Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Draft and FA predictions influenced by today's hirings


  • Please log in to reply
84 replies to this topic

#31 MadHatter

MadHatter

    The Only Voice of Reason

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,752 posts
  • LocationDark Side of the Moon

Posted 17 January 2011 - 07:32 PM

I'm comparing him to Gholston in that it took 1 productive year for him to shoot up the charts. They're comparable in that they've used their athleticism to get penetration but they can be exploited in similar ways. Gholston was a sack machine, but he would get taken out of plays constantly. Same thing with Fairley.

The dude has 12 sacks as a DT.. you just don't see that in the NFL. It just seems too easy..


He got 12 sacks in the toughest conference in college football.....as a DT. That means that he is athletic and disruptive.

He is definitely worthy of the #1 pick. Decision has to be made whether to go offense or defense.

#32 SOJA

SOJA

    Official Panthers Fan

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,532 posts

Posted 17 January 2011 - 07:33 PM

we don't need both Mankings and Nicks just one of them. We need a better tight end. Dont expect us to sign Nnmadi (sp?) he has Colts written all over him

#33 GritsRgreat

GritsRgreat

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,101 posts

Posted 17 January 2011 - 07:37 PM

To bad it won't happen.


Why not, Coefield is a free agent and Fairley is now the obvious pick at number 1.

#34 GritsRgreat

GritsRgreat

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,101 posts

Posted 17 January 2011 - 07:39 PM

I like K Boss @ tightend and Johnathan joseph @ cornerback.

#35 scarface

scarface

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,065 posts
  • LocationEastern NC

Posted 17 January 2011 - 07:39 PM

Why not, Coefield is a free agent and Fairley is now the obvious pick at number 1.


Hardly obvious since I don't see him as #1 overall pick.

#36 GritsRgreat

GritsRgreat

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,101 posts

Posted 17 January 2011 - 07:40 PM

I think he's a better pick than Bowers.

#37 House

House

    Fly Navy

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,481 posts

Posted 17 January 2011 - 07:40 PM

The thought process of some people amazes me. I read a post yesterday were someone didn't want Aso because he was so good that he shut down half of the field. So QB's didn't throw at him much and it would be better to get somebody that QB's would target more so that we could maybe get more INT's.

Now I am reading that Fairley is a bad pick at #1 because he is too athletic for a big man and was able to penetrate and get too many sacks in college. I understand some peoples aversion to picking up Fairley but the logic behind this escapes me.

#38 Seamonk

Seamonk

    kekekekekeke

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,058 posts
  • LocationRichmond, Va

Posted 17 January 2011 - 07:40 PM

Gabbert didn't have that great of a line this year. He took 23 sacks (Same number as Cam Newton). For comparison, Luck took all of 6, Mallett took 25 (statue), Locker took 19. Russel took 16 his last year of college, Clausen 24.


My main point about Russell was that he and Brady Quinn were the only QBs taken in the first round that year. Russell being taken #1 because of his potential alone. He was an outstanding college player, don't get me wrong. He just wasn't worth the top pick. His draft stock only existed due to a shortage on top level QBs. It was him or Brady Quinn and Quinn's drop showed how weak the QB class really was.

Without Luck, this year's QB class is relatively weak in the upper echelon. Sure they're some high calibre guys like Mallet and Locker and Gabbert, But I don't see them as Top 10 picks let alone Top 5. You're really reaching if you want a QB. We might not see all 3 drafted in the first either. This means the Second and Third rounds will be money in terms of QBs. Especially when someone takes a gamble on Cam Newton like Denver did with The Golden Calf of Bristol.

Now had Luck declared and we'd taken him with the #1, we'd probably see more of these guys get drafted in the first simply because it'd mean that their values would essentially drop enough that the risks woudl be more worth it.

#39 Seamonk

Seamonk

    kekekekekeke

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,058 posts
  • LocationRichmond, Va

Posted 17 January 2011 - 07:44 PM

He got 12 sacks in the toughest conference in college football.....as a DT. That means that he is athletic and disruptive.

He is definitely worthy of the #1 pick. Decision has to be made whether to go offense or defense.


