Assuming Cleveland goes Darnold at #1

.

any 1st round picks next year would be fantastic. We can use them to trade up next year if we have to

imo. I'd choose C. I think Barkley would still be there.

for me I would try and trade down a few picks (5 maybe) and then get Fitzpatrick, Nelson or Chubb if Barkley is gone.

I do NOT want Rosen or Allen.

In comment 13879282 Joey from GlenCove said:

Quote:

any 1st round picks next year would be fantastic. We can use them to trade up next year if we have to

Doubtful they would.

Always take the best player available.

...and Draft Nelson.

of the same thread being repeated in many various forms with many various posters.

It would be more impressive to have someone go back through each already started to see if anybody have changed their minds or uses different logic to support their position.

...except on one point. I'd draft Darnold if I have the opportunity. He's the goods.

In comment 13879295 Torrag said:

Quote:

...except on one point. I'd draft Darnold if I have the opportunity. He's the goods.

pretty much how I see it. If Darnold is there at #2 im picking him.

If CLE does what everyone thinks and picks Darnold then I have some decisions to make which I'm cool to waiting until the last second until we are on the clock.

Draft Barkley
Draft Highest QB on the board
Trade Down with Denver (draft Nelson)
Trade Down with Bills (use the draft to fill a ton of needs)

I flip flop between all 4...it will be a tough decision for sure.

Going QB high is an major organizational decision. Teams usually know going into the 1st round that they are coming away with a QB or they aren't. For example, everyone knew Carolina was going QB in the 2011 draft. It was assumed they would get Andrew Luck. However Luck decided to stay in school. So they went Cam Newton since he was now the best QB available. We see this type of behavior time and time again. Even the Manning Draft. The chargers were going QB whether it was Manning available or Leaf.

Considering their are some similarities this year where the top QB's are somewhat similar in ranking I find it hard to believe that the Giants would go Darnold, but not Allen or Rosen. Meaning If They really want Darnold, but he isn't available they will dramatically change directions on an organizational level and go running back.

One can make the argument that it is different because we have Eli so therefore we have the luxury not to be forced into a QB or that Barkley is so exceptional that it changes the normal rules. Totally possible. However, it would definitely be different than the norm.

Rosen or bust!!

But, if not Rosen, don't draft a RB at #2. Yuck!

Trade back for picks and still get a premmium player. If not, then trade back for a ton of picks and restock the roster.

In comment 13879321 Jarvis said:

Quote:

Going QB high is an major organizational decision. Teams usually know going into the 1st round that they are coming away with a QB or they aren't. For example, everyone knew Carolina was going QB in the 2011 draft. It was assumed they would get Andrew Luck. However Luck decided to stay in school. So they went Cam Newton since he was now the best QB available. We see this type of behavior time and time again. Even the Manning Draft. The chargers were going QB whether it was Manning available or Leaf. Considering their are some similarities this year where the top QB's are somewhat similar in ranking I find it hard to believe that the Giants would go Darnold, but not Allen or Rosen. Meaning If They really want Darnold, but he isn't available they will dramatically change directions on an organizational level and go running back. One can make the argument that it is different because we have Eli so therefore we have the luxury not to be forced into a QB or that Barkley is so exceptional that it changes the normal rules. Totally possible. However, it would definitely be different than the norm.

I think that's right. You need to know if you're going to take the QB, it's sea change moment. It's essentially signalling you don't expect to compete that year as you're basically saying your first round pick will sit and learn for a year.

If we're not going to QB, I'd take Barkley unless the Bills back up the truck, or somehow manage to trade their way into the top 6. If Denver put together an offer to go to 5 I'd consider it. With the defensive scheme change, and a general lack of depth we really could use more than 5 picks.

.

I'm running to the podium and then I'm running him non stop for 10 years... all the way to a championship! Don't care who the QB is, Webb, or someone else, I just want the once in a generation back!

Why would Denver trade up like that? Would would Cleveland trade up like that?

Rather than the "run to the podium", I think the Giants should take the full 10 min (or at least 9 min and 30 seconds) and work the phones for the proverbial "King's Ransom" trade offer (I wouldn't trade down past 6th overall so that the Giants come away with one of Barkley, Darnold, Allen, Nelson, Chubb or Fitzpatrick).

the madness if the Browns would just go ahead and draft their guy today. They are allowed to draft before the draft with the #1. At least we'd have one less guy to argue about.

for future with Rosen. Maybe Giants the confidence Rosen will be a Franchise QB. I do not.
B is all in on Manning/Webb. I am hopeful, but not convince.
C may still offer a shot at Barkley, and definitely can fill multiple holes. I see this as best move if it were available

In comment 13879357 cjd2404 said:

Quote:

the madness if the Browns would just go ahead and draft their guy today. They are allowed to draft before the draft with the #1. At least we'd have one less guy to argue about.

If Browns are REALLY smart, they trade up to 2 and take Darnold and Barkley. With their offensive weapons (assuming Landry and Gordon stay out of trouble) they would be very tough to defend. Plus, a great running back can take pressure off a young QB.

Think of their offense:

QB- Darnold (when ready and Taylor until then)
RB- Barkley
TE- Njoku
WR- Landry
WR- Gordon
WR- Coleman

They would be scary good.. Even with trade up they will still have a lot of picks left plus cap space..

Look back to 2004. Lots of people wanted Gallery to help protect Collins thinking we would win if we only gave him more time. Hell, we had been to a Super Bowl with Collins, right? IMHO, this is about the biggest no brainer pick I have ever seen. We take a QB and let him learn under Eli for ONE year and the it's the start of a new era in Giants football and if Webb shows he can be a great one too then fantastic!

I trade down if i get a great deal or take Barkley.

In reference to 2004, I wanted Gallery at 4 because I thought there was no way we could get Eli. Eli was the pipe dream.

.

by our scouting and FO. I think Allen has all the physical tools and they need to figure out if he can be taught the mental part of it. If so, he's a top candidate too. Seems as though Mayfield isn't really in the cards that early. So I can see Rosen or Allen. If not, I'd be all for trading back a few spots and then nabbing Nelson or Chubb.

there will be a new crop of QBs every season.

C) Trade back with Denver receiving their 2018 2nd/5th picks and 2019 1st. Select BPA - I suspect Barkley falls to pick #5. Flexibility for 2019 QB.

high draft picks gives the Giants to get more quality players that can be used as part of the rebuild. There are once in a decade players, Quenton Nelson is one of them, he has All Pro talent. And who will be the other LB's?

on the mark.

Rosen has All-Pro talent. Allen has All-Pro talent. Fitzpatrick has All-Pro talent. Barkley has All-Pro talent. But that is all potential, not realized. Do you really want to take a guard with a top 5 pick?