Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

2019 Nfl Draft

Options
1…457910

Comments

  • Options
    #182
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,627 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Absolutely shocked that Haskins fell all the way to 15. Imo he should have been the no.1 pick.
    It really doesn't matter how Kyler Murray works out, he is a risk given his height so should never have been picked in the top 10.
    Haskins on the other hand has the height and an incredible arm. He is ready to go I think and the Washington Redskins just became my favourites to win the AFC East.
    Delighted with the Patriots taking N'Keal Harry. We badly needed WR and this guy fits the bill as a big target who is an excellent route runner and has great hands and athletic ability.
    Redskins clearly won the first round getting Haskins and Montez Sweat.
    Whoever is running the show for the Buccaneers, Dolphins, Giants and Broncos should be sacked for passing up on Haskins.


  • Options
    #183
    D9Male
    Registered Users Posts: 1,644 ✭✭✭D9Male


    Of course it matters if Murray works out. Why wouldn't it?

    Pretty underwhelming draft in the drama stakes by the looks of it. Lots of corners on the board for Day 2.


  • Options
    #184
    el Fenomeno
    Registered Users Posts: 3,131 ✭✭✭el Fenomeno


    letowski wrote: »
    Rumors were that Daniel Jones was not going to get by Denver so NYG had to pick him at 6

    I don't know. If I heard that Elway wanted to draft the QB I had my eyes on, I'd immediately reconsider it.


  • Options
    #185
    The_Honeybadger
    Registered Users Posts: 4,155 ✭✭✭The_Honeybadger


    Raiders pick was a surprise to say the least. PFT on Monday called the Giants picking Jones and felt he was underrated but even so he looks like a tremendous reach. Hope it works out for them.

    Delighted the Steelers got Devin Bush but it was a costly manoeuvre. They have two rd 3 picks and bagful of picks between 4-6 so I expect them to trade back in to the second this evening.


  • Options
    #186
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users Posts: 39,556 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    Just a note that there is a 40 minute version of the first round of the draft from last night on gamepass.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #187
    Knex*
    Registered Users Posts: 22,477 ✭✭✭✭Knex*


    Well, I'm fairly sickened by that Jones pick. Especially at 6 with Josh Allen on board and Haskins not going til 15.

    Lawrence, a two down player at 17 is also hard to take.

    I do like the trade up for Baker, but if Jones is Tannehill at absolute best case scenario, then it won't matter. This franchise will go nowhere.

    Rumours are that both Broncos and Redskins had Jones mocked higher than Haskins, which is part of the reason Giants pulled the trigger, but I find that baffling.


  • Options
    #188
    phatkev
    Registered Users Posts: 3,636 ✭✭✭phatkev


    Knex. wrote: »
    Well, I'm fairly sickened by that Jones pick. Especially at 6 with Josh Allen on board and Haskins not going til 15.

    And to think of the QB's they passed up on last year!
    Lawrence, a two down player at 17 is also hard to take.

    Getting rid of Snacks for a fifth round pick makes even less sense now as well!


    Can the Jets finally hand over the moniker of NY's circus team to the Giants now?


  • Options
    #189
    Morrison J
    Registered Users Posts: 3,852 ✭✭✭Morrison J


    eagle eye wrote: »
    Absolutely shocked that Haskins fell all the way to 15. Imo he should have been the no.1 pick.
    It really doesn't matter how Kyler Murray works out, he is a risk given his height so should never have been picked in the top 10.
    Haskins on the other hand has the height and an incredible arm. He is ready to go I think and the Washington Redskins just became my favourites to win the AFC East.
    Delighted with the Patriots taking N'Keal Harry. We badly needed WR and this guy fits the bill as a big target who is an excellent route runner and has great hands and athletic ability.
    Redskins clearly won the first round getting Haskins and Montez Sweat.
    Whoever is running the show for the Buccaneers, Dolphins, Giants and Broncos should be sacked for passing up on Haskins.

