Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

49ers jump up to #3 pick in draft


Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Ministry of Pain said:

I want Miami to keep moving back, want nothing to do with the top4 QBs, top 3 WRs, TE is interesting only because I think he is by far the real goods and the dropoff is massive and the TE class last year stunk, it's like taking Kittles in the 2nd of FF Drafts if you see the connection here. 

But otherwise I would prefer they get in the Parsons-Paye-Moerhig sweepstakes, you understand? When did Defense become second fiddle in this league? They cut KVN, shipped off Shaq Lawson and have almost nothing to replace it. WIlkins sucks and is a starting front 7 player, Ogbah last year of his deal, Raekwon Davis is the only DT on the roster basically...

All this offense for Tua is total BS to me. They need more frontline defensive help. The Patriots won Super Bowls without high profile WRs and flashy players, I expect nothing less from an ex-Pats Head Coach who already has anointing oils waiting for him. 

Let's get serious about real team needs. Miami is spending $25M on Parker and Fuller, they need a top 5 WR like they need a hole in the head right now. Get serious about getting better and get these gawd awful OLines and DLines in shape. That's how you win. 

NE won for the better part of 20 years by getting way more production than what they paid their players. That all started with Brady, but they got guys off the scrap heap that other teams didn't want, gave them low dollar contracts, and reaped the rewards. That stemmed from good coaching and player development (and getting production from late round draft picks and UDFAs).

BB was also able to find cheap situational players on defense that cost way less than guys that never came off the field for other teams. So if there was a Pro Bowl LB on another team getting $15M a year, BB would rotate three $2M players and get the same level of production. He did that on the defensive line as well.

It remains to be seen if NE can still win with lunch pail type guys. That strategy works great when you get above average production from average talent. But last year they found out it's hard to win with below average production from below average talent, especially on offense when they didn't have Brady to make up for their deficiencies.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

1 hour ago, Anarchy99 said:

 

, the Falcons will either have to sit the 4th pick in the draft or move on from a very productive QB.
IMO, both of those are not what's best for the team. QB play is not what ails the Falcons.

but word is that both those young QBs need seasoning, so that would make perfect sense for them to grab them now & coach em up for a year or 2. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, massraider said:

Phillips might not be available later in the draft now.  If he passes medicals, the fact is EDGE guys with 10 sacks and freaky workout numbers don't fall.   

All those EDGE guys went bonkers, and all the newer mocks will reflect that, you watch.  Phillips might be top 12.  

No doubt Mass, I'm saying Miami should set themselves up to be the team that takes the first or second guy on Defense and then also double dip from some pretty nice prospects that you don't always find at these spots...I'm sorry but Harris is not a steal at 18 vs where you can find Gainwell from Memphis if you see where I am heading here. Miami needs to make the most of these selections and I don't see the value at some of the spots the media is penciling them in for. Then you add in they aren't looking for a QB and likely not wanting Sewell or they would have stayed put so you start doing the math and I just hope they don't burn a 6 pick on a WR. This team has so many more pressing needs right now. It's astonishing others don't seem to see it that way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

But word is that both those young QBs need seasoning, so that would make perfect sense for them to grab them now & coach em up for a year or 2. 

IMO, almost by definition, if guys getting drafted 4th overall need two years of seasoning, then they shouldn't be getting drafted 4th in the draft. They're called projects . . . and should be considered more of Day 2 or Day 3 picks. Similarly, if you already have a productive player that MIGHT need replacing in THREE YEARS, by definition, that really isn't a critical position of need for your team to burn the 4th pick in the draft on. And to highlight again, the Falcons aren't losing due to the play of Matt Ryan. In fact, whomever they draft at QB at #4 (if that's the direction they go in) will be lucky to be as productive as Ryan has been multiple years from now, let alone now. It's not Ryan's fault the Falcons have the 29th ranked defense.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ministry of Pain said:

No doubt Mass, I'm saying Miami should set themselves up to be the team that takes the first or second guy on Defense and then also double dip from some pretty nice prospects that you don't always find at these spots...I'm sorry but Harris is not a steal at 18 vs where you can find Gainwell from Memphis if you see where I am heading here. Miami needs to make the most of these selections and I don't see the value at some of the spots the media is penciling them in for. Then you add in they aren't looking for a QB and likely not wanting Sewell or they would have stayed put so you start doing the math and I just hope they don't burn a 6 pick on a WR. This team has so many more pressing needs right now. It's astonishing others don't seem to see it that way. 

 

IMO the most important thing Miami can do in this draft (and I don't even see a close second) is put Tua in a position to be successful...if you do that and he pans out everything else will be figured out...if not, you take a huge step backwards.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Anarchy99 said:

IMO, almost by definition, if guys getting drafted 4th overall need two years of seasoning, then they shouldn't be getting drafted 4th in the draft. They're called projects . . . and should be considered more of Day 2 or Day 3 picks. Similarly, if you already have a productive player that MIGHT need replacing in THREE YEARS, by definition, that really isn't a critical position of need for your team to burn the 4th pick in the draft on. And to highlight again, the Falcons aren't losing due to the play of Matt Ryan. In fact, whomever they draft at QB at #4 (if that's the direction they go in) will be lucky to be as productive as Ryan has been multiple years from now, let alone now. It's not Ryan's fault the Falcons have the 29th ranked defense.

Philosophically you won’t get any argument from me there, but if that’s the landscape of the NFL & getting elite QBs, then you either poop or get off the pot. Teams will suffer paralysis by analysis and never take their future QB in the draft because they don’t want to draft a year early.

because there’s no such thing as drafting them a year too late.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Boston said:

IMO the most important thing Miami can do in this draft (and I don't even see a close second) is put Tua in a position to be successful...if you do that and he pans out everything else will be figured out...if not, you take a huge step backwards.

