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!

     

Josh Norris will be on WFNZ at 910


Ruff

Recommended Posts

I see almost a perfect situation at Dline right now.

1. 2 young Stars in there prime.

2. Young developing talent behind them.

3. Surrounded by young talent at DT and Lb.

I wouldn't understand adding another player to that when there are other abundantly evident holes on the team.

If they didn't tag Hardy and filled the other holes with his money then I could see this as a option.

 

But it is HIGHLY unlikely that both CJ and Hardy will be with us after this year.....that is the part that you just cannot comprehend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But it is HIGHLY unlikely that both CJ and Hardy will be with us after this year.....that is the part that you just cannot comprehend.

But like I said I'd rather put more faith in the Young De already on our roster and our development system plus another draft next year. Then drafting a player now.

With the situation we have at OT, WR, and secondary. I'd rather take the gamble that Addison Alexander Horton or Roe can develop. Specially with the guy we would still have around them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one on this board is suggesting that we take the DE if he has the same value as a position of need such as WR or OT. We are only suggesting that we take the DE if he has a noticeably higher value than the WR and OT, in other words BPA.

I understand the reaction "so are you saying that you would take a QB, RB, or MLB if they were BPA? Not necessarily and here's why: a backup QB sees 0 snaps a game unless the starter is injured.

The backup MLB sees 0 snaps, may play special teams. And as far as RB's go, nowadays, no one should be taking them in the first round anyway.

When you reach for need you can setup yourself for drafting a bust. I have no way of knowing this for sure but those years in which we took a receiver in the second round (Colbert, Jarrett) I think we were reaching for need in both instances and both times it didn't work out.

I'm not saying if u reach for a need position you're going to draft a bust, that's silly, I'm just saying that it's a higher chance of drafting a bust.

This is what happens: the GM knows his team has a huge hole at WR. As he watches film on the WR's he starts to overemphasize the players strengths and ignore their flaws. Why? Because he had such a need at that position.

To a hungry man any bitter thing is sweet.

You don't draft hungry, you draft full.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one on this board is suggesting that we take the DE if he has the same value as a position of need such as WR or OT. We are only suggesting that we take the DE if he has a noticeably higher value than the WR and OT, in other words BPA.

I understand the reaction "so are you saying that you would take a QB, RB, or MLB if they were BPA? Not necessarily and here's why: a backup QB sees 0 snaps a game unless the starter is injured.

The backup MLB sees 0 snaps, may play special teams. And as far as RB's go, nowadays, no one should be taking them in the first round anyway.

When you reach for need you can setup yourself for drafting a bust. I have no way of knowing this for sure but those years in which we took a receiver in the second round (Colbert, Jarrett) I think we were reaching for need in both instances and both times it didn't work out.

I'm not saying if u reach for a need position you're going to draft a bust, that's silly, I'm just saying that it's a higher chance of drafting a bust.

This is what happens: the GM knows his team has a huge hole at WR. As he watches film on the WR's he starts to overemphasize the players strengths and ignore their flaws. Why? Because he had such a need at that position.

To a hungry man any bitter thing is sweet.

You don't draft hungry, you draft full.

There is no guarantee that a 1st De beats out the guys who are already in the system. So he could be at 0 snaps as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gman has brought in enough good players to fill need. We can compete with what we have. He will draft the highest graded player at the draft. This May sting to some of you but, that being said. Watch what he drafts.... DE are like OL they usually take a few years to get good. But when you draft for the future you do not draft for need now!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's also make the point that whoever we can get at 28 isn't Clowney. This isn't a once in a decade talent you can't pass up. If Cj is gone next season. There will be similar DE'S in the draft next year. I'd rather see another year of our young DE'S and still have another draft available De's. Then to take 1 this year. Specially with the situation on offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's also make the point that whoever we can get at 28 isn't Clowney. This isn't a once in a decade talent you can't pass up. If Cj is gone next season. There will be similar DE'S in the draft next year. I'd rather see another year of our young DE'S and still have another draft available De's. Then to take 1 this year. Specially with the situation on offense.

 

No, you cannot make that point.

 

Charles Johnson and Greg Hardy say HELLO....from the 3rd and 6th rounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Explain to me how is it different? ?

You have just as much money young talent and depth at the DE position as you do at RB, And Dt.

You have young stars at DE just like MLB and QB.

So explain the difference.

Our QB will be with the team for the next 10-15 years. Our MLB for the next 10. RB's are a dime a dozen and can be had whenever or signed via FA for peanuts to fill a need.

You people keep taking the BPA concept and attempt to break it down to its most literal sense in order to discredit it as a draft method. In spite of any of the incoherent ramblings of most people that do this, I truly believe you all are a hell of a lot smarter than you lead on.

