***2015 San Diego Chargers - Offseason News, Notes, & Analysis*** (1 Viewer)

[Maurile Tremblay]

Let's pretend that is what defines Telesco. Well, if that's the case he's DRAFTED three starters in two years. Well, since we don't even know if Verrett can hold up to half an NFL season maybe we should say he's drafted 2.33 starters but let's give him the benefit of the doubt. At that rate he'll have a 53 man roster in just under 40 years of drafting.

This is not good math.

First, he already has a 53-man roster. More like a 90-man right roster now, but whatever.

Second, he's drafted three starters per year -- six starters in two years. (Even if you don't count Attaochu or Watt even though they're likely to start this year, that's four starters -- Fluker, Te'o, Allen, Verrett.)

At three starters per year, it will take 7.3 years to fill out a starting squad through the draft, not 40 years -- and that's only if he stays at three per year. There's still time for guys like Ryan Carrethers, Steve Williams, and Tourek Williams to become starters.

And third, of course building through the draft doesn't mean refusing to sign free agents. Telesco has signed a number of important free agents. Just in this one offseason, for example, he signed Jacoby Jones , Orlando Franklin, Jimmy Wilson, Stevie Johnson, King Dunlap, and Brandon Flowers, among others.

To say "let's give him the benefit of the doubt" in the same breath as saying that it will take him 40 years to compile a 53-man roster is a bit silly.

 

[Gr00vus]

As far as "wasting" the franchise tag on Weddle, for it to be wasted on him would imply the Chargers would prefer to use it on someone else. I suppose that could be Rivers, but no one else really comes to mind.

Exactly, and it isn't even close. You can plug a hole at S, you can't just go and find a QB every year. You of all people SUPPOSE they could use the franchise tag on Rivers?!

BTW, I don't think when a guy says he wants a deal to retire with the team he's asking for a deal to run through the age of 33. This is like the fantasy contract where Rivers was going to sign some team friendly deal that would open up a bunch of cap room. It just seems completely unrealistic.

Again, I have always been a fan of Weddle but if he thinks ~$8mil/season is "being disrespected" then he obviously wants a lot more and "retire as" means he wants it to be a long term deal. Unfortunately, the top S contracts out there are 50% guaranteed and does it sound like he wants a top S contract to you? It sure does to me.

Yes he wants a top safety contract. And he deserves it.

In this thread, it seems most fans would be fine with letting the team's best player on offense and defense go rather than pay them their market value. I find this very surprising. They don't have cap problems, they have money to spend.

So instead of spending it on Rivers/Weddle, some fans in here want the team to get rid of them. With a GM who has a philosophy of building through the draft, not through free agency, how is that going to help the team? Who is the Rivers/Weddle money going to be spent on? How is it going to be better used to improve the team than using it on extending those two? Lay out some scenarios that make sense.

I realize Rivers has taken a public stance that he doesn't want to sign an extension, but Weddle has said the opposite.

I don't know exactly who they would spend the money on yet. That doesn't invalidate the notion that it's not a great idea to commit large sums of long term money to guys who are on (or are likely uncomfortably near) the downside of their careers. If Weddle's open to a shorter term deal (I'm thinking 3 years maximum) at his market price, fine. Anything longer term or more money than that and it's time to go a different direction.

Just because you already have cap space is no reason to make bad long term decisions.

I don't believe I advocated making a bad long term decision. I think the right answer is a 3 year extension at market price, as you suggested here. Maybe Weddle won't accept anything but that, in which case I agree with not extending him. But his public comments imply that the team hasn't even been willing to talk to him about an extension.

ETA: If they are going to trade Rivers and draft Mariotta, they should be actively exploring trading Weddle as well. It definitely isn't worth paying Weddle market value to go through a rebuild for 2-3 seasons.

I agree with you on all of this. I imagine they haven't engaged in talks with Weddle because they're waiting to see how the Rivers thing ends up. They're probably thinking the same thing you are in regard to the point of keeping Weddle if they're just going to rebuild after trading Rivers.

 

[BoltBacker]

To say "let's give him the benefit of the doubt" in the same breath as saying that it will take him 40 years to compile a 53-man roster is a bit silly.

True.

The statement was an exaggeration. I think the statement a GM is "going to build through the draft" so the amount of FA $ he has at his disposal is of no consequence is also an exaggeration.

 

[BoltBacker]

As far as "wasting" the franchise tag on Weddle, for it to be wasted on him would imply the Chargers would prefer to use it on someone else. I suppose that could be Rivers, but no one else really comes to mind.

Exactly, and it isn't even close. You can plug a hole at S, you can't just go and find a QB every year. You of all people SUPPOSE they could use the franchise tag on Rivers?!

BTW, I don't think when a guy says he wants a deal to retire with the team he's asking for a deal to run through the age of 33. This is like the fantasy contract where Rivers was going to sign some team friendly deal that would open up a bunch of cap room. It just seems completely unrealistic.

Again, I have always been a fan of Weddle but if he thinks ~$8mil/season is "being disrespected" then he obviously wants a lot more and "retire as" means he wants it to be a long term deal. Unfortunately, the top S contracts out there are 50% guaranteed and does it sound like he wants a top S contract to you? It sure does to me.

Yes he wants a top safety contract. And he deserves it.

In this thread, it seems most fans would be fine with letting the team's best player on offense and defense go rather than pay them their market value. I find this very surprising. They don't have cap problems, they have money to spend.