While I agree with you, I suppose the question becomes what would make Tua more successful? Adding an elite weapon at WR or TE? That might make his numbers better but does that equate to more wins. A top RB? That would probably take pressure off Tua and open up the passing game. An elite defender? Like MOP was saying, MIA may be in position to win more by allowing fewer points and taking pressure off of the offense. That's what NE did with Brady on their initial run. Then the Patriots got more weapons on offense and the defense slipped and they couldn't win in what should have been Brady's prime. They scored 500+ points multiple times and didn't win a SB. I'd be interested to hear other people's thoughts on this one.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

While I agree with you, I suppose the question becomes what would make Tua more successful? Adding an elite weapon at WR or TE? That might make his numbers better but does that equate to more wins. A top RB? That would probably take pressure off Tua and open up the passing game. An elite defender? Like MOP was saying, MIA may be in position to win more by allowing fewer points and taking pressure off of the offense. That's what NE did with Brady on their initial run. Then the Patriots got more weapons on offense and the defense slipped and they couldn't win in what should have been Brady's prime. They scored 500+ points multiple times and didn't win a SB. I'd be interested to hear other people's thoughts on this one.

I don't think you can compare Brady's early year's too much anymore as the game has opened up far more with a ton of rule changes...also, that Patriot team had a grade A defense because they had vets like Willie, Law, Bruschi, Milloy and Johnson left over from the Carroll years and they nailed it with adding vets like Vrabel, Harrison and Phifer...right now Miami is not in a position to duplicate that model as they don't have all those type of veterans nor should they as they are building it differently... and it is not so much about wins short-term but giving him the line and weapons to be successful so you know after this year whether he is the long term answer...right now he just doesn't have the supporting cast that puts him in the best position to succeed and with all their future picks they have the draft capital do do this now and than zero in on the D later.

Edited by Boston
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

Philosophically you won’t get any argument from me there, but if that’s the landscape of the NFL & getting elite QBs, then you either poop or get off the pot. Teams will suffer paralysis by analysis and never take their future QB in the draft because they don’t want to draft a year early.

because there’s no such thing as drafting them a year too late.

I don't remember who said it, but the famous quote is "If you have two quarterbacks, you have none." Teams that have had two legit QBs generally haven't fared all that well. One problem is that QB is the only position in football that you can't play two at a time, so there is always a key asset on the sideline on every snap.

Yeah, I get that teams don't often get the #4 pick in the draft to be in position to select a QB. However, a case could be made to trade down and collect assets and use some of them now or tuck them away to move up in a future draft and then use those picks for a QB.

It's also not as simple as to take or not to take a QB now. It could very well be the case of to take the 4th QB now or to move up and try to take the 1st QB 3-4 years from now. If I'm ATL, I like my chances with Ryan and 2 extra first round picks plus potentially other add ins and worry about finding a QB in the future.

Here were the 4th QBs selected in the last 20 drafts . . .

2020 - Jordan Love
2019 - Drew Lock
2018 - Josh Rosen
2017 - DeShone Kizer
2016 - Christian Hackenberg
2015 - Sean Mannion
2014 - Derek Carr
2013 - Matt Barkley
2012 - Brandon Weeden
2011 - Christian Ponder
2010 - Colt McCoy
2009 - Pat White
2008 - Chad Henne
2007 - John Beck
2006 - Kellen Clemens
2005 - Charlie Frye
2004 - J.P. Losman
2003 - Rex Grossman
2002 - Josh McCown
2001 - Marques Tuiasosopo

Sure, there are guys supposedly rated highly at the QB position in this draft. But that list scares me if I am either burning a Top 5 pick or looking to mortgage future picks to move up to take a QB.

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ministry of Pain said:

No doubt Mass, I'm saying Miami should set themselves up to be the team that takes the first or second guy on Defense and then also double dip from some pretty nice prospects that you don't always find at these spots...I'm sorry but Harris is not a steal at 18 vs where you can find Gainwell from Memphis if you see where I am heading here. Miami needs to make the most of these selections and I don't see the value at some of the spots the media is penciling them in for. Then you add in they aren't looking for a QB and likely not wanting Sewell or they would have stayed put so you start doing the math and I just hope they don't burn a 6 pick on a WR. This team has so many more pressing needs right now. It's astonishing others don't seem to see it that way. 

If they trade down again, they should get another 1st rounder from someone, or NOT move down.  

It would take a big price for me. 

If I am Miami, I'll pray that Chase or Pitts is there.  WR and TE might not be a need for the team, but it's not like you can't use a true #1 WR (don't have one now), or a generational TE.  

Mock draft I did from Draft Network, first 4 rounds:

 

6. Kyle Pitts

TE, Florida

18.  Micah Parsons  (Phillips went 13)

LB, Penn State

36. Christian Barmore

IDL, Alabama

50.  Landon Dickerson

IOL, Alabama

81. Kenneth Gainwell

RB, Memphis

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

I don't remember who said it, but the famous quote is "If you have two quarterbacks, you have none." Teams that have had two legit QBs generally haven't fared all that well. One problem is that QB is the only position in football that you can't play two at a time, so there is always a key asset on the sideline on every snap.

Yeah, I get that teams don't often get the #4 pick in the draft to be in position to select a QB. However, a case could be made to trade down and collect assets and use some of them now or tuck them away to move up in a future draft and then use those picks for a QB.

It's also not as simple as to take or not to take a QB now. It could very well be the case of to take the 4th QB now or to move up and try to take the 1st QB 3-4 years from now. If I'm ATL, I like my chances with Ryan and 2 extra first round picks plus potentially other add ins and worry about finding a QB in the future.

Here were the 4th QBs selected in the last 20 drafts . . .

2020 - Jordan Love
2019 - Drew Lock
2018 - Josh Rosen
2017 - DeShone Kizer
2016 - Christian Hackenberg
2015 - Sean Mannion
2014 - Derek Carr
2013 - Matt Barkley
2012 - Brandon Weeden
2011 - Christian Ponder
2010 - Colt McCoy
2009 - Pat White
2008 - Chad Henne
2007 - John Beck
2006 - Kellen Clemens
2005 - Charlie Frye
2004 - J.P. Losman
2003 - Rex Grossman
2002 - Josh McCown
2001 - Marques Tuiasosopo

Sure, there are guys supposedly rated highly at the QB position in this draft. But that list scares me if I am either burning a Top 5 pick or looking to mortgage future picks to move up to take a QB.

 

The concept is predicated on the idea that you rank him that high.  I dunno how far you get with, "I dunno fellas, what about Pat White in 2009? We sure we want the 4th QB?"  

It's why the Packers set themselves up for 15 more seasons, when they had Brett Favre.  

