Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Bill Voth's chat with Gettleman: Understanding offseason plans


Nick_81

Recommended Posts

this is why Voth is an awesome writer, and the guys at the Observer are poo. 

 

 

That introduction was enough to show that he gets how to report on a team, unlike Joe Person who would have had a 10 second interview because he would have only asked about Cam's contract and Hardy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Need influences what BPA for a team

 

If there are two equally graded players and one is of a position of need....you take the position of need.

 

If there are two players graded very closely and one is of need....you usually take the need.

 

If the position of need is graded many positions below another player....the need has no impact on the pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every player we take is a player we need. If we didn't need him, we wouldn't take him. For example, if the BPA is a middle LB, we are going to pass on him (unless he is just as good at OLB). Same at OG. We don't need an OG.

Voth make it sounds like we only need WR, OT and DB. But we also need a great OLB to groom to take TDs spot (TD will be 32 next season, his retirement is around the corner). We need a DE. We need at least one good DT (we do a heavy rotation at DT and Colin Cole will be 35 next season and Dwan Edwards will be 34). We need a S to replace Harper and we need a CB (we play a lot of nickel and you want three really good CBs). We need an OT. As for center, I'm not sure how much longer we'll have Kalil. We need a RB. We need at least two receivers (WR and WR or WR and TE). There is no QB available we can upgrade at QB with. So basically we have a need at every position except QB, OG, probably C, and MLB

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • if  ANYONE actually goes & looks at the FACTS on rookie Qb's after 2 full seasons as a starter in the NFL & they are still well below average do they rarely ever actually become top tier Qb's & instead most likely either do not recieve a second contract & or become life long backups...just saying 
    • So he became GM and decided not to address the weakness in the QB room following one of the worst rookie QB performances in NFL history?  There were options last season other than signing Dalton to a 2 year deal. Brissett and Jones by a wide margin, both of whom outplayed Bryce, Wilson, Winston, hell even Rivers off the couch was more exciting at the QB position. The time to address the failure in the QB room was last year but instead people on the Huddle cheered when we brought Dalton back then cheered when we were able to get anything for him after they finally realized he was washed up like a few of had been saying all along and got poo'd for even mentioning.  This year, the options were more limited obviously, especially since we lost Icky. It changed the dynamic of our draft. I think we were stuck this year keeping Bryce, but i still think giving him a 5th year option for what has amounted to replacement worthy performance was the wrong move. Why guarantee 25m if you're planning to replace him? You think he's going to want to be a bridge QB? Hell no. He's going to want out and we'll end up cutting him if he has another lackluster season because no one is trading for him with that price tag.  Were there better options as far as production available. A couple. Were there guys available with more physical tools than Bryce, Pickett or Grier, you damn well better believe there were. I've been saying all along, you always keep looking for your 1b. Bryce has yet to prove he can be a starter. Keep looking for someone who may. Put competition in camp. Let the best QB lead the team. Stop settling for less than mediocre. 
×
×
  • Create New...