What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

FootballGuys Post Combine Mock Draft (4 Viewers)

Actually...since the times are tight.I should give up my Dallas spot......my wife is due any minute!!!!Whoever does Dallas better take (Merriman or DJ or Spears with the 11 pick)Have fun all!!

 
Actually...since the times are tight.

I should give up my Dallas spot......my wife is due any minute!!!!

Whoever does Dallas better take (Merriman or DJ or Spears with the 11 pick)

Have fun all!!
Congratulations!I'll update the front page...

 
I'm assuming I have San Francisco. If so, I want to make you GMs aware I'm looking to move down & acquire extra picks. I'm not locked into it, but I want to see what kind of offer I could get. Shoot me a PM or e-mail if you have something in mind. Thanks.

 
I'll take ARI or anyone to get this baby goin' :X
Let's give signups until Monday morning... I think we can officially get under way at 10:00am EST Monday.What I think we'll do is go ahead and run the first 7 picks (that should be until Tuesday) and if nobody has asked for Arizona by then, then they are yours. Then run the draft until the next available team comes up (I think Houston) and if nobody has asked for them by that time (Wednesday or Thursday?) go ahead and assign Houston to the next person who offered to pick up extra teams (Jason Wood?)..

Hope that works...

*** Early warning ***

Football Jones (San Francisco), you will be on the clock at 10:00am EST Monday morning. You will have until 1:00pm EST to either make your pick or request the 1-hour trade extension.

Dolfan (Miami) is on deck -- and is also looking to trade down (possibly for cheap). PM me if interested.

 
Any updates?
Done...New Orleans, St. Louis, Denver, and NY Giants are the only remaining teams available. The front page has been updated.

Football Jones (San Francisco) is on the clock beginning at 10:00am EST Monday morning...

 
1-D

If you're gonna trade, make it happen and don't fart around with it.
Just so you know, we are going with a 3-hour time limit for picks with a 1-hour extension possible if you are making a deal.Hope that works for everyone...

 
1-D

If you're gonna trade, make it happen and don't fart around with it.
Just so you know, we are going with a 3-hour time limit for picks with a 1-hour extension possible if you are making a deal.Hope that works for everyone...
Can you clarify this trade extension thing? Does it mean if you are tryng to make a trade, then you get an extra hour?

If you take your extension, do you have to make a trade?

What happens if people do not make a selection in the alotted time?

 
As for the three hour time limit...does the clock stop at all during a 24 hour day? I'd hate to be stuck with the 2AM-5AM time slot.What's the ruling on this...?

 
1-D

If you're gonna trade, make it happen and don't fart around with it.
Just so you know, we are going with a 3-hour time limit for picks with a 1-hour extension possible if you are making a deal.Hope that works for everyone...
Can you clarify this trade extension thing? Does it mean if you are tryng to make a trade, then you get an extra hour?

If you take your extension, do you have to make a trade?

What happens if people do not make a selection in the alotted time?
As for the three hour time limit...does the clock stop at all during a 24 hour day? I'd hate to be stuck with the 2AM-5AM time slot.

What's the ruling on this...?
4. There will be a 3 hour time limit on picks strictly enforced. The time-limit will be in effect from 10:00am EST to 6:00pm EST (7-3 on the west coast) Monday - Friday. Outside of those times, the timer is off. You can be granted a 1 hour extension if you are in trade talks with another team. But, you must check in to the thread during your 3 hour time limit to let us know that you are in trade talks AND the owner you are in trade talks with must also post saying that they are, in fact, attempting to make a move. You can wait until your pick (to see who has just been taken) to decide that you want to sollicit trade offers. Just post a message, "Looking for trades" when your pick comes up and as long as you find an interested owner within 3 hours, you can have the extension. However, at the end of your 1 hour extension, you must either trade your pick or make a selection. If you trade your pick, the owner moving into your spot will have a shortened 1 hour time limit to make their pick (as they should have had a player in mind when they moved up). If time expires and you have not made a selection, the 1st 5 votes from ANY FBG will decide your pick. You can go back and make your alternate selections at anytime after you get back.
That was from the 1st post... Hopefully it helps...To specifically answer your questions:

Does it mean if you are tryng to make a trade, then you get an extra hour?