 

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Boston said:

I don't think you can compare Brady's early year's too much anymore as the game has opened up far more with a ton of rule changes...also, that Patriot team had a grade A defense because they had vets like Willie, Law, Bruschi, Milloy and Johnson left over from the Carroll years and they nailed it with adding vets like Vrabel, Harrison and Phifer...right now Miami is not in a position to duplicate that model as they don't have all those type of veterans nor should they as they are building it differently... and it is not so much about wins short-term but giving him the line and weapons to be successful so you know after this year whether he is the long term answer...right now he just doesn't have the supporting cast that puts him in the best position to succeed and with all their future picks they have the draft capital do do this now and than zero in on the D later.

I get that the 2021 Dolphins are completely different than the 2001 Patriots and the game is played much differently now. I don't know what "setting up Tua to succeed" ultimately means. More beef and protection is nice. An elite playmaker would be nice. A hot shot rookie RB would be helpful. A generational TE could add a lot of sizzle. And that's if they opt to use early picks on offense. 

That being said, in the draft the year Brady first started (ie BEFORE he took over for Bledsoe), NE took Richard Seymour in the first round of the draft followed by Matt Light. That gave NE a starting OL of Light, Mike Compton, Damien Woody, Joe Andruzzi, and Greg Randall. Light would develop into something, as would Woody, but I wouldn't call that a GRADE A front line. The rest of their draft that year was trash.

The following draft they took TE Daniel Graham (who was a decent blocker) followed by Deion Branch. They also hit on David Givens in the 7th round. While I know the Pats and Fins are different, it's not like the Patriots of the day really surrounded Brady with high profile guys. The first two drafts in his era they used only one pick on offense . . . and it was for a blocking TE.

The 3rd draft in the Brady era they spent 4 of their 5 first draft picks on defense and the only offensive player mixed in was WR Bethel Johnson. Once again, they did little to get help for Brady (which would be a common theme for YEARS).

My point being NE didn't really go out of their way to ensure Brady's success by getting him help through the draft. In that era, they didn't even bring in help via free agency. Brady sunk or swim with what he had to work with.

Jumping ahead to 2021, I legitimately wonder what MIA should do to ensure Tua succeeds because I don't know what the really means. IMO, if the Dolphins really have to worry about configuring their team around Tua to ensure his success, that right away almost sounds like they don't fully believe in Tua. I think MIA needs to do whatever they think makes their team better. I think Tua will be Tua and they will be able to access how he does this year regardless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ministry of Pain said:

I think we should also start dropping names in this thread and perhaps even an ongoing Title Change as we progress towards the Draft, the unofficial Official without a bunch of clickbait. 

 

Something like "first round QB draft/trade discussion" would probably work if there isn't something similar already. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

I don't remember who said it, but the famous quote is "If you have two quarterbacks, you have none."

Joe Montana & Steve Young would like a word, but I understand the adage for the salary cap era. 

But that's not applicable to a scenario like the Falcons. That quote's context is referring to tying up the money to have 2 NFL-ready QBs on the roster. 

The Falcons have a guy who's a couple years from being old and the potential to draft his replacement on a cheap rookie deal. 

IMO it is ideal for the Falcons to invest the 4th rounder in whichever is best on the board, then use the next 1-2 years to coach him up. 

We can disagree on that, but the famous quote isn't really applicable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, massraider said:

 

The concept is predicated on the idea that you rank him that high.  I dunno how far you get with, "I dunno fellas, what about Pat White in 2009? We sure we want the 4th QB?"  

It's why the Packers set themselves up for 15 more seasons, when they had Brett Favre.  

 

Not the same situation. Rodgers was the second QB drafted in the 2005 draft . . . as the 24th pick. Brett Favre was turning 36 at a time when QBs didn't play much beyond that. The prior three seasons Favre had already started waffling about whether he still wanted to play and didn't jump at the chance to say unequivocally that he was coming back.

What the Packers likely SHOULD have done was bench Favre halfway through the 2005 season and start Rodgers. Favre was terrible. The Packers started the season 1-7. Favre's passer rating on the season was 70. The writing was on the wall. It was time to move on.

But for some reason, they let Brett finish the year. And for some reason Favre came back the next season. He was just as bad in 2006 (72 passer rating) and GB went 8-8. EVERYONE expected him to retire. Except he didn't. He came back and led GB to a 13-3 record in 2007. And Favre actually retired this time . . . but later changed his mind. By then GB had decided Rodgers was their guy and the rest is history. 

That being said, Rodgers sitting for 3 seasons was both criminal and a waste of a huge resource. I suppose things ultimately worked out, but they blew 3 seasons they could have had with Rodgers (in favor of two rotten ones with Favre). As things turned out, the 2006 and 2007 drafts didn't end up having great QB options in either draft (the only noteworthy guy from either draft class was Jay Cutler).

But in the Favre example, yeah, the Packers should have moved on from Favre but didn't. His PFF grade in 2006 was 55. Even playing on a 13 win team in 2007, Favre's PFF grade was only 74. Ryan, by comparison, had a score of 83.1 for ATL last year and has been steadily productive. He had a couple of scores in the 90s in the past few seasons. He's not washed up and his been healthy. As I mentioned earlier, there is no pressing need to draft someone to replace him yet, and the best they could do is take the 4th QB off the board.

That's fine if they have done their due diligence and absolutely feel they guy they draft is like Aaron Rodgers . . . but there aren't many cases like Rodgers out there.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, massraider said:

 

The concept is predicated on the idea that you rank him that high.  I dunno how far you get with, "I dunno fellas, what about Pat White in 2009? We sure we want the 4th QB?"  

It's why the Packers set themselves up for 15 more seasons, when they had Brett Favre.  

 

and potentially more with Love when that had A-A-Ron Rodgers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

Not the same situation. Rodgers was the second QB drafted in the 2005 draft . . . as the 24th pick. Brett Favre was turning 36 at a time when QBs didn't play much beyond that. The prior three seasons Favre had already started waffling about whether he still wanted to play and didn't jump at the chance to say unequivocally that he was coming back.

That's fine if they have done their due diligence and absolutely feel they guy they draft is like Aaron Rodgers . . . but there aren't many cases like Rodgers out there.

The situations aren't identical, but the comparison seems more apt than comparing top 10 ranked players in this draft to Marques Tuiasosopo, wouldn't you agree?  

