Thread Tools

Display Modes

ILOVEFOOTBALL · 10-09-2006, 12:20 PM

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ejruiz @ Oct 6th ) [snapback]1733754[/snapback]</div>

Quote:

This is a terrible mock draft overall and somehow gets worse when you focus in on the Broncos. We went all offense last year and we certainly do not need to do that again. Passing on Paul Posluszny (LB, Penn State), Quentin Moses (DE, Georgia) and Michael Griffen (S, Texas) at #26 is insanity all on its own, without adding the fact that you have us doing it to get an RB. Maybe you missed the memo, but we're averaging 5 ypc this year and we do just fine with RBs that fall through the cracks of the draft. I'll take Marcus Thomas (DT, Florida) or Brandon Siler (LB, Florida) at #58 over the guy you have us taking, and I'll stop at those two because this mock isn't worth the effort of researching the rest of the players that the Broncos would be better off taking at that spot.
[/b]

Edit, i meant 2nd rounder, dont know why i said 1st.

imported_SteelerSavage · 10-09-2006, 02:48 PM

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ILOVEFOOTBALL @ Oct 9th ) [snapback]1737582[/snapback]</div>

Quote:

Dont forget that you also have Washingtons 1st round pick which he forgot to give you.
[/b]

So the Broncos have 2 first round picks now?

imported_SteelerSavage · 10-09-2006, 03:34 PM

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ILOVEFOOTBALL @ Oct 8th ) [snapback]1736523[/snapback]</div>

Quote:

By far one of the worst drafts yet.

I'll look at the first round and leave the rest for someone else. I also wont look at the order since its hard to get an idea of where teams will be, even after week 5.

1. Oakland wont take Peterson. Jordan and Fargas are a solid duo. They need some interior DL help, a DE opposite Burgess, a decent RT, or a QB depending on how they like Walter.
I love when people claim this team WON'T do this, won't do that.
2. I dont see the Titans taking a WR, but its possible. No argument.

3. Unlikely but possible. No argument.

4. Tampa loves both Sims, when healthy, and Bruce Gradkowski, why take a QB here?
Because the point to this league is to win the ****ing Super Bowl. Is that going to happen with Simms or Gradkowski?
5. Houston took two OT's this year in Spencer and Winston, why take another. If anything, they need a RB or some DB help.
Yet their Offensive line is still not up to par with Kubiak's new scheme.

6. GB has two of the best OT's in the league in Clifton and Tauscher, they dont need OT's, they need some RB help and more importantly, some DL help.
Tell Brett Favre that he has the best OT's in the game.
7. Cleveland has Edwards and Jurevicious on the outside and Northcutt, a similar WR to Ginn, in the slot. They need some OL help, especially at LT.
I don't need you to tell me what a team needs. I know they need OL help. Long and Thomas were just drafted ahead of them, Ginn makes sense here, after they left the board.
8. SF needs defensive help, especially on the DL, so this is possible, but i think they will look for a LB first, especially since they have 0 passrush outside of Lawson.

9. Arizona will not take an OG this soon. Blalock is good, but not nearly worthy of being picked in the top 10. They need a LT to replace the underacheiving Davis.

10. Miami runs a 3-4 defense. They need an athletic LB/DE to groom behind Jason Taylor, not a DE like Adams who is a pure 4-3 DE. He would be out of position the same way Babin was in Houston and wouldnt perform well.

11. I love Merriweather but i think this is a bit too high for him, especially ahead of Landry, but its possible.
So this is a bad draft, because it's YOUR opinion that Merriweather and Blalock won't go this high...that's outstanding.

12-17, These picks are iffy but possible so I wont argue with them.

18. Why would Washington take an OT? They have Samuels and Jansen, neither of whom is really that old and both of whom perform well. Plus, they dont even have a 1st round pick, it belongs to Denver.
I highly doubt they gave up a first round pick for T.J. ****ing Duckett.

19. Why would Atlanta take a 330+ pound DT? They run the same defense Tampa, Philly, Chicago, and Buffalo run which relies on quick DT's to penetrate, not but runstuffers the way Baltimore likes.

20. Possible.

21. Terrible pick. Pittsburgh needs a RB but not Lynch who is similar to Parker in that they are quick and have speed, but dont run over defenders. They need a power runner. I can see them taking Bush, even if he's coming off a broken leg.
Lynch is the total package. He has very good size for a running back, and he is a good interior runner. He attacks the hole, and has the ability to break tackles. Once through the hole, he has the elusiveness to make people miss, and the speed to outrun defenders. Lynch has the big play ability that teams crave, but the steady ability to run between the tackles. He has also shown the ability to catch the ball out of the backfield and make things happen. Lynch is a power runner, and more. And Parker can't break tackles. Besides, even if they were similar, in which they're not, the point is to give one rest, or at least that's what Cowher's point is.

