|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
Yeah, great ... Brady Quinn .... and we have the 22nd pick ....... so what if Tannehill slides ....... do we risk another QB bust at 22? 
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
Quote:
I agree that #4 is too high for Tannihill but I can't imagine him making it past the Dolphins...
That's what everyone said about Brady Quinn too ... 
so the Dolphins are taking Kendall Wright?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,513
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,513 |
Quote:
Quote:
I agree that #4 is too high for Tannihill but I can't imagine him making it past the Dolphins...
That's what everyone said about Brady Quinn too ...
What that the dolphins wouldn't pass him up?
I honestly don't remember...
but I will say that I'll be extremely surprised if he falls past 8... we'll see... i think that's too high as well personally but with his old coach being there and they are in desperate need for a QB I see that as their pick. We'll see. Find out Thursday 
<><
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,513
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,513 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I agree that #4 is too high for Tannihill but I can't imagine him making it past the Dolphins...
That's what everyone said about Brady Quinn too ...
so the Dolphins are taking Kendall Wright?
Sure hoping he drops to 22 
<><
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556 |
Mooch working with Tannehill was interesting yesterday. The kid is raw but very coachable. Apparently he spent the day working with mooch so guess we will have another report on him to work with. I am a junky when it comes to seeing these high quality coaches work with the kids even if it was just refining his technique in the playaction fakes and handoffs.
Anyway with Tannehill spending the day working with Mooch, will be working out with us and spent Sat-Mon visiting the Browns, we should know everything we need to know.
I believe we have Richardson, Tannehill and Blackmon ranked pretty evenly. I thought it was interesting with Heckert talking about the 3 backs they have ranked highest could all run, catch and Block. That is important, depth and positional value. Receiver is also really loaded and we can get a starter later but you can tell Heckert really likes Blackmon a lot.
It is a very tough call. Heckert seemed irritated when asked about Tannehill not being able to start (about like me arguing with YTown and toad on whether he starts day 1) but he also lights up when discussing Blackmon.
I know most of the mocks show Richardson but I would not be surprised if our choice isn't between Tannehill and Blackmon. Unless he is a great poker player, I would say tannehill or blackmon.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
Mooch working with Tannehill was interesting yesterday. The kid is raw but very coachable. Apparently he spent the day working with mooch so guess we will have another report on him to work with. I am a junky when it comes to seeing these high quality coaches work with the kids even if it was just refining his technique in the playaction fakes and handoffs.
Anyway with Tannehill spending the day working with Mooch, will be working out with us and spent Sat-Mon visiting the Browns, we should know everything we need to know.
I believe we have Richardson, Tannehill and Blackmon ranked pretty evenly. I thought it was interesting with Heckert talking about the 3 backs they have ranked highest could all run, catch and Block. That is important, depth and positional value. Receiver is also really loaded and we can get a starter later but you can tell Heckert really likes Blackmon a lot.
It is a very tough call. Heckert seemed irritated when asked about Tannehill not being able to start (about like me arguing with YTown and toad on whether he starts day 1) but he also lights up when discussing Blackmon.
I know most of the mocks show Richardson but I would not be surprised if our choice isn't between Tannehill and Blackmon. Unless he is a great poker player, I would say tannehill or blackmon.
I tend to agree with you here.
And it fits my best case scenario with our top 3 picks.
One thing that stuck out to me in Heckert's latest presser was when he was asked aboit how he felt about Richardson taking a cancer patient to the prom ... He was quick to point out that Blackmon did as well, even though the question was not about Blackmon.
I just like that he gave some props to him, because of all of the negative 'rumors' that have been floated around and unjustly I would add.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Blackmon and Weeden in the 1st and Adcock on day 3...I called it 3 months ago 
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Except you said adcock in the second round... 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246 |
I think we're going to take Blackmon and Weeden, and then they'll be able to talk fellow Okla. St. alum Barry Sanders out of retirement to play for us. He has to be better than what we've got back there!
