Jump to content

Soul Rebel

HUDDLER
  • Content Count

    2,053
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,641 Awesome

1 Follower

About Soul Rebel

  • Rank
    Pitter Patter......
  • Birthday 11/12/1976

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I hope Fitts sees a prospect like Newman/Mond later in the draft as his Russell Wilson over Fields/Jones at 8. To take a beastly OT at 8 (or 15) would be huge. I love Fields and Lance, but after trading for Darnold, really hope we go OT (or perhaps Pitts if we are so lucky) in R1.
  2. I wonder if Seattle would have drafted Tannehill if they had the 8th pick that year after bringing in Whitehurst and Flynn. They passed on Weeden and Osweiler and waited to the 3rd round....a lot different than having the 8th overall and needing OL help with potentially two franchise cornerstone LTs sitting in your lap....and perhaps Kyle Pitts. I think it's a smokescreen to get someone like Denver or NE to trade up to 8 if a QB falls there.
  3. I am excited for Darnold. I'll be even more excited if we draft Sewell/Slater or Pitts at 8 and not a QB. I think Fitts can work some magic with trades throughout the draft as well as with Teddy. Give me Stokes in the 2nd and then go all offense.....build out the trenches and add a late round RB.
  4. Exactly! Not a long term piece, but a starting vet that fills the last major hole we had on our roster....we could've done a lot worse. I still hope we go CB in round 2. This move also should help Pride Jr with a knowledgeable counterpart to help with his maturity.....just stay away from the PEDs.
  5. Hypothetical: Put Teddy on the Jets last year... how does he do for that organization?
  6. Bust is a tough word to use on Darnold. Fit is so important and, not to say a lot of his mistakes aren't on him, but that Jets' coaching carousel and bums at OC they had would have made most QBs fail. Darnold could be a bust, but at 23 and given the weapons he had, I don't think it's fair to call him that...yet. For this above reason, I really...really hope we draft Sewell, Slater or Pitts at 8. Two bookend tackles for the next decade or a weapon like Pitts to go with Anderson, Moore and CMC is amazing. Give Darnold what you never truly committed to Cam.... and to a lesser ext
  7. So, with Darnold here now and when the 8th pick comes up, who are we taking: Sewell/Slater Fields/Lance Build a young wall around Darnold or bring in a rookie QB to compete after just trading for a 23 year old #3 overall pick?
  8. If a QB that New England likes is available at 8, any chance that they trade JC Jackson + 15 to move up to 8? We would still get a franchise-caliber starting LT at 15 (Darrisaw/Vera-Tucker) and a stud CB1 that is only 25 years old. We would then be able to add another game changing player at 39 and already have our LT and CB1 of the future locked in.
  9. If Carolina was sitting at 4 and ATL called to move up, we would drain their assets to face Fields/Lance for the next decade. It sucks bc DEN could very easily move up to 4 and then the QBs go 1-2-3-4. Gotta hope SF truly takes Jones at 3 if we want Fields or Lance.
  10. Fromm was the wrong choice between he and Fields. No idea why Kirby chose Fromm but if UGA had Fields instead, I'm thinking they beat Alabama. I wouldn't trade Grier for Fromm, let alone a 4th or 5th.
  11. I think we call the NYJ after they take Wilson at 2 and if we aren't able to get our QB in the first, that we will send a conditional 3rd to them. They have no need for him, and the market has dried up a bit. Sewell/Slater + Darnold will be just fine by me. A creative OC, the connection with Robby and having CMC is something he did not have in NY. Bookend tackles are also huge assets for him, along with a defense that should be top-10 in the league.
  12. I do think if Fields/Lance are still available at 5, we call Cincy hoping to move up. I do think Cincy really, really wants Sewell or Chase at 5, so they might stick to their guns and keep the selection. I do think we would then try to trade up to 6. Denver, New England, WFT and Pittsburgh all make me nervous. Staying at 8 does get us a franchise cornerstone. Whether that is a QB, Pitts, Sewell/Slater, Surtain/Horn or Parsons. I think we would have no problem sending our 3rd rounder to NYJ for Darnold. The only "wrong move" would be taking Mac Jones, IMO.
  13. Odd question - Would there be a scenario where Lynch would move up to 3, just to trade back and accumulate more assets? If they wanted Mac Jones, they could've come up to 8 to get him if they thought we were interested. However, no SF holds the cards at 3 and could trade back with us, perhaps gain an extra asset vs. what they gave up to MIA and still take Jones at 8. The SF front office is not a room full of folks that untrained GMs need to enter. Pace got worked in that Trubisky deal and I feel like they have something up their sleeve here.
  14. I'm all for sending our 3rd for Darnold at this point. Keep our 8 and either go Pitts, Sewell/Slater or Surtain II. In the 2nd we can grab a CB or OT (whichever we didn't take in R1) and have Darnold on a 1-yr prove it deal. No current or future firsts given up. No current or future seconds given up. No future thirds given up. We'd have a 24 year old QB under center without crushing our draft capital....and we still have Burns/Chinn/CMC. I know folks are hesitant on Darnold, but look at his coaching staff since entering the league.... 2020: HC - Adam Gase / OC
  15. I know I'm probably in the minority, but I think ATL passes on a QB at 4. We trade up to 5 and take Fields. If ATL takes Pitts/Parsons, I think Cincy would not trade out at 5 and take Sewell to protect Burrow. Then, we move up to 6 with MIA and send even less assets. The sky is not falling yet folks.
×
×
  • Create New...