takeitdown

If they provide the video, teams can run their own stopwatch. I figured that's what most teams would do...set up a 3 cone, 40 yard dash, short shuttle, etc. and just film the guys and send the video to front offices. Obviously you don't know wind/etc., but should give a good idea.

I mean if they took him in the first, and CB, DT, Safety with the next 3 picks, that'd improve the team. Really wish we had the other 2nd and it wouldn't be as hard (could take a corner and safety in the 2nd, DT in the 3rd). I still hope we take a DT in the first or otherwise improve the D.

Well, he says the strength of the draft is WR, CB, DT, OT so at least he seems to be in line there (might add RB).

So that has us running 3 deep at DE with Fowler, Takk, Cominsky and then Means/Larkin at a 4th that may or may not make it And at DT with Jarrett, Davison, Bailey, and the question mark of Senat? And Tuioti Mariner somewhere off in the distance? Seems like we can really use a legit threat at either of those positions. A playmaker at either is going to make the whole group better, but probably not looking for a 4th rounder at those positions, as we have some developing depth. Wouldn't be surprised at all with a 1st round DT. But it looks like we may be going heavy on the secondary.

Agreed. We need at least 1 guy of the caliber. But I'll take 2. We need at least 1 so they can smooth over any bumps with Sheff, Oliver. And we still should take a mid round CB even if we get a vet.

Yeah. I'd like a mid tier vet and one early to mid draft pick. That'd give us a young nucleus to grow, with qualified vet experience to step up in case of problems (and we also have some safety flexibility in case of emergency)

There were a lot of mistakes in that game. We couldn't convert 3rd down to save our lives. We got a couple turnovers at opportune moments that made it look more lopsided than it was early. Still, had we started milking clock middle of the 3rd, they would have had a hard time coming back. We were making them take long drives. But we chose to stay aggressive and that's fine. When it wasn't fine was with 4 minutes in the game and inside field goal range. Run 3 times and kick a field goal. There is no excuse for anything else there. You take the win. Up 11 points with 3 minutes left and them w no timeouts and it's game over.

If by a trade we can come down with a good CB, DT, S and edge or LB in the first 3 rounds, then we can be a way different team. I like a few of these. Can then take RB/WR in the 4th and you've set yourself up to have a good haul.

I’m saying he’s got to be enough better than graham to be worth a 2nd. if he’s only 200 yards better than graham, we would’ve been better off using that pick on a defender but I hope it’s a clear cut win

I'm hoping you're right, obviously. I think Hurst is likely to be better year 1 than who we would have drafted at TE. I just don't know how much better he is than what we have, and if that is worth a 2nd. I know he should be better, but it's always a question of how much. I like the 2nd round in this draft a lot, so I lean toward I would have rather spent that on a safety or DT we wouldn't have gotten otherwise. But my hope is Hurst becomes a 1000 yard TE and makes us all ecstatic.

Yeah. IOL has been our biggest consistent weakness along with pass rush over the last 20 years to me. We'd have a good year here or there, but not consistently. And the rest is useless without that. Your passing game and run game start there. I hope Hurst is great, I just would have gone multiple other places first. I feel like Graham would have been fine for 500 yards. If Hurst is going to be 700 yards...I wouldn't have spent a 2nd for the difference.

All these mocks make me really wish we hadn't traded our 2nd rounder away. That extra 2nd could have given us Uche, Swift, or Biadasz (w minor trade for Uche) in this version.

Unless a top 6 talent drops, I don't see it. There are 6 to 8 top players in this draft, and then there are 40 after that who are similarly talented. In that situation, you're far better off trading back and trying to get a late first and early 2nd for your mid first. Since we still have holes to fill, that could easily be the difference between getting a quality safety or DT in the 2nd, and not getting one at all because we fill other holes.

Everything is important. But being able to be a top running team isn't as critical. Now it's more of "have a way to consistently pick up yardage with low risk." Which he did himself in NE by doing the short passing option routes. Picking up the blitz, converting 3rd downs, converting scoring opportunities haven't changed at all.

A lot has changed since '91, but still a lot of that holds. He back then wants the versatility in his guys, and cares a lot about them being able to do what they're told/supposed to instead of being phenoms.