I beleive there are a few players the birds are targeting and will take the one highest on thier board when it becomes there pick. These players are 1. Haloti Nagata 2. Brodrick Bunkley 3. Winston Justice 4. Michael Huff 5. Chad Jackson Now with Haloti Nagata and Michael Huff would have to slip alot to them to draft so that leaves the birds with Bunkley Justice and Jackson. With Clevland and Baltimore right before use there is a real good chance Bunkley and Justice go right before. So In my Opinion that leaves us with Chad Jackson. Which is in my opinion the 2nd best big play player in this draft. 1 being Reggie Bush.
With Pinkston back from injury and the addition of Gaffney (with a one year deal) would give Chad Jackson a chance to learn the offense before getting thrown in. Would LOVE this pick.
So my pick is CHAD JACKSON, WR Florida
More than likely someone who was mentioned in this thread. (http://www.concretefield.com/forum/index.php?topic=17699.0)
Do you have Wimbley or Lawson projected to SLB? If so they are both very athletic and can rush the passer. I think they both fit an OLB in a 3-4 better than our SLB. Dont know if they can pass defend? They both have very good STRAIGHT line speed. Which is more conclusive to DE. So if we have to go OLB with the 1st round pick. I would look more toward a Chad Greenway or Bobby Carpenter in the 2nd.
Both Wimbley and Lawson would play DE for the Eagles, not OLB. If you'd read some of the other threads on the topic of the draft, you'd see a few comments about the pundits saying that both guys are best-suited to play OLB in a 3-4. What they don't realize is that those are exactly the type of DE's the Eagles look to add to the team.
Well i definitly agree that they are DE's. And they are the type the Eagles like at DE. But I really do not see the Birds going DE in the first. Especially after the Howard signing. But if one of those guys is avalible in the 2nd they would be too good of a value to pass on.
To me Jackson will probably be the pick just because he will probably be the best player available at that point that fills a need. There are some other guys that could be available that would also make sense: D. Williams, L. Maroney, M. Lawson, and K. Wimbley.
I'm not going to say a WR because we are trading for Walker, and not an OL because that would be a stupid pick. Also not an OLB because we don't draft them that high, so I'll say DT Ngata.
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 09, 2006, 04:56:39 PM
I'm not going to say a WR because we are trading for Walker, and not an OL because that would be a stupid pick. Also not an OLB because we don't draft them that high, so I'll say DT Ngata.
Why would drafting OL be stupid? And you know for a fact that they are getting Walker?
Quote from: Drunkmasterflex on April 09, 2006, 05:01:53 PM
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 09, 2006, 04:56:39 PM
I'm not going to say a WR because we are trading for Walker, and not an OL because that would be a stupid pick. Also not an OLB because we don't draft them that high, so I'll say DT Ngata.
Why would drafting OL be stupid? And you know for a fact that they are getting Walker?
No, PF's just having wet dreams.
Quote from: Drunkmasterflex on April 09, 2006, 05:01:53 PM
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 09, 2006, 04:56:39 PM
I'm not going to say a WR because we are trading for Walker, and not an OL because that would be a stupid pick. Also not an OLB because we don't draft them that high, so I'll say DT Ngata.
Why would drafting OL be stupid? And you know for a fact that they are getting Walker?
My post was semi-facetious, but I do think we'll get Walker.
I think OL would be stupid, because we have other more pressing needs, but if the DTs we want get snatched up, and we are there at 14, with a stud G/C available, it wouldn't be a dumb pick.
There are no G/C types that wouldn't be a reach at 14. None.
Quote from: FFatPatt on April 09, 2006, 05:18:32 PM
There are no G/C types that wouldn't be a reach at 14. None.
There pretty much isn't any draft that a G or C wouldn't be a reach.
True, and this draft is no exception.
But with that said whos to say if Winston Justice is there he could follow the Shawn Andrews path on the Left side next to Tra for a few years.
No one's to say that's not a possibility, but he wouldn't be drafted to play OG long-term.
I would love to see Nick Mangold last till the eagles second round pick.
That would be sweet. But I really dont see it happening.
whos that center that is like 6-6...i have no idea where he will go but i cant imagine its very high...might be an intriguing pick to take with one of the fourth rounders
I don't want Mangold simply for the fact that Eckel does want him.
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 10, 2006, 04:56:24 PM
whos that center that is like 6-6...i have no idea where he will go but i cant imagine its very high...might be an intriguing pick to take with one of the fourth rounders
Ryan Cook out of New Mexico. He'll probably go anywhere from the 5th to being undrafted.
Quote from: Dillen37 on April 10, 2006, 05:02:09 PM
Ryan Cook out of New Mexico. He'll probably go anywhere from the 5th to being undrafted.
What about Ernesto Ramirez out of Mexico.He'll probably go anywhere from being undrafted, to being deported.
