Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Your Opinion: Winner And Loser Of This Years Firsts


  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

#1 Brokenbad

Brokenbad

    Cam is my hero

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,550 posts

Posted 27 April 2012 - 05:41 AM

In your opinion, who had the best and worst first round picks this year?

I am going to say New England had the best, getting two versatile defensive guys that fit their scheme VERY well and adding some punch to their last ranked defense.

I would say Miami had the worst. They made a reach that Stretch Armstrong would have been jealous of, picking up Tannenehill in their spot. Tannenhill does not remind me of Blaine Gabbert, but I think his story will be similar. He picked up tons of momentum with his draft stock towards draft day and was reached for by a quarterback hungry team. Now he is a quarterback that normally would have been drafted in the second or third and is now the projected starter for an awful team.

#2 chubs2496

chubs2496

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,224 posts

Posted 27 April 2012 - 05:43 AM

The rams. Even tho I don't like brockers, it's a good pick for them and they are taking up on the picks. How many frigginh picks do they have in the second and third now. My god.

#3 arc

arc

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 404 posts
  • Locationin orbit

Posted 27 April 2012 - 05:47 AM

Rams = huge losers

They thought they were gonna land Cox, Blackmon or Floyd and failed miserably

I'm not gonna lie I'm pretty impressed with the Bengals getting Kirkpatrick & Zeitler while managing a trade

Steelers snagging DeCastro at 24 makes them my biggest winner

#4 chubs2496

chubs2496

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,224 posts

Posted 27 April 2012 - 05:48 AM

But instead they wrapped up alot of picks. Yeah total losers and a decent payer in brockers. And how exactly do u know who they wanted. Oh that's right u don't

#5 Zod

Zod

    YOUR RULER

  • MFCEO
  • 20,086 posts

Posted 27 April 2012 - 05:51 AM

Panthers with the #9 pick get the best LB in the draft.

That ain't too shabby.

#6 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Administrators
  • 13,614 posts
  • LocationILM

Posted 27 April 2012 - 05:53 AM

Panthers were only team to draft a 4-3 LB in the first round.
Minimal risk, Minimal Impact.

#7 arc

arc

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 404 posts
  • Locationin orbit

Posted 27 April 2012 - 05:53 AM

But instead they wrapped up alot of picks. Yeah total losers and a decent payer in brockers. And how exactly do u know who they wanted. Oh that's right u don't


Yeah I don't and we happen to disagree

They'll probably get Jeffery or Hill today

Nice job at being all snarky though

#8 Zod

Zod

    YOUR RULER

  • MFCEO
  • 20,086 posts

Posted 27 April 2012 - 05:54 AM

Panthers were only team to draft a 4-3 LB in the first round.
Minimal risk, Minimal Impact.


Not sure an elite LB who can play all three spots should be considered minimal impact in regards to our LB core last year.

#9 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Administrators
  • 13,614 posts
  • LocationILM

Posted 27 April 2012 - 05:55 AM

I'll be thrilled if I am wrong.

#10 JawnyBlaze

JawnyBlaze

    Senior Member

  • ALL-PRO
  • 6,916 posts

Posted 27 April 2012 - 05:59 AM

Well, I think Rams were huge winners if they went into this draft thinking DT at #6 if they couldn't trade down. Brockers was my favorite of the bunch. The Patriots bucked both their drafting trends by trading UP and making GOOD picks, in my opinion. The Steelers stayed put and took a phenomenal guy and value for where they got him. Thought the Vikings did a good job, still took the guy they needed and were able to add some late round picks. Not sure about the trade up for Harrison Smith, but they didn't give up much for the move. The Chargers stayed put and got exactly the guy they needed. Ditto for the Lions and Packers.

I think the biggest losers were the 49ers. Maybe they know something about that kid everyone else doesn't, but surely they had to think they could have gotten him in the 2nd. Ditto with the Seahawks. Surely they could have gotten him in the 2nd. I think the Bengals whiffed with their second pick. Traded themselves out of taking Decastro and ended up taking a G anyway and only picked up what, a 3rd? Not a good trade in my opinion. Not saying Zeitler is a bust, but whoever they get in the 3rd with that pick will probably not make up the difference between Zeitler and Decastro. They gambled, they lost. The Bears also, I don't think that McClellin kid was the better pick over Chandler Jones.

#11 chubs2496

chubs2496

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,224 posts

Posted 27 April 2012 - 06:01 AM

Yeah I don't and we happen to disagree

They'll probably get Jeffery or Hill today

Nice job at being all snarky though


Yeah they will probably get hill or Alshon, then mayve one of the best DTs available to put with brockers. And a LB or whoever they want like a zach brown. That's four quality starters in 2 rounds. Sounds like a win win to me. Sorry for being snarky

#12 arc

arc

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 404 posts
  • Locationin orbit

Posted 27 April 2012 - 06:04 AM

Yeah they will probably get hill or Alshon, then mayve one of the best DTs available to put with brockers. And a LB or whoever they want like a zach brown. That's four quality starters in 2 rounds. Sounds like a win win to me. Sorry for being snarky


Makes sense...I just don't see Brockers as an instant impact type which I could easily be wrong with. no worries mate

They need to get Bradford weapons bottom line

#13 chubs2496

chubs2496

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,224 posts

Posted 27 April 2012 - 06:07 AM

Makes sense...I just don't see Brockers as an instant impact type which I could easily be wrong with. no worries mate

They need to get Bradford weapons bottom line


Yeah I guess I put them top heavy in this draft with defense. I'm a defense kinda guy. But yeah your right that offense needs weapons

#14 JawnyBlaze

JawnyBlaze

    Senior Member

  • ALL-PRO
  • 6,916 posts

Posted 27 April 2012 - 06:07 AM

In regards to our pick, I don't think we fit either description. We got a phenomenal football player, but I can't disagree with Kurb's succinct assessment. It'd be the same thing as if we took a similar prospect at TE, G, C, FB or probably S. I feel the same way about the Bucs pick. They got a really good player (though I don't think Barron is as good a S as Kuechly is a LB) but it just wasn't a big enough impact position for the top 10.

But I'm trying to stay positive. Kuechly is the leading piece of the second stage of building blocks of Rivera's regime to take us to a Lombardi. I truly believe that. Cam was the foundation, Kuechly will be the frame.

#15 Rags

Rags

    help

  • ALL-PRO
  • 2,228 posts
  • LocationButtsville, NC

Posted 27 April 2012 - 06:26 AM

How can anyone not say the Seahawks were the biggest losers.

You just took a head case one trick pony where there were plenty of other great, complete pass rushers on the board.

Grats.

49ers took a huge-ass reach, but he's a great player and was expected to go early-mid second. And honestly, they should be thanking the Seahawks.

Dolphins reached but hey in a pass happy leauge when you've been passed on every QB and head coach with any shreds of dignity you need to reach.

Rams missed out on who they wanted but who gives a fug they got picks everywhere. Besides Brockers fills a need and can be a stud.

Pats and Bengals won the first round, as much as I hate to say it.

Runner up are the Chargers who got a great pick in Ingram who happened to fall right into their laps.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com