45catfan

Yes.

No, but the bust rate, especially for LTs goes WAY up.

I'm down with this. Dallas has two third rounders, one being a comp pick #99. That is spot on for the value of this trade. The first of their third rounders is much too pricey and they would balk. If the QBs and Sewell are gone, we trade back with Dallas pick up an extra third rounder and draft Slater at #10.

Value vs. expectation. The draft is deep on the OL, but we are looking for starters and while you can surely get some quality depth later in the draft, it is unrealistic to think they could turn into starters. Thus good value, but unrealistic expectation.

Ah, now I see why you have so few DTs. I still see 6-7 going before the end of round 3. I don't put such limiting parameters on them. I mean several guys are in the 290's. I don't think 10 pounds is going to limit their success in the League. Barmore, Onwuzurike (290), Nixon, McNeill, Wilson, Togiai and possbilby Tufele. There will be a run in rounds 4-to-5, that's where the value is this year. I agree this is not a top heavy DT class, but that's not to say there's still not some quality to be had in the meat of the draft. It would suck to be stuck in last year's boat looking for a

I guess we got a trade partner if we want to trade back in the later rounds.

I remember someone on the board saying this was staged awhile back. While dude did pound some beers he apparently went around and collected the surrounding empties before someone took this pic.

I'll tell him, I guess. So Little wasn't even a first round pick and was sinking fast in the 2nd round until Hurney inexplicably threw him a life line by trading up to draft Greg. I'm 99% sure he would have been there several picks later at our original draft position. Heck, I didn't even want him then.

I'm only for taking a CB in the 2nd if we got our OT in the 1st and one of them falls from the first round to us at #39.

Cox should be gone and #34 is high for Samuel. Some are calling for a CB at #39, but I think there will be an early run on corners and the value will not be there at #39; in other words, without reaching. Twyman made me question his athleticism when he ran his 40 at 5.4 seconds. Remember, he's not a NT and only 280 pounds. That threw up a big red flag to me.

I get UT, but what keeps the rest of the folks from smoking?

They are a power 5 conference, thus getting the better recruits than smaller conferences so that is only logical. The players are not bad per se, just the programs. In 2019, only 3 schools besides Clemson had better than .500 conference records. THREE. It's the trend more times than not. Every since Virginia Tech, Miami, Florida State and to a lesser extent Georgia tech have fallen off their pedestals, it has left Clemson with a clear path virtually every year to the playoffs.

Only 43% of Denver fans smoke and it's legal? That alone calls into question these findings.

Who wants to tell him?

So a team or players that played most/all of the season are automatically better than teams/players with abbreviated or cancelled schedules solely because they have a larger body of work? Nah, I can't accept that. Lacking a full season of college football play does not make lesser talented teams/players better by simply filling a void.