Pre-Draft All Questions Answered Thread
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 9:52 AM PDT
Email
PrintI need to break free of the boring diagnostic stuff for a day, so with the draft around the corner and impending news hanging like a cartoon piano, let's have an all questions answered thread. Fire away and I'll do my best to answer. A couple caveats, I have not scouted all or even close to all of the relevant draft eligible prospects. Sometimes I can provide non-scouting information, sometimes I can't. I also don't pretend to be a better scout than Mike Mayock or Rob Rang. I do think I provide a global perspective, and I'm sure I have a better understanding of the Seahawks.
I'm penciling this in from 10am to 4pm PST.
Update: Thanks everyone, that was awesome.
336 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
what's up with our 'project' linemen?
ie: Atkins, Red Bryant, Mansfield Wrotto, Ray Willis. All rough dudes with good upside when we drafted them. What is your take on them, and how do you think the team views them?
The FO’s evaluation of those guys would dramatically impact our drafting strategy, right?
Atkins showed some life as an edge rusher
but is worse than Tapp at setting the edge. He’s just 24, months younger than Perry Jerry (to beat an old man), and cheap so I don’t think Seattle is either ready to give up or count on him.
Bryant showed he can play in this league and that’s about it. He’s basically a second year rookie.
I think the team believes in Willis and Wrotto. Wrotto showed strong potential in limited action, and looked like a potentially excellent run blocker. Same basic story with Willis. I think the team sees the value in Willis, but isn’t too invested in him yet.
I think the FO sees DL as a need, if only for upgrade, and OL as less of a need.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions
RB situation
Do you think Mora & Co. are content with the Jones/Duckett backfield for this season, or will they be targeting a RB to add to the mix? If so, where do you think they’d go for one? I don’t really see Duckett taking more than 3rd-and-short and goal line carries, so it seems like we’re relying an awful lot on Jones. I think Jones is OK, but don’t really have a back-of-the-future on the roster.
Duckett will definitely be more involved this season
So you shouldn’t expect him to be as limited as last season. He’s a rusher, not just a situational rusher and will see 100+ rushes, barring injury.
I think the team will add another running back talent. That talent will present itself when Seattle sees it as best available. It’s more likely to come from the middle rounds, but show someone like Moreno slip, I could see Seattle trading back into the first to acquire him.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 10:14 AM PDT up reply actions
Where are the Snowdens of yesteryear?
I might be jumping the gun on a positional preview, but how important do you think it is to address TE depth in this draft? Would they consider a TE in the 2nd or 3rd round if they thought they were getting a great value there? Or are they likely to look for a guy in the late rounds, if at all?
We all love Carlson but I’m wondering whether they might be looking for a second guy for depth and/or trying some things in 2-TE sets.
Oakland ran 2 TE sets on just 15% of all plays in 2007
Seattle might look for a tight end, but probably a late round blocking tight end. I don’t think the team sees the position as a need.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions
Why don't teams employ more 2 TE sets?
It seems that to TEs are more involved in the passing game nowadays. I mean, isn’t a TE more valuable than a slot receiver? 2 TE sets gives you an extra blocker to run either left or right. If a passing play is called, you have two guys up the middle that can go across the middle or towards the sideline. Last year we saw the popularity of the WIldcat formation mainly due to unpredictability, but wouldn’t 2 TE sets lend for more unpredictability as well? It seems like an underused ‘gimicky’ formation, if only to keep the defense on its toes.
I agree, from a game theory perspective, I love the versatility of two TE sets
I think the problem is only that 2 TE sets do not stretch the field horizontally, and that’s something that’s been essential in every post-Walsh passing offense.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 10:38 AM PDT up reply actions
I think another thing is
when you put in a tight end, you typically lose your fullback. The fullback is a much more of an unknown on where he goes to block. That or you take out a wide receiver, which will make passing harder, and running since most teams in that formation will be prepared for it.
by B.B.Finnegan on Apr 22, 2009 11:01 AM PDT up reply actions
2 parter
Why didn’t we resign K-Rob, and do you think this might even still happen, if we miss a WR in the draft?
And
Pat White? Why, and why not.
2/3 of the world is covered by water. The rest is covered by Marcus Trufant.
I've read Robinson has a chronic knee injury
I think the team probably doesn’t see the value in injury prone depth.
Pat White is not an NFL quarterback. He played in a far out system that near-perfectly matched his abilities. And in that system he was sensational, but he won’t continue to be so in the pros. He’s not Michael Vick fast or even Vince Young fast, and as Young has proven, it’s not enough to be just above-average fast as a quarterback to succeed in the NFL. White makes sense for a deep, near-complete team that can use him in a variety of roles. Seattle is not that. It needs starting caliber players and not super-subs. It needs a legitimate quarterback of the future and not a trick play specialist.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 10:34 AM PDT up reply actions
How important is game playing time
in terms of talent evaluation within your own team. I mean if Mebane for some reason never had started, would we know that he was a great talent? Is it possible that we have a guy sitting on the bench (Jamar Adams or Bryant) that could be a pro bowler in two years, and we just don’t know it because we haven’t played them much yet, or is this the type of thing coaches should be able to spot from either practice or scrimmage?
A coach should have a good idea of what a player can do from watching that player in practice.
That doesn’t preclude a player from playing well above his practice level in real time, but that’s not super-likely, and it certainly doesn’t preclude a player from playing well below his practice level in real time, that’s classic Brian Russell-syndrome.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 10:36 AM PDT up reply actions
Addressing quarterback
You’ve scouted both quarterbacks up and down the street. The fans, analysts and the FO have communicated, to some extent, that a strategy must be put in place to backfill Matt seeing as he’s aging and very prone to serious back injury. No one, with the FO included, have communicated that they see Frye or Wallace as future starters.
How does Seattle address the QB situation?