I am unfamiliar with this feeling of optimism
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Did I? Pre-injury he was much higher on most lists...after more research he's too raw and just doesn't have the upside to go in the first 2 days...Adcock was the added running gag anyway...I liked and still like the thought of Blackmon+Weeden and instant chemistry
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Quote:
I liked and still like the thought of Blackmon+Weeden and instant chemistry
I liked the concept... I just don't like Weedon's athleticism. Don't like that I saw him fall over dropping back on a shotgun snap. Don't like that he rarely moves around in the pocket. I do think that drafting Blackmon first elevates Weedon's benefit to the Browns at 37... but still not sure that I like the overall value to the team.
I remember people on here complaining about the idea of getting both Griffin and K. Wright because they went to the same school. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246 |
My problem with Weeden is I'm not sure how he is in the face of pressure.
I am unfamiliar with this feeling of optimism
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
actually, he seems to throw pretty well when he knows he's going to get hit (relatively speaking from what I saw) but he doesn't move in the pocket to avoid pressure and certainly isn't going to be extending any plays.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
I've watched everything that I could get my hands on with Weeden, and I'm not very high on him at all. He looked fine when he didn't face pressure, but at the first sign of disruption his passes went all over the grid. His accuracy numbers look better than his actual accuracy would indicate, as he completed passes in "Brady Quinn" windows due to his wide-open offense. He's pretty-much a statue, and his mechanics are wonky, meaning he still looks like a baseball pitcher throwing a football.
When you combine all that with the fact he's going to have to learn how to take snaps from under center and learn an entirely new game of football, well, I don't think there's that much to like about Weeden's chances.
I wouldn't want Weeden any sooner than the 3rd round. Because of his age, he's actually a 4th or 5th rounder in my mind. There's very little difference between he and Chris Weinke. The only REAL difference is the hype and importance of getting a QB, which is driving his stock through the roof.
Here's a scouting report about 28-year old Wienke in 2001. Tell me this isn't exactly what we're seeing about Weeden: Quote:
ANALYSIS
Positives... Outstanding team leader who is called a "coach on the field" by mentor Bobby Bowden...Has good foot speed to drive away from the line after the snap... Plants his feet firmly to deliver a full windup before unloading the pass...Throws the ball with good velocity and has the arm strength to easily reach receivers on deep routes... Patient passer who will step up in the pocket to absorb the hit while waiting for his secondary receivers to get open...Cool field general who lets his teammates know who is boss, under no uncertain terms...Knows how to avoid the rush, showing good escape-ability when pressured.
Negatives... Has accuracy problems throwing on the move...Even though he has the arm to go deep, his receivers generally will have to work hard for the ball on those routes...Needs to improve his timing patterns to prevent receivers from having to adjust and turn constantly on routes...Will tend to overthrow the ball when pressured and forces passes when escaping from the collapsed pocket...Needs to upgrade his touch and accuracy in the short areas...Makes questionable judge- ment calls at times, as he tends to lose awareness for the oncoming defensive linemen...Has to work on increasing his release time, as he tends to wind up like a pitcher before unleashing the long ball...Lack of foot quickness is a concern. - NFLFutures.com
Load him up on youtube and pay attention to when he faces pressure. It's not pretty, not pretty at all.
Weeden will have to come into the league as a 29 year old rookie. He's going to have to learn to take snaps from under center. He's going to have to learn an NFL offense. He's going to have to learn how to read NFL defenses. He's going to have to improve his mechanics and accuracy. And the truly unfortunate part about this is that he's going to have to absolutely have to get all this accomplished right out of the gate or he'll never sniff the field again.
Weinke started right out of the gate. He got 15 starts and looked exactly how you'd expect a rookie to look. He only got a few more starts before he was relegated to backup QB because he was 30 and had a long road to go before he'd be a competent starter. He was out of the league by 2006.
If Weeden doesn't make near-miraculous strides as a rookie, which is highly unlikely because he has more to overcome than Weinke did, his career path is most-likely going to follow that of Weinke. Now tell me that's worth a 1st or 2nd round pick.
I'm not buying the pre-draft hype. To me, he's coming into the league as a 29-year old Derek Anderson. No thanks.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246 |
When Stanford brought pressure against him early in the Fiesta Bowl, he struggled mightily. Now, later in the game it wasn't as bad, but I can't remember if Stanford was still bringing the pressure.
I am unfamiliar with this feeling of optimism
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,513
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,513 |
Toad - have you looked at Moore much from BSU? Just curious your impressions on him... seems like he could be a solid mid rounder. Not saying we'd be looking at him but the kid had a good college career... I know he's not as big as some people want their QB but i like the guy's accuracy.
