National Football League

Page 40 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Their analysis of Seattle was good. Obvious need at QB, but they are out of the Luck/RG3 sweeps. They definitely need a LB who can cover the pass, probably a CB, a TE, and a possession receiver. But their defense impressed, and has very good potential, and the young OL was coming together at the end of the year. 2013, 2014, they could be quite good.

I'm all but convinced if the Redskins can't get Manning, theyll make a trade just like Bleecher repert says to get RG3. There's no reason Griffin shouldn't be taken 2nd in the draft. The guy has NFL star written all over him.

Interesting that they have Brandon Weeden the 3rd QB picked. Obvious talent, but at 28, a bit of a risk.
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,924
0
0
So Alpe, this RG3 to the Skins possibility - is this just one sports journalist's opinion, or do you think there is more to it? Do these people have/get inside info from the clubs?

Keeping football talk ticking over......Foxxy, please feel free to respond too, I only addressed Alpe because he posted the story, but maybe we can drag this one out for a while....;)
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
Ahh guys, speculating about the draft is the same as pre season picks for superbowls. Actually it leads to nothing. Even Kiper, who made a business out of it :eek: is wrong 50% of times (he picks 40 (?) players out of 300 at the combine). In other words let a monkey throw 40 darts at the 300 players and he´ll get the same (but unpaid) results.

Sorry guys i won´t discuss a non topic just for the sake of killing time. ;)

And, to be honest, the "clinic stuff" was more interesting.

But i´ll give it a try anyway, like i did in the pre season:
1st pick is RG III to Indy. That´s all i can predict. And you guys know that i am sure Luck will be a bust. But that has nothing to do with the draft order anyway.

Finally, you know my SB-Winner-Pick: TB after going 7-9 in the regular season. Avatar bet 1/10 odds anyone? :D
 
First on RG3. If Luck were not in this draft, Griffin would be taken 1st, without question. There are more than a couple people who think he should be taken first anyway. He has quicker reads and is probably more accurate deep than Luck, which are two key factors for an NFL QB. Luck is simply more polished as a pocket passer, which does matter. I don't know how much you guys saw RG3 outside of the Alamo bowl where Washington played constant dime/quarter deep zone packages to stop him, but he made several quick deep throws during the year that were astounding, jaw-dropping, at how accurate he was, even on the move. If StL or Minnesota needed a QB, they'd take RG3 with the 2nd or 3rd pick. He won't fall past Cleveland, who maybe doesn't need him, as they have McCoy, but RG3 is too good to pass up beyond there. Washington must make a big trade with St. Louis to get him, and it may take three draft picks/players. Considering Washington's situation and desperate need for a franchise quarterback, and RG3's potential, it's probably worth giving that up to get him.

As to who will do well in 2012-2013, that's a huge crap shoot. Especially now. Of course some teams will improve, and some will fall, and maybe I'll try to speculate on that later. But if I had to pick a 2012 Superbowl right now, I'd pick New Orleans vs. Houston.
 
Alpe d'Huez said:
Moving away from the conspiracy fun and back to the sport. Here's the latest mock draft, courtesy of Bleacher Report. I agree with their thoughts that it's very possible the Redskins will give up three picks in order to be able to draft RG3 with the second pick in the draft. Very possible. It's something Snider and the Redskins would risk, and it's something St. Louis will give up. The only question I think is just how much they'll give up.
Here's a summary of the Bleacher Report link you posted. I too thought they had a pretty good analysis, including this bit on Washington:
The Washington Redskins hopefully learned from their previous mistakes and avoid signing a veteran quarterback. Peyton Manning, Matt Flynn and Kyle Orton are not what this franchise needs to get back into contention. A young quarterback like Baylor's Robert Griffin III would provide both a long-term and immediate upgrade.

Mike Shanahan wants to win now, but that want could end up costing him his job. He needs to look further into the future and make a move to land Griffin III. The Redskins have a good enough defense to make the playoffs, and I argue that Griffin III can get the offense where it needs to be.