1. Draft this year, and if so, who? (based on realistic and likely draft board scenarios)
2. FA next year
3. Draft next year
I think Seattle will acquire a quarterback this year
I do not know exactly how. I think Ruskell would be overjoyed to get someone like Jason Campbell that is “established”. I think interest in Stafford is real, interest in Sanchez could be real—but would be a bit surprising—but the real favorite is the field with mid-round pick. Someone like John Parker Wilson, Nate Davis or Tom Brandstater.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 10:55 AM PDT up reply actions
If that's the case
Do you see Seattle dangling the #4 in front of the Jets and/or Redskins for more picks? If you’re looking to gamble on a mid-round QB, someone that could VERY likely bust, I’d imagine you’d only do so if you had more than just one pick per round. Maybe take either teams’ first round pick + a 3rd round pick?
by Nick Andron on Apr 22, 2009 11:01 AM PDT up reply actions
i think its a no brainer
if the opportunity to trade down in the first round comes up we will jump on it.
let’s get the Sanchez Hype Train rollin!
Seattle clearly wants to trade down
but then so does every team in the top five. Seattle has bluffed well, but I don’t think they will escape their loser’s curse.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 11:06 AM PDT up reply actions
I'm not adamantly opposed to any QB
except John Parker Wilson.
I’m even coming around a bit on Josh Freeman, if only because he’s like that tall lefty pitcher who can project to be a good pitcher. Wilson seems like a Dilfer play-it-safe type QB in college. I just don’t think he can make it in the pros.
Do you think this past 4-12 season
and the slew of injuries could have a shake up with regards to Ruskell’s draft philosophy? Maybe more of an emphasis on durability? Or perhaps a chance at a small school player? Or maybe less emphasis on defense in the early rounds?
I would guess the major shift
is away from NFL-ready players with lower upsides to more project picks that could develop as the team rebuilds. Seattle is not tear-down-rebuilding, but it was punched in the jaw last season and I think it’s definitely getting younger, looking to the future rebuilding.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions
You've stated a few times that you think linebacker is both fungible and relatively low-impact.
Is there any reason to take a non-rush linebacker in the first round?
A player like Curry is safe
in that he won’t likely bust-bust, but there’s a good chance you get AJ Hawk. A good player that hasn’t impacted his team much. And that’s a kind of bust when you have so much cash invested. The only linebacker I would take in the first round is a linebacker that somehow had otherworldly cover ability, but was still a complete linebacker. And I can’t think of one.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions
Doug seems to be sold
on Curry’s coverage skills. Or are you worried that he’s not a complete linebacker who can blitz?
Curry is good for a linebacker in coverage
but I’m talking about better than Julian Peterson in his prime coverage.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 11:12 AM PDT up reply actions
The team has stated it has a 4 player board ranked already in preparation for the 1.04.
What would do you think the teams ranked 4-player board is (in order)?
What would it be in your own view?
Oooh, good question
Curry, Stafford, Jenkins, Tyson Jackson
My own
Stafford, Jenkins, Crabtree, E. Brown
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions
to clarify
you think Malcolm Jenkins is a very real possibility at 1.04?
Yes.
Envision the one team that wouldn’t care about Jenkins 40 times and would be gaga over his other achievements.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions
FYI everyone
I think this is a solid indication that Curry is you’re new favorite to be selected first overall.
We can only hope...
I’d love for Curry to go 1.01. We’d have a good chance at Stafford or one of the OT’s. Although Smith would likely be gone, there have been rumblings of the Rams favoring Monroe. His knees cause some fear, though.
Curry going #1 really REALLY throws a wrench into things.
I mean, it pretty much guarantees Stafford is available to us, for one.
I've heard rumblings of STL thinking about QB.
Also, a trade up is always a possibility, especially with KC dying to get out of the 3 spot?
This is so stupid.
Of course he should get less than Jake Long. Long is a tackle, he’s a OLB. Also, if he didn’t accept less, there’s a chance he could ball to pick number 4 or 5, which would mean he’d have to take less.
Wouldn't an OL help every asapect?
It seems the best-available from Monroe or either Smith would…
A) Keep Hasselbeck upright & productive maybe a year or two longer than we think
B) Open holes for the running game, which eats up clock
C) Keeping the defense from having to be on the field 35:00+ every game
And, ultimately, D) take over for Big Walt when that day comes
Monroe and Smith should both be better than Locklear
And Locklear should be better than Willis. Adding a left tackle would benefit Seattle’s line in total talent, but Seattle has stated it thinks coaching and continuity are they keys to a good offensive line, and that it doesn’t believe in first round offensive linemen. The second might be smoke, but I doubt the first is.
The four benefits of drafting an offensive linemen can also be accomplished with quality play from Locklear. I think Seattle is willing to experiment with Locklear at left and see if they didn’t sign a bargain.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions
Are you more excited for the first round pick or the mid round selections?
Considering Ruskell’s spotty-at-best track record with the #1 pick, and the likelihood that the player wouldn’t dramatically affect the 09 Seahawks, are you more interested at the picks (Robinson, Chung, etc) that could come in the later draft slots where Ruskell typically shines?
"Hey, guess what? Nobody cares who would win in a crazy fantasy fist-fight between Anne Frank and Lizzie Borden." The Monarch
by crushedoptimist on Apr 22, 2009 11:29 AM PDT reply actions
First round
Nervous, excited and curious, really. It’s a huge investment and likely the single most important move of Seattle’s entire offseason. I love the later rounds, it’s where being so hard core about this stuff over the last few months pays off, but the first pick is so important to the future of this franchise, in a way no other pick in the draft can be.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions
I'm pretty excited about the first pick as well
I have a feeling I’ll be pretty pleased with the later round selections as well… at least that’s the track record. This of course entails a super long/awesome weekend.
"Hey, guess what? Nobody cares who would win in a crazy fantasy fist-fight between Anne Frank and Lizzie Borden." The Monarch
by crushedoptimist on Apr 22, 2009 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions
If we draft Curry, what will the future hold for Leroy Hill?
