MHS831

That was the thought I could not get out of my head. I think they like the fact that Willis stole the show--knowing that he will probably be drafted first.

I used "smokescreen" in one post---can't believe a word. It does, however, seem to signify the "end" of the free agency frenzie for us-so maybe they were signaling the agents of Duane Brown, Stephon Gilmore, etc? Who knows.

He did not show us the team's xrays, but I think he basically said,"We'd like to upgrade the pass rush, add a LT--but we are taking a QB."

Thanks for the insights from your perspective. Since he mentioned that Luvu and Haynes would step up for the loss of Reddick, I think it is T or QB. He mentioned BC's flexibility and then mentioned Elf, Corbett, Bozemen, and Moton by name---I think it means "We are going with BC at LT for now, but would like to add a player if we can. he spent a lot of time talking about QBs on rookie contracts and compared them to Seattle with Russell Wilson---I think he basically told us, "We'd like another pass rusher and a LT, but we are better in those areas now and people will have to step up. We are drafting a QB." If we miss, we will draft a QB again. So I respectfully disagree, but it could be a case of hearing what I wanted to hear.

A month before the draft---did you expect to see blueprints?

Here is my take: Offensive Tackle: We are better up front (OL) but would like to add 1 more player. Talked about BC's versatility, so he is saying, "If a LT does not happen, we can go with what we have now." Mentioned Elf, Bozeman, Moton, and Corbett--and BC's flexibility. Sd OL has more depth. I think we could be set on the OL and this did not sound as if we were targeting a T at the moment--smokescreen? Edge: Mentioned that Luvu and Haynes flashed and played better with reps. Sd they need to step up. I am not sure we are going to draft or sign an edge with the #6 pick. QB: We are drafting a QB. Basically, my take is this--we are going to start with Sam Darnold and feel that the team has been built around him--something that was missing last year. Sam will have competition. That competition will be Willis, Pickett, or Corral, in my opinion. When asked about drafting a QB: He said, you do not want to reach, but you have to take swings at the QB position. Also, he talked about building a team around a QB on a rookie salary. Compared to Seattle/Russell Wilson.

I heard that Tomlin is in love with the kid and will do what he has to do---so we shall see---If the Giants get the #7, #20 and many other picks or players, they can be persuaded--I think that is what they are announcing, but that far? Good point.

Tomlin loves Willis

Seattle, Pittsburgh I would say are the biggest 2--

DONT FORGET: FITTERER AT NOON/

I think they know what the rest of the league knows: Panthers are going QB. So the #5 pick has a ton more value for teams moving up for a QB. I think they are leveraging what we have made rather obvious.

The Giants know that if Detroit and Houston (both with serviceable QBs and other needs) pass on the QB, then it is likely WillisPickett will be there at #5. They obviously feel (if they want a QB) they can get one with 5 or 7--or they could just roll with Jones and maybe take Howell in round 2--dunno. But they know that a move up for a QB is more value than normal--so they are willing to listen.

Hey Kakalaki, 2015 called....

I do not see Willis falling to #6. The Giants will be open for business.

why not trade the 2021 offensive stars of free agency--Darnold, Erving, Elflien for some bagles. Mmmm. Bagles.

No offense because I am with you for an OT---but we going QB unless we make a splash in week 3 of free agency

The lastest Buzz--and I have not read the entire thread---is that Baker could be going to Tampa Bay....I saw this proposed ion the NFL Network--a station I have been watching 5 hours per day because I have no life.

A good supporting cast makes an average QB good. A bad supporting cast makes an average QB bad.

Jesse Davis gave up 8 sacks and had a 52 pff score. Yikes.

I am sorry, but an "Improvement Index?"

We need a LT and an edge--Gilmore would take reps from developing young CBs. I would spend the $$$ where we need it most.

I will take this a step farther because that is what I do--I push the envelope--whatever that means. QB is mental. If you put a young QB in a bad situation, they are bad. Here is why: 1. No time to throw the ball/fear of being sacked. 2. Weak or poor running game making passing downs obvious. 3. A bad defense means you are likely playing from behind, forcing the young QB to try to make plays when the defense knows what is coming. 4. A bad OL means the QB's vision is often partially obscured. Soon in the head of the young QB, doubt begins to fester. Doubt becomes a lack of confidence. When a QB loses his swag, game, set, match. So where do the best QBs go in the draft? To the worst teams. They are often drafted early in the first despite having late first round to second round grades in some cases. They are forced to start before they are ready. The transition from College to NFL is a big test that MOST drafted players fail. But the transition for a QB from the college game to the NFL is tremendous. Big transition, bad situation, pressure to win NOW. I get why they bust. The best QBs started in good situations without the pressure to perform right away. Some were able to rise above the odds of failure, but many do not. Do the Panthers have a situation in which a QB can prosper? That depends on the OL and defense, if you ask me. I think our RBs and WRs are solid, and I think the defense can be good. Whoever the QB is, he will have a coach who is in win now or get fired mode.

OK, then I want you to go up to Aaron Donald and call him "boy." That is a nefarious term. Even if it isn't somehow perceived as being racial within a particular context, it is degrading to call a grown man a boy. You see, empathy is the ability to see how something might impact someone other than yourself. If you can't see it, that is called bias. If you refuse to see it, that is called racism.

You must be white.

When I see a ranking of QBs that is all over the place--on some boards, Pickett is the third qb, on some he is #1, for example---I see it as a matter of preference. If there is no real glaring divides between the first four or five QBs, and we have only one pick, then yes, trade back. I get the feeling that we are "in love" with one of the top 2 QBs--and if so, I doubt we trade back. While I would guess that QB is Pickett, I can see Rhule getting wide eyed over Willis. Me? I can't decide, but I am more interested in the long term than the short term. I rank the QBs this way on March 24: 1. Pickett and Willis A- 3. Corral B+ 4. Howell B 5. Ridder C 6. Punt