Discussion in 'Fantasy Sports Zone' started by vaturkey, Dec 27, 2010.
No kidding, it's full of clowns/trolls.
Ok. If we knew that Luck was the next Ryan or Bradford, and we also got a inside starting linebacker and a starting SS. Why and the heck wouldn't we at least consider it. I mean, wouldn't that in the long run help the team?
Take off your blinders and look at how bad this team is this year. Both Greenway and their SS would be a signifficant upgrade in our defense for sure.
Greenway and a top safety would be an upgrade but not having a top QB would be crushing. I have seen this team without a good QB and frankly I would go with our current LB and safety before I got rid of our QB they are too damn hard to find
No, I will not hear you out.
But we don't, so you can't exactly throw that out there as a given.
Madden is more fun on an actual console or PC.
You'll never know for sure. Look how many top 10 QBs have flamed out. The Packers didn't know when they took Rogers and he turned out good. I wonder how much of it for Rogers was related to the fact that he wasn't thrown into the fire right away -- that he had three years to mature, learn how to study, and watch another great QB.
For all we know the Joey Harringtons, Akili Smiths, Alex Smiths, etc, etc, all might have turned out like Rogers had they been able to sit for three years and watch a great QB every day and been nurtured by a QB friendly coaching staff.
Your logic is kind of crazy here.
I think you are the one with blinders on right now and everyone else is trying to help you take them off.
Seriously this is not Madden.
The vikings are not going to trade away picks and multiple players for Romo. If they want a QB that bad they would just trade those players and pick(s) to move up to the first slot and take Luck.
Furthermore let's just say for some crazy, they all lose their minds, madden like draft scenario did play out and they traded all of that for Romo and we got the 2 first round picks and we try to trade them to the Panthers in order to get Luck and they say...Thanks but No thanks, we are going to take our sure fire Franchise QB because we might not get another chance to get a player like this.
So..we now have no Luck and no Romo.
I swear I think I am going to need a 55 gallon drum of Valium before next season starts with all of those silly scenarios.
Threads like this should just be locked and deleted.
So trade Romo for a LB and safety that you say will give us good play at those positions for the next 3-5 years, in favor of hopefully getting a QB who will be ready to lead this team to a Superbowl in 3-5 years.
So basically trade Romo, and our chances at being a Superbowl contender over the next couple of years, for two players who probably won't be good by the time the QB you want to draft is good enough to take us to a Superbowl?
Yeah that makes a lot of sense to me.
I second, third and fourth this notion.
you ever seen him play? he doesn't remind me of Troy, more like Aaron Rogers
I understand some not liking the scenario set out in this thread, but I don't get people acting as if it's such a horrible, unfathomable thought. It's debateable how much that would help us improve, or if it would at all, but a scenario where we help shore up a defense that desperately needs help and get a franchise QB for the future isn't so unfathomable to me.
I would just as soon draft a QB to sit behind Romo than to give up a top QB. I don't disagree that we need to add to our defense but I think the risk of gambling with your top QB is way to big of a risk.
Read Braveheartfan's post.
I was agreeing with it for a second until he said trade up to get Andrew Luck... I like Cam Newton 6-6 260. Cam Newton have a personality of a leader on the field and I feel with his ability, he can take Cowboys to the next level.
I have no problem with this. It weighs the pros and cons, is well thought out and doesn't automatically treat the proposal as unfathomable.
I did, and while I understand his points, and don't find them unreasonable, I don't think its that cut an dried. For example, while I agree Romo gives us a better chance to win in 2011, which would be Luck's rookie year, I don't agree that is undoubtedly true for 2012 or 2013. And I don't agree that it would necessarily take Luck 3-5 years to be ready to win. I guess I don't see Romo as enough of a sure bet to automatically shrug off this trade proposal as unfathomable.
There is a lot wrong with this team. Why can't people just be happy with what we do have right?
which is why I have not flamed the guy. I understand what he is saying I just think the risk is too great.