Most likely, there is a QB at #4 this year that carries a higher grade than Rodgers (and Alex Smith) had coming out of college.  I remember that draft.  No one was in love with either QB.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, massraider said:

The situations aren't identical, but the comparison seems more apt than comparing top 10 ranked players in this draft to Marques Tuiasosopo, wouldn't you agree?  

Most likely, there is a QB at #4 this year that carries a higher grade than Rodgers (and Alex Smith) had coming out of college.  I remember that draft.  No one was in love with either QB.  

This gets us back to what I brought up before. Are we to believe / expect / accept that in 2021 there are 4 or 5 QBs with a grade worthy of all being drafted in the Top 10. That's the only reason I brought up other years and other draft classes. Are evaluators considering the COVID chaos at all? Wilson wasn't even on the radar and was probably considered  just above average prior to last year. Lance didn't even play, and I am guessing players don't get better by NOT playing. Jones played on a college NFL team that looked like they were playing overmatched high school teams. The same could be said of Lawrence (but he at least did well across multiple seasons). Bottom line, is this group that much better than other years when QBs put up similar big numbers but weren't really NFL caliber? I just find it odd that after a COVID season there are now so many highly rated QBs. That to me seems odd. But who knows, maybe they are all good and they deserve the hype they're getting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thought is the order of ranking said QBs. There's a 95%+ chance the draft will start QB-QB-QB. I quickly looked at some draft evaluation lists to see who were the guys listed past the Top 3.

Draft Network had Lance at 24 and Jones at 65.
PFF had Lance at 10 and Jones at 33.
Walter Football had Lance at 16 and Jones somewhere in the 30-40 range.
NFL.com had Fields at 17 and Jones at 37.
Drafttek had Lance at 10 and Jones at 25.
Profootballnetwork had Lance at 15 and Jones at 20.
Sporting News had Fields at 9 and Jones at 20.
Gil Brandt had Lance at 13 and Jones at 24.
Zach Hicks had Wilson at 17 and Jones at 65.
Draft Diamonds had Wilson at 17 and Jones at 31.

The point being, even if there are multiple QBs with high draft marks, is it prudent to reach for them just because they play QB? (Again, there are probably 100 draft lists out there, these were just some that popped up . . . doesn't make their evaluations better or worse than anyone else's.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

This gets us back to what I brought up before. Are we to believe / expect / accept that in 2021 there are 4 or 5 QBs with a grade worthy of all being drafted in the Top 10. That's the only reason I brought up other years and other draft classes. Are evaluators considering the COVID chaos at all? Wilson wasn't even on the radar and was probably considered  just above average prior to last year. Lance didn't even play, and I am guessing players don't get better by NOT playing. Jones played on a college NFL team that looked like they were playing overmatched high school teams. The same could be said of Lawrence (but he at least did well across multiple seasons). Bottom line, is this group that much better than other years when QBs put up similar big numbers but weren't really NFL caliber? I just find it odd that after a COVID season there are now so many highly rated QBs. That to me seems odd. But who knows, maybe they are all good and they deserve the hype they're getting.

Well, I think history says, what, 3 out of 5 will disappoint?  And no reason all 5 can't bust.  

I don't believe in the organizational structures of the teams picking 1/2.  The Jags put together a team with talent everywhere, and two months later everyone on the team hated the entire front office.  The way the Jags were able to completely screw the pooch with that team is amazing.  Kyle Wilson is about to get New York Jets-ified, so that sucks.  Thoughts and prayers to him and his family.  

I'm only considering 'what if' the Falcons rank him 'franchise'.  Whatever that is.  Not Andrew Luck.  Maybe just......Deshaun Watson.  

The danger with your thinking, to me, is grouping the players.  Fields' pro prospects are not different because other QBs happen to be ranked high.  He isn't less likely to be good because there's 5 guys.  Collectively, it's unlikely all 5 hit.  Or 4 out of 5.  Individually, Fields' grade, OBVIOUSLY, shouldn't be affected by that.  Nor by the fact that OSU QBs haven't done well in the pros.  (By the way, I dunno who remembers the Aaron Rodgers draft, but that was the knock, he was a product of the Cal system, inflated numbers, yada yada yada).  

I agree with you 100%, in talking about the group, collectively.  

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Anarchy99 said:

I get that the 2021 Dolphins are completely different than the 2001 Patriots and the game is played much differently now. I don't know what "setting up Tua to succeed" ultimately means. More beef and protection is nice. An elite playmaker would be nice. A hot shot rookie RB would be helpful. A generational TE could add a lot of sizzle. And that's if they opt to use early picks on offense. 

That being said, in the draft the year Brady first started (ie BEFORE he took over for Bledsoe), NE took Richard Seymour in the first round of the draft followed by Matt Light. That gave NE a starting OL of Light, Mike Compton, Damien Woody, Joe Andruzzi, and Greg Randall. Light would develop into something, as would Woody, but I wouldn't call that a GRADE A front line. The rest of their draft that year was trash.

The following draft they took TE Daniel Graham (who was a decent blocker) followed by Deion Branch. They also hit on David Givens in the 7th round. While I know the Pats and Fins are different, it's not like the Patriots of the day really surrounded Brady with high profile guys. The first two drafts in his era they used only one pick on offense . . . and it was for a blocking TE.

The 3rd draft in the Brady era they spent 4 of their 5 first draft picks on defense and the only offensive player mixed in was WR Bethel Johnson. Once again, they did little to get help for Brady (which would be a common theme for YEARS).

My point being NE didn't really go out of their way to ensure Brady's success by getting him help through the draft. In that era, they didn't even bring in help via free agency. Brady sunk or swim with what he had to work with.

Jumping ahead to 2021, I legitimately wonder what MIA should do to ensure Tua succeeds because I don't know what the really means. IMO, if the Dolphins really have to worry about configuring their team around Tua to ensure his success, that right away almost sounds like they don't fully believe in Tua. I think MIA needs to do whatever they think makes their team better. I think Tua will be Tua and they will be able to access how he does this year regardless.

Again, that era is totally different and I don't see that as a blueprint for success in 2021...what it means (and it is pretty simple) is you give him a quality line and beef up his weapons so he is surrounded by enough talent to develop correctly because in general to win in today's NFL you need to put up points...take a look at the info below...the top 9 teams in points for made the playoffs last year...in points against 4 of the top 9 did not make the playoffs (and Miami was one of them though in fairness they won 10 games)...I am definitely not advocating for ignoring defense but in today's NFL you need to score to be successful and good QB play is the key to that...if Tua is the real deal than Miami's future is beyond bright, if not things become far more difficult.

