Jump to content

trueblade

HUDDLER
  • Content Count

    2,357
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2,100 Awesome

About trueblade

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 11/08/1972

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I think we're missing the bigger takeaway from this story. Kyle Shanahan is considered by many to be a pretty good offensive mind. I guess it's a good sign that he thinks Darnold can improve enough to offer his first round pick. This might also be why the Jets wanted a first round pick for Darnold initially.
  2. Not just Patrick Mahomes. The last four NFL MVPs: Rodgers - sat three full seasons. L. Jackson - sat 9 weeks. Started due to injury to Flacco. Though to be fair he played in every game in certain packages. Mahomes - sat 16 weeks. Only played in Week 17 because KC was locked into the fourth seed and resting starters. Brady - sat 17 and half weeks. Started due to injury to Bledsoe. The rest, as they say, is history. Even if we pick Fields, it might be a great idea to let him sit for a while and learn while Darnold plays.
  3. 1. Lawrence 2. Fields 3. Sewell 4. Slater 5. Wilson 6. Lance --------------------------------- Would consider trade back here if it got me a future number one and didn't drop me below 12. ---------------------------------- 7. Pitts 8. Surtain
  4. Because we had a absolute superstar at QB. If you think Fields or Lance can develop into that, and they are there at 8, you don't even answer the phone. You turn in the card. If you have doubts about Fields or Lance, take Sewell or Slater or get as much as you can for the pick (assuming Sewell/Slater are gone).
  5. Not knowing how will be there I picked 7. 1. Lawrence 2. Fields 3. Slater 4. Sewell 5. Wilson 6. Lance 7. Pitts If all seven are gone, I'd be looking to trade down into the Darishaw range.
  6. If I never hear about 'phases' or a 'phrased approach' again, I'll be thrilled.
  7. This is Kiper's latest. This would be a terrible decision. I would be throwing things at my TV if this happens. You either take Slater or (my preference) Fields. I think Mel was just trying to get Fields to NE because that would generate more interest/views/clicks.
  8. I want Sam to be successful for the exact same reasons I wanted Teddy to be successful, and Kyle Allen to be successful, and Cam Netwon to be successful. Because if they're successful it means the Panthers are winning.
  9. 1. How many young QBs did Joe Thomas end up protecting? 2. "seem to think they have solved that [QB] issue " is not how Fitterer acted in Seattle at all. Don't misunderstand. I'd be thrilled with an OT, but if Fields was there, I think I'd take him. Time will tell if it would be the right move or not.
  10. OTs are far from the reliable can't miss prospects they used to be. It's still a projection for both the LT and QB (just like every rookie ever drafted). Sewell/Slater could very well be "an LT that can protect the QB at an elite level for a decade or so barring injury". I'd be thrilled with picking either. They could also struggle to adapt to the pro game and have to move to guard or really not work out and be out of the league in 4 years. All of those are within the range of outcomes. But man, if we're going to talk best case scenarios, and Fields is there, and he hits his best scenario
  11. The one guy I do NOT want is Parsons. Off the ball linebacker is not a premium position. You don't spend premium resources (like a top 10 draft pick) on a non premium position.
  12. I get the impression he's excited to be here.
  13. Their initial move was to try to move up to 3, but they didn't like the price MIA wanted. Based on what SF paid, I'm kind of glad Fitt decided not to. It begs the question, though. Who were they targeting at 3? What if that player happens to be there at 6, or 7, and they can move up for a much cheaper price than what it would have taken to get to 3? Or what if by some chance he's there at 8?
  14. This year's draft is deep at OT. You can get a starter in round 2. Next year's draft look is be relatively sparse on QB talent. If Fields hits his ceiling, you'd really regret not taking him. Lance is much more of a gamble, but I'd take Fields if he falls to 8. I also think that's it is incredibly unlikely that Fields is there at 8. My nightmare scenario is we get to watch him become a star in Atlanta.
×
×
  • Create New...