RE: General Vikes Talk

Talk Vikes and Other MN Sports

Forums Register Login My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums

Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ Ticket List Log Out

RE: General Vikes Talk

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> Vikes Talk >> RE: General Vikes Talk

Page: << < prev 332 333 [334] 335 336 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 2:04:45 PM

Phil Riewer

Posts: 27426
Joined: 8/24/2007
From: MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer
You know a top 10 pick will make more than Fields in 2024. Lance is 7 then 22; Fields is 4 then 25.
If you go top 3 they make 41 million over 4 years with a around a 24 million dollar signing bonus. 11th pick would be about half that $$$.
So if you really are worried about money why trade up to top 3?

Who is advocating trading up to top 3?
I specifically stated do it if there was an Elway or Manning but there isn't.

My response wasn't directed at you specifically. There are many advocating moving up.

Anyone who says they are saving money by going from Kirk to a top 3 pick at QB needs to review their cheat cards......KC won because they picked Mahomes at 11 which is half the cost on rookie contracts of a top 3.

_____________________________

SSG Riewer, Greg A Co 2/136 CAB
KIA 23 March 2007 Habbaniyah Iraq

Post #: 8326

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 2:06:21 PM

David Levine

Posts: 77901
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Las Vegas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

You know a top 10 pick will make more than Fields in 2024. Lance is 7 then 22; Fields is 4 then 25.
If you go top 3 they make 41 million over 4 years with around a 24 million dollar signing bonus. 11th pick would be about half that $$$.
So if you really are worried about money why trade up to top 3?

Not sure when you have to pick up their option but I would prefer either over Wilson.

Upside.

Why spend the money on guys who have shown to not be good?

Post #: 8327

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 2:09:09 PM

TJSweens

Posts: 45013
Joined: 7/16/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

If there was an Elway or Manning in the draft, consider trading 3+ first rounders. This draft? Nope. Besides, Chi, Wash, and NE are going QB. Chi certainly isn't trading with us.

We're in the running for McCarthy, Penix, or Nix.

If we stay at 11, there is a solid chance that Penix and Nix are our only options.

If we want a QB, we should trade up and get a guy. Settling for whoever falls to us is proven loser strategy for this team.

_____________________________

"The eternal fate of the noble and enlightened: to be brutally crushed by the armed and dumb."

Post #: 8328

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 2:09:34 PM

David Levine

Posts: 77901
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Las Vegas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer
You know a top 10 pick will make more than Fields in 2024. Lance is 7 then 22; Fields is 4 then 25.
If you go top 3 they make 41 million over 4 years with a around a 24 million dollar signing bonus. 11th pick would be about half that $$$.
So if you really are worried about money why trade up to top 3?

Who is advocating trading up to top 3?
I specifically stated do it if there was an Elway or Manning but there isn't.

My response wasn't directed at you specifically. There are many advocating moving up.

Anyone who says they are saving money by going from Kirk to a top 3 pick at QB needs to review their cheat cards......KC won because they picked Mahomes at 11 which is half the cost on rookie contracts of a top 3.

What??

The #1 overall pick will cost the same over the next 4 years combined as Kirk will cost just this year.

That's a HUGE savings.

Post #: 8329

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 2:12:19 PM

Mark Anderson

Posts: 12164
Joined: 9/1/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

If there was an Elway or Manning in the draft, consider trading 3+ first rounders. This draft? Nope. Besides, Chi, Wash, and NE are going QB. Chi certainly isn't trading with us.

We're in the running for McCarthy, Penix, or Nix.

If Maye or Daniels gets to Chargers pick, I go for it.

Post #: 8330

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 2:18:00 PM

Bill Johanesen

Posts: 28598
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer
You know a top 10 pick will make more than Fields in 2024. Lance is 7 then 22; Fields is 4 then 25.
If you go top 3 they make 41 million over 4 years with a around a 24 million dollar signing bonus. 11th pick would be about half that $$$.
So if you really are worried about money why trade up to top 3?

Who is advocating trading up to top 3?
I specifically stated do it if there was an Elway or Manning but there isn't.

My response wasn't directed at you specifically. There are many advocating moving up.

Anyone who says they are saving money by going from Kirk to a top 3 pick at QB needs to review their cheat cards......KC won because they picked Mahomes at 11 which is half the cost on rookie contracts of a top 3.

