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!

     

Peterson 1, then Marvin Austin in the 3rd.


eViL jEsTeR

Recommended Posts

If Peterson can be a shut down corner, and there is no obvious QB to take with this pick, we should use it to take a dominate player at his position.

Fairley isn't a top 10 DT amongst other NFL DT's but Peterson has a chance to be top 10 (if not top 5) amongst other CB's in the league.

I don't think Marvin Austin, if he's still around, would be a HUGE drop off in talent at the DT spot. Besides, we're still going to suck and get a top 10 pick next year and can get a QB and DT then with 2 top 45 picks next year.

OK. i've made up my mind. can someone please relay to Hurney what I've decided for him to do? Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our D will revolve around the D line, we have a MUCH bigger need there now.

Not denying there is a need, but #1 pick overall and what we need is lower on my list than overall talent. I put Green and Peterson as the best available talent like most scouts do. Nevertheless, I think DT can be fixed in FA. I think Peterson is better long-term talent and with a young team that is important in my opinion. There is not really a bad choice between all three, and not that big of gap in talent; I wouldn't mind if we picked any of them. As for Cam Newton and his lovers, now that I just don't understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would take Peterson 1st, DT through FA and see who is available in the 3rd..

although, there are quite a few options I could point out.. we'll see what our coaching staff and scouting department come up with..

I can raise an argument against each option, most make as much sense as any.. the only difference is no position of our need has more options available in FA than DT.. and you most likely get more production from the get-go..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No point in arguing. This isn't like many drafts where there is a clear #1 overall choice. It is unique in that aspect, but not something that benefits us at #1 overall. Any of the three top players would immensely help us, but I think what people also don't take into consideration is the fact that they could immensely hurt as well. That is my only fear of Fairley. He has the skills but can he prove himself. No one will know until all is said and done. No one is a 'sure thing' but the idea is to get as close as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Keep away from North Winston,  you should be fine. West Winston towards Clemmins is cool. If you're ever at the Peterscreek Walmart, the Pepsi guy is 😎. 
    • Game-winning drives have been credited to QBs since the beginning of time
    • A lot of people have been slobbing all over this last draft but I hate the way that Fitterer/Morgan have built this offense since drafting Bryce. Anyone with eyes knew our IOL was crap but we didn't invest there and instead took project receivers and an injured RB. If you want a lesson in how build for your QB wrong, IMO, this was it. Draft him, protect him, THEN get him weapons. Its pretty much a rule, draft interior linemen, pay tackles. We're paying everyone. We had the opportunity to draft a center instead of Brooks, or perhaps instead of trading up for XL, trade back and take 2 guards/center. We could have paid Lewis and still drafted 2, but Hunt at 100m was just an overpay. And it's not like the guys many of us were begging us to draft were long shots. They're solid starters from day 1. Injuries happen. That's why all your starters can't be high value players. You need rookie contracts mixed in to be able to absorb those inevitable losses on the line. An offensive line playing an entire season together is an abnormality.  Factor into that also paying Moton 44m this offseason with a huge signing bonus when we didnt need to do right now to do him a "solid".  Now we have to sign Icky and possibly Bryce and it's a mess with more money tied up in the offense, inevitable cuts and dead cap coming. That's not even factoring in shifting Corbett to C last year after major injury to start at a position he's never played for an NFL season. It's all stuff that was foreseeable and pretty easily avoided.  The $$ and picks we've spent trying to surround Bryce outside of Tmac (Mitchell and Horn are TBD) have been used inefficiently IMO. Smarter drafting and FA with the line could have let us get more reliable weapons than XL and Sanders in FA. It might not be popular opinion, but I'll take a Bersin with hands that can get 6-8 85% of the time vs a big play XL with greasy fingers.  The part about hitting guys in stride was more about placement, which Bryce has struggled with. Obviously not every route is run to be hit in stride, but they do need to have the ball placed well to give the receivers a chance to do something after the catch. I just used Hill as an example because he's the biggest YAC threat I could think of over the past 5 years.   Receivers can feast on dink and dunk if it's schemed right. But to make it work, that vertical threat has to be there, if not the deep pass then the high speed routes that can spring someone for the huge YAC to keep the safeties from cheating into that 20 yard box all game.  I hope DC and Bryce can keep up what they did in the last game and it isnt just an Atlanta thing. But no matter what, I really want to see some better long term strategy coming from the FO. 
×
×
  • Create New...