Yes, but you have to get another owner to post within your original 3-hour time limit saying that he is in trade talks with you. If you do this, you will be granted an additional hour on the clock.

If you take your extension, do you have to make a trade?

No.

What happens if people do not make a selection in the alotted time?

Whatever FBGs are viewing the thread at the time will be able to vote on who they think your team would select. The first player to receive 3-5 votes will be assigned for your pick and the next team will be on the clock. If you miss more than one pick, another owner may be assigned to take over your team.

As for the three hour time limit...does the clock stop at all during a 24 hour day? I'd hate to be stuck with the 2AM-5AM time slot.

The "timer" is only in effect from 10:00am to 6:00pm EST (7-3 on the west coast) Monday through Friday. Outside of those times, the timer is turned off..

 
ok, the only team that really needs a franchise QB just trades out of the #1 spot and the team that drafted a franchise QB last year (plus has a probowler at the position) moves into the #1 spot. Why even go up to the top spot if you aren't going to use it on a QB?

 
TRADE: San Francisco sends #1 to SanDiego for #12 & #61.

Chargers' GM to confirm.
WOW :shock: Surprisingly (or maybe not so surprisingly) low value for the #1 overall... It will be interesting to see if a trade like this (much lower than usual value for the top few picks in a trade) actually happens on draft day...

Nice job San Diego!

I guess it could work out for San Fran too if they pick the right players and are able to fill some holes...

 
ok, the only team that really needs a franchise QB just trades out of the #1 spot and the team that drafted a franchise QB last year (plus has a probowler at the position) moves into the #1 spot. Why even go up to the top spot if you aren't going to use it on a QB?
It's debatable whether SF needs a franchise QB. Rattay has shown a lot of promise in his limited action IMO and is still very young (especially by QB standards)...Also, I doubt they could have gotten a lower pick (2-4) for much less than what he was able to get the #1 for -- so why risk Cleveland or Miami (or San Francisco) making a surprise pick and taking their guy??

 
Miami Dolphins desperately want to trade out of the #2 spot....Looking to move down just a few spots and possibly pick up a 2nd...

 
I hope you mean 2 1st's!!!!A 1st and 2nd doesn't seen like it's enought for a 1st. Unless there's a 2006 1st included.Just my two cents....

 
TRADE: San Francisco sends #1 to SanDiego for #12 & #61.

Chargers' GM to confirm.
WOW :shock: Surprisingly (or maybe not so surprisingly) low value for the #1 overall... It will be interesting to see if a trade like this (much lower than usual value for the top few picks in a trade) actually happens on draft day...

Nice job San Diego!

I guess it could work out for San Fran too if they pick the right players and are able to fill some holes...
Agreed. Low value, but this is a mock. People kinda want to keep their picks & there just wasn't much interest (plus, we're pretty limited on what we can trade). However, if I'm the real-life 49er GM, I DEFINITELY move down in this draft, especially since they need to fill lots of holes. On the bright side, I believe I can get a player at 12 that's real close to the quality of the #1. That said, I may want to move down from the 12-hole, as well.

 
Trade is confirmed. #12 and #61 for #1 overall. I really see this as value for the Bolts. The #1 this just doesn't have the same value as in years past. This pick may shock and really cause controversy. But...With the #1 pick in the 2005 NFL draft the San Diego Chargers select - Mike Williams -WR - formely of USC. A very detailed write up to come later.

 
I hope you mean 2 1st's!!!!

A 1st and 2nd doesn't seen like it's enought for a 1st.

Unless there's a 2006 1st included.