The play of rookie quarterbacks like Andy Dalton and Cam Newton show that you don't need a veteran quarterback to find success. Griffin III's explosiveness and ability to attack the deep part of the field will greatly improve this offense.
This makes good sense to me. I have a gut feeling Shanahan will not want to pass up on a QB who could be as valuable to a team as Elway was in Mike's stint in Denver. Only question is, how much is Washington willing to give and how little is STL will to get in return. The Rams have already been posturing a little bit by saying they may not be satisfied with Bradford, implying they might want to use the 2nd overall pick to take the QB. These kind of mind games make the whole process more interesting, but could also push a team wanting the QB to offer a bit more to get him. STL needs a WR, and a guy like Blackmon could be just the guy to help Bradford out. So the second gut feeling I have is STL is not really going to throw in the towel on Bradford just yet. That could be good news for Washington.

BLEACHER REPORT MOCK DRAFT:
1. IND: Andrew Luck (QB, STANFORD)
2. WAS: Robert Griffin III (QB, BAYLOR. TRADE: From STL)
3. MIN: Jonathan Martin (OT, Stanford)
4. CLE: Quinton Coples (DE, North Carolina)
5. TB: Morris Claiborne (CB, LSU)
6. STL: Justin Blackmon (WR, Oklahoma State. TRADE: From WAS)
7. JAX: Matt Kalil (OT, USC)
8. CAR: Riley Reiff (OT, Iowa)
9. MIA: Courtney Upshaw (DE/LB, Alabama)
10. BUF: Melvin Ingram (DE/LB, South Carolina)
11. KC: David DeCastro (G, Stanford)
12. SEA: Michael Brockers (DT, LSU)
13. ARI: Mike Adams (OT, Ohio State)
14. DAL: Dre Kirkpatrick (CB, Alabama)
15. PHI: Luke Kuechly (LB, Boston College)
16. NYJ: Trent Richardson (RB, Alabama)
17. CIN: Alshon Jeffery (WR, South Carolina. TRADE: From OAK)
18. SD: Cordy Glenn (OT, Georgia)
19. CHI: Michael Floyd (WR, Notre Dame)
20. TEN: Kendall Wright (WR, Baylor)
21. CIN: Stephon Gilmore (CB, South Carolina)
22. CLE: Mohamed Sanu (WR, Rutgers. TRADE: From ATL)
23. DET: Janoris Jenkins (CB, North Alabama)
24. PIT: Mark Barron (S, Alabama)
25. DEN: Devon Still (DT, Penn State)
26. HOU: Dwayne Allen (TE, Clemson)
27. NE: Whitney Mercilus (DE/LB, Illinois. TRADE: From NO)
28. GB: Chandler Jones (LB, Syracuse)
29. BAL: Peter Konz (C, Wisconsin)
30. SF: Nick Perry (DE/LB, USC)
31. NE: Kendall Reyes (DT, Connecticut)
32. NYG: Vontaze Burfict (LB, Arizona State)
 
Just for reference, here's Scout's Inc top 32...

SCOUTS INC.'S TOP 32
Player...............Pos....School......Grade

1. Andrew Luck* QB Stanford 99
2. Matt Kalil OT USC 97
3. Quinton Coples DE N. Carolina 96
4. Robert Griffin III* QB Baylor 96
5. Trent Richardson* RB Alabama 96
6. Morris Claiborne* CB LSU 95
7. Melvin Ingram DE S. Carolina 95
8. Courtney Upshaw OLB Alabama 95
9. Riley Reiff* OT Iowa 95
10. Michael Brockers* DT LSU 95
11. Luke Kuechly* ILB Boston Coll. 95
12. Justin Blackmon* WR Okla. State 94
13. Mark Barron S Alabama 94
14. David DeCastro* G Stanford 94
15. Janoris Jenkins CB N. Alabama 93
16. Ryan Tannehill QB Texas A&M 93
17. Jonathan Martin* OT Stanford 93
18. Michael Floyd WR Notre Dame 92
19. Dre Kirkpatrick* CB Alabama 92
20. Kendall Wright WR Baylor 91
21. Brock Osweiler* QB Arizona St. 90
22. Chandler Jones* DE Syracuse 90
23. Vontaze Burfict* ILB Arizona St. 90
24. Coby Fleener TE Stanford 90
25. Nick Perry* DE USC 89
26. Cordy Glenn G Georgia 89
27. Mike Adams OT Ohio State 89
28. Brandon Thompson DT Clemson 89
29. Dwayne Allen* TE Clemson 88
30. Jerel Worthy* DT Michigan St. 88
31. Fletcher Cox* TE Miss. State 87
32. Lamar Miller* RB Miami (FL) 87
* Denotes draft-eligible underclassman