So instead of spending it on Rivers/Weddle, some fans in here want the team to get rid of them. With a GM who has a philosophy of building through the draft, not through free agency, how is that going to help the team? Who is the Rivers/Weddle money going to be spent on? How is it going to be better used to improve the team than using it on extending those two? Lay out some scenarios that make sense.

I realize Rivers has taken a public stance that he doesn't want to sign an extension, but Weddle has said the opposite.

I don't know exactly who they would spend the money on yet.

Exactly, we have no idea who will be on the market next year.

But as an exercise let's pretend that the Weddle contract had expired at the start of this year instead of next. Let's say Weddle signed somewhere else and SD was forced to use his $10+mil elsewhere. I would have signed...

Searcy(S)$3.7mil(26yo)

Moats(LB)$1.5mil(27yo)

Branch(S)$1.3mil(28yo)

Ridley(RB)$1.3mil(26yo)

Montgomery(C/G)$1mil(32yo)

Would the Chargers be a better team with those five players or Weddle? I think with those five players.

 

[cstu]

Q: Marcus, who are you looking forward to playing with or against the most in the NFL?

Mariota: "Manti Te'o, just because growing up in Hawai'i I could remember him getting recruited out of high school, so it'd be a fun opportunity to either play with or against him."

 

[BoltBacker]

PFF rated Weddle as...

I appreciate the fact that you put a great deal of faith in PFF rankings.

That said, where does PFF rank Brandon Spikes and Lance Briggs?

 

[Tau837]

PFF rated Weddle as...

I appreciate the fact that you put a great deal of faith in PFF rankings.

That said, where does PFF rank Brandon Spikes and Lance Briggs?

Briggs:

2014: +7.6, #10 4-3 OLB

2013: +1.7, #17T 4-3 OLB

2012: +13.0, #4 4-3 OLB

Spikes:

2014: +7.3, #13 ILB

2013: +12.6, #6 ILB

2012: +13.1, #9 ILB


Briggs will turn 35 in November and is a 4-3 OLB. Has he ever played as a 3-4 OLB? Doesn't really seem like a good fit.

Spikes will turn 28 in September and is a ILB, so he would be a better fit. That said, I assume Telesco views Butler and Teo as his starters this year and hopefully longer term, so he presumably wouldn't be offering a starting role. Spikes seems to be viewed as a run stopping role player (i.e., not a 3 down player), so maybe he would accept that kind of role. He grades out as a much better run defender than both Teo and Butler, and, for that matter, actually grades out better than both of them in coverage as well. I would love to see the Chargers sign him.

 

[Tau837]

As far as "wasting" the franchise tag on Weddle, for it to be wasted on him would imply the Chargers would prefer to use it on someone else. I suppose that could be Rivers, but no one else really comes to mind.

Exactly, and it isn't even close. You can plug a hole at S, you can't just go and find a QB every year. You of all people SUPPOSE they could use the franchise tag on Rivers?!

BTW, I don't think when a guy says he wants a deal to retire with the team he's asking for a deal to run through the age of 33. This is like the fantasy contract where Rivers was going to sign some team friendly deal that would open up a bunch of cap room. It just seems completely unrealistic.

Again, I have always been a fan of Weddle but if he thinks ~$8mil/season is "being disrespected" then he obviously wants a lot more and "retire as" means he wants it to be a long term deal. Unfortunately, the top S contracts out there are 50% guaranteed and does it sound like he wants a top S contract to you? It sure does to me.

Yes he wants a top safety contract. And he deserves it.

In this thread, it seems most fans would be fine with letting the team's best player on offense and defense go rather than pay them their market value. I find this very surprising. They don't have cap problems, they have money to spend.

So instead of spending it on Rivers/Weddle, some fans in here want the team to get rid of them. With a GM who has a philosophy of building through the draft, not through free agency, how is that going to help the team? Who is the Rivers/Weddle money going to be spent on? How is it going to be better used to improve the team than using it on extending those two? Lay out some scenarios that make sense.

I realize Rivers has taken a public stance that he doesn't want to sign an extension, but Weddle has said the opposite.

I don't know exactly who they would spend the money on yet.

Exactly, we have no idea who will be on the market next year.

But as an exercise let's pretend that the Weddle contract had expired at the start of this year instead of next. Let's say Weddle signed somewhere else and SD was forced to use his $10+mil elsewhere. I would have signed...

Searcy(S)$3.7mil(26yo)

Moats(LB)$1.5mil(27yo)

Branch(S)$1.3mil(28yo)

Ridley(RB)$1.3mil(26yo)

Montgomery(C/G)$1mil(32yo)

Would the Chargers be a better team with those five players or Weddle? I think with those five players.

I don't, for multiple reasons:

1. The comparison would really be comparing your 5 players above to Weddle and 4 other players who would be on the final roster. So you need to identify which other 4 players you would replace with your group. And in doing that, you need to consider roster makeup.

2. You are saying you prefer Branch as one of the replacement players. He has played 261 total snaps in the past 2 seasons. The last time he graded out among the top 30 safeties was 2011. Are you suggesting you would count on starting him along with Searcy? That's a big downgrade at the safety position either way.

3. Moats has played well, but as a role player. He has never played more than 401 snaps in a season, and that season was 2010. I'm not saying he couldn't be a helpful role player, but you don't give up a 1st team All Pro safety for role players.

4. It isn't/wouldn't have been necessary to give up Weddle in order to sign one or more of these players. The Chargers are sitting on $18M in cap room after having already allocated salary to their rookie draft picks.