    Think you're far too high on Haskins personally. He has some tools but he had some genuinely horrible games in college. He's terrible under pressure and with the Skins interior O-Line as it is I don't think he's going to thrive there as it stands. Needs to sit for a year but knowing Snyder he'll be pushed to start week 1.


  • Options
    #190
    nerd69
    Registered Users Posts: 9,670 ✭✭✭nerd69


    Knex. wrote: »
    Well, I'm fairly sickened by that Jones pick. Especially at 6 with Josh Allen on board and Haskins not going til 15.

    Lawrence, a two down player at 17 is also hard to take.

    I do like the trade up for Baker, but if Jones is Tannehill at absolute best case scenario, then it won't matter. This franchise will go nowhere.

    Rumours are that both Broncos and Redskins had Jones mocked higher than Haskins, which is part of the reason Giants pulled the trigger, but I find that baffling.

    Also the broncos/skins don't have the best history of evaluating QBs


  • Options
    #191
    Lionbacker
    Registered Users Posts: 981 ✭✭✭Lionbacker


    Faugheen wrote: »
    Lionbacker wrote: »
    Not impressed

    He's an excellent player. Badly needed production at TE and makes sense.

    My problem is that you can get a perfectly fine TE in the later rounds. For example Gronk was a 2nd rounder & Kittle went in the 5th round.
    I don't think you could get comparably good pass rushers later in the draft.
    If Flowers goes down, we're in trouble.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #192
    Foxtrol
    Registered Users Posts: 11,032 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    eagle eye wrote: »
    Absolutely shocked that Haskins fell all the way to 15. Imo he should have been the no.1 pick.
    It really doesn't matter how Kyler Murray works out, he is a risk given his height so should never have been picked in the top 10.
    Haskins on the other hand has the height and an incredible arm. He is ready to go I think and the Washington Redskins just became my favourites to win the AFC East.

    You can't look at a player in a vacuum of the teams they're going to. I was quite high on Haskins, shocked he dropped that far, but he wouldn't be a fit at all for the Cardinals, with their porous OL and Kingsburry's scheme, while Murray fits perfectly.

    Also, I strongly disagree with ruling players out of being a high pick due to a physical measurable, plenty of players have shown teams to be fools for playing it safe and letting them drop while prototypical sized guys bust regularly.


  • Options
    #193
    Foxtrol
    Registered Users Posts: 11,032 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    At this point you could make an argument that since Gettleman took over he has been purposefully trying damage the Giants for the long term.

    I'm not quite sure which is more bizarre, the decisions he makes or his explanations for the decisions. Last night he stated that they couldn't miss out on Jones but he could see him sitting behind Eli for 3 years.


  • Options
    #194
    neris
    Registered Users Posts: 20,042 ✭✭✭✭neris


    Not a big follower of american football but been watching bits and pieces online over last few months but can some one explain what the purpose of the draft is and why a team cant just go down to a college and sign a kid up in the same way a soccer team could


  • Options
    #195
    tgdaly
    Registered Users Posts: 933 ✭✭✭tgdaly


    neris wrote: »
    Not a big follower of american football but been watching bits and pieces online over last few months but can some one explain what the purpose of the draft is and why a team cant just go down to a college and sign a kid up in the same way a soccer team could

    Basically it's designed to create fairness amongst all the teams, so the worst team from last year gets the first pick next year, and the best team gets the last pick. The hope is it'll stop certain teams from being dominant and give every team the hope it can win each year. As opposed to football where team with money will usually get the best players


  • Options
    #196
    Knex*
    Registered Users Posts: 22,477 ✭✭✭✭Knex*


    https://twitter.com/JimNagy_SB/status/1121757591019884545


  • Options
    #197
    el Fenomeno
    Registered Users Posts: 3,131 ✭✭✭el Fenomeno


    The_Honeybadger wrote: »
    Raiders pick was a surprise to say the least.

    It's funny because Mayock as a GM is getting slammed for that pick.

    Yet if Mayock the NFL Network analyst had put Ferrell as his no. 2 DE behind Bosa on his annual Top 5 position lists, a different GM would be being praised right now for a smart pick.