I personally would love to see Leroy featured more and resigned for the right price, being the homer that I am.
pt2: Will Hill develop enough in coverage in your estimation, or will the team have to rely on that from another player?
I like Leroy Hill and hope to see him in the JP passrush slot this year
That said, if we draft Curry, I think it’s highly likely that Hill is gone within the next year, from the standpoint of the amount of money we would be spending on linebackers.
Just my thought… I would prefer that we would keep all three at that point.
"Hey, guess what? Nobody cares who would win in a crazy fantasy fist-fight between Anne Frank and Lizzie Borden." The Monarch
by crushedoptimist on Apr 22, 2009 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions
I keep floating the idea of taking Curry and dealing Hill
Mostly because to me, it doesn’t seem like Hill really wants to be around unless we overpay him. Screw that, deal him to another team for a high second rounder or something.
Of course, I’m not totally sure how the whole “not signed to a contract” thing works.
I don't think Seattle would receive more than a third-round pick for Hill
and could receive as little as a fourth round pick. Hill is good in Seattle, but he doesn’t fit a lot of systems, especially most 3-4 systems.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions
The Hill situation is either reaching critical mass or absolutely nothing.
The team may just be so busy with the draft that it hasn’t had time to meet with Hill. If Seattle drafts Curry, it will gain leverage with Hill, but I think it will still want to keep him. The two do different things and can each improve the team in different ways.
Hill can be good at “man in front” cover where he limits yards and punishes weaklings. I think that’s where he tops off. If Seattle wants to use more Tampa 2 principles, that shouldn’t be a problem.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 11:35 AM PDT up reply actions
Also, which NFC West team do you think will help themselves the most in the draft?
"Hey, guess what? Nobody cares who would win in a crazy fantasy fist-fight between Anne Frank and Lizzie Borden." The Monarch
by crushedoptimist on Apr 22, 2009 11:29 AM PDT reply actions
Seattle
It has a good track record, much better than Arizona or San Francisco. Arizona has hit big with a few picks, but mostly because it was bad for so long. San Francisco is always one step forward, one step back, but that defense will eventually coalesce into something very good-great.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions
Not even considering STL, huh?
Funny how years of awful drafting can set an opinion.
"Hey, guess what? Nobody cares who would win in a crazy fantasy fist-fight between Anne Frank and Lizzie Borden." The Monarch
by crushedoptimist on Apr 22, 2009 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions
I don't know what to make of the Rams
I haven’t hated their drafts, but they are a team in flux.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 11:40 AM PDT up reply actions
I've been curious why they haven't even been rumored to be interested in a QB
I guess I wouldn’t be surprised (as LantermanC points out above) that they go ahead and grab Stafford if he slips past #1.
"Hey, guess what? Nobody cares who would win in a crazy fantasy fist-fight between Anne Frank and Lizzie Borden." The Monarch
by crushedoptimist on Apr 22, 2009 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions
Rumors are flying now that they may be interested in Sanchez
I think the team has a decent quarterback and a few seasons to see if another Bulger falls into their laps. For any team that isn’t really designed to compete again for a few years, I can understand taking a wait and see attitude about quarterback.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions
Rick Gosselin has them taking a QB in his latest mock
I’m sure there’s a good chance that he’ll change it up before the draft, but currently he has Rams taking Stafford, Hawks taking Sanchez and 49ers taking Freeman.
I would be pretty surprised if that actually happend, but people keep saying that this guy has been the most accurate mock drafter over the last few years.
by Mind of no mind on Apr 22, 2009 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions
Heavily invested in Bulger, who really is a pretty good QB.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 22, 2009 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions
What do you think of the team's current WR situation, and how would Crabs fit?
We’ve got TJ, two injured + expensive potential starters in Branch and Burleson, and a bunch of injured projects. Considering the team’s published desire to upgrade the WR position, do you think the team really is considering Crabtree? Or one of the middle rounders?
And how does the rest of the depth chart shake down?
Well
Burleson isn’t injured, he’s recovering from an injury with a good history and consistent timetable. I’m not at all worried about his health. Branch has terrible injury momentum and I think the team is giving him one last chance to prove himself or will be cut next offseason. Housh should be good for a few years. The team needs quality depth, but it doesn’t need it now. It could take it now or it could see how its stable of WRs develop and who becomes available through FA or trades.
The team may be considering Crabtree, because it may consider Crabtree best available talent.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions
I think there's a significant gap in talent between the two
I think Jenkins will make a fine corner, where I see Smith as a good Tampa 2 corner, or second corner/free safety/nickelback. Jenkins is not super fast, but I think part of the value of a 40 is measuring a player’s athleticism. I have no doubts about Jenkins athleticism. Smith is not the same kind of athlete, but he does have great hands and exceptional size.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 11:48 AM PDT up reply actions
Is this for real?
NFL Draft Bible reports that the Lions will make Matthew Stafford the No. 1 pick overall and sign him to a deal worth $40 million guaranteed.
Draft Bible was wrong about Vontae Davis, Brian Cushing, Clay Matthews, and B.J. Raji failing drug tests at the Combine, so take this with a grain of salt. But the website claims Lions owner William Clay Ford has already signed off on the deal, Stafford’s been the likely pick all along, and the money seems right. The deal’s max value is expected to be $80 million over six years. Apr. 22 – 2:38 pm et
http://rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=NFL&hl=142667&id=5132
Same report from Oakland Press
I think this has legs.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions
Although I have thought Detroit would nab Stafford all along,
I wanted to convince myself otherwise and get excited for him. Now, I feel disappointed he’ll be gone. Fack!
Detroit is denying the report.
I honestly think this will continue as long as clicks are currency and sports “news” is all about headlines.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions
I saw that too a minute ago.