<><
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Yeah, he's a gamer, but he'll never make it in the pro's. Too small, too weak of an arm...I don't wanna trash the guy, but he's a late-round guy at best, undraftable at the worst. If you're looking for your future, long-term 3rd QB, then maybe you take a flyer on him, but beyond that? He's an afterthought.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Quote:
I've watched everything that I could get my hands on with Weeden, and I'm not very high on him at all. He looked fine when he didn't face pressure, but at the first sign of disruption his passes went all over the grid. His accuracy numbers look better than his actual accuracy would indicate, as he completed passes in "Brady Quinn" windows due to his wide-open offense. He's pretty-much a statue, and his mechanics are wonky, meaning he still looks like a baseball pitcher throwing a football.
When you combine all that with the fact he's going to have to learn how to take snaps from under center and learn an entirely new game of football, well, I don't think there's that much to like about Weeden's chances.
I wouldn't want Weeden any sooner than the 3rd round. Because of his age, he's actually a 4th or 5th rounder in my mind. There's very little difference between he and Chris Weinke. The only REAL difference is the hype and importance of getting a QB, which is driving his stock through the roof.
Most QB's accuracy suffers when faced with pressure. His did, but not nearly as much as a guy like Foles. I saw Weedon hit a number of passes when he was about to get knocked.
For the most part, I agree with you... mobility, draft value, inflated accuracy, zero experience under center, etc. I'm not big on player comparisons, though.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
I don't like Foles either, hehe.
Frankly, there's 3 draftable QB's this year if you want a guy who can possibly become your franchise QB, and only two of those are ready to start right out of the gate. Tannehill is borderline. The rest? Projects who are being pumped up because it's draft frenzy time.
Many don't like comparing players, but with Weeden, you have to compare him to Weinke. Both guys were pitchers who came to the NFL as 29 year old rookies. Both guys are virtually identical in size and athleticism. When you have to project a player who is this old, the best way is to find someone like him, and in the case of Weeden, Weinke is the same guy. Same size, same big arm, same pitching background, same college success. The problem is that after all the hype simmers down, you're faced with a 29 year old rookie who has about 1.5 years to transform into a legit starter, or you're going to start looking for his replacement. It sounds like a good plan now, but once the season starts and the 31-year old QB is still making poor decisions and slowly working his way up the developmental curve, any organization is going to have a damned-hard time sticking to their guns and letting this old QB stand out there and take lumps when it's your ass who is about to be held accountable.
And you've spent a 1st or high 2nd round draft pick on that gamble.
I'm a FIRM "NO" on Weeden as anything but a flyer pick in the mid-to-late rounds. He just doesn't have much of a shot if you ask me.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
What skills does Tannehill have that Osweiler doesn't? He's a little faster, but so what? Osweiler is IMO better in the pocket, has just as strong of an arm, and is at least as accurate.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,229
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,229 |
Quote:
Tannehill, Glenn, Doug Martin, Greg Childs
That is 4 starters and we will still have 9 more picks.
except he also said he expects guys in the first couple rounds to be starters
Hunter + Dart = This is the way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
Guess who had a 70.3 completion pct?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
Pretty much everything under 60% in CFB is trash
that depends on the system that a QB runs. in the shotgun-spread systems, I agree.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
is there another kind in college?
Wisconsin, Stanford... and who?
What did Michigan State run this year?
I guess there's the triple option.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
I don't know and am sure it is a bust but where did I say that a 65%+ is a lock to be a NFL star? I just said that CFB QBs under 60% almost never make it...at least not in today's NFL...I'm sure there's a QB from the 60s or 70s but back then a 55% in the league was gold
Ryan Leaf: 55.4%
Akili Smith: 56.6%
J.Harrington: 54.4%
See a pattern? Where's that sub 60% QB that made it?
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 18
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 18 |
Brett Favre 52.4%
Drew Brees 61%
Matt Ryan 59.9%
Jay Cutler 57.2%
Hail to Pitt!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
Well said. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,229
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,229 |
Quote:
Brett Favre 52.4%
Drew Brees 61%
Matt Ryan 59.9%
Jay Cutler 57.2%
there goes that theroy
Hunter + Dart = This is the way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
I know you didn't say that 65+ would be a lock. I was just busting chops because it was Colt McCoy who had a 70.3 comp pct. BTW, Eli Manning was at 60.8, or .9 above "trash".
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Walterfootball is a good site, but you should read more than just 1
Quote:
Negatives... Has accuracy problems throwing on the move...Even though he has the arm to go deep, his receivers generally will have to work hard for the ball on those routes...Needs to improve his timing patterns to prevent receivers from having to adjust and turn constantly on routes...Will tend to overthrow the ball when pressured and forces passes when escaping from the collapsed pocket...Needs to upgrade his touch and accuracy in the short areas...Makes questionable judge- ment calls at times, as he tends to lose awareness for the oncoming defensive linemen...Has to work on increasing his release time, as he tends to wind up like a pitcher before unleashing the long ball...Lack of foot quickness is a concern. - NFLFutures.com
Quote:
No, it's NOT a good comp: Weinke had a comp % of 58.7 and his best was 61.7
Weeden's is 69.5% and it got better with every season. Weinke's was stagnant
That's one way to look at it.
But here's another. 
Ok, Weinke's comp percentage of 61.3 only went up to 61.7. But what you've failed to note is that his yards per attempt skyrocketed from 8.4 up to 9.7. Furthermore, his average yards per attempt went from 8.1 up to 10.1. That's HUGE.
Weeden, on the other hand, stayed at 8.4 in both his Junior and Senior seasons in yards per attempt, and his average yards per attempt went from 8.6 to 8.7.
So basically, Weeden's comp percentage went up on the same types of passes, while Weinke's comp percentage stayed the same while going much further downfield.
Is that really so much different? Not at all, especially when you consider that the spread Weeden comes from is FAR different than that which Weinke played in. Weinke had 431 attempts his senior year compared to a whopping 564 with Weeden.
So far, they are eerily similar.
Furthermore, Weinke's QB rating got better each year, going from 141 to 147 to 163.
Weeden? 154 to 159.
Both guys got marginally better in TD's thrown (29 and 33 for Weinke, 34 and 37 for Weeden). Weinke's INT's went down from 15 to 11 while Weeden's stayed the same at 13.
So far, both guys are the same size at 6'4. Both guys are the same age, 29-year old rookies. Both guys are immobile. Both guys didn't sense pressure well. Both guys cratered under pressure.
Oh yeah, and the most important stat of all, in which Weinke KILLS Weeden is the following:
Rushing stats, where Weinke rushed for -97 yards while Weeden was horrible with -102 yards on 13 less attempts.  
Weinke is the perfect guy to compare to Weeden. But it's not the stats which are most critical. It's the fact that when a player who comes to the NFL as a 29-year old rookie he absolutely MUST come right out of the gate looking like he's ready. Weeden comes to the NFL out of an offense even less similar to that which Weinke played in. Weinke shows that if a rookie QB comes in and has a typical rookie QB season, he's only going to get a short period of time to produce.
Weeden won't get 3 years to improve if he comes here. He'll get a rookie season and maybe a sophomore season. If he doesn't produce very well right out of the gate, we'll be looking for another high QB, and will have wasted a 1st or 2nd round pick.
I don't like those odds, and neither should the fanbase.
Setting all that aside, who cares about comp percentage out of spread offenses? Colt freakin' McCoy completed more than 70% of his passes. I'd warned people he wasn't that accurate, and in the NFL, he's not.
There's so much more to go on besides comp percentage out of the spread. The stats aren't even the important part of the comparison.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Good find...Favre played CFB in the 80s...he qualifies as an old timer The other 2 are 2nd/3rd tier QBs in this league, don't you think? Going just by stats is a weak correlation game, I'm well aware....but most of the sub 60% guys in the past 20 years have flopped...and that was the original point: Weeden isn't Weinke...not even close and he isn't a 29yo DA (50.7% btw, lol), Weeden has touch and hits his underneath targets
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
is there another kind in college?
Wisconsin, Stanford... and who?
What did Michigan State run this year?
I guess there's the triple option.
yeah, there's the triple-option teams. then there are the spread-option teams like Oregon who aren't true shotgun-spread teams (not that either of those helps here)
then there's the pro-style teams. they are becoming less prevalent but there are still a few out there.
Florida State, Penn State was a hybrid, Michigan State, South Carolina, Georgia (hybrid), Florida(hybrid), A&M (2011), Washington, USC, Rutgers, UConn, Maryland (transitioned into it and it was ugly), North Carolina
wisconsin was a hybrid last year w/ Wilson. Stanford definitely. SD State qualifies too. Michigan might after Denard leaves.
i'm sure there are others but thsoe are the obvious ones IMO.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Oh yeah... that tiny kid at QB that FSU has looks like a good player. Bryn Renner shows promise at UNC, too IMO. Looking forward to watching a lot of Aaron Murray this year.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
I agree completely that he has to come in and be good within his first 2 seasons and I think there's a good chance he can do it....
I also agree tha he is a statue....CleveSteve I think put it best calling him a juggs machine, that's what he is...an old school pocket QB...so what? Mobility is overrated anyways, it's like blocking WRs...QBs have to be good throwing the footbal...everything else is an extra....if we didn't have Thomas and another 1st rounder on the OL I probably wouldn't like Weeden so much for us, but what the heck did we draft those elite pass protectors for again? Put a juggs machine back there, give him 3sec and let him spin it
Weeden is a pure gamble to upgrade a very valuable position of need...Weeden is 1 of those QBs that can go as early as to the Chiefs in the 1st or drop like Colt did all the way to the 3rd/4th area...I really don't care WHERE we pick him: 22, 37, 67 or 100...I think he's worth the gamble...the further down, lesser the "perceived" risk/gamble...in THIS draft it doesn't make a ton of difference going 22, 37 or 67 imho...it really doesn't as most prospects you'll get there are decent ones but not elite
Taking Weeden, we would have to give him at least 10-12 starts...I think that'd be enough with him to see where he's trending....it wouldn't be very fair, but life isn't fair to QBs in this league....Weeden would not stop the FO going QB high again next draft, esp. if drafted outside the 1st round...then again Holmgren's pride wouldn't allow that
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
Oh yeah... that tiny kid at QB that FSU has looks like a good player. Bryn Renner shows promise at UNC, too IMO. Looking forward to watching a lot of Aaron Murray this year.
there's that Price kid at Washington too. he was good enough to beat out a Montana for the starting job
ok, 2nd part sarcastic, but Price is a good QB. alot better of an actual QB than Locker ever was in college (to say the least)
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
Quote:
“Richardson might be the best player in this draft,” Polian continued. “You could argue that. He has very few flaws. And even as nitpicky as we get at this time of year, there’s very little to dislike about him or even very few nits to pick.”
Link
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556 |
I keep getting the feeling that #4 is gonna be in play on draft day and either the Bucs or Rams will want to secure the #4. Another 2nd added in this draft and man we are sitting in great shape. Trade winds are blowing in Berea and it is looking more and more like Glenn is gonna fall to us at 22 as is Doug Martin at 37. Maybe it is time the fates did smile on Cleveland.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
Figured that I might as well post this here: Running backs aren't worth a top-five pick? Trent Richardson is - NFL, NFLDRAFT - CBSSports.com - NFLDraftScout.com http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/story...t-richardson-isThere's an argument to be made that Alabama's Trent Richardson shouldn't be drafted as early as he'll be drafted next week. And it's a compelling argument. In the past decade, only seven running backs have been picked in the top 10 of the NFL Draft -- and just one of them was worth it: Adrian Peterson, who went No. 7 overall in 2007. That's the argument against Trent Richardson. Here's the argument for Trent Richardson: He's better than Adrian Peterson. That's my position, anyway, and I'm never wrong on this sort of thing. Well, I'm not. In my illustrious career here at CBSSports.com (shaddup), I've weighed in on exactly one top-10 draft pick. It was 2006. The pick was Vince Young. I laughed at it, said he wasn't worthy of the No. 3 pick, said a whole lot of other stuff that angered people in Tennessee and Texas. I was right, of course. I was so right, it's almost embarrassing to brag about it. Vince Young would fail? Well, duh -- who couldn't see that one coming? Lots of folks, actually. Back in 2006. Point being, the same sort of fervor will be spoken about Trent Richardson some day, only in the opposite direction, and I want to get out front of that as well. When he's the best running back in the NFL, don't bother saying, "Well, everyone saw that coming." No, everyone didn't. Everyone is saying he's the best running back prospect in 2012, but I'm not seeing a lot of talk that he'll be the best back in the league. What I'm seeing is a lot of debate about whether Trent Richardson is worth going as early as he's going to go. I've seen it on NFL.com, and I've seen it here at CBSSports.com, and that's just the start. It's everywhere, and it's a fascinating concept: In today's NFL, have running backs been so devalued by the passing explosion -- and their careers so compromised by the league's violence -- that they're no longer a value pick early in the first round? It's a great question, but I have an even better answer: He's worth it when he's as good as Trent Richardson. Again, we haven't seen a guy like this since Adrian Peterson. Before him? Marshall Faulk. Then Barry Sanders. That's how far back you have to go to find three more promising running backs, pre-draft, than Trent Richardson. Along the way, of course, other guys have overachieved. Emmitt Smith, the all-time rushing leader, went 17th overall in 1990. Curtis Martin, the No. 4 all-time rusher, was a third-round pick in 1995. Chris Johnson, the only back to reach 2,000 yards in the past eight years, went 24th overall in 2008. Scouts miss on guys. It happens. It isn't happening with Richardson, but still his value is being debated. He looks to be headed to Cleveland with the fourth pick, and if that doesn't happen the Bucs are ready to grab him at No. 5, but the debate rages on: Should he go fourth or fifth? And I say: No -- he should go third. Look, this is a quarterback's league, so Andrew Luck and Robert Griffin III have to go No. 1 and No. 2. A franchise quarterback trumps a superstar running back every time, even this time. But an offensive tackle? No, an offensive tackle doesn't trump Trent Richardson, but that's who the Vikings -- who have Peterson at running back, of course -- are said to be taking with the third overall pick: Southern California tackle Matt Kalil. Which would just be an enormous mistake. Whether they draft Richardson and trade Peterson, or (much more likely) trade the pick for a ransom, the Vikings should do something -- anything -- to avoid being known as the team, years from now, that used the No. 3 draft pick on a non-quarterback other than Trent Richardson. Richardson is special, and not just on the field. He's a special young man, which has nothing to do with his ability to run for 1,500 yards but still has value in a league where public relations are vital. Richardson is unselfish enough to have taken a backseat to Mark Ingram at Alabama even though some people at the time suspected -- and now we know -- that Richardson was the better back. A franchise would be lucky to make Trent Richardson its public face. This is a guy who lost his father and two aunts to cancer, and whose mother is a cancer survivor, so when he heard about a high school senior in nearby Hueytown, Ala., who had beaten cancer -- but didn't have a date to the prom -- Richardson took her to the prom himself. On the field he's special in a different way. Richardson is lineman-strong in the weight room, where he benches 475 pounds and squats 600, and he uses that strength to protect the ball -- no lost fumbles in two years -- and break tackles. He's Adrian Peterson, is what he is, only short, squatter, more powerful. But just as fast. And with better hands. And a better blocker, too. Watch the third run on this video, where he's too strong for the opposing SEC defensive front, and too fast for its secondary. He's a physical freak, is Trent Richardson, but he's a running back -- so the question is, how early should a team draft him? And the answer is: As early as possible. It has been years since the NFL has seen a guy like this. And it'll be years before it sees another.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
Should you draft a running back who is 5'9, 227lbs, rocked up, runs stiff and runs a 4.58 40 at number 4 overall...in 2012???
Ummm.....No.
I desperately want a RB here that...when the seas part and there's a seam in the defense....is capable of going the distance.
He's going to get caught from behind by many outside linebackers and most DBs.
Heck there's even edge rushers that are going to beat him laterally to the outside.
I understand a lot of the love because of the other things he does so very well. But to me he runs stiff and is not a burner. I don't want to use the number 4 overall pick on a guy that has the upside of a Ray Rice or Maurice Jones-Drew.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums The Archives 2013 NFL Season NFL Draft (2013) Heckert: "We'll get one of our top
two guys'' at No. 4
|
|
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/Heldawg/rgiii2.jpg)