Bottom line, you build a better team by adding talent around your 1st team All Pro players, not by getting rid of them.

 

[Gr00vus]

Titans and Chargers have not talked about a Rivers trade.

Seems like Gehlken has been a much more reliable beat reporter than Acee for the last couple of years.

I don't see Rivers getting dealt. Sounds like an extension is more likely.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Thank god

 

[Gr00vus]

Jay Glazer was on the Dan Patrick show this morning, said the Chargers won't be trading Rivers.

 

[BoltBacker]

Jay Glazer was on the Dan Patrick show this morning, said the Chargers won't be trading Rivers.

Pfffft, he's not a local Charger "insider" like Acee! In Acee we trust, no?

 

[BoltBacker]

As far as "wasting" the franchise tag on Weddle, for it to be wasted on him would imply the Chargers would prefer to use it on someone else. I suppose that could be Rivers, but no one else really comes to mind.

Exactly, and it isn't even close. You can plug a hole at S, you can't just go and find a QB every year. You of all people SUPPOSE they could use the franchise tag on Rivers?!

BTW, I don't think when a guy says he wants a deal to retire with the team he's asking for a deal to run through the age of 33. This is like the fantasy contract where Rivers was going to sign some team friendly deal that would open up a bunch of cap room. It just seems completely unrealistic.

Again, I have always been a fan of Weddle but if he thinks ~$8mil/season is "being disrespected" then he obviously wants a lot more and "retire as" means he wants it to be a long term deal. Unfortunately, the top S contracts out there are 50% guaranteed and does it sound like he wants a top S contract to you? It sure does to me.

Yes he wants a top safety contract. And he deserves it.

In this thread, it seems most fans would be fine with letting the team's best player on offense and defense go rather than pay them their market value. I find this very surprising. They don't have cap problems, they have money to spend.

So instead of spending it on Rivers/Weddle, some fans in here want the team to get rid of them. With a GM who has a philosophy of building through the draft, not through free agency, how is that going to help the team? Who is the Rivers/Weddle money going to be spent on? How is it going to be better used to improve the team than using it on extending those two? Lay out some scenarios that make sense.

I realize Rivers has taken a public stance that he doesn't want to sign an extension, but Weddle has said the opposite.

I don't know exactly who they would spend the money on yet.

Exactly, we have no idea who will be on the market next year.

But as an exercise let's pretend that the Weddle contract had expired at the start of this year instead of next. Let's say Weddle signed somewhere else and SD was forced to use his $10+mil elsewhere. I would have signed...

Searcy(S)$3.7mil(26yo)

Moats(LB)$1.5mil(27yo)

Branch(S)$1.3mil(28yo)

Ridley(RB)$1.3mil(26yo)

Montgomery(C/G)$1mil(32yo)

Would the Chargers be a better team with those five players or Weddle? I think with those five players.

I don't, for multiple reasons:

1. The comparison would really be comparing your 5 players above to Weddle and 4 other players who would be on the final roster. So you need to identify which other 4 players you would replace with your group. And in doing that, you need to consider roster makeup.

2. You are saying you prefer Branch as one of the replacement players. He has played 261 total snaps in the past 2 seasons. The last time he graded out among the top 30 safeties was 2011. Are you suggesting you would count on starting him along with Searcy? That's a big downgrade at the safety position either way.

3. Moats has played well, but as a role player. He has never played more than 401 snaps in a season, and that season was 2010. I'm not saying he couldn't be a helpful role player, but you don't give up a 1st team All Pro safety for role players.

4. It isn't/wouldn't have been necessary to give up Weddle in order to sign one or more of these players. The Chargers are sitting on $18M in cap room after having already allocated salary to their rookie draft picks.

Bottom line, you build a better team by adding talent around your 1st team All Pro players, not by getting rid of them.

1. Not really. Ok, so Weddle, Robinson, and three draft picks you wouldn't have to burn on backup LB's and part time RB's. It's kind of the Inman conversation again. Are you really worried about "losing" Robinson??? Is it even worth mentioning, honestly?

2.+3. ??? I guess I'm having trouble following your logic here. You seem completely convinced that Wilson is the solution for SD at SS and that's based on how many SS snaps over the past two years? Wilson is a much bigger unknown than either Moats or Branch at this point.

4. Well, if you want to criticize Telesco for not using his FA $ efficiently I won't argue with you. The question you posed was who would they spend the $ on if they weren't paying Weddle $10+mil. I was just answering your question. Regardless, anyone thinking he's been "disrespected" is addle brained, but that is a quote from Acee I believe... so there's that.

I think the bottom line is Weddle has publicly said he wants to sign an extension to "retire as a Charger". I don't know many 30yo all-pros that think they only have three more years before retiring. You've said you would sign him to a three year extension. So would I. Now if we can just convince HIM to sign a three year extension.

 

[Gr00vus]

Acee changes his tune.

And he still gets it wrong.

If the Chargers want to win in 2015 ...the team’s first-round pick needs to be a running back.

 

[cstu]

Acee changes his tune.

And he still gets it wrong.

If the Chargers want to win in 2015 ...the team’s first-round pick needs to be a running back.

That's rich.

 

[Tau837]

As far as "wasting" the franchise tag on Weddle, for it to be wasted on him would imply the Chargers would prefer to use it on someone else. I suppose that could be Rivers, but no one else really comes to mind.

Exactly, and it isn't even close. You can plug a hole at S, you can't just go and find a QB every year. You of all people SUPPOSE they could use the franchise tag on Rivers?!