Still raises questions as to why he wasn't starting before his Junior Season. I still feel like the system set him up to succeed more than his abilities did. He wouldn't be coming through the line with no one on him so many times against so many different teams otherwise. Oregon sure took advantage of that.

#40 Seamonk

Seamonk

    kekekekekeke

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,058 posts
  • LocationRichmond, Va

Posted 17 January 2011 - 07:48 PM

The thought process of some people amazes me. I read a post yesterday were someone didn't want Aso because he was so good that he shut down half of the field. So QB's didn't throw at him much and it would be better to get somebody that QB's would target more so that we could maybe get more INT's.

Now I am reading that Fairley is a bad pick at #1 because he is too athletic for a big man and was able to penetrate and get too many sacks in college. I understand some peoples aversion to picking up Fairley but the logic behind this escapes me.


lol both were me :<.

If aso shuts down half of the field, teams pick on gamble. you want that?

#41 House

House

    Fly Navy

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,481 posts

Posted 17 January 2011 - 07:49 PM

Still raises questions as to why he wasn't starting before his Junior Season. I still feel like the system set him up to succeed more than his abilities did. He wouldn't be coming through the line with no one on him so many times against so many different teams otherwise. Oregon sure took advantage of that.


You should, maybe.....I don't know, maybe........do some research?

#42 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,506 posts

Posted 17 January 2011 - 07:51 PM

My main point about Russell was that he and Brady Quinn were the only QBs taken in the first round that year. Russell being taken #1 because of his potential alone. He was an outstanding college player, don't get me wrong. He just wasn't worth the top pick. His draft stock only existed due to a shortage on top level QBs. It was him or Brady Quinn and Quinn's drop showed how weak the QB class really was.

Without Luck, this year's QB class is relatively weak in the upper echelon. Sure they're some high calibre guys like Mallet and Locker and Gabbert, But I don't see them as Top 10 picks let alone Top 5. You're really reaching if you want a QB. We might not see all 3 drafted in the first either. This means the Second and Third rounds will be money in terms of QBs. Especially when someone takes a gamble on Cam Newton like Denver did with The Golden Calf of Bristol.

Now had Luck declared and we'd taken him with the #1, we'd probably see more of these guys get drafted in the first simply because it'd mean that their values would essentially drop enough that the risks woudl be more worth it.


I think you're confused.

First, did you read Russel's scouting reports? People claimed he'd be the next great thing. He had all of it - except the work ethic, it turns out. He was worth a high first rounder. It's easy to say he wasn't worth the #1 the way he ended up busting, but what if he hadn't? Many, many scouts and analysts thought he was worth the #1 and I recall from that combine people decided he was worth it.

What I bolded just doesn't make sense. Some analysts had Gabbert at #5 before Luck said he was staying in school, and many still had him in the top half of the first round. Newton also has a good chance of going high.

There may not be a QB worth the #1 right now, but that doesn't mean none of them are worth being taken in the first round.

#43 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,506 posts

Posted 17 January 2011 - 07:52 PM

lol both were me :<.

If aso shuts down half of the field, teams pick on gamble. you want that?


...yes?

lol, what kind of stupid question is that.

If half the field is shut down you can game plan to cover the other half. You're acting like we will ONLY ever be in man coverage.

Plus Gamble is a decent corner.

So you'd rather teams have the option to pick on both sides of the field at their choosing??

#44 House

House

    Fly Navy

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,481 posts

Posted 17 January 2011 - 07:53 PM

lol both were me :<.

If aso shuts down half of the field, teams pick on gamble. you want that?


Sure, because if you can let a DB stand completely alone with a WR then that frees up everyone else in coverage. Gamble is not chopped liver either, he was poorly utilized in the past defensive shemes.

If you are pretty much taking away a WR, the offense is playing with 10 guys. That is a pretty big help to a D.

#45 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,506 posts

Posted 17 January 2011 - 07:57 PM

Also, about Nick Fairley, he transferred to Auburn in 2009 from a junior college and what I heard was that he was basically a walk on who fought hard for playing time and only got sizable amounts of it this year, which is why his stats are so heavily weighted to this year.

In 2008 at a junior college, he had 63 tackles and 7 sacks.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com