You can't with any semblance of an IQ think taking Johnny Manziel at 28 is the exact same as taking Kony Ealy. Or that taking Carlos Hyde in the 2nd is the same as taking someone like Dee Ford even though our linebackers are studs.

The reality we have one stud defensive end signed to a huge contract that we could save a lot of money by cutting, and another that we are only guaranteed to have for a year. So drafting a DE in the first gives our FO a lot of flexibility for the future as far as which way they want to go with potentially $25MM+ in cap allocations.

If we have the following 3 guys on the teams big board all available at 28 when we pick, it should be obvious to anyone which one they will go with. Say we have Johnny Football at 25, Blake Bortles at 26, and Kony Ealy at 27, even though the other two are technically one spot or two higher, the FO would still go with Ealy.

BPA doesn't necessarily mean to a T the highest rated guy on your board. It can mean not reaching for a guy that plays WR that you have rated in the early 3rd, and takin him at 28 overall simply because all the other WR you like were taken and you really need a WR.

That's what some of you are missing the point on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no guarantee that a 1st De beats out the guys who are already in the system. So he could be at 0 snaps as well.

You are 100% correct, but what if the WR we draft can't beat out Underwood or McNutt, you never know that's why it's always smart to go BPA.

All that being said I get the feeling with amount of WR available one will be BPA at 28. The fact of the matter is 1st round prospects grades aren't that far apart. I think those pining for a wideout, including myself, will be happy come draft night

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember the same argument being made to not draft Kuechly.

I lead the fuging argument against picking Kuechly. I told everyone that would listen that we had an All-Pro MLB why the fug would we draft a MLB, I don't care how good the kid is. When we drafted Kuechly I was at my Lake Tahoe house on my laptop in the draft chat room and was raging and making snarky comments for a couple hours.

That right there showed me that if a player is head and shoulders better than the other guys on your board, you draft him and figure it out as far as how he fits on your team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I lead the fuging argument against picking Kuechly. I told everyone that would listen that we had an All-Pro MLB why the fug would we draft a MLB, I don't care how good the kid is. When we drafted Kuechly I was at my Lake Tahoe house on my laptop in the draft chat room and was raging and making snarky comments for a couple hours.

That right there showed me that if a player is head and shoulders better than the other guys on your board, you draft him and figure it out as far as how he fits on your team.

 

 

Yeah I remember arguing with you because Kuechly was the one player I wanted. Fun times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, you cannot make that point.

Charles Johnson and Greg Hardy say HELLO....from the 3rd and 6th rounds.

Do we not have players with similar backgrounds already on the or can't we not get them next year? When hopefully the WR'S or Oline or Secondary is in better shape.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Would Morgan or Beason have been HOFers' if injuries hadn't derailed their careers?  I was not a close watcher of the game when Morgan was in his prime but I thought Beason had a few seasons at close to Lukes' level of play.
    • Franchise QBs feast when things are rolling and the tide that raises boats when things are going sideways.  Bryce isn't that. He's a complimentary player, that's it.  When the defense and STs are on point, he plays loose and it shows.  When we are in a dog fight and things haven't gone our way, he struggles.  It's that simple. He's not a horrible QB, but he's not top tier either.  So the question begs, is this worthy of a second contract?  The answer should be no.  It definitely is my answer. Bryce will never be a QB that can produce wins largely on his arm.  That's a FRANCHISE QB, any other QB is simply a placeholder at the starter's position until that guy can be found.   At some point the excuses of lack of weapons will be a straw man.  Heck, it's nearly there now.  I mean if he doesn't look even better than last year will we blame it on the TE position?  'Well if Bryce only had a player like Kelce, Kittle or Gronk on this team...'  Are we really going to do that?  
    • When I arrived at college, I was 18, not too much younger than some of these draft picks.  It was not a huge school, but there were guys on the team who were 21, 22, 23....playing ahead of me.  I was seventh on the depth chart.  Those guys have been through a few seasons, were stronger, more knowledgeable.  I was a better raw player than some of them, but those other factors matter.  As I grew stronger, more familiar with the playbook, and learned what it was like to play in college, I gradually improved and with that, I rose up the depth chart.  It took most of my freshman year for the light to come on.  Had the coach thrown me into the starting lineup day 1, I would have probably failed.    And that was college.  So I agree with you based on my experience on a much lower level.  Frankly, I think that is why so many kids drafted to fill huge gaps bust.  The teams are desperate.  Anyone who looks to fill vacancies in the starting lineup through the draft is desperate.  You draft depth to develop.  For this reason, I say, "Let Walker start for a while."  Maybe Brazzell can be our WR 4.  Throw Hunter into a rotation and ask him to do one or two things.  Freeling needs some strength and he needs to work on run blocking.
×
×
  • Create New...