Reference: http://espn.go.com/nfl/draft

I think Seattle also needs a DT, and I like this Brockers kid, who the BleacherReport Mock Draft had being taken by Seattle with their 1st round pick.
 
The issue with Seattle is beyond the obvious need of a franchise QB, they are perhaps two or three players from being a solid playoff team, that's it. At question is just who is that? Is it a CB? A DE? A LB? A WR? A TE? They could use some improvement at all of those positions. But they may not need them all. Just filling in two or three of those gaps could be enough that those around them rise to the level of a quality player. It's the classic coach's off-season dilemma.

But one thing with Seattle remains certain, by 2013 they're going to have to find a young QB. Jackson (or Whitehurst) are not going to lead them there. Maybe they'll find someone in the 2nd or 3rd round of this draft this year (Tannehill? Foles? Davis?) who sits on the bench and learns well, but by 2014 looks like the guy. They probably have their eye on a few potentials, and if they can't get someone they like, Pete Carroll will be willing to give away a fair amount to get Matt Barkley as the missing piece of the puzzle next year.
 
the SI mock draft had Seattle taking Ryan Tannehill in the 1st round. I spose that could happen, but don't think it will. Honestly, they are pretty good at WR and TE... they just need them all healthy. I could see them taking a WR or TE, but not as a top priority. I also see them pretty solid at CB, but Tru is probably done there and it would not hurt to have another. But again not as a top priority because they've got Thurmond. There top priority would be QB OFC, but none that they would like to draft are going to be available, unless I am wrong on Tannehill. So their next priorities would be LB (Heater Hawthorne is adequate/explosive at the point of attack, but really slow... and Hill is getting over the hill), DE (a better 5 technique guy than Red), OL (Gallery is getting old and is just adequate... plus they need some insurance in case the injured right side of the OL can't return healthy).

edit: But OL would be like a 3rd round priority or maybe 2nd rounder. But I have already forgotten how many picks they have.
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,924
0
0
Ask a question, get half a page back.:D

Very much appreciate all this input guys, I feel like I'm in NFL school. I hope these guys are right. I'm sure that all long suffering Skins fans would give away the crown jewels for a QB who can make a difference and who would be there for years.

My son in Indy tells me that it is widely believed that Peyton will retire, and indeed, that Luck is nailed on to succeed him.
 
Amsterhammer said:
My son in Indy tells me that it is widely believed that Peyton will retire, and indeed, that Luck is nailed on to succeed him.
If son decides to join the forum he could be Indyhammer. (ok, dumb joke)

I have thought that about Peyton too. It really makes sense, even though he probably still has passion for playing the game and will not want to retire. I say it makes sense because flexibility of the body is everything when it comes to preventing injury. Getting neck vertibrae fused does not sound like it would help in that area, and might just make him more vulnerable to injury due to some reduced flexibility. But I'm no MD either. If I was in his position, I'd hang up the cleats and call it a great career cos it's just not worth it IMO to risk further and possibly more serious injury. That will be a hard choice for him to make I think.
 
Mar 8, 2010
3,169
0
0
I really have no clue about the sport, improving myself by watching the Superbowl regularly in last few years.
But just wanted to say, it was an absolute mess to watch on German private TV station Sat1.
Actually they made me lose the feeling and "contact" to the game.