Having a moment? You just said a top rookie will cost $41 million over 4 years (Spotrac says $35-38 million). Cousins over 4 years is easily TRIPLE that, with a discount for age.

You best review your "cheat cards".

Post #: 8331

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 2:18:25 PM

Phil Riewer

Posts: 27426
Joined: 8/24/2007
From: MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer
You know a top 10 pick will make more than Fields in 2024. Lance is 7 then 22; Fields is 4 then 25.
If you go top 3 they make 41 million over 4 years with a around a 24 million dollar signing bonus. 11th pick would be about half that $$$.
So if you really are worried about money why trade up to top 3?

Who is advocating trading up to top 3?
I specifically stated do it if there was an Elway or Manning but there isn't.

My response wasn't directed at you specifically. There are many advocating moving up.

Anyone who says they are saving money by going from Kirk to a top 3 pick at QB needs to review their cheat cards......KC won because they picked Mahomes at 11 which is half the cost on rookie contracts of a top 3.

What??
The #1 overall pick will cost the same over the next 4 years combined as Kirk will cost just this year.
That's a HUGE savings.

What does draft capital and the contract cost? I am directly responding to the ones stating that there is a big savings money wise. You trade up and use draft picks instead of signing a FA.....it is still very costly.

It can't be the rational for moving on from Kirk ($$$) it has to be to move on and get younger. Fields, Lance, etc. fit that bill.

_____________________________

SSG Riewer, Greg A Co 2/136 CAB
KIA 23 March 2007 Habbaniyah Iraq

Post #: 8332

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 2:19:08 PM

Jeff Jesser

Posts: 19458
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: Southern Cal
Status: offline

The thing with Fields is we'd get a cheap year for KOC (and now McNown) to work with him to see what his real ceiling is. Chicago is such a dumpster fire for QB's it's hard to judge him. I'm not at all saying that's my favorite choice but I would take that chance over KC's for 2 guaranteed years at 40+ each. Or whatever outrages demands he's gonna attempt.

Post #: 8333

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 2:22:44 PM

David Levine

Posts: 77901
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Las Vegas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Jesser

The thing with Fields is we'd get a cheap year for KOC (and now McNown) to work with him to see what his real ceiling is. Chicago is such a dumpster fire for QB's it's hard to judge him. I'm not at all saying that's my favorite choice but I would take that chance over KC's for 2 guaranteed years at 40+ each. Or whatever outrages demands he's gonna attempt.

You almost have to pick up (and believe he's worth) his 5th year option though.

If you don't, you're saying you don't have faith he's your guy - so you're just wasting another year of the franchise.

Post #: 8334

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 2:23:55 PM

Bill Johanesen

Posts: 28598
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

If there was an Elway or Manning in the draft, consider trading 3+ first rounders. This draft? Nope. Besides, Chi, Wash, and NE are going QB. Chi certainly isn't trading with us.

We're in the running for McCarthy, Penix, or Nix.

If we stay at 11, there is a solid chance that Penix and Nix are our only options.

If we want a QB, we should trade up and get a guy. Settling for whoever falls to us is proven loser strategy for this team.

Presuming the big 3 go 1-2-3 because those teams are not trading out of their positions, how high does one go for the second tier? Granted, a team could have their sights set on what they think is a sure-fire option but in general at what point is trading up a panic move?

Post #: 8335

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 2:23:58 PM

Phil Riewer

Posts: 27426
Joined: 8/24/2007
From: MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Jesser

The thing with Fields is we'd get a cheap year for KOC (and now McNown) to work with him to see what his real ceiling is. Chicago is such a dumpster fire for QB's it's hard to judge him. I'm not at all saying that's my favorite choice but I would take that chance over KC's for 2 guaranteed years at 40+ each. Or whatever outrages demands he's gonna attempt.

You almost have to pick up (and believe he's worth) his 5th year option though.

If you don't, you're saying you don't have faith he's your guy - so you're just wasting another year of the franchise.

2/29 Million. Still saving a ton for 2 years. Again if you are justifying the move is to save money(you are saving around 50 million compared to what Kirk is getting). Fields and Lance can end up being better than the top 4 options if put in our dynamic offense. Gives you 2 years to build around them...

