-
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!
.thumb.gif.f35aad759896324c3e174efcba5a66a6.gif)
-
-
-
-
Topics
-
-
-
-
Posts
-
You could say that-- but if we don't need a starting OT this year, why would you draft a flawed one that is not going to play? (We are coming from different underlying assumptions and perspectives--I see your argument and don't disagree with the premise) Your thinking is based on the assumption that an OT for the future is more important than immediate needs at other positions, or that we can meet other needs in later rounds even if we take the OT in round 1. I do not think there is but 1 OT worthy of a first-round grade---they are mocked based on need and demand--if we do not have a need for a starter right now, a team at 18 may grab a T that is the 33rd best player--worth it if you have no starting T, but not if you have a starter. So just because they are mocked around the middle of the first it does not mean that the players are good values--teams get desperate. QBs are a great example. Simpson may be worth it in round 1 for the Cardinals, but not the Jets, because they have Geno Smith. Sure, they will need a QB by next year, but taking Simpson is a reach. I do not see our need, with 2 starters (Walker and Moton) and another possibly returning by the end of the season enough to justify ranking OT over positions like Safety, Will LB--I do not think we replaced A Shawn Robinson (We gonna put a NT out there? Wharton (280lbs)? So do we reach in round 1 for a player who may not play much or do we get a Will LB that can cover? A deep free safety? A quality center? A playmaking TE? A DT to replace Robinson? A wide receiver to balance the secondary? Long term, if the right player was there, you would be right. Short term, OT is a luxury at this point, in my view. -
Put Huey P Newton on the helmet. With his AK. -
We arent switching. Evero is 3-4 to the core. Given how 3-4 has been a noticeable characteristic of top defenses recently and we have drafted and signed players fir it I dont know why anyone would think that's a good idea
-
-
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.