IntheBullseye.com  

Go Back   IntheBullseye.com > Hot Reads ...In the Bullseye > The NFL Draft
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-03-2009, 03:15 PM
popanot popanot is offline
Pro Bowler
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,916
Default

Yeah, let's be like the Detroit Lions and draft a WR when it's about the lowest area of need on the team. It's proven to work for them over the years. I'd rather draft Knowshon Moreno if we're looking for a guy who could possibly hit home-runs and do double-duty by returning kicks. At least he'd be a sensible pick and back up/provide insurance for Slaton. But please, I hope Kubiak and Smith have level heads and do the right thing by drafting defense.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-03-2009, 03:30 PM
papabear papabear is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 838
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by popanot View Post
Yeah, let's be like the Detroit Lions and draft a WR when it's about the lowest area of need on the team. It's proven to work for them over the years. I'd rather draft Knowshon Moreno if we're looking for a guy who could possibly hit home-runs and do double-duty by returning kicks. At least he'd be a sensible pick and back up/provide insurance for Slaton. But please, I hope Kubiak and Smith have level heads and do the right thing by drafting defense.

I hope we end up with a defense heavy draft too, but if it's an offensive player who stands out when we're on the clock in the first then so be it. I would rather take a player the coaches have a lot of confidence in than for them to take a lesser player because he fills a need. My point wasn't to say don't take Maclin if he's far and away the best guy available. I was just pointing out to those who may be in favor of that realize what's the likely outcome because of my very high opinion of Kevin Walter.
__________________
"Well, at least our players kept their helmets on, so that showed some intelligence"-BobMcNair
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-03-2009, 03:51 PM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,902
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by papabear View Post
I hope we end up with a defense heavy draft too, but if it's an offensive player who stands out when we're on the clock in the first then so be it. I would rather take a player the coaches have a lot of confidence in than for them to take a lesser player because he fills a need. My point wasn't to say don't take Maclin if he's far and away the best guy available. I was just pointing out to those who may be in favor of that realize what's the likely outcome because of my very high opinion of Kevin Walter.
This is exactly how I feel. We better go defense if it is even a reasonably possibility. If an offensive guy stands out so far above the defensive choices, then I hope we try to trade down to a spot where defense makes more sense.

If we get stuck going offense in round one, I would look OL first and WR/TE second. I would not draft a RB who is clearly going to be a specialist behind Slaton. After all, you often put 3 WRs on the field but almost never use 2 RBs at once, so you are talking about a guy who rotates in. It's a waste to go after that guy in round 1.

If we go WR I want one who can play the slot because Walter is very good and I don't want him moved from the outside. This way, AJ plays mostly X and takes a few snaps in the slot. Walter is the primary Z and plays outside. The rookie we draft plays the Y in three wide sets, and takes snaps at X and Z as well depending on situation. Maybe Maclin can do this. I trust Roy that if we go WR he is the way to go.

Any WR should additionally help our return game making sure I never see Jacoby Jones dropping another punt.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-03-2009, 04:43 PM
papabear papabear is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 838
Default

I've ranted about RB's in the first before, but I would be OK if we took one at 15....Yea, I would be OK, but not excited. I think a two headed monster in the running game could make our offense scary good. I know there will be plenty of later round guys who can fill the bill, but I'll be Ok if we grab one we like earlier. I actually salivate at the idea of Slaton + a bruising running back lined up in the backfield together. I'm not saying bring back the triple option or that we should jump on the wildcat bandwagon, and this negates the keep their legs fresh argument if you do it all the time. I just like all the possibilities that creates when you have two running threats in the back field...especially if they are both capable receivers as well.
__________________
"Well, at least our players kept their helmets on, so that showed some intelligence"-BobMcNair
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-03-2009, 07:02 PM
painekiller painekiller is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Near the Galleria
Posts: 2,852
Default

Donald Brown is who we should take in round one. The kid is going to be this years Chris Johnson, a post bowl game 3rd rounder who becomes a 1st rounder by draft day.

Donald Brown and Steve Slaton gives us a top 5 backfield. Add that to our passing game, and the offense is done until much later in the draft. Now go defense.

BTW I did not say at 15, but he might be good enough to be taken there.
__________________
There is no failure, only feedback.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-03-2009, 08:39 PM
gunn gunn is offline
Veteran Depth
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 149
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by painekiller View Post
Donald Brown is who we should take in round one. The kid is going to be this years Chris Johnson, a post bowl game 3rd rounder who becomes a 1st rounder by draft day.

Donald Brown and Steve Slaton gives us a top 5 backfield. Add that to our passing game, and the offense is done until much later in the draft. Now go defense.

BTW I did not say at 15, but he might be good enough to be taken there.
I don't see Brown as that kind of back at all. AT ALL... I see him as more of a Derrick Ward type of back. Maybe a little bit quicker... but similar in the way they run. I don't get the fascination with him from some of you guys. LeSean McCoy is a better back across the board in my opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-03-2009, 08:47 PM
Fonz the Boss Fonz the Boss is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 351
Default

Im gonna be real sad if we trade down.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-03-2009, 09:25 PM
painekiller painekiller is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Near the Galleria
Posts: 2,852
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gunn View Post
I don't see Brown as that kind of back at all. AT ALL... I see him as more of a Derrick Ward type of back. Maybe a little bit quicker... but similar in the way they run. I don't get the fascination with him from some of you guys. LeSean McCoy is a better back across the board in my opinion.
I am not saying his running style is the same as Chris Johnson, I am saying the way he will shoot up from 3rd rounder to 2nd rounder to 1st rounder will be the same as CJ.

And to be honest I have not seen McCoy play, or at least do not remember seeing him.
__________________
There is no failure, only feedback.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-03-2009, 07:46 PM
dalemurphy dalemurphy is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 259
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by papabear View Post
I've ranted about RB's in the first before, but I would be OK if we took one at 15....Yea, I would be OK, but not excited. I think a two headed monster in the running game could make our offense scary good. I know there will be plenty of later round guys who can fill the bill, but I'll be Ok if we grab one we like earlier. I actually salivate at the idea of Slaton + a bruising running back lined up in the backfield together. I'm not saying bring back the triple option or that we should jump on the wildcat bandwagon, and this negates the keep their legs fresh argument if you do it all the time. I just like all the possibilities that creates when you have two running threats in the back field...especially if they are both capable receivers as well.
I'd be fine, even excited, about a 1st round RB if involved a trade down. I think we still too desperately need some OL depth and a few players on defense to stand pat and take a back. If they want to drop ten spots and get a RB and then have a 2nd, two 3rds, and two 4ths to hammer away at those postions, then great!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.