< Message edited by Phil Riewer -- 3/5/2024 2:27:00 PM >

_____________________________

SSG Riewer, Greg A Co 2/136 CAB
KIA 23 March 2007 Habbaniyah Iraq

Post #: 8336

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 2:31:57 PM

Trekgeekscott

Posts: 39278
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: United Federation of Planets
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Jesser

The thing with Fields is we'd get a cheap year for KOC (and now McNown) to work with him to see what his real ceiling is. Chicago is such a dumpster fire for QB's it's hard to judge him. I'm not at all saying that's my favorite choice but I would take that chance over KC's for 2 guaranteed years at 40+ each. Or whatever outrages demands he's gonna attempt.

You almost have to pick up (and believe he's worth) his 5th year option though.

If you don't, you're saying you don't have faith he's your guy - so you're just wasting another year of the franchise.

2/29 Million. Still saving a ton for 2 years. Again if you are justifying the move is to save money(you are saving around 50 million compared to what Kirk is getting). Fields and Lance can end up being better than the top 4 options if put in our dynamic offense. Gives you 2 years to build around them...

screw Fields. There is a reason the Bears are giving up on him. Same with Trey Lance. The 49ers gave up very quickly on him. There is a reason.

DRAFT A QB. Sign a bridge QB like Russell Wilson or Sam Darnold until Rookie can take the reigns. Don't waste your time on Fields or Lance

_____________________________

“There is no hate like Christian love.”

Post #: 8337

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 2:34:08 PM

Bill Johanesen

Posts: 28598
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer
You know a top 10 pick will make more than Fields in 2024. Lance is 7 then 22; Fields is 4 then 25.
If you go top 3 they make 41 million over 4 years with a around a 24 million dollar signing bonus. 11th pick would be about half that $$$.
So if you really are worried about money why trade up to top 3?

Who is advocating trading up to top 3?
I specifically stated do it if there was an Elway or Manning but there isn't.

My response wasn't directed at you specifically. There are many advocating moving up.

Anyone who says they are saving money by going from Kirk to a top 3 pick at QB needs to review their cheat cards......KC won because they picked Mahomes at 11 which is half the cost on rookie contracts of a top 3.

What??
The #1 overall pick will cost the same over the next 4 years combined as Kirk will cost just this year.
That's a HUGE savings.

What does draft capital and the contract cost? I am directly responding to the ones stating that there is a big savings money wise. You trade up and use draft picks instead of signing a FA.....it is still very costly.

It can't be the rational for moving on from Kirk ($$$) it has to be to move on and get younger. Fields, Lance, etc. fit that bill.

You are the one who tossed out a top 3 QB. You were then fact-checked regarding your assertion about "saving money" with this top 3 QB you created vs. Cousins.

AND you compared the cost of FOUR years of a top 3 QB vs just TWO years of Fields/Lance.

Post #: 8338

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 2:36:09 PM

Lars

Posts: 11418
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: Midi-chlorians
Status: offline

I have seen enough film on Fields. No thanks

_____________________________

<this space for rent>

Post #: 8339

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 2:37:20 PM

Phil Riewer

Posts: 27426
Joined: 8/24/2007
From: MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer
You know a top 10 pick will make more than Fields in 2024. Lance is 7 then 22; Fields is 4 then 25.
If you go top 3 they make 41 million over 4 years with a around a 24 million dollar signing bonus. 11th pick would be about half that $$$.
So if you really are worried about money why trade up to top 3?

Who is advocating trading up to top 3?
I specifically stated do it if there was an Elway or Manning but there isn't.

My response wasn't directed at you specifically. There are many advocating moving up.

Anyone who says they are saving money by going from Kirk to a top 3 pick at QB needs to review their cheat cards......KC won because they picked Mahomes at 11 which is half the cost on rookie contracts of a top 3.

What??
The #1 overall pick will cost the same over the next 4 years combined as Kirk will cost just this year.
That's a HUGE savings.

What does draft capital and the contract cost? I am directly responding to the ones stating that there is a big savings money wise. You trade up and use draft picks instead of signing a FA.....it is still very costly.

It can't be the rational for moving on from Kirk ($$$) it has to be to move on and get younger. Fields, Lance, etc. fit that bill.

You are the one who tossed out a top 3 QB. You were then fact-checked regarding your assertion about "saving money" with this top 3 QB you created vs. Cousins.

