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!

     

Who should get the bant stick?

Argus Plexus

By Argus Plexus,
in Huddle Lounge

  

35 members have voted

  1. 1. Who should get bant in the face?

    • Jakob
      11
    • Bwood (again)
      18
    • Bwoods alt
      14
    • Bwoods other alt
      14
    • Douchebag Argus Guy
      128
    • Tru Catz Fan
      11
    • Grammer Hammer Chico
      8
    • Alicejandro
      13
    • Fuging Squirrel
      9
    • Pantherclaw
      3
    • Doyle
      3

Recommended Posts

Lurk ∆ Newbie

Lurk ∆

Posted
Posted

I'm at work like most adults are at this time. Do you have a job? Or do you just sit on the huddle all day?

And I wanted this thread? Go look at your posts you were begging someone to start it for you when I didn't even care and actually suggested it wouldn't be a good idea and that I will get banned regardless.

This is the best thing you have going on tonight, you are stoked for the opportunity to boost your Internet ego even more. I'm glad I could give you this opportunity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • MHS831
      Some homers' opinions of the OTs that we may realistically be able to get at 19

      By MHS831 · Posted

      You could say that-- but if we don't need a starting OT this year, why would you draft a flawed one that is not going to play? (We are coming from different underlying assumptions and perspectives--I see your argument and don't disagree with the premise) Your thinking is based on the assumption that an OT for the future is more important than immediate needs at other positions, or that we can meet other needs in later rounds even if we take the OT in round 1.  I do not think there is but 1 OT worthy of a first-round grade---they are mocked based on need and demand--if we do not have a need for a starter right now, a team at 18 may grab a T that is the 33rd best player--worth it if you have no starting T, but not if you have a starter.  So just because they are mocked around the middle of the first it does not mean that the players are good values--teams get desperate.  QBs are a great example.  Simpson may be worth it in round 1 for the Cardinals, but not the Jets, because they have Geno Smith.  Sure, they will need a QB by next year, but taking Simpson is a reach. I do not see our need, with 2 starters (Walker and Moton) and another possibly returning by the end of the season enough to justify ranking OT over positions like Safety, Will LB--I do not think we replaced A Shawn Robinson (We gonna put a NT out there?  Wharton (280lbs)?  So do we reach in round 1 for a player who may not play much or do we get a Will LB that can cover?  A deep free safety?  A quality center? A playmaking TE?  A DT to replace Robinson?  A wide receiver to balance the secondary?  Long term, if the right player was there, you would be right.  Short term, OT is a luxury at this point, in my view.  
    • strato
      Off-season topic: WWYD? Total Branding Redesign

      By strato · Posted

      Put Huey P Newton on the helmet. With his AK. 
    • csx
      Baldinger on the 2026 LB Class

      By csx · Posted

      We arent switching. Evero is 3-4 to the core. Given how 3-4 has been a noticeable characteristic of top defenses recently and we have drafted and signed players fir it  I dont know why anyone would think that's a good idea 
×
×
  • Create New...