So does hiring of Fred Graves have a ripple effect on draft day?

[bleys]

but I just don't see how the FO can get around not taking either Fairley or Dareus.

by drafting a 5 year vet by the name of Cofield... who is proven.

[Jackofalltrades]

by drafting a 5 year vet by the name of Cofield... who is proven.

What about the other DT spot?

Why not Coefield and Fairley?

I'm a firm believer in the trenches, that's where games are won and lost. Own the LOS, own the game. It was our philosophy in '03 and it's a time tested way to win.

[House]

by drafting a 5 year vet by the name of Cofield... who is proven.

That sounds great! On paper. The reality is this, Cofield would be 27 when the season started, as long as there is no lockout. That gives you possibly 5 years of a sustained level of play that is above average. Dareus or Fairley could give you 10+.

(I am not taking into acount a wash factor because Green and Peterson have as good of a chance to not live up to hype because of thier postions as Fairley or Dareus.)

The second issue is that you have to convince Cofield that he wants to play here. Yeah, its a new and exciting coaching staff full of defensive gurus but we went 2-14 last year. I know that the Panthers have a ton of $$$$$ but to some of these guys money does not rule the day.

Make a million more year on a loser or be on a constant contender still making bank? Get tons of recognition in a big market on a winner or possibly die in obscurity on a small market loser?

It could be harder than some people realize to get some of the FA that you all seem to think are going to be here next year. Yeah, the money is available but the FO is going to have to overpay to get guys in here. As they have already stated that they want to BUILD through the draft, that to me means that FA will be picked up but they are not going to go out and overspend to get big names on the team.

Even if we do get Cofield, the draft comes first this year most likely. So do you not take a position of need in hopes that the FA you want will be there later on? I just don't see it.

[Baschski]

warning: not directed towards everyone...

there are very possible FA's at DT... the CBA isn't going to change that.. our desire to get them will.

IF that desire is there, Cofield is a very real possibility.. we can even bring in Abrayo(sp?) Franklin as a lower teir guy, and draft another DT later in the draft.. Add in Landri and we have just solved our entire DT problem.

with that said, Peterson is more of a positional need. no real CB solutions in FA, but we could get a CB later in the draft.. Munnerlyn can hold us over very well, especially with our now improved pass rush.

So if you guys complaining about team need want to keep bitching about that while TOTALLY IGNORING DT's in FA.. you now have a bigger obstacle in your way for grabbing Fairley..

but continue to read...

I fully expect the people talking about "WR makes no sense" have no understanding about what we actually have and what Green does to improve that. Yes, Gettis and LaFell did well last year. Yes, they should improve. No, that doesn't guarantee that either can take over a game, and you need that to demand a double team. Smitty may demand that one more year, but adding Green with his talent will ensure Gettis and LaFell are in single coverage.

is Green a sure thing? No.. but neither is Fairley.. so stfu..

To use the excuse "we don't have anyone to throw the ball" is the dumbest poo I've ever heard.. you don't wait until you have a QB to fill holes on the team. you plan ahead of time so that when you have a QB, the pieces are in place.

Add a TE through FA, and we are now an explosive offense waiting on a QB..

AND ALL THE HOLES IN OUR DEFENSE ARE FILLED....

/thread

/topic over and done with..

does that mean Green is a sure lock at #1? No.. absolutely not. hell it may not happen.. neither you, nor I, can predict the future.. but what I am laying out, is none of your dumb logic makes more sense than what I just laid out as possibilities..

There are a lot of "if's" in your argument. Why gamble on signing free agents who may or may not be affordable and may or may not want to play here when we could pick up a stud DT at #1?

[Snake]

What about the other DT spot?

Why not Coefield and Fairley?

I'm a firm believer in the trenches, that's where games are won and lost. Own the LOS, own the game. It was our philosophy in '03 and it's a time tested way to win.

Much rather have Cullen Jenkins then Fairley. He can play DT and DE and he prob would be Cheaper. Add to the fact that he has played in both 4-3 and 3-4 sets with success and he could be a great pick up.

