the first half doesn’t prevent you from winning, the issue is when your defense allows 31 in that first half. It was on the defense as only one Bama scoring drive was less than 50 yards (48) and that was a field goal, it wasn’t a case of turnovers putting them in bad positions. Bama played great on offense no doubt but the Oklahoma defense was dreadful all year and everyone saw that coming.

Pressure up the middle on a QB is a huge issue, especially when you want to take deep shots. You can’t step up and so your constantly forced laterally which makes your throws deep down the middle late and easy to intercept. You don’t want to make it a habit to roll out if your plan is to work vertically which the OU offense likes to do.

The guy threw for 300+ yards 100 rushing and two TDs against a defense with most likely 6+ draftable defenders on it. It was a special performance and one that puts him in rare company. It actually reminds me a lot of the Watson performance a couple years back.

[McC]

(03-26-2019, 10:30 PM)Au165 Wrote: In many games 10 points in the first half doesn’t prevent you from winning, the issue is when your defense allows 31 in that first half. It was on the defense as only one Bama scoring drive was less than 50 yards (48) and that was a field goal, it wasn’t a case of turnovers putting them in bad positions. Bama played great on offense no doubt but the Oklahoma defense was dreadful all year and everyone saw that coming.

Pressure up the middle  on a QB is a huge issue,  especially when you want to take deep shots. You can’t step up and so your constantly forced laterally which makes your throws deep down the middle late and easy to intercept. You don’t want to make it a habit to roll out if your plan is to work vertically which the OU offense likes to do.

The guy threw for 300+ yards 100 rushing and two TDs against a defense with most likely 6+ draftable defenders on it. It was a special performance and one that puts him in rare company. It actually reminds me a lot of the Watson performance a couple years back.

He'll be reliving that night week after week when he becomes a Cardinal.  He's gonna need those fast feet. They did nothing about their crappy line in free agency and they won't be able to spend a first round pick on a lineman, obviously, unless they get a first rounder somehow for Rosen.

[Joelist]

Sorry but no sale. Even many of those who advocate for Miller state in the same breath that the team who drafts him will have to special craft their offense around him to get around his limitations. I'd rather wait for a QB who can operate in a pro offense. But then again this thread is just another of the usual "shiny new thing" combined with the "hate Andy Dalton" threads.

[fredtoast]

(03-26-2019, 10:30 PM)Au165 Wrote: The guy threw for 300+ yards 100 rushing and two TDs against a defense with most likely 6+ draftable defenders on it. It was a special performance and one that puts him in rare company. It actually reminds me a lot of the Watson performance a couple years back.

Vince young had 200 rushing yards and almost 300 passing against a USC defense with 8-10 NFL players (and multiple All-Americans) in the '06 Rose Bowl.

How much did that mean in the NFL?

[XsandOs]

(03-26-2019, 09:19 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Personally I hope he's not, because I don't like his mentality; but admittedly, I suck at scouting QBs.

I simply disagree with taking a top talent QB at 11 is a "waste". There's no more risk of success or failure than there is any other position. 

Just imagine in 2017 if we didn't think WR opposite AJ was such a need and instead thought about taking a talented QB

I don't think there is anyone who can assess QBs to any significant degree.

There was a time that you needed at least 3 years of starting college experience to be analyzed. Now, you get a year maybe two.

Murray has one year under his belt.

But he has the tools. Based on that he is in the top three.

Personally, I like Lock. But he will most probably be the first QB selected. Haskins may be gone before Murray as well.

But at 11, any of those three would be worth the pick.

[fredtoast]

(03-26-2019, 09:19 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Just imagine in 2017 if we didn't think WR opposite AJ was such a need and instead thought about taking a talented QB

Just imagin in 2016 we passed on William Jackson for Paxton Lynch.

[McC]

(03-26-2019, 09:19 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Personally I hope he's not, because I don't like his mentality; but admittedly, I suck at scouting QBs.

I simply disagree with taking a top talent QB at 11 is a "waste". There's no more risk of success or failure than there is any other position. 

Just imagine in 2017 if we didn't think WR opposite AJ was such a need and instead thought about taking a talented QB

Everybody wants to go back in time and take Mahomes now but, at the time, no one said jack shit about him.

[Au165]

(03-27-2019, 12:42 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Vince young had 200 rushing yards and almost 300 passing against a USC defense with 8-10 NFL players (and multiple All-Americans) in the '06 Rose Bowl.

How much did that mean in the NFL?

That was a pretty special performance as well, you are correct. Young's issues were with his head more than skill. He had serious mental and work ethic issues from the jump. He was rookie of the year in 2006, but he actually considered retiring after his rookie season. Things started to go sideways after the rookie year as reports basically say he became distant and didn't really put work in anymore. He had police called on him in 08 after told his therapist he was considering suicide and at that point his career was basically done. He had a falling out with Jeff Fisher and that was about all she wrote.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(03-25-2019, 05:14 PM)Joelist Wrote: No interest in Murray and his red flags, plus this is a weak QB class and we have FAR higher priorities like LB and OL.

This, I'd rather draft one over the next two years...and fix holes this season.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(03-26-2019, 12:21 PM)RunKijanaRun Wrote: Only QB I'd be interested in - at 11, mind you, not overall - would be Haskins.

I'd love Grier or Lock later in the first or in the 2nd. Jones is 2nd-3rd round talent to me.

Murray is just too much of a gamble. Alabama was the first and only real defense he faced all season and he looked lost. And he is just way too small.

He's got arm talent, and stranger things have happened, but no way IMO is Murray going to be Mahomes 2.0 or even Wilson 2.0. And Russell Wilson is not a high enough comp to justify a #1 overall pick when you just spent your #10 pick on a QB the year before. So I'm predicting shenanigans and epic fail.

This.....all of this.....I'd rather gamble on QB with a later pick in this year's draft.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(03-26-2019, 01:50 PM)BengalChris Wrote: 1. Murray is NOT Mayfield, so how quickly one acclimates has nothing to do with the other.

2. Also, according to Casserly, Murray did horribly in his interviews with some teams and couldn't remember the plays he was shown.

Murray = losing bad for years.

Smaller Akili Smith.....no thanks.

[Catmandude123]

A mobile QB adds a new problem for opposing defenses. The defenses have faced Andy for eight years and with a weak line all they need to do is make him move and he will become a whole lot more inaccurate. To say Murray will be a failure is something no one can accurately predict. I can't predict he will succeed but I will predict that Dalton will not be a success with this line. I do hope that the new regime might allow him to do better but he is who we have seen for the last eight years and to truly expect a new Andy is pure folly.

[KillerGoose]

(03-27-2019, 09:37 AM)WychesWarrior Wrote: Smaller Akili Smith.....no thanks.

Murray and Akili Smith are not similar prospects. Murray is a better athlete by several magnitudes.