I would love to have Winston Justice, OT, USC that the Birds have in today.
BTW, I've already tried to make my pick based on things people didn't see coming or mocks weren't predicting (Wimbley or Lawson). Now, some mocks are starting to pick Lawson, so I'm thinking the Eagles could go elsewhere:
Tye Hill? Jason Allen? DeAngelo Williams? Let's think of some rarely mentioned names with the Eagles that are an outside possibility...
I wouldn't mind them taking Maroney or Bobby Carpenter if they traded down.
I wouldn't mind them taking Maroney or Bobby Carpenter if they traded down.
if they trade down and can find a suitor from the bottom of round one then moss is the no brainer
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 16, 2006, 08:26:59 PM
I wouldn't mind them taking Maroney or Bobby Carpenter if they traded down.
if they trade down and can find a suitor from the bottom of round one then moss is the no brainer
For you maybe. I think they can get a guy like Bloom or Toby Zeigler to handle return duties in the later rounds.
moss isnt strictly a return guy....you comparing tony zeigler to him is worthy of a temporary banning
If they trade down to 28ish and pick up two additional picks I don't think I would have a problem with them drafting Moss there.
Because they could still trade up in round 2 or acquire another #2 with their plethora of picks and have a solid day 1.
But hopefully they get Walker and Ngata or Bunkley.
If they trade down to 28ish and pick up two additional picks I don't think I would have a problem with them drafting Moss there.
thank you phreak..thats all im saying
lolol @ tony zeigler
Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on April 16, 2006, 08:48:27 PM
But hopefully they get Walker and Ngata or Bunkley.
Half the people the room with me will end up with a fresh coat of my happy juice all over them if the Eagles pull that off. The other half will get the same if they walk away with Thomas Howard as well.
I mean, I am no big time Sinorice fan, but he's got the tools to be a playmaker. And any playmaker that can be added is obviously a plus. And if they have no realistic shot at Bunkley or Ngata because they are off the board or go too high, I would pimp that pick like crazy and get out of 14.
But they still need defensive playmakers more than offensive at this point, IMO. But if trading back gets us more picks and Moss, then we hope we got a clone of his brother or another Steve Smith type WR and see whats up.
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 16, 2006, 08:39:11 PM
moss isnt strictly a return guy....you comparing tony zeigler to him is worthy of a temporary banning
Don't make a connection I didn't. I think it can be argued that Zeigler is equal to Moss in return ability not as an overall reciever. I am just not as high on Moss as you are. If he turns out to be a stud I will gladly admit I am idiot.
I don't know why IGY has such a man crush on Moss, he had one.....I repeat one ok season, it is not like he set the world on fire I just don't get your infatuation with him. That being said I think he could be a good pro and I wouldn't mind if the Eagles took him. Personally, I would rather see a guy like Holmes if you were looking for a versatile player, because he has actually proven it on the field.
Eckel basically says he used deduction to assume the Eagles are targeting Ngata (http://www.nj.com/columns/times/eckel/index.ssf?/base/columns-0/114577983110370.xml&coll=5)
So, he has no inside info at all. Just hearsay/hunch as usual, and leads him to this "obvious" conclusion:
QuoteSo there you have it. The Eagles can move up and draft Ngata; stay at 14 and take Jackson, or move down and select Mangold and get another pick.
Oh, and he lists this guy as one of the non-Bush USC Trojans available:
QuoteTE Marcedes Lewis -- "He's a good enough athlete, but he's just an average player."
What a farging idiot Eckel is.
Dreckel...what a doosh :-D
And he got his obligatory shot at Reid in there nice and early too..
QuoteCards for wide receiver Bryant Johnson. But I'm the only person who seems to want the former Penn State receiver
We've found Dreck's new man-crush. He's been swinging from Johnson's nuts since February.
I wonder how Kevin feels about this?
QuoteThe big tackle, despite attending Oregon instead of BYU, is a devout Mormon. Now this is not to accuse Reid of any religious prejudice, but he does have a fondness for followers of the faith. With that in mind you have to wonder how he feels about HBO's new hit, "Big Love."
Ngata is a Mormon.
Quote from: SD_Eagle on April 23, 2006, 03:46:42 PM
QuoteThe big tackle, despite attending Oregon instead of BYU, is a devout Mormon. Now this is not to accuse Reid of any religious prejudice, but he does have a fondness for followers of the faith. With that in mind you have to wonder how he feels about HBO's new hit, "Big Love."
Ngata is a Mormon.
Well, there ends THAT speculation!
Wroten tested postive at the combine. So doubt we take him now. Unless he's there in the late 2nd or early 3rd. I'd holla at that. Still a 1st round talent, but where is his head at? I still take him over Gras/Thomas/ etc.
