1of10Charnatives

Because the fine career keeps getting interupted with injuries that keep him out substantial portions of a season. Given that WR's take less pounding than RB's, it is not an inherently bad idea. Also take a look at the avg career length for RB's vs WR's and then think about how long you'd like that fine career to last.

*Looks at watch* Since the Sphinx had a nose? Since the tower in Pisa was straight? Since The Great Sam Mills™ wore leather helmets as a rookie?

They don't. We aren't.

I vote yay. Problem is my vote means nothing. Your vote means nothing. Rhule's vote means something. Brady's vote means something. CMC's vote probably is worth 51% by itself, and I get the impression he's not into the idea. But just on the merits of the idea, yeah I agree with you.

I am slightly better than you as an Oline consultant for two reasons: One, I am slightly cheaper. Two, my business card has the words Don't Panic in large friendly embossed letters on it.

Well I'm glad you asked. Suppose you have a guy that really sucks at Left Guard, but he goes down with an injury. If you have a guy that can suck at BOTH Left Guard and Right Guard, then you just plug that guy in and you're good to go. But if the replacement can only suck at Right Guard, well, now you've got problems.

I do not need PFF to tell me our line play was beyond horribad. I also do not need them to tell me that touchdowns are good and penalties are bad. Some things are self evident.

I mean...it's the not worst point ever made by the OP, that's for sure. But while I am also leery of contract year superstars, I think Dante is the closest thing to a sure thing going forward for this secondary. Horn has only 3 games, Henderson and Gilmore do come with question marks, so if some team was gonna offer me a pro bowl caliber guard in his prime for Dante, would I bite? Probably. Is that likely to happen? Not really.

I understand the theory of drafting best overall player, and overall I mostly agree with it BUT if followed with no accounting for the ease vs difficulty of filling different positions AND other factors like, oh I don't know, protecting your first year QB that you're essentially trying out to see if he's as bad as his 3 years with the Jets or if it was mostly the Jets, I'd say that's not exactly optimal either. Continuing to draft quality WR's that can be had a dime a dozen while knowing full well quality OL are so scarce no team is gonna let go of them without a harsh price hasn't worked out well for us either.

This is likely what happened to me.

F that noise. I know this might be hard to believe, but there is actually a place somewhere between being a drunk asshole with a rapsheet and born to lose tattooed on his forehead and being some wine and cheese prick who doesn't get football at all and is there for the social scene. It's called being a reasonable person. I can support my team AND be louder than you on 3rd down without advocating for asshattery.

I'll grant Fitterer that quality OL to be had via FA or trade are in short supply, however.... Since you're not brand new to the league, scarcity in the market of quality OL to be had from other teams seems like the sort of thing you should ALREADY have known prior to the draft, and it should have made drafting OL a much higher priority. Seviceable to good WR's are a dime a dozen in the NFL, even crap teams have a couple of good ones, but FItt gets no pass from me for failing to take this into account when drafting Marshall. I made a post just after the draft that caught a lot of flack which pointed out all of the highly graded OL who were available when we drafted Marshall. Being a good GM isn't just making tons of deals and shrugging your shoulders when the crucial position group can't be had that way. It's knowing you won't be able to fix that part of your team via trades and FA and drafting accordingly. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, and right now I think we all know what this pudding tastes like.

Dead on. I was indifferent to Romo when he was a player up until the classy way he stepped aside to not be a distraction when Dak took over, that really impressed me. My opinion on the vast majority of commentators is somewhere between loathing and laughing at their inane pablum, but Romo is a true breathe of fresh air. Insightful, engaging and entertaining. Olsen provides good insight but is still new at it and needs to bring some enthusiasm. It's too easy to give him a pass because he's our guy, but the truth is his game still needs some work. Having said that, I'd take him over almost everyone in the Fox line-up. Dear Lord most of those guys suck donkey balls.

Here's the problem not getting OL help sticks us with: We still don't know if Darnold is worth keeping. Yes yesterday was bad, but as this thread title makes abundantly clear, it's easy to be bad when you're constantly in fear of getting killed. Those stats are absurb. Our line is absurdly bad, and it's not like that wasn't obvious in the offseason. There is really no justification whatsoever for taking a WR in the 2nd when it was already one of your stronger position groups without even accounting for how good a receiver CMC is out of the backfield while continuing to ignore an obviously awful OL as you bring in a young but unproven QB from a bad franchise. The tactic you described of drafting Marshall to let Anderson walk? That's the kind of luxury move teams that aren't horribly shorthanded at critical position groups get to make with day 1 picks, not teams looking at starting the football version of the Washington Generals plus one good RT should even be considering.

I did notice that as much as there are things to like about Hubbard's performance, he dropped more than one pass and he goes down easily when tackled. I think superior speed and athleticism kept him on his feet a lot more in college, but even with those flaws he seems more than good enough to be a RB2.