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!

     

Niners confirm the smokescreen


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, MHS831 said:

Yeah, because Ohio State at Clemson did not have that.  Yet Jones won the national title, completed nearly 80% of his passes (Waddle injured), and averaged 350 yards a game--all higher than Fields and Lawrence. 

But your stats are good too.  You make a compelling argument.

I don’t even think Stidham had much NFL talent around him on offense at Auburn? Burrow would have made more sense, but he looks good in the NFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

That's not a high mark to hit. The ACC only fielded one P5 caliber program last year and that was Clemson.

Most of the league would have struggled against Coastal Carolina or App St.

 

Edit: Maybe Miami.

How many did the SEC field then, 3?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

The "better than everyone else" dart could be lobbed at just about everyone but Wilson. Lawrence, Fields, Jones and Lance all had star studded teams. 

But to be fair, Wilson had Brady “Stonewall” Christensen - greatest LT in the history of college football and future NFL first ballot HOFer!!

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lawrence was one, Wilson was two.  What would they need a smokescreen for?  Getting some team to trade up to 4?  

I don't buy the smokescreen theory.  There would have been no need to create one because there would have been no one for them to trade up to in front of them for Lance.

IMO they initially thought Jones was their man but later determined that Lance was too good to pass up. 

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My only guess would be concerns about a team trading with the Jets or the Jets considering Lance once they realized how badly the Niners wanted him? I know at one point the Jets were considering trading the pick and keeping Darnold, not sure if the timing aligns with the “smokescreen” or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

I'm saying those rankings were pretty laughable since most of the conferences played in conference only(or pretty close). 

If you want proof of that, reference the 0-6 ACC bowl record. So, we basically finished the same way that Conference USA did. 0-6.

Frankly, even Clemson was probably a little bit of a paper tiger.

Lol, three of those losses were to the #1 ranked and eventual NC, #3 ranked and #5 ranked. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, OldhamA said:

How many did the SEC field then, 3?

The SEC fared pretty well OOC during bowl season. I don't know if they were the strongest conference but they did go 3-0 versus the ACC. 

I would imagine that the traditional ACC vs. SEC seasonal matchups would likely have been similarly tilted.

The ACC just wasn't good last year versus a couple of seasons ago when we were very clearly the best conference.

Edited by kungfoodude
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

    • we have 2 solid/above average (however you want to phrase that) wr's, which is more than half the league at least.  We dont need to be blowing more first round capital just to placate Bryce and his limitations.   We have one absolute stud (probably top 10 wr) in tmac and we have a high floor guy with insane potential if he can stay healthy.  Yeah man we are in better shape than the bulk of the teams in the league.  If you need to add some speed or whatever, sure draft in the mid rounds or wait until tc cuts.  Its monumentally stupid to spend 3 straight firsts on a wr if thats the route they go.  ITs just more and more excuses for Bryce, thats where we are at now.    "How can bryce succeed without a big possession type wr (drafts 2 for him), how is bryce supposed to exceed without a speed guy......."   Its fuging never ending.  Give EE some goddamn help on defense for once
    • Tight ends in the first round just have so much risk. Even guys that look like guarantees at the position, fail. OJ Howard is a big one that comes to mind (and I REALLY liked him and thought he was going to be a stud in the NFL). I know that every player/position can be a gamble, but when you look at Kyle Pitts (he's come a long way, but he has clearly underperformed), TJ Hockenson, Hayden Hurst, Noah Fant, Eric Ebron, etc., NONE of these guys changed the dynamic of their team for the better. Zero. In fact, most of them end up being traded before their rookie deal is up. This draft has some good tight ends. I wouldn't spend a 1st on one.
    • Not true. I mean, come on dude. You went to "above average" to "solid." The teams that I mentioned have at least three solid options. Let's not waste time going through the motions.  But, maybe someone will see it as fun. Njigba, Shaheed, Kupp (maybe even Barner and/or Arroyo). I didn't even lost everyone. The Jags, Minny, Detroit. I could probably go on. Our WR corps is just not up to snuff. Just admit it. 
×
×
  • Create New...