2026 Draft - QB Prospects

Wouldn't oppose. The defense needs talent, it has almost none

 

It needs an interception lol

 

Exactly what I wrote yesterday. Draft 3 studs (maybe even a slight trade down with the Colts pick to add a late 3rd). Edge, LB, DT, and maybe a WR with size within those first 4 picks sounds good to me ….

 

It's a great scenario except for the fact we don't have a QB

 

All these are interesting discussions…tomorrow we will have more clarity on our draft position…hoping we lose and lose big (maybe Woody gets antsy and fires AG), and hoping the Giants win, and we sit at #2.

If the Giants lose along with us and we end up at 3, I do think it will cost a lot to flip with the Giants…they will undoubtedly be getting offers from other teams for that 2nd pick knowing that we’d take a QB (which I do think happens if Moore declares), so I don’t think swapping from 3 to 2 will come cheap. Especially with the Giants knowing we have so many first round picks…they will work that angle for sure.

I am assuming the Raiders will take Mendoza first as he’s the safest pick, and then I don’t know if Moore is good enough to give up multiple picks for moving from 2 to 3 for him, and I actually don’t hate the idea of letting those 2 QBs go first and second and then taking the BPA positional player if we can find a decent stopgap with potential in free agency (would be fine with Willis or trading for Mills…want no part of Mac Jones he sucks and will not replicate his success in SF outside of that coaching staff).

Honestly, my preferred path would be to somehow trade for Mills even if it’s a 2nd rounder or sign Willis, and then use our first rounders on best available player at WR or DE.

But again, we will have a lot more clarify on draft position after tomorrows games

 

Hopefully at #3 the Jets let some other team empty their coffers to trade up for Moore. Sit tight and draft the best defender for a defense that has almost no talent. No beef up front, LBs needs an overhaul and a shaky secondary….I say both first rounders should go to the front 7 but we’ll see.

 

Well, your statements were obnoxious first when you called my examples goofy, but you said "principled teams do not trade into top 10" and I quite clearly showed Philly, KC, SF, and Bills did it. You were clearly wrong here, and would not admit it, hence I pointed it out. You then said they do not give up a haul, and again same thing, I showed they did give up a haul, extra 1sts and then some. You did not go where the facts led you, but instead you changed your position again to the following: good teams did trade into top 5, but it did not work out for them. That is very different from principled teams not trading into top 10.

To that last bit I say you narrowed it down too much where it is too small of a sample size, nor do I see much relevance which exact spot the trade up was. What's relevant is how much they gave up in a trade up and how good the player turns out to be. If Moore turns out to be a good QB, and we give up what Chicago did or even less when they moved up, we will be very happy, just like they would be if they took Mahomes instead of Mitch.

 

Yep, that's the problem, we do not have QB!!! It would be great scenario if we had one, it really would be. But we don't and therefore it is an awful scenario and we will end up looking stupid again. We will pick up a good defensive player I am sure, but we had two all pros already and went 1-7 with them. We need a QB for fuck's sake. It would be absolutely terrible to allow other teams to trade in front of us and pick up consensus #2 guy, who happens to be a QB? https://www.nflmockdraftdatabase.com/big-boards/2026/consensus-big-board-2026 .

No, the smart thing would be if Moore declares to end up with him. It might require a trade up, but we need a QB in place. We are missing the most important piece of the puzzle. Until this is solved, picking up good defenders to replace good defenders we just had and failed with is an awful idea. Which is why we are kinda fucked if Moore stays in school. After we have a QB, sure it is awesome if others draft them and good non QBs fall to us. But when QB is #1, 2, and 3 on our own list, we have to get a top 2 rated QB if we have this opportunity. Let's hope we lose and Giants win so no one can jump us if Moore comes out.

 

True, he has 3 years starting on tape between OU and WS. I think he’s ready to come out but with 3 mil in nil money on the table it’s definitely possible he returns

 

I am not clearly wrong. San Francisco made a horrible trade and you’re citing it as some sort of win. The Chiefs and Bills traded up to 10 and 7 which is wildly different from the situation we’re in.

Die on this hill though dude. Along with some sort of dream scenario where we’re only giving up a single second round pick or something to move up to 2 (for a QB I don’t think is worth it but we’ll see). I think there’s an even smaller scenario where we give up as little as Chicago did. And if we do, alarm bells should go off as to why no one else wanted him, like no one wanted Mitch Trubisky.

 

We are not getting anywhere. It's obvious there were multiple attempts by good teams to trade up into top 10, some worked out, and some didn't. That was factually proven. But it's OK, you want to believe principled teams do not trade into top 10, because you said it before and cannot change your mind, you go ahead.

As far as how much it will cost us, that's what Brook asked and I also am wondering too. It's hard to tell, would like to know what people think. 2nd or so should be enough to move 1 spot IMO, but would like to know what others think.

 

pretty much a false hope for creating additional picks to lure a coach. If we trade out of 2/3, it will be right around the draft, not much before. So no ammunition.

 

we don’t have anything

 

We have have OTs, TE, WRs, RB, two 1st round picks for DE, Briggs and Phillips, Brownlee, Thomas, Stephens at CB, just signed Sherwood to big contract... Just because Glenn underperformed with the roster doesn't mean we don't have anything.

But QB is where it starts. That's objective #1, 2, and 3.

 

Sherwood is awful, i know he has that team mvp under his belt (lol). Stephens was not impressive. But most importantly, you could only list 12-14 players and 6 positions (!) Where we have "talent." Of those 6 positions listed, you only were plural 3 times.

I ignored the DE comment as they don't currently exist.

Honestly it looks like you're making a point to the jets lack of talent.

 

If we do indeed pick second I’m in agreement with trading back. Unless, the raiders take Moore and Mendoza is there. It’s highly unlikely but that’s my feeling. Moore or Simpson getting thrown into the fire here will be the same disaster as Wilson, Darnold, Geno and Sanchez. No chance the kid succeeds he just hasn’t played enough ball and is nowhere close to pro ready. Mendoza and Mateer are the only players who I think would have a chance to have success as the both have 2 and 3 years respectively starting for a program.

 

Mendoza, Mendoza, Mendoza - he may be the "consensus" QB of many wags; he may be the first QB chosen, but that gives him about a one in three chance of being the BEST quarterback. Between 2000 and 2019 the first quarterback chosen turned out to be the best one seven times. Seven out of twenty! Getting the best guy is not "settling" for anything, and it's pretty much carved in stone now that without a great quarterback you're going nowhere. I don't need to remind anyone here that, like it or not, the best QB chosen this century came from the sixth round. Nobody comes with a guarantee. Don't waste picks trading up or down; use your highest pick every year until you hit paydirt. In the meantime use the rest of the pick basket on all the other holes you need to fill.

 

This guy?


Naaaah!