22. Why would the Eagles take a CB in the 1st round? We have two pro-bowl caliber CB's in Brown and Shepard and while we do need a nickel CB to replace Hood who is a FA, the 1st round is way too early. We could use a DE instead and with Moses still on the board, that should be the pick.

23. I dont see the Ravens taking another QB. They are an aging team and are making a push to win now. A rookie QB is a waste of a pick since they will have to rebuild in 2-3 years when Lewis, Mcnair, Ogden, Mulitalio, etc will retire.

24-25. I can see these picks happening. Dallas needs a DT and although Pitcock isnt that big, he could play the NT or DE in the 3-4. Meanwhile NY needs a RB to groom behind Barber.

26. Denver doesnt use power RB's. They prefer quick 1-cut RB's. Marshawn Lynch is perfect for their scheme.

27. This is a realistic pick. Carolina needs a good OT opposite Gross.

28. Cincy doesnt have a playmaking TE but i think they need DT and DE help more than a TE, especially since their offense doesnt involve the TE much anyway. And the Steelers didn't need Heath Miller (at the time) as much as they needed a Running back and other positions.

29-30. Both are excellent picks to help the New England defense, although, if a good WR falls to them they may take him to team with Chad Jackson for the future.

31. iffy pick. If Briggs leaves than its a good pick but if they resign him, its a waste of a pick. They need a good WR, and OL help more than anything on defense.

32. I dont see Indy taking a DE like this. They rely on quick DE's like Mathis and Freeney, not bigger DE's like the 270+ pound Crowder. Plus, i think they need some LB or CB help more.
[/b]

ILOVEFOOTBALL · 10-09-2006, 04:44 PM

Its possible to say some teams WONT do something. For example, last year everyone was saying Philly would trade up to take a DT, Ngata. Several people said there was no way in hell they would because Ngata doesnt fit their scheme.

Likewise, i can say, Philly WONT take a CB in the 1st round this year. Indy WONT take a QB or RB in the 1st, Oakland WONT take a RB in the 1st.

Look at the league, before this past year with Big Ben, who was the last 1st round QB to lead a team to a superbowl win. A 1st round QB doesnt guarantee **** and its obvious Gruden loves Gradkowski. I hate the Bucs but even i can say that he showed a lot yesterday and can be their "franchise" QB.

Houston had terrible talent on the interior line, and they lost Spencer for the year after week 1. They are rebuilding the OL but OT is not where they need help on the line.

Give me Favre's phone number and I'll tell him how good they are. If you look at GB play, the majority of the pressure on Favre is up the middle, where there are 2 rookie OG's starting.

Again, Cleveland WONT Take a WR unless, by some miracle, Calvin Johnson falls to them. Thats the same as saying Indy needs a QB.

Read my entire statement on the Merriwheather pick. I think its a bit high, BUT ITS POSSIBLE.

Your right about the Redskins pick. For some reason i mixed up their trade for a 2nd round pick last year with them trading their 1st. In the 1st four rounds now, they only have their 1st round pick. But, dont forget that Denver has some clauses in the TJ Duckett trade where they can take Washington's 1st. Thats where i misunderstood the pick.

But, still on the Redskins pick, why do they need an OT? They have one of the better OT duo's in the league and both are locked up long-term and are in their 20's.

Look at the problems with Pittsburgh's offense. They have no running game. It was a similar situation to a few years ago when Tommy Maddox was the QB. They went from a power running game to a pass first offense and when Maddox failed, their offense failed. When they went back to the run first offense, they improved. Now, their offense is built around the power running game, where the big RB is needed, and than Parker is the complement to whoever the power RB is. Look at their RB's, besides the small Parker, the rest are 240 pound Davenport, 235 pound Staley, and 240 pound Haynes. Thats why Micheal Bush is perfect for them, he has the size/power/speed similar to Bettis, which is the perfect complement to Parker.

Everyone knows Cincy's needs are on defense, especially on the DL, and possibly on the OL depending on how free agency plays out for them. They dont involve their TE's in their offense that much. It doesnt matter if they have a good receiving TE or not. Remember, they had Matt Schobel and Kelley at TE, both of whom are good receivers, but they let Schobel leave without offering him anything and Kelley is used as a blocker far more than a receiver. This is like saying Philly will draft Micheal Bush in the 1st round, it wont happen because he doesnt fit the scheme. Same thing here, Olson, while a good receiver, isnt a good enough blocker to fit the Cincy scheme.

Catalyst · 10-09-2006, 05:05 PM

I could damn sure deal with that pick for the Panthers

Thread Tools Display Modes

View more football photos

Thread Tools

Display Modes