BTW, I don't think when a guy says he wants a deal to retire with the team he's asking for a deal to run through the age of 33. This is like the fantasy contract where Rivers was going to sign some team friendly deal that would open up a bunch of cap room. It just seems completely unrealistic.

Again, I have always been a fan of Weddle but if he thinks ~$8mil/season is "being disrespected" then he obviously wants a lot more and "retire as" means he wants it to be a long term deal. Unfortunately, the top S contracts out there are 50% guaranteed and does it sound like he wants a top S contract to you? It sure does to me.

Yes he wants a top safety contract. And he deserves it.

In this thread, it seems most fans would be fine with letting the team's best player on offense and defense go rather than pay them their market value. I find this very surprising. They don't have cap problems, they have money to spend.

So instead of spending it on Rivers/Weddle, some fans in here want the team to get rid of them. With a GM who has a philosophy of building through the draft, not through free agency, how is that going to help the team? Who is the Rivers/Weddle money going to be spent on? How is it going to be better used to improve the team than using it on extending those two? Lay out some scenarios that make sense.

I realize Rivers has taken a public stance that he doesn't want to sign an extension, but Weddle has said the opposite.

I don't know exactly who they would spend the money on yet.

Exactly, we have no idea who will be on the market next year.

But as an exercise let's pretend that the Weddle contract had expired at the start of this year instead of next. Let's say Weddle signed somewhere else and SD was forced to use his $10+mil elsewhere. I would have signed...

Searcy(S)$3.7mil(26yo)

Moats(LB)$1.5mil(27yo)

Branch(S)$1.3mil(28yo)

Ridley(RB)$1.3mil(26yo)

Montgomery(C/G)$1mil(32yo)

Would the Chargers be a better team with those five players or Weddle? I think with those five players.

I don't, for multiple reasons:

1. The comparison would really be comparing your 5 players above to Weddle and 4 other players who would be on the final roster. So you need to identify which other 4 players you would replace with your group. And in doing that, you need to consider roster makeup.

2. You are saying you prefer Branch as one of the replacement players. He has played 261 total snaps in the past 2 seasons. The last time he graded out among the top 30 safeties was 2011. Are you suggesting you would count on starting him along with Searcy? That's a big downgrade at the safety position either way.

3. Moats has played well, but as a role player. He has never played more than 401 snaps in a season, and that season was 2010. I'm not saying he couldn't be a helpful role player, but you don't give up a 1st team All Pro safety for role players.

4. It isn't/wouldn't have been necessary to give up Weddle in order to sign one or more of these players. The Chargers are sitting on $18M in cap room after having already allocated salary to their rookie draft picks.

Bottom line, you build a better team by adding talent around your 1st team All Pro players, not by getting rid of them.

1. Not really. Ok, so Weddle, Robinson, and three draft picks you wouldn't have to burn on backup LB's and part time RB's. It's kind of the Inman conversation again. Are you really worried about "losing" Robinson??? Is it even worth mentioning, honestly?

2.+3. ??? I guess I'm having trouble following your logic here. You seem completely convinced that Wilson is the solution for SD at SS and that's based on how many SS snaps over the past two years? Wilson is a much bigger unknown than either Moats or Branch at this point.

4. Well, if you want to criticize Telesco for not using his FA $ efficiently I won't argue with you. The question you posed was who would they spend the $ on if they weren't paying Weddle $10+mil. I was just answering your question. Regardless, anyone thinking he's been "disrespected" is addle brained, but that is a quote from Acee I believe... so there's that.

I think the bottom line is Weddle has publicly said he wants to sign an extension to "retire as a Charger". I don't know many 30yo all-pros that think they only have three more years before retiring. You've said you would sign him to a three year extension. So would I. Now if we can just convince HIM to sign a three year extension.

1. I'm talking about play on the field. I disagree that your group of 5 would outplay/make a greater impact than Weddle plus whatever others would no longer be on the team.

2-3. I'm not passing any judgment on Wilson being the answer at SS. But your scenario is a bit unrealistic in that Telesco did just sign him to presumably start in that role. So it really wouldn't make sense to replace Weddle with two more safeties, among the others. Beyond that, I think there is virtually no chance that Searcy + Branch will be as good as Weddle + Wilson, so your group would amount to downgrading at safety in order to theoretically upgrade at center and add another couple of role players. I'd prefer that he just use the money he has to upgrade at center and/or elsewhere and/or add role players.

4. Yes, it was a rhetorical question. Sitting on $18M after rookie salaries and with the most talented free agents already signed, IMO it doesn't make sense to let Weddle walk or cut/trade him in order to clear more cap space.

Glad we agree on resigning him if possible.

 

[Tau837]

Hoping for Shelton tonight. If not, I'd be happy with Flowers, Scherff, or Erving, in no particular order.

 

[Gr00vus]

Hoping for Shelton tonight. If not, I'd be happy with Flowers, Scherff, or Erving, in no particular order.

I'll be happy with anything other than an RB, WR or Marriotta.

 

[BoltBacker]

Hoping for Shelton tonight. If not, I'd be happy with Flowers, Scherff, or Erving, in no particular order.

My opinion has shifted slightly but I can certainly live with what you have. First round...

1. Trade down

2. Shelton

3. OL(Scherff, Erving, Peat, Humphries, Flowers)

4. DL(Goldman, Phillips, Brown, Armstead)

.

.

.

.

PK

Punter

RB

Trade up for.... anyone

 

[Bucky86]

Chargers are going to end up in QB purgatory unless we sack up and use a 1st/2nd round pick on a QB SOON.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Todd Gurley - first round

 

[Bucky86]

Todd Gurley - first round

WE'RE SO ####ED

 

[tommyGunZ]

I think many of you underestimate how much better the Chargers offense is with a real threat at RB. If Gurley or Gordon are not busts, the Chargers offense will be a LOT better with them at RB immediately.

 

[Gr00vus]

I think many of you underestimate how much better the Chargers offense is with a real threat at RB. If Gurley or Gordon are not busts, the Chargers offense will be a LOT better with them at RB immediately.

It's an opportunity cost thing. To me, there's much more room for improvement on defense than offense, so if they can land an impact defensive player, they'd contribute more to the overall success of the team than a RB. You want to win a championship, you need some studs on the defensive line. The Chargers have none. You can win a championship with just a guy at running back. If one of the "stud" running backs is there for their pick and there's not a similar talent at a more important position available at the pick to take, they should do everything they can to trade down to someone who wants the RB.

 

[tommyGunZ]

I think many of you underestimate how much better the Chargers offense is with a real threat at RB. If Gurley or Gordon are not busts, the Chargers offense will be a LOT better with them at RB immediately.

It's an opportunity cost thing. To me, there's much more room for improvement on defense than offense, so if they can land an impact defensive player, they'd contribute more to the overall success of the team than a RB. You want to win a championship, you need some studs on the defensive line. The Chargers have none. You can win a championship with just a guy at running back. If one of the "stud" running backs is there for their pick and there's not a similar talent at a more important position available at the pick to take, they should do everything they can to trade down to someone who wants the RB.

It's hard to imagine any defensive player having as much impact as a very good/great RB who touches the ball 300+ times.

I understand the opportunity cost angle, but this offense could be great if there was a legitimate playmaker in the backfield.

 

[Gr00vus]

I think many of you underestimate how much better the Chargers offense is with a real threat at RB. If Gurley or Gordon are not busts, the Chargers offense will be a LOT better with them at RB immediately.

It's an opportunity cost thing. To me, there's much more room for improvement on defense than offense, so if they can land an impact defensive player, they'd contribute more to the overall success of the team than a RB. You want to win a championship, you need some studs on the defensive line. The Chargers have none. You can win a championship with just a guy at running back. If one of the "stud" running backs is there for their pick and there's not a similar talent at a more important position available at the pick to take, they should do everything they can to trade down to someone who wants the RB.

It's hard to imagine any defensive player having as much impact as a very good/great RB who touches the ball 300+ times.

I understand the opportunity cost angle, but this offense could be great if there was a legitimate playmaker in the backfield.

Even if the OL can't run block for ####?

 

[Gr00vus]

I mean, Matthews just left town and you want to try to play that game all over again? No thanks.

 

[cstu]

I mean, Matthews just left town and you want to try to play that game all over again? No thanks.

I made a bad call that year, not doing it again. RB's shouldn't be drafted until the late 1st now.

 

[B Maverick]

http://espn.go.com/blog/san-diego-chargers/post/_/id/10820/chargers-seven-round-mock-draft-2

Eric D. Williams, ESPN San Diego Chargers reporter

SAN DIEGO -- We take a closer look at what players could make sense for the San Diego Chargers with the draft just a few hours away. So here is my seven-round mock draft for the Chargers.

First round, No. 17 pick: Melvin Gordon, 6-1, 215, Wisconsin

My rationale: An explosive playmaker, the Chargers get their every-down running back to replace Ryan Mathews and take pressure off of Philip Rivers.

Second round, No. 48 pick: Shaq Thompson, OLB 6-0, 228, Washington

My rationale: He can play several different positions defensively, giving Chargers defensive coordinator John Pagano some flexibility. San Diego linebackers coach Mike Nolan took him to dinner and attended his pro day. Thompson played in 40 games in his three-year career with the Huskies, finishing with 3.5 sacks, 15 tackles for loss, 16 pass break-ups, five fumble recoveries and five interceptions, including two of them returned for scores.

Third round, No. 83 pick: Brett Hundley, QB 6-3, 226, UCLA

My rationale: Hundley is a project. But he's an athletic freak who throws the deep ball well, is coachable and will learn a lot spending time in the quarterback room with Rivers. The Chargers held a private workout with Hundley, and should have good information from UCLA offensive coordinator Noel Mazzone, who served in that same capacity for Rivers at North Carolina State.

Fourth round, No. 117 pick: Za'Darius Smith, OLB/DE 6-4, 274, Kentucky

My rationale: Still relatively new to football, Smith was productive in college and impressive at the Senior Bowl. He could give the Chargers more juice off the edge as a pass-rusher on third down.

Fifth round, No. 153 pick: Kenny Bell, WR 6-1 200 pounds, Nebraska

My rationale: Bell is a dynamic playmaker with the ability to make things happen after the catch. He can also help in the return game.

Sixth round, No. 192 pick: Jeremiah Potesasi, 6-5, 335, OL Utah

My rationale: Played tackle in college but could move inside and play guard at the next level. He has the ability to develop into a decent run blocker.

 

[tommyGunZ]

I mean, Matthews just left town and you want to try to play that game all over again? No thanks.

I think writing off elite RB prospects due to Mathews being a bust is allowing one mistake to potentially multiply into additional mistakes.

 

[BoltBacker]

http://espn.go.com/blog/san-diego-chargers/post/_/id/10820/chargers-seven-round-mock-draft-2

Eric D. Williams, ESPN San Diego Chargers reporter

Unfortunately, I wouldn't really be shocked by that draft. I count one, maybe two starters out of that mess.

Can all Charger fans agree that the roster Telesco has assembled is so weak from top to bottom that if he can't get FOUR starters in this draft he should be on the hot seat?

Kenny Wiggins

Sean Lissemore

Brandon Oliver

Kendall Reyes

Jimmy Wilson

Chris Watt

Jeremiah Attaochu

Should any of these guys be starters on opening day? They need a lot more than two starters to push some of these guys to the bench.

 

[cstu]

I mean, Matthews just left town and you want to try to play that game all over again? No thanks.

I think writing off elite RB prospects due to Mathews being a bust is allowing one mistake to potentially multiply into additional mistakes.

RB's shouldn't be drafted top 20 anymore. High rate of injury and short career make them not a good investment early.

 

[BoltBacker]

I mean, Matthews just left town and you want to try to play that game all over again? No thanks.

What I don't understand is everyone in the football universe seems to think it's absolutely inconceivable that SD could come out of the first 50 picks without drafting a RB. Almost everyone has SD taking a RB in the first, and if not always a RB in the second round. All this because they lost Matthews.

NE on the other hand lost both their opening day starter in Ridley and Vereen yet NOBODY says NE should be desperate to trade up to the middle of the first round and draft a RB. It's because they have the blocking and system in place to plug and play a RB. There is no reason to chase some RB as a savior to their running game.

Oh, and BTW the SB champions just picked up a starting RB from the waiver wire. That RB was completely undrafted the year SD traded up in the first to draft Matthews.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

I mean, Matthews just left town and you want to try to play that game all over again? No thanks.

What I don't understand is everyone in the football universe seems to think it's absolutely inconceivable that SD could come out of the first 50 picks without drafting a RB. Almost everyone has SD taking a RB in the first, and if not always a RB in the second round. All this because they lost Matthews.

NE on the other hand lost both their opening day starter in Ridley and Vereen yet NOBODY says NE should be desperate to trade up to the middle of the first round and draft a RB. It's because they have the blocking and system in place to plug and play a RB. There is no reason to chase some RB as a savior to their running game.

Oh, and BTW the SB champions just picked up a starting RB from the waiver wire. That RB was completely undrafted the year SD traded up in the first to draft Matthews.

Blount is a headcase with talent

 

[BoltBacker]

I understand the opportunity cost angle, but this offense could be great if there was a legitimate playmaker in the backfield.

And that's the problem. Based on how the interior of the line blocked last year whoever they draft will have to be a playmaker in the backfield because that's where they'll meet the first defensive player. Orlando Franklin was an excellent move but he's one guy. Otherwise this line is the exact same OL that was ranked about #30 last year. I don't see Barry Sanders in this draft. He's the only back I can think of that can run with no blocking in front of him.

If you don't fix the OL not only won't you be able to run but Rivers gets killed(again) and you push that retirement party one year closer.

 

[BoltBacker]

I mean, Matthews just left town and you want to try to play that game all over again? No thanks.

What I don't understand is everyone in the football universe seems to think it's absolutely inconceivable that SD could come out of the first 50 picks without drafting a RB. Almost everyone has SD taking a RB in the first, and if not always a RB in the second round. All this because they lost Matthews.

NE on the other hand lost both their opening day starter in Ridley and Vereen yet NOBODY says NE should be desperate to trade up to the middle of the first round and draft a RB. It's because they have the blocking and system in place to plug and play a RB. There is no reason to chase some RB as a savior to their running game.

Oh, and BTW the SB champions just picked up a starting RB from the waiver wire. That RB was completely undrafted the year SD traded up in the first to draft Matthews.

Blount is a headcase with talent

... and a SB ring. Let's not forget that part. That's significant in this discussion.

 

[tommyGunZ]

http://espn.go.com/blog/san-diego-chargers/post/_/id/10820/chargers-seven-round-mock-draft-2

Eric D. Williams, ESPN San Diego Chargers reporter

Unfortunately, I wouldn't really be shocked by that draft. I count one, maybe two starters out of that mess.

Can all Charger fans agree that the roster Telesco has assembled is so weak from top to bottom that if he can't get FOUR starters in this draft he should be on the hot seat?

Kenny Wiggins

Sean Lissemore

Brandon Oliver

Kendall Reyes

Jimmy Wilson

Chris Watt

Jeremiah Attaochu

Should any of these guys be starters on opening day? They need a lot more than two starters to push some of these guys to the bench.

Watt and Attaochu should absolutely be starters on opening day.

 

[BoltBacker]

http://espn.go.com/blog/san-diego-chargers/post/_/id/10820/chargers-seven-round-mock-draft-2

Eric D. Williams, ESPN San Diego Chargers reporter

Unfortunately, I wouldn't really be shocked by that draft. I count one, maybe two starters out of that mess.

Can all Charger fans agree that the roster Telesco has assembled is so weak from top to bottom that if he can't get FOUR starters in this draft he should be on the hot seat?

Kenny Wiggins

Sean Lissemore

Brandon Oliver

Kendall Reyes

Jimmy Wilson

Chris Watt

Jeremiah Attaochu

Should any of these guys be starters on opening day? They need a lot more than two starters to push some of these guys to the bench.

Watt and Attaochu should absolutely be starters on opening day.

So you think FIVE projected starters shouldn't be starting in the NFL?

Do you think SD should be able to draft FOUR starters in this draft?

 

[BoltBacker]

I mean, Matthews just left town and you want to try to play that game all over again? No thanks.

I think writing off elite RB prospects due to Mathews being a bust is allowing one mistake to potentially multiply into additional mistakes.

... and by "elite" RB prospects you mean the best RB prospect since Adrian Peterson? Because the last guy that was the best RB prospect since Adrian Peterson was named Trent Richardson. Let's not forget that. It wasn't long ago people were going on and on and on about Mark Ingram and he's nothing more than a RBBC back. The "can't miss" elite RB prospect the year after Adrian Peterson was drafted was Darren McFadden. He aspires to be in a RBBC.

 

[BoltBacker]

Todd Gurley - first round

WE'RE SO ####ED

Save it until after we hear, "Well he can play this year but you won't see the REAL Gurley until the 2016 NFL season and he's completely recovered from the knee surgery" and that whooshing sound you hear is yet one more year of Rivers career going down the toilet.

 

[Gr00vus]

I mean, Matthews just left town and you want to try to play that game all over again? No thanks.

I think writing off elite RB prospects due to Mathews being a bust is allowing one mistake to potentially multiply into additional mistakes.

It's not just about Matthews being a bust. It's about seeing how championship teams are built - championship teams don't seem to panic and allocate high draft picks to RB just because they don't have a stud there. They spend those resources in other, more important places.

 

[Tau837]

I think many of you underestimate how much better the Chargers offense is with a real threat at RB. If Gurley or Gordon are not busts, the Chargers offense will be a LOT better with them at RB immediately.

It's an opportunity cost thing. To me, there's much more room for improvement on defense than offense, so if they can land an impact defensive player, they'd contribute more to the overall success of the team than a RB. You want to win a championship, you need some studs on the defensive line. The Chargers have none. You can win a championship with just a guy at running back. If one of the "stud" running backs is there for their pick and there's not a similar talent at a more important position available at the pick to take, they should do everything they can to trade down to someone who wants the RB.

It's hard to imagine any defensive player having as much impact as a very good/great RB who touches the ball 300+ times.

I understand the opportunity cost angle, but this offense could be great if there was a legitimate playmaker in the backfield.

Agree 100% with Groovus. From page 1 of this thread:

On the surface, it appears that the defense fared better, despite dealing with significant injuries of its own. The team finished #9 in yards allowed and tied for #13 in points allowed. However, this is a bit misleading. The team played 8 games against teams in the bottom 9 in offensive yards, which seems to have padded that #9 ranking. This defense really was more of a middle of the pack performing defense at best.

The Chargers were #4 in passing yards allowed, but also faced the 4th fewest passing attempts. So, again, that ranking is misleading. They were #11 in YPA allowed, and tied for #12 in TDs allowed despite the low attempts. The biggest problem is that they finished with just 7 interceptions; only 3 teams had fewer. I'm sure this is related not only to the DBs and cover schemes but also to the lack of an effective pass rush. The Chargers had just 26 sacks; again, only 3 teams had fewer. PFF rated the Chargers pass rush at #25 and their pass coverage at #30. I am concerned that some of the numbers taken out of context will provide a false sense of comfort about the Chargers' improvement in this area.

The Chargers allowed the 7th most rushing yards and the 6th highest YPC. To some degree, this explains the low number of passing attempts faced by the defense; teams didn't have to pass as much to have success. PFF rated their rush defense at #28 in the NFL.

The Chargers defense forced 18 turnovers, which was #27 in the NFL. This goes mostly back to the lack of interceptions and effective pass rush.

I think the defensive personnel has improved a bit since Telesco arrived, but not enough. The Chargers are still below average in all three defensive units.

It is much more imperative that Telesco address the front 7 early in this draft than RB, for all the reasons bolded above. DT/NTs, DEs, and 3-4 OLBs will get snapped up fast, and the Chargers need more than one of them.

 

[Tau837]

Even if the OL can't run block for ####?

I think the run blocking will already be much better this season. Previous post on this:

The Chargers resigned Dunlap, who will stay at LT. PFF rated him as the #17 OT in run blocking (+4.5), and the #11 LT.

They signed Franklin, supposedly to play LG. PFF rated him as the #13 OG in run blocking (+7.6), and the #5 LG.

It appears Watt will be the starting center. PFF rated him as the #25 C in run blocking, but with a positive grade (+1.1). He was a rookie and had to step in at center after multiple injuries at the position, after never playing that position in college. He only had 331 snaps at center last season. Now he has an entire offseason to prepare. I am optimistic he will be better this year. Meanwhile, last season, the Chargers played 4 other centers for a total of 778 snaps, and they had a cumulative PFF rating of -9.7. Watt should definitely be a big improvement on that.

Fluker will start. Last season at RT, PFF rated him as the #37 OT in run blocking (-0.9), and the #18 RT. But Fluker played hurt last season. In 2013, PFF rated him as the #25 OT in run blocking (+4.9), and the #9 RT, and that was his rookie season. He should be healthier and better this year. And it is still possible he will be moved to RG, depending on who else the Chargers acquire in free agency and/or the draft. Many feel he is better suited at G.

The Chargers released OG Chad Rinehart. He played 1089 snaps for the Chargers last season, and PFF rated him as the #74 OG in run blocking (-15.8). Obvious addition by subtraction.

They still have OG Johnnie Troutman, who could stay at RG if Fluker stays at RT and the team stands pat. Last season, Troutman played 790 snaps, and PFF rated him as the #73 OG in run blocking (-14.4). In 2013, Troutman played 648 snaps, mostly at LG, and PFF rated him as the #23 OG in run blocking (+5.5). I'm not sure if the reason for his dropoff was moving to RG or something else. Not sure if he can regain his 2013 form, but it's possible.

I'd like to see the team add one more starting caliber RG/RT, moving Troutman to the bench, and that remains possible.

All of this points to much better run blocking from the OL in 2015.

And that is one reason why we should expect improvement in the running game without blowing the first or second round picks on a RB.

 

[BoltBacker]

Chargers are going to end up in QB purgatory unless we sack up and use a 1st/2nd round pick on a QB SOON.

I actually agree with this, but this isn't the draft class to get that guy imo.

There are those that say TB would be willing to part with Glennon for a 4th-5th rounder if their guy was there. I would definitely like to see SD trade a 5th rounder if that was possible. TB and this latest regime has sent so many mixed messages about Glennon it's hard to tell.

Otherwise, maybe Brandon Bridge goes undrafted and you are patient enough to just let him be your third string QB for at least two years

 

[Tau837]

http://espn.go.com/blog/san-diego-chargers/post/_/id/10820/chargers-seven-round-mock-draft-2

Eric D. Williams, ESPN San Diego Chargers reporter

IMO this is an absolutely horrible mock. Only one front 7 player in the first 3 rounds, no DL help at DT/NT, only pick at DL a 4th round project, only help at OL in the 6th round and probably unlikely to even make the team. :X

And don't get me started on Hundley. If the team is sticking with Rivers as seems apparent, they need to go all in. They have way too many holes to spend a 3rd round pick at QB.

 

[Tau837]

http://espn.go.com/blog/san-diego-chargers/post/_/id/10820/chargers-seven-round-mock-draft-2

Eric D. Williams, ESPN San Diego Chargers reporter

Unfortunately, I wouldn't really be shocked by that draft. I count one, maybe two starters out of that mess.

Can all Charger fans agree that the roster Telesco has assembled is so weak from top to bottom that if he can't get FOUR starters in this draft he should be on the hot seat?

Kenny Wiggins

Sean Lissemore

Brandon Oliver

Kendall Reyes

Jimmy Wilson

Chris Watt

Jeremiah Attaochu

Should any of these guys be starters on opening day? They need a lot more than two starters to push some of these guys to the bench.

I am skeptical Wiggins will make the opening day roster, much less be starting on opening day. Frankly, I'm not sure why you are suggesting he would be in line to start.

I fully expect Watt, Attaochu, and Wilson to start, and I think that is fine if they can stay healthy (particularly Attaochu).

I agree the other three should ideally be pushed to the bench. (And Reyes should ideally be cut, but they have to strengthen the DL group to do that.)

 

[BoltBacker]

I am skeptical Wiggins will make the opening day roster, much less be starting on opening day. Frankly, I'm not sure why you are suggesting he would be in line to start.

It's just because we are at the FBG site and that's who they project as the starting G opposite Franklin. You can just as easily plug any other crappy Charger guard (Troutman) if you like. Baca(I thought he was cut already)? Whoever.

It's sort of like the C position last season when everyone was wringing their hands because they were on their 3rd or 5th C. If they all stink does it really matter if another one gets hurt? As you know, I get a much less warm and fuzzy feeling about Watt being the #25 rated C in run blocking(his supposed "strength") than you do. I mean yeah the centers all stunk all year long. In a league of 32 teams he might have been the 25th best in run blocking I guess, that's pretty bad. He might get better at it, or not. Maybe by the time Rivers is ready to retire he'll work his way up to a mediocre player. It's certainly possible.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Can all Charger fans agree that the roster Telesco has assembled is so weak from top to bottom that if he can't get FOUR starters in this draft he should be on the hot seat?

I disagree strongly with this. I think Telesco is two for two so far in having great offseasons. He needs to have at least one poor year before we even start talking about him being on the hot seat.

McCoy is not on the hot seat either, IMO. They've both been great, and they seem to work well together.

 

[BoltBacker]

Can all Charger fans agree that the roster Telesco has assembled is so weak from top to bottom that if he can't get FOUR starters in this draft he should be on the hot seat?

I disagree strongly with this. I think Telesco is two for two so far in having great offseasons. He needs to have at least one poor year before we even start talking about him being on the hot seat.

McCoy is not on the hot seat either, IMO. They've both been great, and they seem to work well together.

I am very happy with McCoy. I just don't think he has that many good players to work with.

I'm not sure I agree that 9-7 records are the results of "great" offseasons. They were a game under a .500 team when he took over, they are a game over .500 two years later.

How many opening day starters do you think are reasonable to expect out of this draft? If SD misses the playoffs again should he be on the hot seat?

 

[Tau837]

Can all Charger fans agree that the roster Telesco has assembled is so weak from top to bottom that if he can't get FOUR starters in this draft he should be on the hot seat?

I disagree strongly with this. I think Telesco is two for two so far in having great offseasons. He needs to have at least one poor year before we even start talking about him being on the hot seat.

McCoy is not on the hot seat either, IMO. They've both been great, and they seem to work well together.

I tried to stimulate some discussion about Telesco and McCoy early in this thread and there wasn't much interest. I'd be interested in discussing the pros and cons of how each of them have performed their jobs to date with the Chargers. My gut reaction is saying Telesco has had two great offseasons is a bit of an overstatement, but maybe it is semantics (i.e., how one defines 'great').