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!

     

Ben Boulware seems..... Determined.


Jeremy Igo

Recommended Posts

He is my UDFA to make the team.

I am sorry but if you are the MLB for the National Championship team and lead the team in tackles. (BTW I hate Clemson) You can play in the NFL.   I don't give a crap about what he ran in his underwear. This guy is a football player and will make somebody dispensable.  Of all the UDFAs that I have bet on I am more confident about him than any of the others.  (all but 1 made it Garrett last year) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Sam Mills Fan said:

I don't think he has to beat out Mayo or Jacobs OR Cash. He just needs to beat out Chuck Norris. Norris was an UDFA last year that made the team for special teams. He was fine on special teams, but 7 linebackers on a 53 man roster is traditional: Kuechly, Davis, Thompson, Cash, Jacobs, Mayo, Boulware. That seems completely reasonable to me. Don't forget that Klein is gone.

 

17-completely-insane-chuck-norris-gifs-to-celebrate-the-legends-birthday-image-17.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he is a PS player year one. But give him a year just to focus on football and who knows what this guy is capable of. He has got every corny, overused expression for "heart" that you can think of. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

He is my UDFA to make the team.

I am sorry but if you are the MLB for the National Championship team and lead the team in tackles. (BTW I hate Clemson) You can play in the NFL.   I don't give a crap about what he ran in his underwear. This guy is a football player and will make somebody dispensable.  Of all the UDFAs that I have bet on I am more confident about him than any of the others.  (all but 1 made it Garrett last year) 

He also led Clemson (2 years in a row) in missed tackles. Not sure his attitude and motor can make up for his short arms and lack of athleticism. He may be able to make a living on ST teams though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, brandon_87 said:

This ^

Not that we have a bunch of slouches in our LB group. Heck there are a coaches would give their left nut to have our third stringers as their starters. Our first string is so good that it is hard to see sometimes how good their backups are. And their backups.

A fiery kid could come in and really elevate some of their work, though, as good players can sometimes be pushed to greatness and great players will rise to any challenge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I would say that he's pulling things out of his ass to get people to visit his site.
    • Yep. I was hoping for and calling for a day three guy. But I didn’t research the position to say if we should or should‘t have jumped at a particular guy at a particular spot.    And everything I read said it was a poor draft for RBs depth wise. I guess when Seattle takes a backup RB in the 1st, that kind of backs that up.    I definitely think we should keep 4 running backs and if King can play well enough then keep him too.    I believe I heard Canales say we are a running team (talking about drafting a WR he will be needing to block as well as catch). Well if we are gonna be a running team by identity we don’t need to stock the WR room to overflowing. If one room has to sacrifice, it should not be the RB room given our circumstances. 
    • If there's a pattern I'm definitely picking up from Dan and company is a philosophy of making trades where we try not to sacrifice the number of draft picks we have by day's end. In other words, we're not giving up three picks for one, or giving up a future pick to make a pick today. And even if we give up something at the start, we make trades later to make up for that initial loss. Here's how it stacked up for 2026: How we started: 19, 51, 83, 119, 158, 159, 200 How we ended: 19, 49, 83, 129, 144, 151, 227 (no future picks sacrificed) Ultimately, we moved up two spots in the second to ensure we got someone we coveted, gave up a few spots for our fourth round pick, but then had better picks in the 5th (and got really good value out of them), and had a worse 7th rounder which isn't that big of a loss anyways.  At this point, we can question who they draft, but they're pretty good maneuvering across the draft board.
×
×
  • Create New...