While I don't disagree with this I cannot see a team swapping 1st round picks and giving up their 2nd round pick if it is a high pick.

Then don't do it. Don't get ****ed twice!

Depends on who it is and how many spots they move up but I can't see doing it without getting a 2nd round pick in 2013. Which if there are multiple teams gunning for the pick one of them will cough it up. If not then maybe we can work a swap of our 3rd for their 2nd with some other trimmings. We need that 2nd round pick.

You mean the same franchise who went into the previous year with Cassel/Quinn/Stanzi?

Oh, reputable you say...

What I'd be curious to hear is if there are any other QBs they might consider at #1. Now for me, there are none. I think public consensus would agree too, but maybe there is someone who still likes Barkley or something. But it would be interesting to hear if Reid thinks Geno has distinguished himself as the clear cut best QB in the draft, in his opinion.

I think that would speak volumes to this concept of value they are so hard about.

Ian Rapoport‏@RapSheet2m
Chip Kelly said he sees no value in naming a starting QB in OTAs or minicamp. Needs to see 11-on-11. Expect a decision during camp.

They dont want to name their starter because he isnt on the roster yet ;)

yeah, i get it. But the problem is that if mjd is healthy at all, you guys are going to win enough to beat out the jets and raiders. Those teams are that bad

I wonder if Pete Carroll's "real" open QB competition last year will have any effect on college coaches who just entered the NFL or his prior staff. It's too risky for an established coach like Reid, but I could see the Jags, Buffalo and Philadelphia all being open to a real competition.

I don't understand this logic.

Why is it too risky for an established coach?

The greater risk is to try to win with lesser talent.

It also would seem more likely that an established coach would be given more rope to hang himself with.

Because those old school guys can't change their spots. They are risk averse.

I just don't buy the Eagles trading up. Outside of Chiefs fans I haven't seen many if any people who think they would. And it just doesn't make sense to me. Why bring in Dixon and basically flat out refuse to deal Foles if you were going to take a QB in the first round? Only way I would buy this is if they dealt Foles and wanted to go into camp with Vick/Geno/Dixon.

Its a smoke-screen for KC to go ahead and take Geno.
Posted via Mobile Device

Like they can't just trade Foles before or after the draft.

According to Reid the Eagles had no interest at all in trading Foles. I don't see that changing. Foles is a good young QB.