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/points-per-game?date=2021-02-08

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/opponent-points-per-game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Boston said:

Again, that era is totally different and I don't see that as a blueprint for success in 2021...what it means (and it is pretty simple) is you give him a quality line and beef up his weapons so he is surrounded by enough talent to develop correctly because in general to win in today's NFL you need to put up points...take a look at the info below...the top 9 teams in points for made the playoffs last year...in points against 4 of the top 9 did not make the playoffs (and Miami was one of them though in fairness they won 10 games)...I am definitely not advocating for ignoring defense but in today's NFL you need to score to be successful and good QB play is the key to that...if Tua is the real deal than Miami's future is beyond bright, if not things become far more difficult.

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/points-per-game?date=2021-02-08

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/opponent-points-per-game

You still haven’t answered my question on what Miami should do to set up Tia to succeed. 

As for high scoring teams, BUF and GB continued the longggggg run of teams scoring 500 points in a season only to not with the SB. The number of teams that have scored a ton of points and won the title is really, really small. Sure, Tampa was a TD away from hitting the 500 point mark, but the high octane teams quite frequently can’t get it done in the postseason. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Anarchy99 said:

The point being, even if there are multiple QBs with high draft marks, is it prudent to reach for them just because they play QB? (Again, there are probably 100 draft lists out there, these were just some that popped up . . . doesn't make their evaluations better or worse than anyone else's.)

I mean your team had a 6th round QB become the GOAT and made your QB needs obsolete for nearly 2 decades, so I'd say your perspective on this is a bit skewed...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, chinawildman said:

I mean your team had a 6th round QB become the GOAT and made your QB needs obsolete for nearly 2 decades, so I'd say your perspective on this is a bit skewed...

I also don't think you can learn much from the Patriots' success other than to have the best QB and to cheat when that doesn't suffice. :coffee:

  • Like 2
  • Laughing 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Anarchy99 said:

You still haven’t answered my question on what Miami should do to set up Tia to succeed. 

As for high scoring teams, BUF and GB continued the longggggg run of teams scoring 500 points in a season only to not with the SB. The number of teams that have scored a ton of points and won the title is really, really small. Sure, Tampa was a TD away from hitting the 500 point mark, but the high octane teams quite frequently can’t get it done in the postseason. 

Yes, I did answer it...surround him with as much talent as possible on the offensive side of the ball be it on the line and/or skill positions...as for offense if you look at the info below you will find that in the past 4 Super Bowls the teams have finished 2, 6, 2, 3, 3, 2, 1 and 2 in points per game:

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/points-per-game

Again, I am not saying D does not matter because it always will but in today's NFL having a legit offense is becoming a must and it's tough to do that without a good QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Anarchy99 said:

While I agree with you, I suppose the question becomes what would make Tua more successful? Adding an elite weapon at WR or TE? That might make his numbers better but does that equate to more wins. A top RB? That would probably take pressure off Tua and open up the passing game. An elite defender? Like MOP was saying, MIA may be in position to win more by allowing fewer points and taking pressure off of the offense. That's what NE did with Brady on their initial run. Then the Patriots got more weapons on offense and the defense slipped and they couldn't win in what should have been Brady's prime. They scored 500+ points multiple times and didn't win a SB. I'd be interested to hear other people's thoughts on this one.

Bingo and thank you for seeing the field from just a slightly different angle. It's hard to fathom 10 guys on Offense flying off the DraftBoard to start things, there is serious value on Defense in the 10-20 range, and then I like a big chunk of guys both Offense and Defense in the 20-40 range. 

Miami has a couple of pieces in their Front 7 but they could use at least 2 cornerstone types. Last year they drafted 3 on the OL and started them almost all season, in fact Miami ran 1-2-3...hang on I'm not very good at math...Jackson/Kindley/Hunt/Tua/Ahmed/Bowden...6 some weeks on Offense, hard to win starting 6 Rookies on Offense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Boston said:

Yes, I did answer it...surround him with as much talent as possible on the offensive side of the ball be it on the line and/or skill positions...as for offense if you look at the info below you will find that in the past 4 Super Bowls the teams have finished 2, 6, 2, 3, 3, 2, 1 and 2 in points per game:

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/points-per-game

Again, I am not saying D does not matter because it always will but in today's NFL having a legit offense is becoming a must and it's tough to do that without a good QB.

I don't think much has changed with regard to the RANKINGS of the offenses and defenses of SB teams over the years. Sure, offenses score more these days and to go along with that defense allow more points. But rankings wise, it typically requires bot a strong offense and defense to win. Here are the rankings from very team in the last 50 SBs both offensively and defensively. Across the decades, I don't see much of a difference.

		2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015	2014	2013	2012	2011
Win	Off	3	5	4	3	3	19	4	8	10	9
	Def	8	7	7	4	1	4	8	1	12	25
Lose	Off	6	2	2	2	1	1	10	1	11	3
	Def	10	8	20	5	27	6	1	22	2	15
											
		2010	2009	2008	2007	2006	2005	2004	2003	2002	2001
Win	Off	10	1	20	14	2	9	4	12	18	6
	Def	2	20	1	17	23	3	2	1	1	6
Lose	Off	12	7	3	1	2	1	8	15	2	1
	Def	1	8	28	4	3	7	2	10	6	7
											
		2000	1999	1998	1997	1996	1995	1994	1993	1992	1991
Win	Off	14	1	2	1	1	3	1	2	2	1
	Def	1	4	8	6	1	3	6	2	5	2
Lose	Off	15	7	4	2	2	5	5	7	3	2
	Def	5	15	4	5	14	9	9	5	14	19
											
		1990	1989	1988	1987	1986	1985	1984	1983	1982	1981
Win	Off	15	1	7	4	8	2	2	3	12	7
	Def	1	3	8	6	2	1	1	13	1	2
Lose	Off	1	8	1	4	6	10	1	1	10	3
	Def	6	1	16	7	15	6	7	11	2	12
											
		1980	1979	1978	1977	1976	1975	1974	1973	1972	1971
Win	Off	7	1	5	2	4	5	6	5	1	1
	Def	10	5	1	8	12	2	2	1	1	7
Lose	Off	6	15	1	10	9	8	5	9	7	4
	Def	1	11	3	3	2	9	3	2	3	3

Looking at things collectively . . .
- 36 of the 50 winning teams had a Top 10 offense and a Top 10 defense
- 32 of the 50 losing teams had a Top 10 offense and a Top 10 defense
- 68 of the 100 teams had a Top 10 offense and a Top 10 defense
- 17 of the 50 winning teams had a Top 5 offense and a Top 5 defense
- 8 of the 50 losing teams had a Top 5 offense and a Top 5 defense
- The #1 offense won 10 times and lost 11 times
- The #1 defense won 14 times and lost 4 times
- Since 2000, the #1 offense has gone 0-6
- Since 2000, the #1 defense has gone 6-0
- 31 of the 50 winning teams had a Top 5 offense
- 29 of the 50 losing teams had a Top 5 offense
- 60 of the 100 teams had a Top 5 offense
- 30 of the 50 winning teams had a Top 5 defense
- 21 of the 50 losing teams had a Top 5 defense
- 51 of the 100 teams had a Top 5 defense

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, massraider said:

If they trade down again, they should get another 1st rounder from someone, or NOT move down.  

It would take a big price for me. 

If I am Miami, I'll pray that Chase or Pitts is there.  WR and TE might not be a need for the team, but it's not like you can't use a true #1 WR (don't have one now), or a generational TE.  

Mock draft I did from Draft Network, first 4 rounds:

 

6. Kyle Pitts

TE, Florida

18.  Micah Parsons  (Phillips went 13)

LB, Penn State

36. Christian Barmore

IDL, Alabama

50.  Landon Dickerson

IOL, Alabama

81. Kenneth Gainwell

RB, Memphis

I get a similar run but I take Elijah Moore at 36 every time, but that's a simple player exchange. I like Dickerson at 50, started to come around on him. Also like Ben Cleveland, we don't really run a Zone Blocking offense that I know of. And I love Gainwell. 

Excellent work Mass

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

I don't think much has changed with regard to the RANKINGS of the offenses and defenses of SB teams over the years. Sure, offenses score more these days and to go along with that defense allow more points. But rankings wise, it typically requires bot a strong offense and defense to win. Here are the rankings from very team in the last 50 SBs both offensively and defensively. Across the decades, I don't see much of a difference.





		2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015	2014	2013	2012	2011
Win	Off	3	5	4	3	3	19	4	8	10	9
	Def	8	7	7	4	1	4	8	1	12	25
Lose	Off	6	2	2	2	1	1	10	1	11	3
	Def	10	8	20	5	27	6	1	22	2	15
											
		2010	2009	2008	2007	2006	2005	2004	2003	2002	2001
Win	Off	10	1	20	14	2	9	4	12	18	6
	Def	2	20	1	17	23	3	2	1	1	6
Lose	Off	12	7	3	1	2	1	8	15	2	1
	Def	1	8	28	4	3	7	2	10	6	7
											
		2000	1999	1998	1997	1996	1995	1994	1993	1992	1991
Win	Off	14	1	2	1	1	3	1	2	2	1
	Def	1	4	8	6	1	3	6	2	5	2
Lose	Off	15	7	4	2	2	5	5	7	3	2
	Def	5	15	4	5	14	9	9	5	14	19
											
		1990	1989	1988	1987	1986	1985	1984	1983	1982	1981
Win	Off	15	1	7	4	8	2	2	3	12	7
	Def	1	3	8	6	2	1	1	13	1	2
Lose	Off	1	8	1	4	6	10	1	1	10	3
	Def	6	1	16	7	15	6	7	11	2	12
											
		1980	1979	1978	1977	1976	1975	1974	1973	1972	1971
Win	Off	7	1	5	2	4	5	6	5	1	1
	Def	10	5	1	8	12	2	2	1	1	7
Lose	Off	6	15	1	10	9	8	5	9	7	4
	Def	1	11	3	3	2	9	3	2	3	3

Looking at things collectively . . .
- 36 of the 50 winning teams had a Top 10 offense and a Top 10 defense
- 32 of the 50 losing teams had a Top 10 offense and a Top 10 defense
- 68 of the 100 teams had a Top 10 offense and a Top 10 defense
- 17 of the 50 winning teams had a Top 5 offense and a Top 5 defense
- 8 of the 50 losing teams had a Top 5 offense and a Top 5 defense
- The #1 offense won 10 times and lost 11 times
- The #1 defense won 14 times and lost 4 times
- Since 2000, the #1 offense has gone 0-6
- Since 2000, the #1 defense has gone 6-0
- 31 of the 50 winning teams had a Top 5 offense
- 29 of the 50 losing teams had a Top 5 offense
- 60 of the 100 teams had a Top 5 offense
- 30 of the 50 winning teams had a Top 5 defense
- 21 of the 50 losing teams had a Top 5 defense
- 51 of the 100 teams had a Top 5 defense

I honestly don't know what you are arguing...I have said a few times you need a good D but more than ever you need a very good offense as well...the #'s the last four years bear that out...it is gonna be real difficult to win with an average offense which is why teams are mortgaging their assets for a QB...this goes for college as well...here is a very interesting article about Saban and this change:

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/30177093/alabama-crimson-tide-nick-saban-concedes-defense-no-longer-key-victory

Edited by Boston
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

I don't think much has changed with regard to the RANKINGS of the offenses and defenses of SB teams over the years. Sure, offenses score more these days and to go along with that defense allow more points. But rankings wise, it typically requires bot a strong offense and defense to win. Here are the rankings from very team in the last 50 SBs both offensively and defensively. Across the decades, I don't see much of a difference.