Quote from: pinoyboy2pt0 on April 23, 2006, 04:54:57 PM
Wroten tested postive at the combine.
He won't be an Eagle.
Quote from: pinoyboy2pt0 on April 23, 2006, 04:54:57 PM
Wroten tested postive at the combine. So doubt we take him now. Unless he's there in the late 2nd or early 3rd. I'd holla at that. Still a 1st round talent, but where is his head at? I still take him over Gras/Thomas/ etc.
Tested positive for being Morman? No way!
there has to be a mormon masking agent for this guy to have taken
they'll draft simms.
Quote from: hunt on April 24, 2006, 09:09:59 AM
they'll draft simms.
Why, because he's the guy you least want?
Ngata. I don't even think they will have to move up for him anymore.
Quote from: PhillyPhaninDC on April 24, 2006, 10:16:13 AM
Ngata. I don't even think they will have to move up for him anymore.
Ngata hasn't dropped that far. Even if he has... Cleveland and Baltimore still sit ahead of us... and both of them have DT needs and have shown an interest in him. IMO, we'll need to see some major draft surprises for Ngata to fall into our laps.
Quote from: EagleFeva on April 24, 2006, 11:46:25 AM
Quote from: PhillyPhaninDC on April 24, 2006, 10:16:13 AM
Ngata. I don't even think they will have to move up for him anymore.
Ngata hasn't dropped that far. Even if he has... Cleveland and Baltimore still sit ahead of us... and both of them have DT needs and have shown an interest in him. IMO, we'll need to see some major draft surprises for Ngata to fall into our laps.
Buffalo could also use a DT. I also wouldn't be surprised to see Bunkley or Ngata drafted by Detroit. The new Lions coach is an ex D-Line coach and their defense needs help.
I really don't think that they are going to get Bunkley or Ngata unless they trade up. I like the thougth of Watson that was mentioned in a previous post I am a big fan of his. #14 is obviously too high but I think they could get him in the second or possibly trade down and get him.
Quote from: EagleFeva on April 24, 2006, 11:46:25 AM
Quote from: PhillyPhaninDC on April 24, 2006, 10:16:13 AM
Ngata. I don't even think they will have to move up for him anymore.
Ngata hasn't dropped that far. Even if he has... Cleveland and Baltimore still sit ahead of us... and both of them have DT needs and have shown an interest in him. IMO, we'll need to see some major draft surprises for Ngata to fall into our laps.
Cleveland, according to the Plain Dealer, is looking hard at Kamerion Wimbley in the 1st.
Baltimore, with Mike Anderson at 33 and Jamal Lewis basically on a 1 year contract COULD TAKE Lendale White.
Quote from: bobbyinlondon on April 24, 2006, 01:20:49 PM
Cleveland, according to the Plain Dealer, is looking hard at Kamerion Wimbley in the 1st.
Baltimore, with Mike Anderson at 33 and Jamal Lewis basically on a 1 year contract COULD TAKE Lendale White.
That's what they want us to think.
Birds trading up in the first for Ngata :drool
If they don't trade up for one of the DTs, it sounds like Justice will be the pick at #14... :-\
Quote from: BigEd76 on April 24, 2006, 03:52:23 PM
If they don't trade up for one of the DTs, it sounds like Justice will be the pick at #14... :-\
If they can't trade up for Ngata, I would be fine with Justice at #14. Give him a year or two learning from Tra and big nasty.
Quote from: BigEd76 on April 24, 2006, 03:52:23 PM
If they don't trade up for one of the DTs, it sounds like Justice will be the pick at #14... :-\
and Sun_Mo won't let us forget about it until at least next year's draft
farging right
Quote from: Philly_Crew on April 24, 2006, 03:56:54 PM
Quote from: BigEd76 on April 24, 2006, 03:52:23 PM
If they don't trade up for one of the DTs, it sounds like Justice will be the pick at #14... :-\
If they can't trade up for Ngata, I would be fine with Justice at #14. Give him a year or two learning from Tra and big nasty.
i would be okay with justice as well.
Quote from: BigEd76 on April 24, 2006, 03:52:23 PM
If they don't trade up for one of the DTs, it sounds like Justice will be the pick at #14... :-\
I could live with this but do you think Justice will still be there at #14? If we don't get him I'd love to see Colledge from Boise St. or Lutui from USC later on day 1. Lutui is a beast but his weight is frightening. Dude is 370 lbs! I love McNeil from Auburn but as stated earlier he has a history of back problems.
Lutui is a guard and guard only, though. I don't think the Eagles are going to draft anyone to play guard on day 1.
Quote from: FFatPatt on April 24, 2006, 04:28:12 PM
Lutui is a guard and guard only, though. I don't think the Eagles are going to draft anyone to play guard on day 1.
Good point. Everyone knows how AR loves lineman with "utility".
