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!

     

Jon Beason: Would we have been better off?


Evengelion

Recommended Posts

Suppose we had drafted an OT in 2012 instead of Luke Keuchly, would we have been better as a team right now? No, this is not a Keek bashing by any stretch. The OT that was drafted that year after our pick was Riley Reif by the Lions. Had we drafted him he would probably be playing RT for us, thus our running and passing game would have been better throughout that span.  Instead of Keuchly we would have Beason playing his spot. Having Keek kind of forced us to get rid of Beason thus losing a starting caliber player in Beason. Not saying that Beason would have done the same or a better job but it wouldn't be that far off, especially behind our DL. The tiny edge we get from Keuchly we would probably have gotten an even bigger return from the offense with better protection.

 

Now with Gross retiring all we'd need to do is move him to the LT spot. So this off season we would only be worrying about WRs and secondary and maybe an OT in the later rounds. Right now we have a complete mess.

 

Here is a highlight of Beason's 2013 season. The guy is a beast.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love me some Beason. His is the only ex player jersey I'll still wear. He's a class act, a great leader and a great guy. But no. Kuechly is to LBs what AJ Green was WRs and Clowney is supposed to be to DEs. I was against taking him at first but I was wrong. Guys like this don't come around every year or every couple of years. Kuechly is gonna be the best MLB in the game for a long time and you don't give that up for a JAG at RT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kuechly just won DPOY following his ROY campaign and you ask this poo? Get. Out.

I'm not saying Beason is a better player but he's a 3 time pro bowler so he's no slouch. We subtracted a starting caliber MLB for a starting caliber MLB, and we lost a franchise LT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...