AND you compared the cost of FOUR years of a top 3 QB vs just TWO years of Fields/Lance.

Yearly cap hits are already projected/slotted for the Bears #1 Pick and our #11 pick. Easy to compare. 2023 and 2024.

_____________________________

SSG Riewer, Greg A Co 2/136 CAB
KIA 23 March 2007 Habbaniyah Iraq

Post #: 8340

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 2:37:45 PM

Bill Johanesen

Posts: 28598
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Jesser

The thing with Fields is we'd get a cheap year for KOC (and now McNown) to work with him to see what his real ceiling is. Chicago is such a dumpster fire for QB's it's hard to judge him. I'm not at all saying that's my favorite choice but I would take that chance over KC's for 2 guaranteed years at 40+ each. Or whatever outrages demands he's gonna attempt.

You almost have to pick up (and believe he's worth) his 5th year option though.

If you don't, you're saying you don't have faith he's your guy - so you're just wasting another year of the franchise.

2/29 Million. Still saving a ton for 2 years. Again if you are justifying the move is to save money(you are saving around 50 million compared to what Kirk is getting). Fields and Lance can end up being better than the top 4 options if put in our dynamic offense. Gives you 2 years to build around them...

Wrong. Try comparing apples to apples on your two-year kick.

Stroud, #2 overall last year, has a total cap hit of $15 million for his first two years.

So a #2 is about HALF the cost over the two years you keep throwing out. Let's call it "a ton" of savings.

And saying Fields and Lance can be better than the rookies is merely unsubstantiated innuendo. They can just as easily be worse. Nobody is beating the door down to get them... absent the Cowboys trading a 5th for Lance. A 5th, LOL.

< Message edited by Bill Johanesen -- 3/5/2024 2:46:19 PM >

Post #: 8341

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 2:41:57 PM

Bill Johanesen

Posts: 28598
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer
You know a top 10 pick will make more than Fields in 2024. Lance is 7 then 22; Fields is 4 then 25.
If you go top 3 they make 41 million over 4 years with a around a 24 million dollar signing bonus. 11th pick would be about half that $$$.
So if you really are worried about money why trade up to top 3?

Who is advocating trading up to top 3?
I specifically stated do it if there was an Elway or Manning but there isn't.

My response wasn't directed at you specifically. There are many advocating moving up.

Anyone who says they are saving money by going from Kirk to a top 3 pick at QB needs to review their cheat cards......KC won because they picked Mahomes at 11 which is half the cost on rookie contracts of a top 3.

What??
The #1 overall pick will cost the same over the next 4 years combined as Kirk will cost just this year.
That's a HUGE savings.

What does draft capital and the contract cost? I am directly responding to the ones stating that there is a big savings money wise. You trade up and use draft picks instead of signing a FA.....it is still very costly.

It can't be the rational for moving on from Kirk ($$$) it has to be to move on and get younger. Fields, Lance, etc. fit that bill.

You are the one who tossed out a top 3 QB. You were then fact-checked regarding your assertion about "saving money" with this top 3 QB you created vs. Cousins.

AND you compared the cost of FOUR years of a top 3 QB vs just TWO years of Fields/Lance.

Yearly cap hits are already projected/slotted for the Bears #1 Pick and our #11 pick. Easy to compare. 2023 and 2024.

Again, the comparo you made was the cost of FOUR years of a top 3 QB vs just TWO years of Fields/Lance.

#11 nor 2023 vs 2024 have nothing to do with what you posted.

Post #: 8342

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 2:55:58 PM

Bill Johanesen

Posts: 28598
Status: offline

Looks 5th year options are all the rage!

- Break The Bank $20 million

- Lance/Fields $22 million

- Darrisaw $16 million

Spend... spend! Then have Brzez backload what you spent! Pfff... flush with cap!

Post #: 8343

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 3:26:28 PM

David Levine

Posts: 77901
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Las Vegas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Jesser

The thing with Fields is we'd get a cheap year for KOC (and now McNown) to work with him to see what his real ceiling is. Chicago is such a dumpster fire for QB's it's hard to judge him. I'm not at all saying that's my favorite choice but I would take that chance over KC's for 2 guaranteed years at 40+ each. Or whatever outrages demands he's gonna attempt.