That whole commercial mess, the timing, the frequency, and the selection of "spots" was very very close to beeing an "absolutely unconscionable impudence" and not worth a Superbowl TV time.
They even messed up a touchdown, and 99% of the commercial selection and time was actually one and the same spot about a meeting platform, including an annoying theme-"song". It came close to brain-washing or water-boarding.
Lost contact, couldn't stand it, only watched it additionally to playing cyclingmanager then, mute on TV. That poor Bud beer I always chose to drink during superbowl, it even survived, warm and half-emptied.
Later they even included a "best of Superbowl spots"

I really enjoyed last few years on German public TV, without any commercials. That feeling is completely different.

Anyway, I really enjoyed the "Arschbomben" touchdown. :D
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
Cobblestoned said:
I really have no clue about the sport, improving myself by watching the Superbowl regularly in last few years.
But just wanted to say, it was an absolute mess to watch on German private TV station Sat1.
Actually they made me lose the feeling and "contact" to the game.

That whole commercial mess, the timing, the frequency, and the selection of "spots" was very very close to beeing an "absolutely unconscionable impudence" and not worth a Superbowl TV time.
They even messed up a touchdown, and 99% of the commercial selection and time was actually one and the same spot about a meeting platform, including an annoying theme-"song". It came close to brain-washing or water-boarding.
Lost contact, couldn't stand it, only watched it additionally to playing cyclingmanager then, mute on TV. That poor Bud beer I always chose to drink during superbowl, it even survived, warm and half-emptied.
Later they even included a "best of Superbowl spots"

I really enjoyed last few years on German public TV, without any commercials. That feeling is completely different.

Anyway, I really enjoyed the "Arschbomben" touchdown. :D
You should have watched on Espn international. There you get the original commentator and in the commercial breaks you get "old" highlightes of NFL-Games. It´s obvious that to watch on a channel who has no clue about the sport and only shows one game in the season, is not a good idea.
The rules are simple (easier than soccer with it´s dubious timing and indirect offsides:eek:):
4 Downs (Versuche) to gain 10 yards or more by passing (= throwing) or running (every not caught pass counts as 0 yards gain). If you got them, you get another 4 downs to make at least 10 yards and so on, until you reach the endzone (= Touchdown worth 6 points + 1 point for a kick after). If after 3 downs the coach has the feeling to not gain the 10 yards you kick. Either try to kick between the goal posts (gelbe Stangen = Field Goal worth 3 points) or just kick the ball away to the other team (you do that if the coach thinks the goal posts are too far away for the kicker). You only can lose the ball if the opponent catches the ball or you scored points or, as said, kicked the ball away. The rest of the rules are nuances.
That´s it. Football rules in 5 lines. I think to explain offsides in soccer needs 10 pages.

Enjoy it next time. It´s a great game. :)
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,924
0
0
on3m@n@rmy said:
If son decides to join the forum he could be Indyhammer. (ok, dumb joke)
Funny you should say that. Years ago, before he had two kids, he posted on the same West Ham forum as I did and yup, he was Indyhammer.;)

Why would anyone with Peyton's money contemplate even for one minute doing himself (further) lasting damage? He has nothing left to prove to anyone.
 
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
That´s it. Football rules in 5 lines. I think to explain offsides in soccer needs 10 pages.
I can explain soccer in one sentence: Kick ball into goal. However, nuances and rules take 100 pages, 90 of which involve referee interpretation and judgment. ;)

Amsterhammer said:
Ask a question, get half a page back.:D Very much appreciate all this input guys, I feel like I'm in NFL school.
Funny thing is, we really don't know that much. Enough to be a scout's junior assistant maybe. Try talking to a true coach about play breakdowns, blocking schemes and assignments, or player evaluations. Keep reading this post to find a link to Rob Staton's site. That guy is an NFL geek. And coaches know more than he does. I don't know anything.

