Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

CatMan72

Rivera: We Would Have Drafted Coples To Play Dt If Kuechly Wasn't There

109 posts in this topic

I guess you missed the whole "we're going to take the best player available in the first"

Blackmon may have been the pick had he been there as well

It's BPA based on need. Are you saying if Andrew Luck were there, that we would have taken him #9 overall because he was BPA? It's not logical. I don't think OT or WR would be logical that high either. I don't feel like they were greater needs than LB/S/CB. When the talent is similar, then you don't draft the highest reated player, you draft the highest rated player based on need (if they are rated similarly).

For instance if we have Kalil rated 87, and Kuechly rated 86. Guess which player we are taking?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because I'm a UNC fan doesn't mean I'm oblivious. There are tons of factors that probably contributed to Coples play declining last year. As I said earlier, he played mostly DT in 2010 while he was moved to DE for 2011. Second, everyone knows about the turmoil the program went through these past two years (Davis being fired a week before training camp - one of the more idiotic moves in the history of college football, but that's a post for another time). There are rumors abound that the outgoing staff trashed many of the players to NFL GMs (Withers was particularly salty at not getting the HC gig even though he didn't deserve it and wasn't a good coach). IMO, Coples is no more likely to breakout or bust than any other player in the draft. That's the beauty of it - it's always a crapshoot. Aaron Curry was highly regarded as the safest bet in the 2009 (2008? Not quite sure) draft and a high-character guy with great work ethic, but he turned out to be a marginal NFL player.

I'd bet good money that Reggie Smith will be the starting FS Week 1. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if Martin is cut after TC if he doesn't impress.

Yea if they keep the current safeties, Smith is starting. But they wanted to draft Barron, which makes me believe they still aren't comfortable with our safeties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea if they keep the current safeties, Smith is starting. But they wanted to draft Barron, which makes me believe they still aren't comfortable with our safeties.

True as that may be, I think they'd only be interested in a guy that was clearly better than what we have on the roster (which, if Carrier is correct, they thought Barron was). I think we're set at safety for this season though - I doubt there's gonna be anyone after cuts are made that will be better than what we have today. It's possible, but I wouldn't count on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's BPA based on need. Are you saying if Andrew Luck were there, that we would have taken him #9 overall because he was BPA? It's not logical. I don't think OT or WR would be logical that high either. I don't feel like they were greater needs than LB/S/CB. When the talent is similar, then you don't draft the highest reated player, you draft the highest rated player based on need (if they are rated similarly).

For instance if we have Kalil rated 87, and Kuechly rated 86. Guess which player we are taking?

My belief is that "need" is factored into a particular team's BPA. In other words "filling a need" has a numerical bonus that naturally bumps those players up the draft board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought some of you had bad reading comprehension. You're even worse at hearing comprehension. No were in that interview did Ron Ron say his top rated DT was Jerrel Worthy and his lowest rated DT was Fletcher Cox. All he did was list off the guys he was interested in.

That was a great interview. Ron gave a ton of information. When he described the thought process in picking Kuechly over Coples he used the word "need". Clearly his ideas of needs are different from ours. It makes sense to, Jordan Senn < Frank Kearse. It's clear they view anything Thomas Davis can do as gravy.

I actually liked the fact he wanted Coples as a 5 tech. If you read the scouting reports he is considered a power rush guy that can't get around the edge. He had his most successful season in college on the interior. Also the New York Jets drafted him and I expect him to play 5 tech for them. He's only about 10 lbs light for the 5 tech so It really isn't outlandish. The only problem I would have with that pick is the character.

I love listening to Ron talk. It makes you believe something constructive is actually happening at BofA Stadium. Marty comes across as slow and ignorant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the point being that they aren't desperate for a DT, which is different from saying we couldn't find anyone at all to upgrade DT. What Marty is referring to is the total panic some fans and media are going through over the DL.

not that anyone on this forum would panic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone have a link to the interview?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone have a link to the interview?

http://charlotte.cbslocal.com/?podcast_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.podtrac.com%2Fpts%2Fredirect.mp3%2Fnyc.podcast.play.it%2Fmedia%2Fd0%2Fd0%2Fd1%2Fd0%2FdE%2FdM%2FdR%2F10EMR_3.MP3&podcast_name=Panthers+Head+Coach+Ron+Rivera+On+The+Mac+Attack+05%2F01%2F12&podcast_artist=The+Mac+Attack&station_id=61&audio_link=true&config_file=config.xml&dcid=CBS.CHARLOTTE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://charlotte.cbslocal.com/2012/05/01/ron-rivera-we-feel-very-comfortable-with-the-way-our-d-line-played-the-last-6-games/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What better way to help cover up a leak of who they would pick before who they did than to expose who they would have picked if who they did wasn't there.

That is why no one should care what poeple say I am sure Hurney had a least 5 choices and they lined up depending on who might or might not be there at #9. We weren't 'set' on anyone, and the players shouldn't be offended the #9 pick isn't a sure lock like 1,2 overall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.