(denied the report) Sometimes I’m a sucker for news, but I really want to know who our options are after the 1.01 is decided.
If Seattle can't trade the pick down, do they take Sanchez to use as trade bait even if they are not truly interested?
I am actually amazed how far Sanchez’s draft stock has risen.
They could.
I think Seattle understands the leverage it would give them, but also is willing to accept Sanchez if they are stuck with him.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions
I suppose...It could've just been artificially low.
I mean Stafford was regarded highly to start the year. Then his stock dropped a bit, but he still ended up number 1. Sanchez had that awesome bowl game, and was in the mix for top 5 pick after that. Then it dropped for whatever reason to possibly being 17 to the Jets. I think people just realize that if Sanchez could be a first overall pick next year, and there really aren’t any QBs after the him (excluding Freeman), then he’s a valuable commodity.
I swear half of this resurgent interest in Sanchez is because of the Hawks.
We send a bunch of people to see him, the media reports it, and suddenly he’s in our spot on every second mock in the country.
Maybe manipulating the media isn’t as hard as it looks.
I'm confused as to whether the Hawks are geniuses or just doing due diligence.
I mean if it’s a possibility that we could take anyone, wouldn’t the team that wanted Sanchez trade up with KC instead of us to take Sanchez? Same applies for Curry or Crabtree.
I think it's a smokescreen
If there’s a player Seattle really wants, usually they’re very quiet about it. Unfortunately they’ve been very quiet about most of the top players, except the nods towards Sanchez. Until that Mora blerb, I haven’t heard a peep about Crabtree…
by B.B.Finnegan on Apr 22, 2009 12:16 PM PDT up reply actions
And if you clicked through that link
I’m sorry for posting it. This is the one time of year I go to PFT, and it’s playing head games with me.
Are there any mid round defensive tackles that you think might surprise?
And do you think Seattle would go for it? It’d be nice to get another Mebane type addition, but then I guess there’s also Red Bryant. Anybody stand out to you?
Dorrell Scott is kind of this year's Bryant.
My favorite guy, and the guy I’ve only sort of talked about is Roy Miller.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions
If you get bored enough...
You get four picks — roughly evenly spaced — in each of the first three rounds. You have to assemble a complete defense. Scheme is your choice. (The 12th guy can be a nickelback or pass rusher or whatever.)
Feel free to pass if you don’t like fantasty-type questions. I just thought it might be an interesting exercise. (For bonus points, take three picks in each of the first four rounds.)
Sure, let's see.
I’d run a 3-3-5. Jackson, Raji, Jenkins, Brown. Ayers, Alphonso Smith, Chung, Laurinaitis. Rashad Johnson, Marcus Freeman, Michael Hamlin, Moala.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions
Cool
I noticed you had Tyson Jackson on your potential ‘Hawks top four, too. Haven’t heard much about him yet.
Can a 4-3 team make good use of him or is he destined to play in a 3-4?
Jackson makes sense to a 4-3
that is flexible about its line. Jackson could be a good two down defensive end and a good defensive tackle on passing downs. In fact, he could be great at both. Like a bigger, stronger, but slower Justin Tuck.
Gee, do we know any teams who play a 4-3 and are flexible about their line?
I can’t think of any.
Is a 3-3-5 scheme run in the NFL often, or is that more of a college thing?
Is that the light at the end of the tunnel, or the headlights of an oncoming train?
Nickle
Frequent “starters” officially due to first snap, but not a common base.
by jacobstevens on Apr 23, 2009 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions
Batman Begins
was my fav., Dark Night close second.
by jacobstevens on Apr 23, 2009 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Will the team ever free Red Bryant?
Will Mansfield Wrotto’s oddly shaped head ever evolve into an effective starter?
If Crabtree is available, do we draft him? Do you believe he will make a very good #1 WR? Do you think he is too slow to be effective in the NFL? Are the concerns about his speed even an issue?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
Bryant ensnared himself with poor play and poor health.
Wrotto could and I think should be a good starter, but he’s still a ways away. I’m not so sure about Crabtree. He’s great to watch, but that system really did make it hard to know if he has NFL caliber separation skills. His speed is a concern because his level of competition is a concern, his athleticism is a concern and his upside is a concern. I hate to say it, but Crab does remind me a bit of Peter Warrick.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 12:48 PM PDT up reply actions
So we can count on him to be an effective punt returner if worst comes worst, right?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 22, 2009 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions
Warrick looked to have top notch cutting ability and change-of-direction skills.
I’m not sure if Crabtree relies on those things as much.
Have you warmed up to Sanchez at all, or do you still see him as a Ryan Leaf type?
I’m still not sold on him as a top 1st round talent, but I’ve heard plenty that has made me think he’d end up as at least a passable QB in his career. Has your view of him changed at all?
Also, we’ve run down plenty of scenarios, but gun to your head, who do you think the ’Hawks ACTUALLY end up with?
Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.
I think Sanchez looks great on tape
He moves and fires and looks like he’s “just having fun” or whatever, but I think he’s got huge bust potential. The kind of bust potential scouts often miss. Because it’s not on the tape. That’s the essence of my problem with Sanchez, he didn’t play long enough to have a real meltdown (every quarterback does), play from behind, get knocked around and still try his best, or suffer a losing streak.
Gun to my head, given what the Lions probably will do (draft Stafford), I’d say Curry.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Who do you think will be the best WR out of this draft?
Personally, I think Crabtree’s concerns are people overanalyzing to death (same with Ryan last season), and I don’t think it gets much better than him at all in the draft.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
But you still have concerns about him,
so it’s not really saying he’ll be a top 10 WR, right? I mean, you don’t seem high at all on Nicks, Maclin, Harvin, Heyward-Bey, or Britt.
With good reason.