As to Peyton Manning, I'm 99% sure he'll be back, and with another team. My guess is Arizona, NY Jets, KC or Washington. His neurosurgeon and a second opinion neurosurgeon both declared him completely healthy and cleared him to play. One of them said if Peyton were his own son, he'd tell him to go play. You also have to understand Manning the person and player. This isn't some normal guy, he's driven to win, get paid well for it, and will likely to so until he's shown that he doesn't have it anymore, just like most elite athletes. He may not hang around as long as Favre did, but he's not going to just retire because he was hurt last year and the Colts may not want him. He's gotten over the first part, the second part he'll be over and accept in a week or two, if he isn't already.

As to Ryan Tannehill, I don't see any way the Seahawks take him in the first round. Rob Staton writes a blog about the Seahawks. Read this analysis of Kirk Cousins to get an idea of his knowledge. Staton has discussed Tannehill more than once, and while Staton is not with the Seahawks in any way, he definitely has their pulse, and says Tannehill should be a 2nd or 3rd round pick, and that the 'Hawks won't take him. Though he thinks because of the desperation in the league right now for QBs, and the fact that Barkley (and Landry Jones) decided to stay in college someone may take Tannehill early. But it very likely won't be Seattle.
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
I can explain soccer in one sentence: Kick ball into goal. However, nuances and rules take 100 pages, 90 of which involve referee interpretation and judgment. ;)
That´s right. You won the argument. :D

Alpe d'Huez said:
Funny thing is, we really don't know that much. Enough to be a scout's junior assistant maybe. Try talking to a true coach about play breakdowns, blocking schemes and assignments, or player evaluations. Keep reading this post to find a link to Rob Staton's site. That guy is an NFL geek. And coaches know more than he does. I don't know anything.
Don´t make yourself smaller than you are, you know a good amount of all sides of football. But i have to admit, i knew more about formations and assignments in the late 80´s/early 90´s when we had the good old pro set and i formations and the Berlin Adler were running with Clarence Rambo. Yes his name was Rambo. And another players name was/is Mücke (a player in a german/italo football movie with Bud Spencer is called the same).
Nowadays it´s difficult to keep track with all the new formations like Pistol and all.
Player evaluations, i can´t do outside of QB´s. But this one i could keep up with anybody (which isn´t to difficult, seeing all the draft busts and misses by the scouts). Some called me QB-Guru in the past. Basically i gamble with the stake of my reputation, when predicting Luck to bust (also in Berlin, not only in the anonymous internet). Because i havn´t seen to much footage of him.
 
As I see it Tannehill is going to have to sit a year, unless he makes Cam Netwon like adjustments between now and September. This could be said about any QB in the draft except Luck and RG3 who are head and shoulders above everyone else and should be expected to start from week 1. Though arguments can be made for Weeden and Kellen Moore, simply because they already play pro-sets and are seniors, though Moore is undersized and a risk.

You are correct Foxxy on all the draft busts, and misreads from scouts. Even looking at the last couple of years we can play this game: I'm going to skip the obvious busts like Russel and Leaf, or even semi-busts like Leinhart or Young, and going to skip Tom Brady. Let's just look at recent years:

2011: Cam Newton (1) - Was expected to take time to develop, and would run too much. Might sit a year behind Claussen. Wrong on all counts. Turned out to be very dedicated and learned to be a pocket passer first. ROY.

Blaine Gabbert (10) - Big prospect, had maybe 1 good game, nearly a bust. If something doesn't turn around...

Andy Dalton (35) - Great in college, scouts said his reads were not good enough and he didn't see the entire field, and he was the 5th QB taken. Turned out he started all year, lead the team to the playoffs, and was 2nd in ROY voting.

2010: Jimmy Claussen (48) - 3rd QB taken in the draft (behind Bradford and Tebow), high hopes going in. Turned out to be a head case and may be done.

Colt McCoy (85) - Taken some 30+ picks after Claussen, and became the Browns starter and played fairly well (when not hurt).

John Skelton (155) - Taken over 100 picks after Claussen. Played well this year when Kolb got hurt, looks like he has a future in the NFL.