You almost have to pick up (and believe he's worth) his 5th year option though.

If you don't, you're saying you don't have faith he's your guy - so you're just wasting another year of the franchise.

2/29 Million. Still saving a ton for 2 years. Again if you are justifying the move is to save money(you are saving around 50 million compared to what Kirk is getting). Fields and Lance can end up being better than the top 4 options if put in our dynamic offense. Gives you 2 years to build around them...

And most likely sets you back 2 years, so we're having this same conversation in 2026...

Post #: 8344

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 3:43:28 PM

Tom Sykes

Posts: 5872
Joined: 7/27/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Jesser

The thing with Fields is we'd get a cheap year for KOC (and now McNown) to work with him to see what his real ceiling is. Chicago is such a dumpster fire for QB's it's hard to judge him. I'm not at all saying that's my favorite choice but I would take that chance over KC's for 2 guaranteed years at 40+ each. Or whatever outrages demands he's gonna attempt.

You almost have to pick up (and believe he's worth) his 5th year option though.

If you don't, you're saying you don't have faith he's your guy - so you're just wasting another year of the franchise.

2/29 Million. Still saving a ton for 2 years. Again if you are justifying the move is to save money(you are saving around 50 million compared to what Kirk is getting). Fields and Lance can end up being better than the top 4 options if put in our dynamic offense. Gives you 2 years to build around them...

And most likely sets you back 2 years, so we're having this same conversation in 2026...

But with a different GM / HC. So there’s that …

Post #: 8345

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 3:47:57 PM

Phil Riewer

Posts: 27426
Joined: 8/24/2007
From: MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Jesser

The thing with Fields is we'd get a cheap year for KOC (and now McNown) to work with him to see what his real ceiling is. Chicago is such a dumpster fire for QB's it's hard to judge him. I'm not at all saying that's my favorite choice but I would take that chance over KC's for 2 guaranteed years at 40+ each. Or whatever outrages demands he's gonna attempt.

You almost have to pick up (and believe he's worth) his 5th year option though.

If you don't, you're saying you don't have faith he's your guy - so you're just wasting another year of the franchise.

2/29 Million. Still saving a ton for 2 years. Again if you are justifying the move is to save money(you are saving around 50 million compared to what Kirk is getting). Fields and Lance can end up being better than the top 4 options if put in our dynamic offense. Gives you 2 years to build around them...

And most likely sets you back 2 years, so we're having this same conversation in 2026...

Same thing could happen with a QB you draft....

_____________________________

SSG Riewer, Greg A Co 2/136 CAB
KIA 23 March 2007 Habbaniyah Iraq

Post #: 8346

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 3:54:20 PM

Mark C. Johnson

Posts: 1191
Joined: 8/2/2007
Status: offline

I have a good feeling about Penix despite the injury issues. It's a risk, but he's got a great arm and he has the one thing that I covet most in a QB...he's accurate.

Post #: 8347

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 3:54:39 PM

Mark Anderson

Posts: 12164
Joined: 9/1/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

Looks 5th year options are all the rage!

- Break The Bank $20 million

- Lance/Fields $22 million

- Darrisaw $16 million

Spend... spend! Then have Brzez backload what you spent! Pfff... flush with cap!

Jefferson's 5th year option figure is already counted to where we are right now. Cap number will probably be reduced if we extend him.

Yeah, basically it is a one year tryout for Lance/Fields and then we have to pony up or cut bait. That would be worth a 4th rounder imo. Also draft QB at #11 or trade back(Penix)

Worry about Darrisaw next year.

< Message edited by Mark Anderson -- 3/5/2024 3:57:18 PM >

Post #: 8348

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 3:56:06 PM

Mark C. Johnson

Posts: 1191
Joined: 8/2/2007
Status: offline

Agreed. Fields isn't the answer. If he was, Chicago would keep him and I've heard that there isn't much of a trade market for him which speaks volumes. More importantly, he isn't an accurate passer. That's a deal killer right there.

Post #: 8349

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/5/2024 3:56:31 PM

Mark Anderson

Posts: 12164
Joined: 9/1/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark C. Johnson

I have a good feeling about Penix despite the injury issues. It's a risk, but he's got a great arm and he has the one thing that I covet most in a QB...he's accurate.

Where do you think his draft range is? #20 to #40??

Post #: 8350