Every other receiver has many red flags.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 22, 2009 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions
I think Crabtree is the best
I think Bey could be the best. Just because a lot of people think he’s a bust because he didn’t produce in college doesn’t mean he is, or is even all that risky. He could be a great deep threat. You can’t fault a guy for bad quarterback play or a run first offense.
I don’t really know Nicks well. Maclin is a good athlete that I think will be a bust. I just do not see him in a pro system.
Is Bey possibly akin to Robert Meachem?
Sort of a one-trick pony (deep threat). Surely he has better hands than, say, Devery Henderson…?
Bey?! As in, HEYWARD-Bey?
Oh, come on. You had me going there for a second. I’ve seen this guy get chased down lots of times in college, how is he going to outrun people in the pros? Especially since his claim to fame is a fast 40 time and a reputation as a deep threat.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 22, 2009 3:56 PM PDT up reply actions
Fili Moala.
How does he project in the NFL? First went from easy first round pick (if not top 10) to…god knows where. Will he become a steal similar to Mebane?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
He won't fall as far as some mocks imply
Moala is very athletic and agile. I don’t know how competitive he is, but I think that’s the key. I think he still has first day talent, rare agility for a tackle, but he needs to commit and work to develop, and beyond concerns he may be a thug or whatever, that’s about competitiveness. I’m unfit to judge that.
Taco Bell vs Jack in the Box?
And your favorite player likely to be taken in the 6th round?
NEEDS MORE FREEDOM!
by Scruffy Lefty on Apr 22, 2009 12:57 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I worked at Jack in the Box
It’s a quality operation that upholds extremely high food safety standards. I also find most of its food disgusting. We ran a Triple Bacon Ultimate Cheeseburger special for a while, and one idle break I determined a TBUS combo meal with cheese wedges substituted for fries, and a shake substituted for a cola (all standard menu options, mind you) had almost two days worth of calories (and I’m talking for a grown man) and over three days worth of saturated fat.
Terrance Taylor, Thomas Moorestead or Curtis Painter.
I wear a lot nicer clothes now!
and you were being flip. I was hungry. Sue me.
by shams on Apr 22, 2009 6:18 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
One ultimate cheeseburger, no bacon, is 109% of your daily fat.
Cutting out fast food was hard, but it’s really one of the best things anyone can do for themselves.
Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.
by BrettJMiller on Apr 22, 2009 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions
The Bacon Ultimate Cheesburger combo will be the death of me.
Is that the light at the end of the tunnel, or the headlights of an oncoming train?
Time for special teams
If Mare beats out Klaatu (Coutu), do we keep Klaatu? Also, if the punter from Cincinatti is available in the 6th, think we should draft him? Or do you expect him to be gone by then?
I like Moorestead
and I do hope Seattle selects a punter. Punters are valuable, and I think represent and inefficiency. I don’t know the future of our twin kickers, but hopefully it’s some kind four legged abomination.
And one roster spot.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 22, 2009 3:58 PM PDT up reply actions
But what about our super-secret two-kicker play?
You don’t think Mora’s going to keep that in his pocket much longer, do you?
Is that the light at the end of the tunnel, or the headlights of an oncoming train?
When will be the optimum time frame to visit the VMAC and watch training camp this year?
I’m strongly considering heading up there from Vancouver (WA) to see a day or two.
Do you think this new coaching staff seriously intends to replace Brian Russell with someone in this draft?
Or do you think they really believe he’s good? Off topic to the draft, but I remember Deon Grant being upset at the coaching staff last year, do you think he finally got tired of being played out of his natural position?
On the second, no
He has experience at strong safety. The idea that free safety is his natural position is something I’ve said a lot, but is not absolute fact or anything. It’s my opinion. I think Seattle wishes to add young talent at safety, but also that the team does not think Russell is truly a poor safety or that he must be replaced.
Well he was a free safety at college in Tennessee and then at Jacksonville
Not sure about Carolina, so I think it’s fair to assume that’s his natural position. And it seemed like he was doing more and more strong safety duties this past year.
by B.B.Finnegan on Apr 22, 2009 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions
later round moves
Given Ruskell’s track record with the team of moving up in the 2nd for a guy(Tats, Carlson) they’ve been targeting do you see the same thing happening this year? Who would that guy be?
I assume you mean moving up in general
Into first: Moreno, Hood, Alphonso Smith, Darius Butler, Robiskie
Into second: Chung, Hamlin, Sean Smith, Max Unger, Micahel Johnson, Iglesias, Asher Allen
After that I can’t predict how talent will fall.
His character concerns are effort concerns
or the vaguely defined not the sum of his parts concerns. To me that’s a more talented Atkins.
No, I meant if he had character problems, then he'd be the ultimate anti-Ruskell guy.
He’s a combine guy who supposedly doesn’t have as much production as his talent would indicate. Kind of the opposite of a Tatupu.
Iglesias, a second rounder?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 22, 2009 3:59 PM PDT up reply actions
Raji
I think he’s good, but I think if a team attempts to make him a 3-4 nose tackle they are going to be sorely regretful.
I know this is late, but
How serious do you take the possibility that the Seahawks could draft Sanchez and trade Hasselbeck?
Trade Hasselebeck: Not serious at all
I think Sanchez is a decent possibility, both as a draft and trade and a pure draft.
Any thoughts about Kenny McKinley, WR from S. Carolina
as a 4th or 5th round project? He’s a slot guy that reminds me a bit of Darrell Jackson, but suffered from horrible, horrible QB play.
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin
Oops. Didn't see the time limit. My bad.
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin
4pm Pacific
It’s cool, the only reason I’m closing it is I have a birthday dinner planned with my wife’s family and then afterward I will be going to sleep.
Looks interesting
He’s not someone I have much insight on. He looks a little slim for what Seattle is doing. There’s been so much made about wide receiver blocking ability, and I take it McKinley is a pretty green blocker, and not likely to develop.
What are your thoughts on Hakeem Nicks from North Carolina?