[Davis83]

Well as we used 3 picks at WR last year (counting AE). I don't see us using #1 for a WR. Barring a suprise offer to trade down (which I'd be in favor of) -

I'd say the #1 will be on the D side of the line.

Rd 2 (if we get a trade) = DB

Rd 3 OL

Rd 4 TE

Rd 5 QB

Rd 6 DL

Rd 7 OL

[bleys]

What about the other DT spot?

Why not Coefield and Fairley?

I'm a firm believer in the trenches, that's where games are won and lost. Own the LOS, own the game. It was our philosophy in '03 and it's a time tested way to win.

why not Green, Cofield, and Abrayo Franklin.. with a DT drafted in the 3rd or next year to coach up?

With Rivera being brought in with his proven talents and his desire to bring in coaches to coach up our players.. I think there are a lot of options..

With Smitty being closer to Hines Ward than not in 2 years and Gettis & LaFell likely to be #2 receivers at best.. we now have a dynamic offense, add in a TE, and both defense and offense have been addressed most efficiently.

some people like to think Gettis & LaFell are sufficient, with Smitty.. but if they don't command double teams in 2 years, what then? we passed on Green because we took Fairley when we could do just as well with the above mentioned?

you can get good penetration from a solid DT.. you can't always find a game changing receiver..

personally, and it's JMO, but I could do more with the former than the latter.. add in that our coaching staff should be doing a MUCH better job coaching up prospects and scheming around players than in the past..

you can get away with that on defense, but there's nothing that makes up for a real threat on offense with other solid receivers around him..

That sounds great! On paper. The reality is this, Cofield would be 27 when the season started, as long as there is no lockout. That gives you possibly 5 years of a sustained level of play that is above average. Dareus or Fairley could give you 10+.

(I am not taking into acount a wash factor because Green and Peterson have as good of a chance to not live up to hype because of thier postions as Fairley or Dareus.)

The second issue is that you have to convince Cofield that he wants to play here. Yeah, its a new and exciting coaching staff full of defensive gurus but we went 2-14 last year. I know that the Panthers have a ton of $$$$$ but to some of these guys money does not rule the day.

Make a million more year on a loser or be on a constant contender still making bank? Get tons of recognition in a big market on a winner or possibly die in obscurity on a small market loser?

It could be harder than some people realize to get some of the FA that you all seem to think are going to be here next year. Yeah, the money is available but the FO is going to have to overpay to get guys in here. As they have already stated that they want to BUILD through the draft, that to me means that FA will be picked up but they are not going to go out and overspend to get big names on the team.

Even if we do get Cofield, the draft comes first this year most likely. So do you not take a position of need in hopes that the FA you want will be there later on? I just don't see it.

1) you're not associated in any way with the NFL.. anything you write is only tested on paper.. and anything you write is generally rubbish because you're just a fan with no real football experience to talk about.. unless you played at the HS level or for a small college.. which then you can't act like you're NFL savvy.. don't give me that bulls.hit..

2) our HC is one of the best defensive minds in the game right now.. players will want to play for the guy, you see the staff we've brought in.. yes, they are untested, but they are all solid coaches at their respective positions.. and most have moved laterally, showing you Rivera has some reach...

3) our 2-14 team is loaded with talent.. only bandwagon fans who call for a QB's head because he didn't throw a TD on every drive would find your point a valid argument.. Our only missing hole is a QB, DT, and CB.. If you're NFL caliber DT who just had a great year has any kind of competitive spirit, he will want to be the man, as he'll be expected to be the man. CB, if any position, should be your main concern with other options available elsewhere as I mentioned above.

4) yes, you do go for a guy at WR with the talent Green offers.. you can bring in solid DT play. I will say you can mask that much more easily, but I'm sure you all will run with that assuming I mean you can plug in just any DT and it'll be fine. that's not what I mean.. Fairley can be found later in the rounds, and in 5 years, we'll have groomed our next guy to take over.. It's not so easy to do that with a talent like Green. since he's there, I would take him first..

There are a lot of "if's" in your argument. Why gamble on signing free agents who may or may not be affordable and may or may not want to play here when we could pick up a stud DT at #1?

if you believe Fairley is the end all, be all, and is a must have to draft, then so be it..

but to act like Fairley isn't a huge "what if" is a joke, and therefore, you're not really saying anything about my point that doesn't apply to yours..

when it comes down to it, neither you nor I are ANYTHING close to NFL scouts or coaches..

so excuse me if we don't act like we are.. like the guy mentioned above, this is all on paper.. with what we DO know and what we can try to foreshadow, everything is nothing more than a "what if"...

unless you personally go ask Cofield how he feels and you personally go talk to all FO's about their interest in Cofield, what we can discuss is that the Giants have used a lot of cap space towards their DLine and we can make a legit grab at him.. what we can discuss is that drafting a DT in the 3rd is a legit possibility.. what we can discuss is next year will be another year we can grab a DT and coach him up, which our coaches are expected to do..

unless you personally go watch Fairley and have experiences scouting players and not just on a forum calling TV recordings "game tape" (not that you have, but that's all anyone does have, and a lot of people actually do lol).. then all we are talking about is "what ifs"...

let me ask you this.. if we get Cofield and Aubrayo Franklin, then drafted a DT in the 3rd round.. would you take Green with your #1 overall? or would you rather scratch all that and draft Fairley?

[Icege]

Ugh... there's so many options right now. CBA is the huge hurdle that has to be cleared first. Once that is done, we'll have a better idea of what the team is working with. A rookie pay scale will make trading down easier since there will be actual monetary value associated with it.

If the team could pick up Cofield and Franklin, that'd be great. I'd be happy with one, though that Cofield pick up is looking like it might have some legs to it.

First and foremost, I'd want to trade down. If that ends up not being an option, then I'd still take Fairley. Unless both Cofield & Franklin end up on the roster next season, then I'd be all about picking up somebody in the 3rd to coach up. Still, trade down is my first move. People can say what they want about it not happening, but if there's anything that we've learned this season, nothing is certain

[MaineManPanther]

why not Green, Cofield, and Abrayo Franklin.. with a DT drafted in the 3rd or next year to coach up?

With Rivera being brought in with his proven talents and his desire to bring in coaches to coach up our players.. I think there are a lot of options..

With Smitty being closer to Hines Ward than not in 2 years and Gettis & LaFell likely to be #2 receivers at best.. we now have a dynamic offense, add in a TE, and both defense and offense have been addressed most efficiently.

some people like to think Gettis & LaFell are sufficient, with Smitty.. but if they don't command double teams in 2 years, what then? we passed on Green because we took Fairley when we could do just as well with the above mentioned?

you can get good penetration from a solid DT.. you can't always find a game changing receiver..

personally, and it's JMO, but I could do more with the former than the latter.. add in that our coaching staff should be doing a MUCH better job coaching up prospects and scheming around players than in the past..

you can get away with that on defense, but there's nothing that makes up for a real threat on offense with other solid receivers around him..

1) you're not associated in any way with the NFL.. anything you write is only tested on paper.. and anything you write is generally rubbish because you're just a fan with no real football experience to talk about.. unless you played at the HS level or for a small college.. which then you can't act like you're NFL savvy.. don't give me that bulls.hit..

2) our HC is one of the best defensive minds in the game right now.. players will want to play for the guy, you see the staff we've brought in.. yes, they are untested, but they are all solid coaches at their respective positions.. and most have moved laterally, showing you Rivera has some reach...

3) our 2-14 team is loaded with talent.. only bandwagon fans who call for a QB's head because he didn't throw a TD on every drive would find your point a valid argument.. Our only missing hole is a QB, DT, and CB.. If you're NFL caliber DT who just had a great year has any kind of competitive spirit, he will want to be the man, as he'll be expected to be the man. CB, if any position, should be your main concern with other options available elsewhere as I mentioned above.

