-
Welcome!
Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!
Or simply create a new Huddle account.Â
Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!
Â
-
-
-
-
Topics
-
-
-
-
Posts
-
Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not. He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT. Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool. He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.  I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.  Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1. However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart. Then we traded up for Hunter. We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR. What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III. Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.  After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft. This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases. Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS. As stated, Scott was signed, but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott. So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players. What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them: DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell. Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit. Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans. I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision. I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.  So in this draft, we got -
This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old. -
(1).thumb.gif.c991ead14106875ce4bbb9e20baa4b88.gif)
Thats what I'm thinking or even a 3rd QB
-
-
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.