And if Seattle is to draft a WR and not select Crabtree, who would be the next best thing?
Seattle: Where the sun coming out or snow falling takes up 20 minutes of a 1 hour local news broadcast.
I like Nicks all-around talent/skills
but I don’t have much individual insight. If Seattle misses on Crabtree, I think Iglesias is the next best combination of talent, skills, value and fit.
You like Inglesias more than Robiskie?
How would you rank these guys:
Britt, Nicks, Robiskie, Inglesias for Seattle’s purposes? Is Inglesias likely to be had following round two, the likely limit for the ability to draft the rest of those guys?
I don't value anything Todd McShay says.
Seattle: Where the sun coming out or snow falling takes up 20 minutes of a 1 hour local news broadcast.
I don't know, I think people pick on him and Kiper too much.
If you write 2 or 3 articles about players every day, and do a new mock draft every two weeks, you’re bound to look foolish on something. Especially when teams are telling you stuff so you can report it so their smokescreen can be accomplished. If Cleveland said they’re picking Crab or Sanchez, McShay has to report that, because it is headline news.
Maybe he was once a diamond in the rough?
But now he’s so looked at that his undervaluedness is overvalued?
Do the Mariners win the AL West?
Also, if Seattle does end up with Knowshawn Moreno what would that mean for Julius Jones? Would he be a likely cut candidate? Or would Knapp try and divide the carries between Moreno, Jones, Duckett?
I think Jones would be pisssssssssed off
I also think he would be the back to unseat in 2009. Moreno would get worked in, probably getting a few more carries than Duckett.
Mariners win the West … almost by default.
Jones attitude worries me a bit if he was to start losing carries to a rookie.
I could see Jones going off on Knapp T.O. style on the sidelines.
I think that was mostly Holmgren's fault.
A.) Because he didn’t even bother to think about running the ball a little more despite being banged up at QB and WR.
B.) Holmgren likes playing favorites (MoMo).
Seattle: Where the sun coming out or snow falling takes up 20 minutes of a 1 hour local news broadcast.
Some of it is on Holmgren, but not all of it.
Holmgren gave Jones a chance to start and get the bulk of the carries against Dallas and Jones played like crap and I doubt Holmgren took kindly to Jones whining about not getting carries.
It would have been nice if Holmgren split the carries a little more, but Jones could of helped himself out by not sucking.
I agree
I think Jones is a team player, but I also think he’s got a pretty big ego and it can get bruised easily…although I guess you could say that about a lot of pro athletes.
That's valid.
I think Jones played pretty well, though, esp. early in the season . I haven’t researched much other than watching all the games, but his 4.x ypc was decent over the course of the year.
The AL West is pretty terrible this year.
If the Mariners keep playing ~.500 ball the whole way, it’s not at all unlikely they sneak into the playoffs.
Is that the light at the end of the tunnel, or the headlights of an oncoming train?
If Seattle drafts Sanchez, what do you think this means for Seneca Wallace?
Seattle: Where the sun coming out or snow falling takes up 20 minutes of a 1 hour local news broadcast.
Too funny.
Seattle: Where the sun coming out or snow falling takes up 20 minutes of a 1 hour local news broadcast.
Wallace is a career backup
Sanchez doesn’t change that. The only way it changes Wallace’s situation is that he is less likely prove himself with spot starts should Hasselbeck miss time.
I know these question are for John, but my guess would be Seneca is still the number 2 behind Matt.
I doubt Sanchez would see any playing time in 2009. If Matt gets hurt Seneca would be the likely candidate to take over at QB.
But would it make much sense to put the #4 overall pick #3 in the QB roster?
Especially since he’ll be ensured plenty of guaranteed money.
Seattle: Where the sun coming out or snow falling takes up 20 minutes of a 1 hour local news broadcast.
for one year, i think yes.
then 2010 he’s #2 on the depth chart.
He would actually get more practice under center as a #3 QB then a 2.
Because he would always be running the scout team.
NEEDS MORE FREEDOM!
by Scruffy Lefty on Apr 22, 2009 6:02 PM PDT up reply actions
I have ways of getting Insider
It’s just no something I’m interested in. I think I’m preserved from bogus information and that creates clarity.
Same, I got a few 'your subscription is up' emails a month or two ago.
And now when I click on insider it still works. It’s bizarre.
Lucky.
Although I suppose there isn’t much in there that’s worth paying for, I still get infuriated when after the third or fourth sentence in an article I get prompted to login to my nonexistent Insider account.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 22, 2009 4:11 PM PDT up reply actions
The team could limp through retreads or just wait a season
It might just not think this is a good draft.
I don't think Seattle will pick high enough next year for McCoy/Bradford
If Seattle passes, I’m thinking their best hope might be a trade.
I could see it
In fact, if Seattle doesn’t select someone big this year, I almost assume they will target Tebow next year.
It's Mike Alstott mixed with Michael Vick mixed with
White Jesus.
by John Morgan on Apr 22, 2009 3:44 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Speaking of Jesus, it seems like his antagonizingly slow windup is in anticipation of a
special invitation of the Christ himself to command him to throw the ball.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 22, 2009 4:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Tebow isn't anywhere remotely as fast as Vick
He’s a power runner through and through.
You know what? Fuck you Sports Gods, fuck you.
Fair enough
I wonder how Much Tebow’s passing numbers will suffer with Percy Harvin to bail him out.
You know what? Fuck you Sports Gods, fuck you.
If that happens
I think I’d find a new NFL franchise to root for for awhile. Tebow is awful.
You know what? Fuck you Sports Gods, fuck you.
I agree and I hate hearing him speak about Jesus.
Jesus is that annoying
by Built2Spill on Apr 23, 2009 12:18 AM PDT up reply actions
The Seahawks targeting Tebow?
Are you serious?
Well, should Tebow not fall in their lap, they could always trade for Vince Young. : P
I'd be more satisfied if he was a 4th rounder.