  • Options
    #198
    The_Honeybadger
    Registered Users Posts: 4,155 ✭✭✭The_Honeybadger


    el Fenomeno wrote: »
    It's funny because Mayock as a GM is getting slammed for that pick.

    Yet if Mayock the NFL Network analyst had put Ferrell as his no. 2 DE behind Bosa on his annual Top 5 position lists, a different GM would be being praised right now for a smart pick.

    Was only saying it was a surprise pick, not that it’s a bad pick. Obviously if the guy is an all pro and fits what Oakland want to do it will be a good pick. Nobody knows for sure yet, not even Gruden and Mayock.


  • Options
    #199
    Foxtrol
    Registered Users Posts: 11,032 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    el Fenomeno wrote: »
    It's funny because Mayock as a GM is getting slammed for that pick.

    Yet if Mayock the NFL Network analyst had put Ferrell as his no. 2 DE behind Bosa on his annual Top 5 position lists, a different GM would be being praised right now for a smart pick.

    I really don’t think Mayock is getting slammed for the pick. General consensus is that it was a bit early for him, but that he was still a great talent and in a position of need for them, especially with the clear top 2 off the board.

    Mayock was never really a golden source for draft ranking. Sure, he was respected, but it wasn’t as if the wider draft community shape their opinions based on what he said. It is also pretty obvious that Gruden is still running the show there with the picks, Mayock shouldn’t be getting slammed for any picks.


  • Options
    #200
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,627 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Morrison J wrote:
    Think you're far too high on Haskins personally. He has some tools but he had some genuinely horrible games in college. He's terrible under pressure and with the Skins interior O-Line as it is I don't think he's going to thrive there as it stands. Needs to sit for a year but knowing Snyder he'll be pushed to start week 1.
    Please explain how you came to the conclusion that he is terrible under pressure.
    Foxtrol wrote:
    You can't look at a player in a vacuum of the teams they're going to. I was quite high on Haskins, shocked he dropped that far, but he wouldn't be a fit at all for the Cardinals, with their porous OL and Kingsburry's scheme, while Murray fits perfectly.
    You build the offense around your QB, if he is a good one, not the other way around.
    Foxtrol wrote:
    Also, I strongly disagree with ruling players out of being a high pick due to a physical measurable, plenty of players have shown teams to be fools for playing it safe and letting them drop while prototypical sized guys bust regularly.
    Name the last player of his height or smaller to succeed in the NFL at QB.
    You won't find one in the last thirty years.
    He may have success for a short while until teams figure him out. His running will keep him alive for a while but he is going up against smarter, faster players than he faced in college.
    I'm pointing out the reasons he will fail. It's entirely possible that he doesn't fail but it's a huge gamble and ridiculous to take him in the top 10.


  • Options
    #201
    Foxtrol
    Registered Users Posts: 11,032 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    eagle eye wrote: »
    You build the offense around your QB, if he is a good one, not the other way around.

    If they were sticking with Rosen then yes, he’d need to rebuild his offense to suit him, but if they’re picking a new QB then you pick one that fits your system (especially when he is also the consensus better QB). They made their bed by picking Kingsbury and if they were picking a QB it would be crazy to pick one that didn’t suit his scheme.
    Name the last player of his height or smaller to succeed in the NFL at QB.
    You won't find one in the last thirty years.
    He may have success for a short while until teams figure him out. His running will keep him alive for a while but he is going up against smarter, faster players than he faced in college.
    I'm pointing out the reasons he will fail. It's entirely possible that he doesn't fail but it's a huge gamble and ridiculous to take him in the top 10.

    Do you really think the less than an inch difference in height between Murray and Wilson will be the difference between being a success and failure? People have tried and failed to figure Wilson out for years. There are plenty of reasons that Murray could fail, but I very much doubt it will be because of an inch or two in height.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #202
    letowski
    Registered Users Posts: 3,112 ✭✭✭letowski


    Miami Dolphins closing in on Rosen going on reports. They would give up the #48 pick.


  • Options
    #203
    D9Male
    Registered Users Posts: 1,644 ✭✭✭D9Male


    Haskins' passer rating under pressure is half of what he achieved without pressure.

