2014 NFL Draft

nerd69 · 06-03-2014 8:44pm

Patww79 wrote: »

Expecting the Packers to flit another couple of early round picks on mediocre to poor defensive players.

Yup joke of an organisation

Paully D · 06-03-2014 9:39pm

Paully D wrote: »

He'll be A.J. Green type levels of good IMO.

HigginsJ wrote: »

I don't see him as a No.1 guy ala Megatron, Bryant, Fitz or Green.

It's hard not to be intrigued by his speed but he is a little on the short side for me & was used in very specific ways at Clemson so will need time to develop in the NFL. I think he could be a really good No.2 where he is able to beat single coverage with his speed but as a top 5 pick he could be abit of a bust.

If I was looking for a WR I would rather wait & get Jordan Matthews at the same spot in the 2nd round.

Probably the first time that I've been discussing the draft on this forum (that I can recall anyway) that we disagree strongly on a draft prospect. We're usually similar enough in our opinions.

I definitely see him as a #1, A.J. Green type receiver. Lovely hands (that sounds strange :pac:), can get up there and win the ball in the air, and if he gets a step after the catch it's goodnight, he's going for massive yards.

It'll be very interesting to see how things turn out

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Interesting thing for me is that I don't recall seeing any two NFL draft analysts or mock drafts giving the Packers the same player up to this point! It really does seem to be impossible to get a grip on who the Packers will go with, even more so than in other years.

davyjose · 06-03-2014 9:52pm

Todd McShay has Bortles goin #1 on his latest mock draft. Can't say I agree, but Bortles' stock has really risen since the combine.

http://imgur.com/gallery/oP0Lx

mikemac1 · 06-03-2014 9:56pm

That's funny as on the front page of nfl.com is a headline of Bortles dropping and Bucky Brooks mocked him 20 to the Cardinals

OldMrBrennan83 · 06-03-2014 10:32pm

This post has been deleted.

HigginsJ · 06-03-2014 10:49pm

Paully D wrote: »

Probably the first time that I've been discussing the draft on this forum (that I can recall anyway) that we disagree strongly on a draft prospect. We're usually similar enough in our opinions.

I definitely see him as a #1, A.J. Green type receiver. Lovely hands (that sounds strange :pac:), can get up there and win the ball in the air, and if he gets a step after the catch it's goodnight, he's going for massive yards.

It'll be very interesting to see how things turn out

Yea was bit odd disagreeing with you alright!!

Paully D · 06-03-2014 11:26pm

Lads, what are your opinions on Jake Matthews/Greg Robinson?

I see a huge amount of mocks giving those in need of a LT Greg Robinson if both he and Matthews are on the board, but personally I'd take Matthews if I had the choice.

Don't get me wrong, Robinson is good, he's an excellent run blocker, but I'd be worried about his pass blocking. I'm not sure if he's going to be able to slot straight in at LT in the NFL or how long it will take him to get his pass blocking up to scratch.

Matthews isn't going to improve a whole ton on what he is currently IMO, but I think I'd be confident enough to put him on an NFL O-line at the LT position. He's very, very solid. Not an athletic freak like Robinson, but technique wise I like him a lot more.

If I'm spending a high first round pick on a LT I'd go with the guy I don't have to worry much about IMO. I can see both sides of the argument though. Robinson probably has a much bigger ceiling.

KrustyUCC · 07-03-2014 12:29am

Matthews is better player for me

Robinson has higher ceiling to improve

Saw 1 mock where Matthews fell to 12

That would be steal of century for Giants

Most mocks have us taking Lewan

Giants usually stay away from players with off field issues in 1st round

nerd69 · 07-03-2014 12:58am

I've herd a few people say Robinson is the best tackle theve ever studied better than Thomas,long etc when they were drafted

I'd possibly go jake because he will know Wat expected and be prepared for the nfl for day one due to his family

But tbh I think both are better prospects than the guys who went one and two last year can't go wrong with either or lewan for that matter

Chucky the tree · 07-03-2014 7:28pm

not sure if it's some irrational hatred for Watkins but I just don't really rate him. I'd nearly be tempted to draft Matthews over him. In my eyes he's a high floor, low ceiling type of pick. Haven't seen enough of him that makes me think he can jump up and pluck balls out the air with ease, and for his size he needs to excel at that.

andyman · 13-03-2014 12:05am

nerd69 wrote: »

D-lines do not win superbowls qbs do

Reading back through this thread and this made me laugh.

HigginsJ · 13-03-2014 12:14am

andyman wrote: »

Reading back through this thread and this made me laugh.

It's pretty accurate really.

andyman · 13-03-2014 1:40am

Yeah, I had originally mixed up D-Lines as whole defences and now I look foolish.

Lions take Gilbert at 10, just to contribute

nerd69 · 13-03-2014 1:59am

andyman wrote: »

Yeah, I had originally mixed up D-Lines as whole defences and now I look foolish.