He’s bad.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 23, 2009 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions
Who cares?
If we have the 32nd pick, we won the super bowl. We could redraft Marcus Vick for all I care. 5 year fan immunity for the FO if they win a superbowl.
Oh yeah.
Man, I’m really slow today. Must be the yogurt I’m eating for lunch.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 23, 2009 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions
What would happen if we combined Charlie Frye and Brian Russell and the new creation became our QB/safety hybrid?
Seattle: Where the sun coming out or snow falling takes up 20 minutes of a 1 hour local news broadcast.
Best is an odd question, it implies I can determine that.
I guess you could say Pulp Fiction, which seems to have aged well and has the kind of popular appeal and artistic appeal that defines timelessness.
These movies age better as cult classics anyway. Best Pictures go to movies that stodgy white people like,
and that tends to gut the cult draw.
Holy shit.
Seems like last week. I feel old now.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 22, 2009 8:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Holy shit, how did that happen?
Sorry guys, feel free to delete them.
by aerozeppelin on Apr 22, 2009 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
Holy shit, how did that happen?
Sorry guys, feel free to delete them.
by aerozeppelin on Apr 22, 2009 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
A few that jump to mind immediately
Saving Private Ryan (lost to Shakespeare in Love)
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (lost to Gladiator)
The Dark Knight (wasn’t nominated)
Cinderella Man (wasn’t nominated)
Academy voters don't like action, they like love stories and/or movies that normal people don't like
It’s just trying to be “smarter than the masses”…Hollywood will always be like that. I bet they HATED knowing that Return of the King was too good to not vote in, because that movie was just made too well to give any awards to a “deep” foreign flick over it.
Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.
by BrettJMiller on Apr 22, 2009 3:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Shankshaw Redemption
Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.
by BrettJMiller on Apr 22, 2009 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions
While we're talking about movies, how about worst Best Pictures?
My vote goes to Slumdog Millionaire and Crash.
by aerozeppelin on Apr 22, 2009 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Slumdog was just ok. Stylish, but very shallow.
Crash was awful. Million Dollar Baby is an atrocity against filmmaking and boxing. I’ve never seen Titanic or Chicago.
Never...seen..Titanic.
DOES NOT COMPUTE.
And you’re married?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 22, 2009 4:05 PM PDT up reply actions
I am
She hates that movie. I’ve never had a girlfriend that is that type. Though I’ve seen Amelia many times.
Wow, you are a lucky man.
One day, I want to reflect upon my life and hope it was somewhere near as fulfilling as John Morgan’s, a man of which the likes we’ve never seen.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 22, 2009 4:09 PM PDT up reply actions
Glad to please.
You awesome spouse you.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 23, 2009 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions
I saw 20 minutes of Titanic while waiting to get my hair cut once
and that is all of it I’ve seen.
You know what? Fuck you Sports Gods, fuck you.
Wow. And I thought I was the only one that hasn't seen Titanic.
I can finally halt my life-long search and breath a sigh of relief.
I also haven't seen it
I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me.
Man, I wish I was lucky as you guys.
I’ve seen that movie at least 5 times. It seems to follow me wherever I go.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 23, 2009 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions
Me too, I was forced to see it multiple times
and at that age (14) Kate Winslet’s tit works only a couple times to overcome the blah-ness of the movie.
Ouch
Slumdog rocked I thought.
No Oscar crime has ever been greater, though, than the crap Ethridge song winning Best Picture over every DreamGirls song just so the carbon-neutral-rabid elitists could patronize us one more time for how much greener they are than everyone else.
by jacobstevens on Apr 22, 2009 3:55 PM PDT up reply actions
This isn't 15 years (or even close), but
1968 Romeo and Juliet by Franco Zeffirelli. I remain convinced that a crime against humanity happened when some shitty musical won Best Picture over it.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 22, 2009 4:14 PM PDT up reply actions
Every direct to sci fi movie ever
Because they all have the same plot, and they are all AWESOME
I think I just pooped your pants...
Was not really that great.
I mean, it was thrilling and all but doesn’t really have much depth to justify a Best Picture.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 22, 2009 6:19 PM PDT up reply actions
uh, like....
…Slumdog Millionaire? Crash? A Beautiful Mind? Driving Miss Daisy? Gladiator? Lord of the Rings?
I thought Dark Knight was full of interesting stuff, particularly the end. Easily as good as Slumdog Millionaire. The Wrestler was the best movie I saw this year, though… outside of Stepbrothers.
I didn't think any of those deserved best picture except for A Beautiful Mind.
Great techniques and plot devices; this is also why Slumdog won.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 22, 2009 9:33 PM PDT up reply actions
See this is the problem with best picture category
Story isn’t everything (even though I loved the dark knight story)
Through and through that movie is what great film making is all about. A director challenging everyone to step it up including being the first major action motion picture to use a imax camera (I can’t even begin to describe how much of a pain in the ass this would be) Also challenging everyone to figure out a way to do all the stunts for real and minimize the use of CGI. (flipping a 18wheeler in the middle of chicago) The performances from all the actors. And how the sound design of one note can make the Joker even more menacing…..
I can go on but I’m really tired.
NEEDS MORE FREEDOM!
by Scruffy Lefty on Apr 22, 2009 9:23 PM PDT up reply actions
Don't get me wrong, I loved TDK.
But just can see why the film committee didn’t vote for it.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 22, 2009 9:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Strongly dissagree on Dark Knight
Its one of the most critically acclaimed movies of this decade, and its a batman movie.
I would argue that Dark Knight had depth, but even if it didn’t, you don’t have to be a deep movie to win best Picture. How “deep” was Gladiator? Unforgiven? LoTR? Rocky? Even Slumdog was kind of a cheesy, shallow movie, even though it was pretty good.
Besides the fact that the Dark Knight was very well directed and produced, and had a very solid script, it also had a long list of great actors in it, including probably the most memorable acting performance this decade.
