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

16 hours ago, Brooklyn 3.0 said:

That's the whole thing! The media wanted a feel good story. Like when the camera showed him giving help to the homeless person. They wanted the Malik Willis story to lead ESPN in clicks, etc. Meanwhile, LOTS of kids in the Draft were "good kids with a big heart". Pickett got that quick bit on ... what was it Big Brothers Big Sisters? Then all the kids with immigrant parents got their time in the sun. The media thought they had the biggest story in years with Willis.

Why are you so consumed by this even after the draft? BTW you're about one step away from saying he has a fake smile 🤔

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, frankw said:

Why are you so consumed by this even after the draft? BTW you're about one step away from saying he has a fake smile 🤔

Oh, calm down, Francis.

All he's saying is the media over projected him, leading with his character story, like they often do. 

He had a great story and it maybe carried him a little further with the media. That's all. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Cam's New Arm said:

Oh, calm down, Francis.

All he's saying is the media over projected him, leading with his character story, like they often do. 

He had a great story and it maybe carried him a little further with the media. That's all. lol

We still gotta get you a new username bud it's time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Snake said:

I think he landed in a terrible place for him imo. 

Why so? I think its perfect. tanny cant be the QB forever but hes good enough where Willis wont have to play for 2-3 years. They have a history with mobile qbs and a strong run game foundation. I believe he will show up in the preseason and some one comes calling for a trade before then tho. He could easily net you a 1-2 as trade compensation if all goes well like jimmy G.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, micnificent28 said:

Why so? I think its perfect. tanny cant be the QB forever but hes good enough where Willis wont have to play for 2-3 years. They have a history with mobile qbs and a strong run game foundation. I believe he will show up in the preseason and some one comes calling for a trade before then tho. He could easily net you a 1-2 as trade compensation if all goes well like jimmy G.

 

Tenn also has a reputation for not developing young QBs and prioritising running the ball over getting a WRs to help. We will see but there were better places. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Snake said:

Tenn also has a reputation for not developing young QBs and prioritising running the ball over getting a WRs to help. We will see but there were better places. 

Well for last year they had ah brown and julio that isn't bad at all. Henry doesn't hurt either. I mean ten got Ryan tanny to work as well. Not sure how many qbs mike vabrel himself has failed but we will see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This could say more about the qb market this offseason as well seeing as how many teams don't need a qb. All the Watson moved and qb moment means fewer jobs or reasons to invest. A few team's are sitting with 2 starting caliber qbs they can't offload(jimmy G and baker) there is a surplus.. But don't let facts get in the waY of a good ole I told you so.

Edited by micnificent28
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

    • Even limited as he was I still don't think they have replaced his production, and not just the sack stats. The games Clowney missed it was very obvious what his value still was. Risky move but whatever. They only had 32 sacks last year and if that drops then it's going to get ugly. I see the improvement in run stopping but not in pass protect in any way.  
    • I have zero issues with this.  
    • Sorta related.  I just looked up a stat:  Success rates for NFL draft's second rounders.  I was surprised that it is 49%.  The success rate for first rounders is 58%.   Here success does not mean those that did not bust, it means that roughly half of the players selected in the second round become full-time starters at some point in their careers.  Busts do that too.  However, considering the fact that a first round talent is worth up to 1800 points (first overall pick) more than the first pick of the second round and as low as 350 points (last pick in first round) higher than the last pick in round 2, it seems there could be cases in which it would be to your advantage to trade out of round 1 and draft two or three second rounders for the value.  Of course, the elite players are likely to be gone, and some positions overwhelmingly suck after round 1 (traditionally, like QB or LT, for example), but if you need to find starters at positions like DT, G, LB, S, C, TE, RB, etc, there could be a time when you trade back for more starters.  I was surprised that the margin between rounds 1 and 2 was only 9%.    While I realize that some of you sofa scholars are thinking, "Well duh?  Trading back gives you more players." as you wipe the Cheetos off your shirt.  Not the point.  The point is you have to consider the draft,the needs (and the number of them), and you need to scout the second and third rounds like you do the first, the cap, and the long-term impact.  If you can find 2 players with a 49% chance of becoming a starter, are you better off than drafting one player who has a 58% chance in the long term? So if I traded away my first rounder for two second rounders (a trade most teams would make) regularly, when I got 10 second rounders (by trading 5 first rounders), 5 would be starters.  If I did not trade and kept my 5 first rounders, 3 would be starters.  Furthermore, their rookie contracts would be much cheaper than the 5 first rounders. 
×
×
  • Create New...