    His drop-off is double the typical drop-off of an NFL QB.


  • Options
    #204
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,627 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Foxtrol wrote:
    If they were sticking with Rosen then yes, he’d need to rebuild his offense to suit him, but if they’re picking a new QB then you pick one that fits your system (especially when he is also the consensus better QB). They made their bed by picking Kingsbury and if they were picking a QB it would be crazy to pick one that didn’t suit his scheme.
    If you don't have an intensive line it doesn't matter what QB you have.
    Foxtrol wrote:
    Do you really think the less than an inch difference in height between Murray and Wilson will be the difference between being a success and failure? People have tried and failed to figure Wilson out for years. There are plenty of reasons that Murray could fail, but I very much doubt it will be because of an inch or two in height.
    You are picking the exception to the rule as your comparison.
    Wilson was a much more prototypical QB coming out of college. He had good feet in the pocket, he was a good runner too but he played a lot more in the pocket than Murray. He was a much safer bet to succeed.
    You realise that Murray only started for one year in college?


  • Options
    #205
    phatkev
    Registered Users Posts: 3,636 ✭✭✭phatkev


    eagle eye wrote: »
    You realise that Murray only started for one year in college?

    Didnt Haskins only start one year as well?


  • Options
    #206
    Morrison J
    Registered Users Posts: 3,852 ✭✭✭Morrison J


    eagle eye wrote: »
    Please explain how you came to the conclusion that he is terrible under pressure.

    How long do you have? His mechanics tend to go to pot under pressure.

    https://imgur.com/KuW3JHW

    https://imgur.com/IxKHxjK

    https://imgur.com/A3iHBDj

    https://imgur.com/KI7PGkZ

    https://imgur.com/Fu5QuXv


  • Options
    #207
    Foxtrol
    Registered Users Posts: 11,032 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    eagle eye wrote: »
    If you don't have an intensive line it doesn't matter what QB you have.

    If you dont have an OL, I'd much rather have Murray than Haskins.
    You are picking the exception to the rule as your comparison.
    Wilson was a much more prototypical QB coming out of college. He had good feet in the pocket, he was a good runner too but he played a lot more in the pocket than Murray. He was a much safer bet to succeed.

    Hard to really call Wilson an exception, as in there isn’t a massive list of failed NFL QBs under 6ft. Like a lot of positions, there is a perceived wisdom in what measurables a player should/must have and as a result they get pushed to other positions before they get to the NFL and never get a chance to succeed. Then teams take a risk on a guy that isnt willing to make the move and it opens the door for others to follow. It happens constantly.
    You realise that Murray only started for one year in college?

    You realise Haskins, who you are pushing to go #1, also only started one year in college?


  • Options
    #208
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,627 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Foxtrol wrote:
    Hard to really call Wilson an exception, as in there isn’t a massive list of failed NFL QBs under 6ft. Like a lot of positions, there is a perceived wisdom in what measurables a player should/must have and as a result they get pushed to other positions before they get to the NFL and never get a chance to succeed. Then teams take a risk on a guy that isnt willing to make the move and it opens the door for others to follow. It happens constantly.

    You want to compare Wilson, I'll compare Doug Flutie. Heisman winner, no good in the NFL. Or Seneca Wallace, no good in the NFL.


  • Options
    #209
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,627 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Morrison J wrote:
    How long do you have? His mechanics tend to go to pot under pressure.
    I'm sorry, what wash supposed to see there to suggest hevis bad under pressure?


  • Options
    #210
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,627 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Foxtrol wrote:
    You realise Haskins, who you are pushing to go #1, also only started one year in college?
    Yes I do but he is not a running QB.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #211
    Foxtrol
    Registered Users Posts: 11,032 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    eagle eye wrote: »
    You want to compare Wilson, I'll compare Doug Flutie. Heisman winner, no good in the NFL. Or Seneca Wallace, no good in the NFL.

    So you're saying their height is the cause of why they weren't good in the NFL, that they would have been successful if they were an extra inch or two taller?


Advertisement