MHS831

Is that you, Matt? Enjoy the prom.

forethought. We are going to be offensive--that is a fact.

Ruined this for me. Damn you.

Nah. I think he knows that some people are unteachable. The irony here is palpable.

Sure as hell was not talking about sex here, right? Who is with me? (not bad for one handed typing) MHS out.

Lotta you guys have some pretty quick access to Payton look-a-likes. Probably doesn't mean anything.

Darnold will be one of the many interesting stories at QB in the NFL this year---aside from the 5-7 rookies, Goff, Wentz, Stafford, Tua, etc.

I cannot think of a situation when the incumbent has not bowed out when a team drafts a top 10 talent. Sooner or later, usually sooner--after the first bad game or so---the shiny new QB takes over. I still think this is unlikely--maybe a bluff. If you are the coach, and Darnold throws 3 picks in a game or the team loses 3 games in a row, the pressure is there to pull the cord. That is all it is about--when to pull the cord and make the switch, knowing that you cannot unswitch the switch.... Can you think of a time when a top 10 QB was drafted and the incumbent kept the job for a long period of time? I can't.

I agree with this. I might add a CB and a MLB as well.

It helps the draft position if others think we will take a QB. If you do not want a QB and you can convince teams like Denver or NE that you do, they may move up with the Lions and take a QB, leaving a player like Pitts or Chase sitting there. Still, a Mond or Mills or even a Trask later might make more sense, if you think you can develop them. A first round, top 10 pick QB is going to start--you have not created a competition, you simply turned Darnold into a bridge.

OK, adopting this new first round philosophy, I think it is very likely that we do not need to move up if we are open minded. I am going to create a big board here. Wait one second. 1. Lawrence. QB Jags? 2. Wilson QB Jets? 3. Fields, QB Niners? 4. Lance, QB Trade up with Atlanta? Assume those 4 QBs go before the PANTHERS pick-- 5. Sewell LT Bengals?) 6. Chase WR (dolphins?) 7. Pitts TE (Lions? or do they trade out? I am guessing that if the Niners take Jones, a QB trade up here) It is very likely one of the three in bold above (5-7) will be available. That is the pick, unless we decide to trade down. Here is to hoping SF takes Jones--that would just about guarantee the top OT or an elite weapon. 8. Waddel WR 9. Smith WR 10. Slater OT 11. Surtain CB 12. Darrisaw OT 13. Horn, CB

SOLD

Chase, Pitts---either or?

If we want Pitts, then I assure you there is a very good reason for it. What was the offense missing last year? Who is going to cover him? etc. I am telling you, they may think we are better off at OT than we think we are.

I have a dry common sense of humor.

Redskins in Washington too. Racists.

Could the panthers have their eyes on a SR bowl T? Smith, Ball? Brown (Not sure he was there--but I like him)

Pitts may help make Darnold better as much as a stud OT---and I think the Panthers may think they have depth at OT right now

Top three reactions: The only mock that requires ankle grabbing. Taking one for the team just hit a new level. And that's OK.

The Raiders do not have any love in Northern California or Nevada.

In a related study, researchers were initially shocked to learn that Atlanta actually finished at the bottom of the league in total number of alcohol and narcotic-related brain cell damage. After several minutes of deliberation, they concluded that these findings in now way dispute the previous study. One researcher, said, "Let's not forget, we are talking about Georgia here."

I see it. Opens up the offense. I think they think the LT spot is serviceable for now--I do not think we go after LT come hell or high water.