		2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015	2014	2013	2012	2011
Win	Off	3	5	4	3	3	19	4	8	10	9
	Def	8	7	7	4	1	4	8	1	12	25
Lose	Off	6	2	2	2	1	1	10	1	11	3
	Def	10	8	20	5	27	6	1	22	2	15
											
		2010	2009	2008	2007	2006	2005	2004	2003	2002	2001
Win	Off	10	1	20	14	2	9	4	12	18	6
	Def	2	20	1	17	23	3	2	1	1	6
Lose	Off	12	7	3	1	2	1	8	15	2	1
	Def	1	8	28	4	3	7	2	10	6	7
											
		2000	1999	1998	1997	1996	1995	1994	1993	1992	1991
Win	Off	14	1	2	1	1	3	1	2	2	1
	Def	1	4	8	6	1	3	6	2	5	2
Lose	Off	15	7	4	2	2	5	5	7	3	2
	Def	5	15	4	5	14	9	9	5	14	19
											
		1990	1989	1988	1987	1986	1985	1984	1983	1982	1981
Win	Off	15	1	7	4	8	2	2	3	12	7
	Def	1	3	8	6	2	1	1	13	1	2
Lose	Off	1	8	1	4	6	10	1	1	10	3
	Def	6	1	16	7	15	6	7	11	2	12
											
		1980	1979	1978	1977	1976	1975	1974	1973	1972	1971
Win	Off	7	1	5	2	4	5	6	5	1	1
	Def	10	5	1	8	12	2	2	1	1	7
Lose	Off	6	15	1	10	9	8	5	9	7	4
	Def	1	11	3	3	2	9	3	2	3	3

Looking at things collectively . . .
- 36 of the 50 winning teams had a Top 10 offense and a Top 10 defense
- 32 of the 50 losing teams had a Top 10 offense and a Top 10 defense
- 68 of the 100 teams had a Top 10 offense and a Top 10 defense
- 17 of the 50 winning teams had a Top 5 offense and a Top 5 defense
- 8 of the 50 losing teams had a Top 5 offense and a Top 5 defense
- The #1 offense won 10 times and lost 11 times
- The #1 defense won 14 times and lost 4 times
- Since 2000, the #1 offense has gone 0-6
- Since 2000, the #1 defense has gone 6-0
- 31 of the 50 winning teams had a Top 5 offense
- 29 of the 50 losing teams had a Top 5 offense
- 60 of the 100 teams had a Top 5 offense
- 30 of the 50 winning teams had a Top 5 defense
- 21 of the 50 losing teams had a Top 5 defense
- 51 of the 100 teams had a Top 5 defense

You do realize all the stats in the world won’t make a QB pop up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Blackbear said:

You do realize all the stats in the world won’t make a QB pop up. 

No one's saying it doesn't take a great QB to win. But it takes an equally great defense to win. My point in posting the rankings is that it's been the same way for 50 years . . . it takes a top offense and a top defense to get to and win the SB. However, priot to the last 10 years, teams didn't go as crazy trying to move up to draft QBs.

Like you said, good QBs don't grow on trees, and once they installed the rookie salary cap it made it much more palatable to start throwing first round picks at the QB position without having to pay them $50 million. My point in everything I have posted recently is just because QBs are going earlier and earlier doesn't necessarily make them better . . . it just means teams are more apt to chase them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

No one's saying it doesn't take a great QB to win. But it takes an equally great defense to win. My point in posting the rankings is that it's been the same way for 50 years . . . it takes a top offense and a top defense to get to and win the SB. However, priot to the last 10 years, teams didn't go as crazy trying to move up to draft QBs.

Like you said, good QBs don't grow on trees, and once they installed the rookie salary cap it made it much more palatable to start throwing first round picks at the QB position without having to pay them $50 million. My point in everything I have posted recently is just because QBs are going earlier and earlier doesn't necessarily make them better . . . it just means teams are more apt to chase them.

I understand. But you need also look at that QB may not on this roster. So I think we need go get the guy that can win 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, massraider said:

"Fields is falling" is definitely the new storyline.

McShay had Jones at #3, and Fields falling to 11.  

Before looking at his mock, I was going to say if Fields falls there’s no way NE isn’t moving up to get him. Of course, he has The Pats as the team taking him at 11. What I do find odd here is that DEN bypasses Fields, which I don’t think would happen. If they didn’t want a QB there, I suspect there will be other suitors that would . . . at which point Fields wouldn’t fall to 11.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

Before looking at his mock, I was going to say if Fields falls there’s no way NE isn’t moving up to get him. Of course, he has The Pats as the team taking him at 11. What I do find odd here is that DEN bypasses Fields, which I don’t think would happen. If they didn’t want a QB there, I suspect there will be other suitors that would . . . at which point Fields wouldn’t fall to 11.

I mean, the who-goes-where is just coffee talk.  These mock drafts from the top guys are designed to get clicks, sure, but also to send messages about who is moving up, or down. The story of this mock is the ESPN guy who knows people saying Fields is not bulletproof.  

  Orlovsky was on Pat McAfee with the "I've heard questions about work ethic, last one in, first one out" rumors that oddly seem to pop up for athletic QBs this time of year (but never before March, sooooo weird).  Orlovsky has said many nice things about him, it should be noted.  Not to the level of the Mac Jones love-in happening on ESPN, but he has not bashed him.  Honestly, there's such a long, known history of scouts planting BS knocks on a guy this time of year, these talking heads should stay away from repeating this stuff.  

McShay mentioned that he's hearing (and that he has seen himself :rolleyes:) that Fields is a see it-throw it guy, little anticipation. That sort of criticism, I much prefer to vague critiques of a guy's character, that require no proof.  A film guy can sit you down, and say, "LOOK.  He shoulda thrown there, but he waited.  Can't do that in the NFL...."

I'll want to see what guys like Zierlein and Jeremiah say, if they agree that he's not top 5.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, massraider said:

I mean, the who-goes-where is just coffee talk.  These mock drafts from the top guys are designed to get clicks, sure, but also to send messages about who is moving up, or down. The story of this mock is the ESPN guy who knows people saying Fields is not bulletproof.  

  Orlovsky was on Pat McAfee with the "I've heard questions about work ethic, last one in, first one out" rumors that oddly seem to pop up for athletic QBs this time of year (but never before March, sooooo weird).  Orlovsky has said many nice things about him, it should be noted.  Not to the level of the Mac Jones love-in happening on ESPN, but he has not bashed him.  Honestly, there's such a long, known history of scouts planting BS knocks on a guy this time of year, these talking heads should stay away from repeating this stuff.  

McShay mentioned that he's hearing (and that he has seen himself :rolleyes:) that Fields is a see it-throw it guy, little anticipation. That sort of criticism, I much prefer to vague critiques of a guy's character, that require no proof.  A film guy can sit you down, and say, "LOOK.  He shoulda thrown there, but he waited.  Can't do that in the NFL...."

I'll want to see what guys like Zierlein and Jeremiah say, if they agree that he's not top 5.  