4) yes, you do go for a guy at WR with the talent Green offers.. you can bring in solid DT play. I will say you can mask that much more easily, but I'm sure you all will run with that assuming I mean you can plug in just any DT and it'll be fine. that's not what I mean.. Fairley can be found later in the rounds, and in 5 years, we'll have groomed our next guy to take over.. It's not so easy to do that with a talent like Green. since he's there, I would take him first..

if you believe Fairley is the end all, be all, and is a must have to draft, then so be it..

but to act like Fairley isn't a huge "what if" is a joke, and therefore, you're not really saying anything about my point that doesn't apply to yours..

when it comes down to it, neither you nor I are ANYTHING close to NFL scouts or coaches..

so excuse me if we don't act like we are.. like the guy mentioned above, this is all on paper.. with what we DO know and what we can try to foreshadow, everything is nothing more than a "what if"...

unless you personally go ask Cofield how he feels and you personally go talk to all FO's about their interest in Cofield, what we can discuss is that the Giants have used a lot of cap space towards their DLine and we can make a legit grab at him.. what we can discuss is that drafting a DT in the 3rd is a legit possibility.. what we can discuss is next year will be another year we can grab a DT and coach him up, which our coaches are expected to do..

unless you personally go watch Fairley and have experiences scouting players and not just on a forum calling TV recordings "game tape" (not that you have, but that's all anyone does have, and a lot of people actually do lol).. then all we are talking about is "what ifs"...

let me ask you this.. if we get Cofield and Aubrayo Franklin, then drafted a DT in the 3rd round.. would you take Green with your #1 overall? or would you rather scratch all that and draft Fairley?

If we can get a top DT FA as per your argument, then why not a FA Wr? Rice, Jackson, etc are all avaible.

[Baschski]

let me ask you this.. if we get Cofield and Aubrayo Franklin, then drafted a DT in the 3rd round.. would you take Green with your #1 overall? or would you rather scratch all that and draft Fairley?

Actually no. If we addressed DT the way you just proposed, I would be calling for us to draft Patrick Peterson. He is just as legit a talent at CB as Green is at WR and we have more need at the CB position than at WR. The point is, I don't think WR is high on our priority list. It was last year and we addressed it with two very promising receivers in Lafell and Gettis. You can argue that Green is a BPA kinda guy and that you don't pass up talent like that, but I and most other people here would argue that guys like Fairley and Peterson are on Green's level in terms of talent. Disregarding my preference for Fairley or Peterson, I just can't see the FO taking a WR #1 overall after spending three draft picks on WR's last year.

[pantherj]

You won't find WRs with Green's elite ability floating around in FA, and if you do they will be incredibly expensive. In addition, there is a huge drop off in WR talent between Green and the lower round WRs. Not so with Fairley, we can easily pick up a DT with similar abilty lower in the draft, or buy a similar FA without breaking the bank. Green is the pick imo.

[MaineManPanther]

You won't find WRs with Green's elite ability floating around in FA, and if you do they will be incredibly expensive. In addition, there is a huge drop off in WR talent between Green and the lower round WRs. Not so with Fairley, we can easily pick up a DT with similar abilty lower in the draft, or buy a similar FA without breaking the bank. Green is the pick imo.

The same with FA DT's, not alot and the ones that are will be a hefty price.

You could also say the same for the Draft. Im sure there are talented DT's later on, but we won't have a pick till the third. They will not be quite as talented as Fairley could be.

[Baschski]

Also there are a lot more "what if's" in saying "IF Cofield, etc. can be signed to reasonable contracts IF they even want to play with us and IF the coaching staff can properly develop young DT's and IF we can get a quality DT in the third round (Corvey Irvin?) and IF we can accommodate deficiencies at DT then we don't need to draft Fairley" than saying "DT will improve if Fairley turns out to be half the player he's projected to be."

[pantherj]

The same with FA DT's, not alot and the one that are will be a heft price.

You could also say the same for the Draft. Im sure there are talented DT's later on, but we won't have a pick till the third. They will not be quite as talented as Fairley could be.

If we're going with DT, then I'd much rather try to trade down and get 2 DTs. Imo Green would be the only reason to pick #1 overall.