Lions take Gilbert at 10, just to contribute

i was wondering although to be fair look at whos won some of the recent super bowls flacco and eli in particular are not elite with mallet there now my point is mute anyway looks like there not convinced by any of the qbs

Paully D · 17-03-2014 5:32pm

Bridgewater's pro day extremely average today by all accounts.

helimachoptor · 17-03-2014 6:01pm

Paully D wrote: »

Bridgewater's pro day extremely average today by all accounts.

yep seems to be the concensus

Paully D · 17-03-2014 8:09pm

helimachoptor wrote: »

yep seems to be the concensus

No excuse for a QB not to look good in a scripted environment I guess, but the pro day doesn't highlight many things Bridgewater does far better than the others such as reading defenses etc. I'd still take him #1.

Red Crow · 20-03-2014 12:08am

Does anyone else not get some of the nonsense that surrounds the draft. Mel Kiper and Todd McShay were talking about who Atlanta were going to take in the draft. They said that Ebron would be a great fit but to take him at 6 would be a bad call as he sits in the 8-15 range. It's not the first time I've heard a comment like that. IMO if a team likes a player and thinks he's a good fit then they should take him. Yes they could attempt to trade back but what's to stop a team taking him at 7? Why not just take your guy if you like him?

Why try and get more value when the guy you want is there in front of you? Why take a risk when you can close out a deal on a player you like.

mikemac1 · 20-03-2014 10:59pm

Sometimes it works

Everyone it seems except the Browns front office knew the Vikings would take Matt Kalil.

The Browns wanted Trent Richardson so badly that moved from 4 to 3 and gave up a 4th, a 5th and a 7th

Minnesota turned that into:
Jarius Wright wide reciever
Robert Blanton safety
Blair Walsh kicker

I don't know a whole lot about those three players. It's all a risk on the day and if the front office reckon they can get their target then for sure they can try this

Paully D · 20-03-2014 11:29pm

Red Crow wrote: »

Does anyone else not get some of the nonsense that surrounds the draft. Mel Kiper and Todd McShay were talking about who Atlanta were going to take in the draft. They said that Ebron would be a great fit but to take him at 6 would be a bad call as he sits in the 8-15 range. It's not the first time I've heard a comment like that. IMO if a team likes a player and thinks he's a good fit then they should take him. Yes they could attempt to trade back but what's to stop a team taking him at 7? Why not just take your guy if you like him?

Why try and get more value when the guy you want is there in front of you? Why take a risk when you can close out a deal on a player you like.

That's just bluster from analysts. They can categorize players like that but teams won't. Teams will always take the player they have ranked #1 on their board (whether that's best player available or to fill a glaring need, whichever strategy they choose) if he is available.

There's no chance a head coach and general manager will sit in their war room on draft night and say to each other ''Player X is the highest on our board and is available now with our pick, but we're picking #8 and he's more of a pick #10-#12 standard player." I couldn't envisage them even categorizing like that in the first place. If the Falcons have Ebron as their #1 and he's available, they'll take him. They don't worry about where analysts have pegged them into a range.

I know it ultimately involved a trade down, but a good example is the Cowboys last year with Fredrick. Personally I had him down as a third rounder, he was pegged as a second rounder at best by all accounts, yet he was the highest rated player on the Cowboys draft board (evidenced thanks to a sharp photographer) when they picked at #31 and thus took him.

Dublin Red Devil · 21-03-2014 3:53am

High praise for Kahlil Mack over Clowney

Silver-Tiger · 21-03-2014 3:41pm

Dublin Red Devil wrote: »

High praise for Kahlil Mack over Clowney

Stopped at 4.00 before them 2 w@nkers came in but High Praise indeed. A serious serious butchering of Clowney mind.

Knex* · 21-03-2014 4:17pm

Silver-Tiger wrote: »

Stopped at 4.00 before them 2 w@nkers came in but High Praise indeed. A serious serious butchering of Clowney mind.

They're theater (albeit bad theater). Its like watching Dunphy and the lads in the RTE Studio. Never take them seriously, and just laugh at them a bit.

Whatever about Stephen A, Skip Bayless is a bit much alright though.

Dublin Red Devil · 21-03-2014 5:15pm

Silver-Tiger wrote: »

Stopped at 4.00 before them 2 w@nkers came in but High Praise indeed. A serious serious butchering of Clowney mind.

I enjoy watching them, their good entertainment. I woud be extatic if mack somehow fell to the giants. I think this is overly harsh on clowney. I think he should be picked 1st. If not him than Johnny football

taidghbaby · 21-03-2014 6:24pm

Dublin Red Devil wrote: »

I enjoy watching them, their good entertainment. I woud be extatic if mack somehow fell to the giants. I think this is overly harsh on clowney. I think he should be picked 1st. If not him than Johnny football

They're good entertainment but not good analysts!

nerd69 · 21-03-2014 8:31pm

taidghbaby wrote: »

They're good entertainment but not good analysts!

Terrible analysts but if your watching there show for indepth analysis your doing it wrong.

Credit where it's due though Stephen a broke the phil to Knicks story

davyjose · 21-03-2014 11:08pm

nerd69 wrote: »

Terrible analysts but if your watching there show for indepth analysis your doing it wrong.

Credit where it's due though Stephen a broke the phil to Knicks story

Stephen A is a decent Basketball analyst, and a poor Football analyst. Bayless knows almost nothing about any sport except football, in which he knows just enough to troll.