Originally posted by bbqfan5909
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
2023 NFL Draft Thread
Collapse
X
-
-
QB should be able to make work with what we got, but that's a different topic.
RBs should got 3/4th round, the value is just not there anymore.
Originally posted by mjhaverkamp View PostIf you are sitting at 26 and a player who is rankled as maybe top 5 in the draft falls to you, you happen to need him, your QB needs him , I say you take him. Would you draft him in the second round ? they are only 4 picks from the second round. People talk about how a first rounder should make it 7 - 10 years in the NFL, players taken in the bottom half of round one do not even average 4 years in the NFL. I doubt he is there anyway so I am with you, stack the line.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dale Moser View Post26 Aint 4. Bijon is a dynamic player, if he's there at 26, you take him. If not, get a 300Lb something or other.
Definitely agree though, if Bijan falls to 26 (not happening, right?) you take him. If not, interior OL if a very good one is there. Interior DL also a possibility but I would also like to see them take a good Edge at some point and get back to moving Parsons around more like it seemed they did his Rookie year.
Dude looked seriously gassed at several points the last 4 or so games in ‘22.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dale Moser View Post26 Aint 4. Bijon is a dynamic player, if he's there at 26, you take him. If not, get a 300Lb something or other.
Now the Texans are a different story. A lot of people are expecting them to make smart decisions but based on their track record, I wouldn’t hold my breath. I’m hoping Ryans has the most input on the selections, they need so much help they need solid players.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Pineywoods View PostI'd be pretty happy if that were their picks. I can't see then sticking at 2, 12, and 33. I think they'll move at least once in the first three picks.
They’d be stupid to trade out of 2, those don’t come around that often. Get the cornerstone of your franchise at 2, and get cute with the others if you must.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dale Moser View PostThey’d be stupid to trade out of 2, those don’t come around that often. Get the cornerstone of your franchise at 2, and get cute with the others if you must.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Comment
-
Originally posted by RMW View PostS2 test scores: Never has been a successful QB in the league with a score of 80 or below, so with that if Texans go QB they better take Levis.
Young- 98
Levis- 96
Richardson- 79
Hooker- 46
Stroud- 18
Comment
-
Originally posted by RMW View PostS2 test scores: Never has been a successful QB in the league with a score of 80 or below, so with that if Texans go QB they better take Levis.
No, I’m not saying he’s worth that pick but he does have a lot of traits a former quarterback/now head coach would want to start with.
My opinion, he’s being undersold to an extent. He lost a lot of talent before last season, plus his OC and the replacement OC was fired after his first season.
That said, it’s the Panthers so who really cares. Pick 2 then becomes really interesting if that happens. Do the Texans take Young, possibly sit him for a year while building defense, and then bring him out in year 2?
They signed Keenum and still have Mills. Maybe Ryan’s starts trying to replicates what SF has done, a QB with talent but not depend on him. Tanking for next year would be an option for sure, but what are you going to have to give up to get one of the top 2 QB’s in that draft.
I already don’t see the Texans being bad enough to get one just off of the 2023 results. It would have to be a pretty obvious tank job, that’s why I’m asking.
First pick is going to make things real interesting this year.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Pineywoods View PostThose were supposedly the unconfirmed "leaked" scores but I saw reports today that the S2 people said they weren't accurate. A team that wanted Stroud or Hooker to slip down the boards could have been responsible for "leaking" that.
Comment
Comment