Anyway, I just don’t get people that were unimpressed by the Dark Knight. It was like the Michael Jordan or Jerry Rice of comic book films. It so stupendously excelled in so many ways, its the rarest kind of movie, especially in that genre.
Well looking back
We’ll wonder how MJ, Shaq, maybe Kobe or LeBron had so few MVPs, so awards mean nothing in both sports and general entertainment.
They should do awards for the moment (Oscar), and then 10 years later, which season/movie was the most memorable.
"Michael Jordan or Jerry Rice of comic book films"
That’s the thing. Comic book films for the most part are trash.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 23, 2009 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Overrated as hell.
I don’t understand the love affair with this film.
It's great to be a Florida Gator!
by Wayward Llama on Apr 22, 2009 11:31 PM PDT up reply actions
Thank you, me either.
Nor Batman Begins. The best Batmans are the original 2 by Tim Burton.
by Built2Spill on Apr 23, 2009 12:22 AM PDT up reply actions
I'm a big fan of Burton
He doesn’t get enough credit, he’s a real talent.
The original Batman was good because it was such a contrast from the campy 1960’s TV show. I think that movie is pretty over-rated, but considering the creativity involved, its still pretty good.
Batman Returns was pretty awkward though. The whole movie felt poisoned and confused. It also went a little too over the top at times and was just a bit too grim, gross, and off-putting by the time it was over. It wasn’t the worst Batman movie, but it was the least fun.
I liked Batman Begins.
But to see that or The Dark Knight deserved Best Picture confuses me.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 23, 2009 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions
As a long time Batman comic reader
I’ll say no thanks to the Burton films. While the world of the first movie felt pretty good, there was just too much else about it that didn’t work.
The second movie was designed to sell action figures, bleh.
You know what? Fuck you Sports Gods, fuck you.
And.... The Creature
NEEDS MORE FREEDOM!
by Scruffy Lefty on Apr 22, 2009 6:05 PM PDT up reply actions
Four words:
There Will Be Blood.
Is that the light at the end of the tunnel, or the headlights of an oncoming train?
I fell asleep watching about 15 minutes in on that movie.
I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me.
Now THAT was a spectacular movie.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 23, 2009 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Interesting. Seahawk Addicts says if Stafford is a no, Aaron Curry would be next in line.
http://www.seahawkaddicts.com/2009/04/confusion-from-motown.html
Seattle: Where the sun coming out or snow falling takes up 20 minutes of a 1 hour local news broadcast.
Seahawk Addicts doesn't actually say anything
It’s linking to a story from MLive, and in doing so is actually misconstruing the story. The Lions have not announced “they have a deal pending with Wake Forest LB Aaron Curry if things don’t pan out with their supposed No.1 choice, Matt Stafford.” MLive is reporting something from a “league source”. It’s just a link dump.
There are several differing version
almost all are capsulized here: http://rotoworld.com/content/Home_NFL.aspx
What QB projected for the later rounds would you be most willing to draft?
Seattle: Where the sun coming out or snow falling takes up 20 minutes of a 1 hour local news broadcast.
Do we need a RB? Or can we finally promote Forsett?
Seattle: Where the sun coming out or snow falling takes up 20 minutes of a 1 hour local news broadcast.
Seattle would benefit from adding a running back
It doesn’t have to be at the expense of Forsett. The two can battle for the position in the preseason.
Bigger back?
Do you think since they do have Forsett that it would be more likely or advantagous to go with a bigger back, more along the lines of Duckett, or does that even matter?
Last questions from me
Do you think that on September 13th we’ll be witnessing Walter Jones play in his final home and season opener?
Should we boo Josh Brown again?
Seattle: Where the sun coming out or snow falling takes up 20 minutes of a 1 hour local news broadcast.
I'm staying out of the Jones stuff
I will only say he’s battling the odds.
I don’t think I would boo Josh, but more power to anyone who does.
Please boo for me.
It's great to be a Florida Gator!
by Wayward Llama on Apr 22, 2009 11:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Thanks again JM! Haven't done this AQA in a long time and enjoyed it.
Can’t wait for the draft!
Seattle: Where the sun coming out or snow falling takes up 20 minutes of a 1 hour local news broadcast.
Great stuff, even just to read and not make comments…other than LantermanC’s movie recommendations, that is!
I believe I was so bored one day, I watched it 3x in a single day.
Soundtrack when the credits roll is great though.
All jokes aside
I’m not sure there’s anything tougher than getting a group of people to agree on movies. That’s why they make so many of them…that and the money, I guess.
Who is the Best Linebacker in this draft?
I have seen multiple mocks with Cushing falling to us in the second. what do you think and waht is your opinions on Tyrone Mckenzie, Ian Johnson, Ramses barden, and my favorite sleeper Rashad Jennings?
Curry lol
forgot about the best player on DEF but for some reason i dont beleive you draft a LB in the top 5 who isnt a rush LB
i know its past 4 but for the rest of us still here
ium not asking john im asking who is still in here
Curry
What are his greatest strenghts, i have seen none of his games nor his tape and seem like he was for sure a top10 pick before the combine and shot up after the combine just like Jason Smith.
The funny thing with smith was he was a second round talent at the end of the season, on 7-10 mocks i read and was like anywhere between 25-35 on most bigboards
Same here
I was out last night celebrating a friend’s birthday, came home at midnight (I’m in the UK) and thought I’d have a quick look on FG to see if there was any news before I went to bed – spent the next 30 mins reading through the above! Great read. Thanks John.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Maria Menounos wears Giants bikini in Times Square after Patriots loss
- How the Super Bowl prop bets played out
- Want to watch UMass kids riot and a Giants fan get punched in the back of the head?
- Only dance can heal the wounded souls of Matt Light and Rob Gronkowski
- Hysterical Pats Fan Cries Over ‘Stupid’ Team
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