Tony Pike (204) - After a great college career, fell to the 6th round, couldn't adjust to the NFL, frequently hurt and now out of football. Showing sometimes scouts get it completely right.

2009: Matthew Stafford (1) - A superb pick. Hurt off and on, but had a great year and all the tools.

Mark Sanchez (5) - A real question if this was a good pick, I say no.

Josh Freeman (17) - After a very good sophomore season, he played very poorly this year. If he can right the ship there's still hope.

Bryan Hoyer was undrafted, and picked up by NE, where he seems cemented as the backup QB and has looked quite good filling in for Brady. RB Arian Foster also went undrafted.

2008 - The year Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco were taken in the 1st round. Taken with the 209th pick, behind Brian Brohem, Chad Henne, Kevin O'Connol, John David Booty, Dennis Dixon, Josh Johnson, Erik Ainge, Andre Woodson, and Colt Brennan was non other than Matt Flynn, in the 7th round. The Packers also took Brohem in the 2nd round, showing you even their own scouts were wrong (so far).

In 2005 no less than seven QBs were taken before Ryan Fitzpatrick and Derek Anderson two decent starting NFL QB's. You know about Alex Smith and Aaron Rodgers. Kyle Orton and Jason Campbell too. But how about Stefan LeFors, Adrian McFerson, Charlie Frye, or David Green?

And then, there's Giovanni Carmazzi...

:)
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
Superb summary. Let me just talk about some of them.

Alpe d'Huez said:
You are correct Foxxy on all the draft busts, and misreads from scouts. Even looking at the last couple of years we can play this game: I'm going to skip the obvious busts like Russel and Leaf, or even semi-busts like Leinhart or Young, and going to skip Tom Brady. Let's just look at recent years:

Mark Sanchez (5) - A real question if this was a good pick, I say no.
No doubt. A bust.

Alpe d'Huez said:
Josh Freeman (17) - After a very good sophomore season, he played very poorly this year. If he can right the ship there's still hope.

Bryan Hoyer was undrafted, and picked up by NE, where he seems cemented as the backup QB and has looked quite good filling in for Brady. RB Arian Foster also went undrafted.
Freeman. LOL. What a waste of money and pick. They have and had a equal talented QB on the bench (JJohnson). Since he was a 5th rounder, he was/is even cheap. Just shake my head.

Beli knows what he´s doing. But we shall not forget, NE offense is surounded with good talent, thus making QB´s look good.

Alpe d'Huez said:
2008 The Packers also took Brohem in the 2nd round, showing you even their own scouts were wrong (so far).

Ryan Fitzpatrick ... Charlie Frye
And the Packers also wasted Rodgers on the bench for a 60 year old QB who didn´t know when it´s time to retire.

Fitzpatrick wouldn´t even be playing football if Martz hadn´t picked him. He´s hated by many and all, but he knows QB´s.
Warner, Bulger a 6th rounder, JT O´Sullivan (ex NFL-Europe) had good games but was forced by Singletary to bench him. Prolonged Kitna´s career. He was even right about Hanie since he demoted him in the pre season. He knew something... that he can´t make it; that the NFC-Game vs. Packers was a fluke.

Frye. My favourite. Like McNown, this guy can´t even throw a tight spiral over 40 yards. How get these guys evaluated?
 
The thing about that list is that I didn't cherry pick. I didn't just mention Russell and Leaf, Brady and Warner. I went over the last few drafts and just listed most QB's taken.

Surprised this thread keeps going. Only two weeks until the combine! ;)
 
Alpe d'Huez said:
I can explain soccer in one sentence: Kick ball into goal. However, nuances and rules take 100 pages, 90 of which involve referee interpretation and judgment. ;)
That's actually not far off when comparing football rules vs futbol rules. I think there are, what, 15 rules total in futbol. Several hundred in football.