Just my two cents....
We can't involve '06 picks, correct? There's no reason to. I guess we could for realism. I really didn't think about it. I was only concerned with what I could do this year in the first 4 rounds with no players involved (our parameters).
 
Trade is confirmed.  #12 and #61 for #1 overall.

I really see this as value for the Bolts.  The #1 this just doesn't have the same value as in years past.  This pick may shock and really cause controversy.  But...

With the #1 pick in the 2005 NFL draft the San Diego Chargers select - Mike Williams -WR - formely of USC.  A very detailed write up to come later.
FIGHT ON!!! :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
BTW, if I viewed Rodgers or Smith as franchise QBs, I'd be all over one of them. I don't, though. If I'm GM, I don't want to make the mistake of picking a QB just to pick one. Not only that, this draft is fairly weak, IMO. Not a bad draft for FF this year (especially RBs & WRs), but overall, I believe it's below-average.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I hope you mean 2 1st's!!!!

A 1st and 2nd doesn't seen like it's enought for a 1st. 

Unless there's a 2006 1st included.

Just my two cents....
We can't involve '06 picks, correct? There's no reason to. I guess we could for realism. I really didn't think about it. I was only concerned with what I could do this year in the first 4 rounds with no players involved (our parameters).
Nothing says anything about not being able to trade '06 picks -- if you think that is what your team would look to do (ie rebuilding mode). You are right, it would make it more realistic. Which is kind of the point. If this thing gets out of hand with the trades, it kind of loses its value..
 
Hey Everyone,Just a quick question. Are our picks supposed to mirror how we think our team will REALLY be looking at things, or is this purely for entertainment purposes? Either way is fine, but I ask because the chances that a) San Diego moves up to #1 and b) San Francisco accepts that price are so de minimous that this mock is already destined to read quite contrary to any "real" draft results that transpire in April.Woodrow

 
Well, one of the top 2 WRs is off the board. Braylon Edwards is still sitting there...

Never know who might pick him up. It might not be me, but then, with Cleveland, you never know. And Chicago would almost surely want to pick him up, if there.

Any team in the 5-8 range (Tampa Bay, Minnesota, Arizona), or even Chicago want to throw me a 2nd to move up and get Edwards??

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hey Everyone,

Just a quick question. Are our picks supposed to mirror how we think our team will REALLY be looking at things, or is this purely for entertainment purposes? Either way is fine, but I ask because the chances that a) San Diego moves up to #1 and b) San Francisco accepts that price are so de minimous that this mock is already destined to read quite contrary to any "real" draft results that transpire in April.

Woodrow
I wanted it to be what you really think your team would be looking to do. That said, since none of us (probably) work for our team's front offices, this is all just conjecture anyways, right?I agree with you about the 1st trade -- that's why I was kind of shocked to see it. I suppose a trade like that could happen this year though :unsure:

 
Woodrow, I really think the point is to have fun.But if SD was offered a chance at the #1 for that price, which I was, then I would hope they would jump all over it. And if that did happen Mike Williams would be the pick.

 
Hey Everyone,

Just a quick question. Are our picks supposed to mirror how we think our team will REALLY be looking at things, or is this purely for entertainment purposes? Either way is fine, but I ask because the chances that a) San Diego moves up to #1 and b) San Francisco accepts that price are so de minimous that this mock is already destined to read quite contrary to any "real" draft results that transpire in April.

Woodrow
Good question/good point. Are we supposed to be mocking how we think the actual draft will go, or how we would like it to go for our respective teams?
 
I certainly would've considered other compensation if I thought we could include more than what was outlined. Still, a late 2nd for moving up 11 spots to the #1 isn't an awful price in this draft.

 
I certainly would've considered other compensation if I thought we could include more than what was outlined. Still, a late 2nd for moving up 11 spots to the #1 isn't an awful price in this draft.
For comparison's sake, I suspect such a move in the real NFL draft would have cost San Diego both of its firsts and its 3rd.Colin

 
Sent out 5 PMs to possible trade partners...Got 3 'No's so far... As soon as I hear from the other 2, I'll either pick or trade...

 
Ah yes, first pick and controversy reigns already. Why did San Diego make that trade and pick. Here is my thinking. First of all the #1 pick in the NFL draft has never had lower value than right now. No real sure fire stud QB or impact Defensive player. The top three running backs are all basically even in value. When SF called and wanted to move down I was thinking now way if he wanted the #12 and #28 overall. I offered #12 and #61. If he turned it down I was fine with that and would hope that a quality player would be there at 12. But the trade was accepted. Everyone knows the Chargers need a few things : A play making wide receiver, a pass rusher, O-line help and cornerback, plus add depth at linebacker. At the 12 spot I could only really address two of those things, my targets were Marcus Spears or Alex Barron. Both of whom could come in right away, start and make an impact. But with Spears stock rising and Detroit needing an OT I doubt either would have been there and I would have to trade down. With the trade being made though, the obvious choice was between Braylon Edwards or Mike Williams. Why Williams over Edwards? I really like what Mike Williams bring to the table, he reminds me a lot of Herman Moore. Just a monster in terms of size, plus he is like a vacuum, he catches everything. I was leery of Braylon Edwards #1 – He looks an awful lot like David Terrell to me. Now I live in Michigan and watched him play a lot over the last few years and I think he’ll be an o.k. pro and will out perform David Terrell and maybe even Amani Toomer (to compare to other UofM wr’s) , but his situation has to be right. Overall I think Mike Williams fits what Marty and SD is trying to do, the adjustment from LA to San Diego won’t be a big one and imaging the starting O of – Brees, LT2, McCardell, Mike Williams, Gates, plus now our third receiver is Eric Parker and Reche Caldwell. The AFC west will have tons of shoot-outs this year and SD has the tools to compete even more.

 
I certainly would've considered other compensation if I thought we could include more than what was outlined. Still, a late 2nd for moving up 11 spots to the #1 isn't an awful price in this draft.
For comparison's sake, I suspect such a move in the real NFL draft would have cost San Diego both of its firsts and its 3rd.Colin
:goodposting: I don't care how balanced the draft is in people's minds there is no way that a team moves that far down with so little compensation.

 
For comparison's sake, I suspect such a move in the real NFL draft would have cost San Diego both of its firsts and its 3rd.Colin
In most years yes, but there is no way that any team would give up something like that to draft Smith or Rodgers.If a team wants to trade down, they will have to take a similar deal. (Not that I think it is likely)PS. I think this would be a good trade for the niners. They need bodies and lots of them.
 
KC wants to move up, and is willing to give up my 1.15 and a 2006 #1......thats obviously the high water mark.I have CHicago, Arizona, Washington and Detroit in mind as partners.

 
I certainly would've considered other compensation if I thought we could include more than what was outlined. Still, a late 2nd for moving up 11 spots to the #1 isn't an awful price in this draft.
For comparison's sake, I suspect such a move in the real NFL draft would have cost San Diego both of its firsts and its 3rd.Colin
:goodposting: I don't care how balanced the draft is in people's minds there is no way that a team moves that far down with so little compensation.
I hear ya. I think Colin's view of it is a stretch, LOL, but maybe not. I just don't think there's anyway San Diego gives both first round picks in this draft, much less their 3rd. History may suggest it, but you can't discount the fact there's not the usual super-stud at the top this year (at least in most people's minds).I chose to go ahead & do the deal because it was enough to justify it in my mind. You have to realize people aren't going to give their whole freaking draft away in a mock. They want to make some picks & I don't blame them.

I guess that's the thing. It really depends on how you look at it. If I thought this was for absolute realism, I wouldn't have done it. I took it as a mixture of realism & what you want to get accomplised. If my view is a lot different than the other GMs, I apologize. Maybe I'm in the vast minority.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top