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!

     

Trey Lance on nfl network as if 12pm est


raleigh-panther
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, MHS831 said:

If we are going to get serious about a QB and they like Lance much more than Mac, and they probably should, we will trade up.

Jags--Trevor

Jets--Wilson

Dolphins (wild card--smart to trade back, but they could love a player and that could be a QB.  Trade for Watson?  Who knows?)

Atlanta--Fields or Lance  (while I think taking a QB now is dumb, they have so many needs and a decent QB under contract) 

Cincinnati  (another Wild Card--teams will be giving them a lot for the #5 spot if a top 5 QB is on the board)

Philly--possibly taking a QB or would trade back

Detroit--Possibly taking a QB or would trade back

Denver (9) SF (12) NE (15) Washington (19) all could try to move up from where they are. (the picks are from memory--approximate)

 

I think picks 3-7 are up for grabs. None of those teams are in a spot where they need a QB and they have too many other needs to ignore. Denver and the Niners are our competition for a trade up. Basically I think it’s Lawrence, Fields at 1 and 2 and we just have to prevent Denver and San Fran from jumping us and taking the other 2. I don’t see WFT trading up to select another QB in Fields or Lance who, one is from the same school as Haskins and two had one great season like Haskins did. They will sign a vet or take someone safe like a Mac Jones. Just my thoughts...

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Ace420 said:

The way the game has evolved to emphasize passing and offense, yes, finding a franchise qb is the only way to win a superbowl. 

 

Lance is considered to be the floor of the 4 qbs by most teams and experts. After watching his pro day, there is no way he males it to 8. Someone is going to trade up for him.

The qb position has been a premium for over 20 years. It's been an all out passing league for at least a decade or more and it still has never happened.  

Edited by mrcompletely11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joe Brady & Rhule were front and center for that workout. 

Maybs this is the guy folks.  Would not be made at all.  Lance or Fields would be super promising.

R1 Lance/Fields QB

R2 Cosmi/Leatherwood/Mayfield OT

the rest--Offensive focus w/maybe a CB or DT

  • Pie 4
  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Ace420 said:

Bit those same teams know that they can trade back to 7, 8 or later and know that their non-qb target will be there because of the run on qbs. Why pick a CB or a LT at 4 or 5 when tou can trade down to 8 or 9 and still get the same target player and an eztra first round pick next year?

 

Franchise QBs are too important in today's NFL. Blame Goodell with allnof the rule changes that has favored offenses for the past 5 to 10 years. It is just a reality of the game these days.

But they don’t know they can trade back and they don’t know the teams in those slots will offer enough compensation to be worth it. Could you imagine the Bengals needing a LT and having Sewell there but they trade back to a spot they think they can get him at and somebody else grabs him? 
 

It’s not a matter of teams wanting to trade up, it’s a matter of the teams in those spots willing to trade down to other spots and accepting the secondary offerings in return. 
 

This gets brought up every year about how XY and Z teams could look to trade up but it often doesn’t happen. 

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is the true definition of bust or boom prospect the one thing that concerns me is not one throw on the inside route did he lead the wr with Anticipation. sure the kid has a cannon now it’s up to the coaches to figure out if he has the mental part of the game without this important part it’s a bust of a pick. I still think Mac Jones is a better pick in the top 10

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Detroit is not taking a qb, they have Goff for better or worse 2 more years.  Same with ATL.  I think a team in the NFL would be pretty stupid to draft a guy and have him sit for 2 years.  See GB and Love

The Lions have already let it be known that picking a QB is not off the table.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sure it does, maybe not every position and not every draft.  You have to admit the hit rate goes down the further in the draft you get.  Would you more readily find a generational talent at the #2 pick or #19 pick?  High picks are considered "busts" if they doesn't pan out, whereas guys drafted later don't have that level of scrutiny upon them.  Different expectation levels.  If Styles does indeed go #2, I already listed the rarefied air that he would be in.  Maybe he doesn't set the League on fire, but my gut feeling is he does.  Again, you don't take an off-ball LB #2 if he is just a 'really good' player.
    • To illustrate my point, I watched (and commented on the Huddle) that Rozeboom would often wait a full second (or close to it) before taking his first step.  I assume that he probably had issues with false steps, a faulty practice that can take an ILB out of the gap completely.  Watch Luke and you see a step with the snap, and rarely was it a false step.  Rozeboom may have had 100 tackles (speculating) but initial contact was 2-3 yards on the defensive side of the ball.  Luke's 100 tackles were made 1-2 yards from the LOS.  Over the course of a year, Luke was much more productive (more fumbles, fewer long gainers, more OL penalties, fewer first downs, etc) that Rozeboom, but on the stat sheet, they both had 100 tackles.  In fact, Rozeboom's inefficiency kept him on the field more (more first downs, fewer OL penalties, turnovers, and punts) so he should have MORE tackles.   I would like to see stats that break down those things.   For example again, Josh Norman was slow--4.68 or so at CB.  However, his anticipation speed was incredible.  He made as many plays as a 4.4 CB.  I had one coach (college--later became the head coach at WCU) tell me that slower players have to use their brains more to still be around.  Elite athletes can just get by on their physical superiority.  He added, "Rarely does a football player run full speed.  Most of the time, they are not, so the 40 time is misleading stat.  Smart players overcome shortcomings--when the elite athlete becomes average (slows with age, advances in level of competition) they struggle against smarter (football IQ) competition.  
    • Obviously tongue in cheek hyperbole. But we do not need a first round RB to compete for a championship. We need intelligent roster building. That to me is the complete opposite of intelligent roster building because it is a prime resource at a devalued plug and play position when we have needs across the defense.
×
×
  • Create New...