Alpe d'Huez said:
Funny thing is, we really don't know that much. Enough to be a scout's junior assistant maybe. Try talking to a true coach about play breakdowns, blocking schemes and assignments, or player evaluations. Keep reading this post to find a link to Rob Staton's site. That guy is an NFL geek. And coaches know more than he does. I don't know anything.
Not to mention not knowing a lot about player techniques (but that's part of player evaluations you mentioned I guess). Then our opinions of what team needs will likely be different from the coaches. Then where certain players in the draft fall on a team's draft board, we really have no clue about. Even team's opponents don't know. They try to guess, and that's why team's will posture to make other teams think they are looking hard at a certain guy - bluffing - so the team doing the posturing and bluffing might have a better chance to get the guy they really want. It's a bit like playing poker. Then on top of all that, each team has their own philosophical approach (e.g. take the best athlete available, or draft to fill a specific position regardless who is still on the draft board, unselected). All this creates a bit of suspense on draft day, and is what IMO make it interesting to watch.

Alpe d'Huez said:
As to Ryan Tannehill, I don't see any way the Seahawks take him in the first round.
God I hope not (I think the SI mock had him going to Seattle in the 1st round, but then they also are the jinx magazine). Not that I think he's such a terrible QB. Just that I think he's a low first-rounder or upper second-rounder in the draft, and I'd hate to see Seattle take him at the number 13 spot overall. BTW, DraftTek.com has him going in the second round to... WASHINGTON.

Just for Amsterhammer, here's what DraftTek shows for the Skins in the first 3 rounds of the draft:

overall.....name............college...............pos..............stretch?
6.... Justin Blackmon.... Oklahoma St.... WRF.... Reach/Val: +3 ....Ht: 6'1".... Wt: 212
39.... Ryan Tannehill.... Texas A&M.... QB.... Reach/Val: +1 .........Ht: 6'4".... Wt: 220
70.... Andrew Datko.... Florida St..... ROT.... Reach/Val: +16 .........Ht: 6'6".... Wt: 321

DraftTek is a computer simulated draft and the program will 'reach' to get a player a team needs. A '+' value (e.g. +16 for Datko) is good. A big negative value is bad. So according the this poll shown above, Washington would not have reached down to pick a player too high that everyone expected to be a lower round pick.
 
Sep 7, 2010
763
0
0
Ah, this brings back memories to the Keane/Vieira era. How I've missed abit if controversial before and after the matches. It just add something extra. Let's keep the racial stuff out but nothings wrong with a bit of trash talk. Keep it up, Evra/Suarez!
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
Surprised this thread keeps going. Only two weeks until the combine! ;)
Yeah lets keep it frontpage all year long.... No it won´t work. There´s nothing to discuss from May to August.
 
I don't think I'm going to have that kind of energy. I'm sort of running on fumes already. Though I am curious about the draft more than in usual years, and the whole Peyton thing keeps me interested. May to August is for cycling anyway. :)

So Foxxy, you picked Tampa Bay in next year's SB. I assume you mean Josh Freemen will get injured? ;) And if you have TB in the NFC, who is your AFC pick? I've got NO vs. Houston. I'm sticking with it until, well, until the draft at least. :)

Some dolt on ESPN was analyzing the Jets and saying really what they only need is a good pass rusher, and for Sanchez and Holmes to mend their differences. Hahahah! Between this kind of nonsense, and their love of NY teams (being from CT next door), ESPN must have crack burning in the air conditioning system there. What a disaster of a team the Jets were. They had everything they needed to get to the SB this year, and completely imploded. That guy not only forgot what Greg McElroy casually said, but also all the things LT has since said about how entirely dysfunctional the entire locker room was with zero leadership. Some ESPN idiot hinted that we could see an all NY Superbowl. Right. If Sanchez, Holmes, a new DT, and Rex Ryan lead the Jets to a SB next year against the Giants I'll eat my jock strap.
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,924
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
.....If Sanchez, Holmes, a new DT, and Rex Ryan lead the Jets to a SB next year against the Giants I'll eat my jock strap.
I'm saving this bit, just in case.;)

Wonderful stuff, guys. Keep it coming. Perhaps a team by team analysis next? :p
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY