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!

     

Malik WIllis


janderson20vt
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, micnificent28 said:

Your very child like I went to your profile and you have done nothing but poo everyone that spoke on willis that didn't think he was trash. I really can't talk to a person like you.

Fine by me I spend most of my time in the hockey forum...rooting for a team that actually wins.

Good luck with your Malik Willis fantasy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, micnificent28 said:

I agree. But on the filp side if you can make every throw and it's the second round or later I don't see a downside at all. You have your Left tackle, Tepper has given you the vote of confidence. I'm sure they are weighing the risk as we speak. Sadly, we don't have the assets to move up into the the early second round. 

I don't see how a team like the lions or seahawks pass on him in the second again.

Seahawks run the same kind of scheme we do. Lions? I don't know.

Not sure where they pick, but honestly the first team who comes to mind that's likely running the kind of playbook Willis would work best in is Rivera's Washington team with Scott Turner at OC.

Heaven knows Rivera's familiar with that style of play.

Edited by Mr. Scot
  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Seahawks run the same kind of scheme we do. Lions? I don't know.

Not sure where they pick, but honestly the first team who comes to mind that's likely running the kind of playbook Willis would work best in is Rivera's Washington team with Scott Turner at OC.

Heaven knows Rivera's familiar with that style of play.

Schemes can change in one offseason. If the guy has the tools and mental capacity to learn said scheme and your plan is to develop him anyway, why let that stop you from trying to unearth gold? The good offensive cordinators adjust to what a quarterback can do and build on that foundation. Chances are if you draft Willis he will be around longer than say Rhule.

  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, micnificent28 said:

Schemes can change in one offseason. If the guy has the tools and mental capacity to learn said scheme and your plan is to develop him anyway, why let that stop you from trying to unearth gold? The good offensive cordinators adjust to what a quarterback can do and build on that foundation. Chances are if you draft Willis he will be around longer than say Rhule.

This forum needs a laughing emoji reaction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, micnificent28 said:

Schemes can change in one offseason. If the guy has the tools and mental capacity to learn said scheme and your plan is to develop him anyway, why let that stop you from trying to unearth gold? The good offensive cordinators adjust to what a quarterback can do and build on that foundation. Chances are if you draft Willis he will be around longer than say Rhule.

Schemes don't generally change unless someone gets fired.

Nobody's making draft plans around the notion that they might get fired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Schemes don't generally change unless someone gets fired.

Nobody's making draft plans around the notion that they might get fired.

On the contrary we changed our scheme from a 4-3 to a 3-4 in riveras last season. A coach that has experience in multiple schemes might make such a change. 

  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, micnificent28 said:

On the contrary we changed our scheme from a 4-3 to a 3-4 in riveras last season. A coach that has experience in multiple schemes might make such a change. 

That was on defense, and on Tepper's suggestion (didn't go particularly well).

Changing offenses is waaaay more complicated than changing defensive alignments.

Really don't see McAdoo switching just to take a second round quarterback.

Edited by Mr. Scot
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

That was on defense, and on Tepper's suggestion (didn't go particularly well).

Changing offenses is waaaay more complicated than changing defensive alignments.

Really don't see McAdoo switching just to take a second round quarterback.

The point was scheme changes happen. Even if slightly.. I think chuds version of the air Coryell was more dynamic than say norvs version. I also don't think Willis is anyone more pigeon toed into a scheme as the rest of the qbs left in the draft. If he is a Coryell dependent qb so would ridder, Howell, and corral I believe.

That said I think you just add in some plays you know he can run and develop him from there. In that aspect he runs very well so throw in some read options rpos and that gives you a higher floor because we know he can do that than any other qb in this draft and bring him along the rest of the way. That's my thinking.

  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

That was on defense, and on Tepper's suggestion (didn't go particularly well).

Changing offenses is waaaay more complicated than changing defensive alignments.

Really don't see McAdoo switching just to take a second round quarterback.

Another point about scheme is it didn't stop us from requiring cam last season who is vastly different scheme wise from darnold or the patriots who acquired Newton who have never run anything like the system cam has run before. Scheme is important but football still fundamentally is played 11 on 11 and the best guys win. Adapt.

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 are in a unique situation here. Just my opinion. Three things: Moton’s playing health has been gradually declining as he is aging, while his contract is a drag on the payroll.  Something will give with him sooner than later but I think 2026 could be it.  So.. need a right tackle by 2027. At the latest.    Icky’s individual situation is unique as well. They would have had an extension done by now if not for the injury. We only have him for this year. With no assurance he will ever be the same player.  It would be reckless just to assume. Now we have Walker for one year. And that is a major relief. Maybe he is the answer, but the team that knows him best let him go and it was cheap for us to sign him. So how much did they value him?    We look to be needing two tackles by 2027.  And have poo for depth this year as well. So anyway we could draft a guy for 2027 RT and groom him this year, and see how Icky does, and act as needed in 2027. Spread out filling the two holes over 2 years.    Then I remember, hey if Bryce doesn’t get a Lot more consistent do they extend him? Hoping not, if he isn’t really good.    So then we are looking at the 2027 draft which people say is gonna be loaded with QBs. If we need a LT and a QB what is the pick gonna get spent on?   Taking into account the recovery success rates cited here on the Icky surgery, you might want to plan for him to not be the same player. rather than assume he will be and get caught with your pants down.  It is a tough situation.    And factor in that it is critically important to protect this QB, always, but especially this year where it is said to be make or break. And how you might feel about that.    All of it points to a real possibility that these things converge in the negative, like Bruce sucks and Icky is not the same. In that case if you want to be assured of getting LT secured, the only place you can do that through the could be very well be 2026 1st round.     For me, I would like to err on the side of caution.  Cover for these outcomes. It wouldn’t be fun. Added benefit is if we do have a tackle go down this year we will have a guy there. Because I don’t know what we have now.  
    • I agree. In a perfect world I wouldn’t want to draft another WR, but in this draft it’s fine based on the value of who will be there at #19.  All of the top tier guys worth pick #19 at other positions of need will be long gone. Only exception is Dillon Thieneman, but he’s almost a shoe in for the Vikings as the Harrison Smith replacement. Some posters on here want to draft an OT just to check a box without realizing the concerns and risk that comes along with said player. Sounds like XL to me… desperately drafting need… KC is a pretty safe player.  Produced all 3 years in college and last year in the SEC vs a lot of top corners in this years draft. He single handily dropped the South Carolina CB Brandon Cisse’s draft stock with how bad he abused him.   Sometimes it’s best to try and hit a double instead of going for the home run. This draft screams “go for the double”. Esp in the first. 
    • Look at what the Bears have done with Caleb Williams, drafting playmaking WR's and TE's and making it easier for him to operate the offense. Conception is perfect for what the offense needs (speed and someone who can make defenders miss) and as today, April 11th, I think he's the pick @19 
×
×
  • Create New...