Zierlein had Fields going at #9 and Jeremiah had him at #8 as of 3/29.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, massraider said:

I mean, the who-goes-where is just coffee talk.  These mock drafts from the top guys are designed to get clicks, sure, but also to send messages about who is moving up, or down. The story of this mock is the ESPN guy who knows people saying Fields is not bulletproof.  

  Orlovsky was on Pat McAfee with the "I've heard questions about work ethic, last one in, first one out" rumors that oddly seem to pop up for athletic QBs this time of year (but never before March, sooooo weird).  Orlovsky has said many nice things about him, it should be noted.  Not to the level of the Mac Jones love-in happening on ESPN, but he has not bashed him.  Honestly, there's such a long, known history of scouts planting BS knocks on a guy this time of year, these talking heads should stay away from repeating this stuff.  

McShay mentioned that he's hearing (and that he has seen himself :rolleyes:) that Fields is a see it-throw it guy, little anticipation. That sort of criticism, I much prefer to vague critiques of a guy's character, that require no proof.  A film guy can sit you down, and say, "LOOK.  He shoulda thrown there, but he waited.  Can't do that in the NFL...."

I'll want to see what guys like Zierlein and Jeremiah say, if they agree that he's not top 5.  

I checked with my son, who went to school with Fields at OSU and is friends with some kids on the football team. He said he's never heard anyone say a bad thing about Fields. His teammates and coaches love and respect him and say he is a super hard worker. So not sure where the source of the "whispers" is coming from, let alone how accurate it is.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

I checked with my son, who went to school with Fields at OSU and is friends with some kids on the football team. He said he's never heard anyone say a bad thing about Fields. His teammates and coaches love and respect him and say he is a super hard worker. So not sure where the source of the "whispers" is coming from, let alone how accurate it is.

Here's one for ya:

Just read a tweet from a former poster/staffer here, who said that the Panthers are obviously talking to Orlovsky.  

 

If the Panthers are running down a guy, in order to draft him, the crappy part is, the chances of it fooling other NFL teams is so remote, why do it?  The 49ers and Falcons and Broncos don't know what the OSU coaches and players think about Fields?  Of course they do.  There is some stuff they won't find out, but work ethic?  They'll know.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm surprised that the whole "supporting cast" argument hasn't managed to rein in the Mac Jones hype... as good as OSU was Fields didn't have a revolving door of  high 1st round WRs to throw to. Also strange that the pro-Jones camp makes the argument that "Joe Burrow had good WRs and he's fine" yet few refer to Tua's struggles in projecting Jones's potential in the NFL (which seem much more directly relevant)

Jones's highlights are more like Devonta Smith highlights... his primary reads at WR are so ridiculously open that he rarely has to check down or beat pressure. It's much easier to make anticipatory throws when your guy's gonna win most of the time. To me it looks like there's a much larger gap between the top 4 and Jones compared to the gap between Jones and guys like Mills or Trask.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, chinawildman said:

I'm surprised that the whole "supporting cast" argument hasn't managed to rein in the Mac Jones hype... as good as OSU was Fields didn't have a revolving door of  high 1st round WRs to throw to. Also strange that the pro-Jones camp makes the argument that "Joe Burrow had good WRs and he's fine" yet few refer to Tua's struggles in projecting Jones's potential in the NFL (which seem much more directly relevant)

Jones's highlights are more like Devonta Smith highlights... his primary reads at WR are so ridiculously open that he rarely has to check down or beat pressure. It's much easier to make anticipatory throws when your guy's gonna win most of the time. To me it looks like there's a much larger gap between the top 4 and Jones compared to the gap between Jones and guys like Mills or Trask.

You mean to tell me that all college QBs don't get to throw to the likes of Devonta Smith, Jaylen Waddle, Jerry Jeudy, and Henry Riggs with Najee Harris in the backfield while being protected by Jedrick Willis, Deonte Brown, Alex Leatherhead, and Landon Dickerson? Why would that be considered beneficial? I mean, those are only 4 Top 15 NFL draft picks at WR. It's not like they were all Top 10 picks, then sure, I could see that MAYBE helping. But only Top 15? Not much benefit there.

Edited by Anarchy99
  • Like 2
  • Laughing 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, chinawildman said:

I'm surprised that the whole "supporting cast" argument hasn't managed to rein in the Mac Jones hype... as good as OSU was Fields didn't have a revolving door of  high 1st round WRs to throw to. Also strange that the pro-Jones camp makes the argument that "Joe Burrow had good WRs and he's fine" yet few refer to Tua's struggles in projecting Jones's potential in the NFL (which seem much more directly relevant)

Jones's highlights are more like Devonta Smith highlights... his primary reads at WR are so ridiculously open that he rarely has to check down or beat pressure. It's much easier to make anticipatory throws when your guy's gonna win most of the time. To me it looks like there's a much larger gap between the top 4 and Jones compared to the gap between Jones and guys like Mills or Trask.

Solid point.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, rockaction said:

I also don't think you can learn much from the Patriots' success other than to have the best QB and to cheat when that doesn't suffice. :coffee:

 

19 hours ago, Blackbear said:

Trolling?

It's his game on these boards.  Calls others trolls while he does it plenty himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Deamon said:

Still can't see him slipping outside of the top 5.

 

I can. If ATL sticks with Ryan (as they probably should) and uses their pick (which they probably shouldn't), the Bengals, Dolphins, and Lions likely aren't drafting a QB. In reality, someone will want to move up to draft Fields if he is not already gone through Pick 3. I have a hard time seeing him getting past the Panthers at 8 (unless the Niners take Jones and Carolina likes Lance better).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Anarchy99 said:

I can. If ATL sticks with Ryan (as they probably should) and uses their pick (which they probably shouldn't), the Bengals, Dolphins, and Lions likely aren't drafting a QB. In reality, someone will want to move up to draft Fields if he is not already gone through Pick 3. I have a hard time seeing him getting past the Panthers at 8 (unless the Niners take Jones and Carolina likes Lance better).

If what Dan said about Fields is true then I could see the slip.  But if not (and teams have plenty of time to do their DD on him) then I think there's a 50% chance or so that SF takes him.  Or that Atlanta takes him or trades the pick to someone who does (like you suggest they should)

Atlanta really needs to figure out what direction they want to take this franchise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...