I hate the idea of Justice, because we have more pressing needs right now. I don't want a player who is going to sit around and learn for a year.
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 24, 2006, 04:32:51 PM
I hate the idea of Justice, because we have more pressing needs right now. I don't want a player who is going to sit around and learn for a year.
...and you think that Holmes or Jackson would play often and really contribute? Ha!
I do. I think one of them would start opening day.
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 24, 2006, 04:32:51 PM
I hate the idea of Justice, because we have more pressing needs right now. I don't want a player who is going to sit around and learn for a year.
i would like to see them land aj hawk...but thats not likely unless he drops to 9 or 10...
and i would love to see them get ferguson, but thats an even larger improbability. i dont think there are many guys after the top 10 this year that are immediate impact players (there will be some surprises, as always) but there isnt a player i am so in love with that i feel the eagles need to get him.
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 24, 2006, 04:37:27 PM
I do. I think one of them would start opening day.
You must have smoked what stillupfront/stalker offered you.
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 24, 2006, 04:32:51 PM
I hate the idea of Justice, because we have more pressing needs right now. I don't want a player who is going to sit around and learn for a year.
Yet, in the other thread you were talking about how if McNabb got injured, season over. If that's your concern, wouldn't it make sense to draft a top level talent who's job is to protect him?
Obviously, it's much better to have better receivers, so they can open and he can get rid of the ball in 1.3 seconds every play. Duh. Come on, Feva... don't you even watch football? GET WR's at ALL COSTS!
Quote from: BigEd76 on April 24, 2006, 03:52:23 PM
If they don't trade up for one of the DTs, it sounds like Justice will be the pick at #14... :-\
Other than getting Hawk or Ngata this pick would excited me the most of any they could feasibly make.
Quote from: FFatPatt on April 24, 2006, 05:37:21 PM
Obviously, it's much better to have better receivers, so they can open and he can get rid of the ball in 1.3 seconds every play. Duh. Come on, Feva... don't you even watch football? GET WR's at ALL COSTS!
O-linemen r for teh stoopids!
Quote from: EagleFeva on April 24, 2006, 05:31:48 PM
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 24, 2006, 04:32:51 PM
I hate the idea of Justice, because we have more pressing needs right now. I don't want a player who is going to sit around and learn for a year.
Yet, in the other thread you were talking about how if McNabb got injured, season over. If that's your concern, wouldn't it make sense to draft a top level talent who's job is to protect him?
Why not draft a OT next season? You know, when we actually might need one.
OT is definetly a need this year. Who knows if Tra can step it up and even be healthy the entire year. I'd much rather have a 1st round pick from this year sit behind Tra and learn and be ready to go next year or mid-year if Tra goes down. Lets face it, worst manneans isn't then next coming of Christ. I'd rather have line protection for McNabb. I think our d-line is going to be a hell of alot better this year, just with the addition of Howard. I'd love to go DT or LB in the draft also, but I think OT is the way to go round one. I'd love a WR more than anything, but i don't see us passing up on OT or DT in round with the WR available this year. McNabb needs protection.
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 24, 2006, 07:22:51 PM
Why not draft a OT next season? You know, when we actually might need one.
Since when do you draft a player you desperately need to be a starter in his first year? How many Eagles WR draft picks have done anything whatsoever in their first years? Following, how many of them made the difference in the offense in their rookie seasons?
You have no clue about anything. If the Eagles desperately need an OT for 2007, then this is the EXACT draft to do something about it. The 2007 draft is too late to get a starting OT to protect McNabb, even if you assume they will pick really early.
Quote from: FFatPatt on April 24, 2006, 08:59:55 PM
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 24, 2006, 07:22:51 PM
Why not draft a OT next season? You know, when we actually might need one.
Since when do you draft a player you desperately need to be a starter in his first year? How many Eagles WR draft picks have done anything whatsoever in their first years? Following, how many of them made the difference in the offense in their rookie seasons?
You have no clue about anything. If the Eagles desperately need an OT for 2007, then this is the EXACT draft to do something about it. The 2007 draft is too late to get a starting OT to protect McNabb, even if you assume they will pick really early.
I'm not disagreeing with you in that aspect. You are the one with no clue.
Do you really want to go into next season with the same DTs we had as last year or Brown, Pinkston, and Gaffney? Because if you take Justice in round one, one of those scenarios will happen.
We have Herremans to play for Tra Thomas next year if need be. Justice is not a priority, I'm sorry. Why would you be happy with Justice, when we have Herremans to play tackle and we have huge needs at DT, OLB and WR?
After how bad our pass rush was last season, do you really want to go in with what we had at DT last year? The way I see it is we need the following positions in the first 3 rounds. DT, SAM LB, WR. Because they are our biggest weaknesses. So if we waste a pick in the first round on Justice, then every player we could've had at those positions gets shifted down a level of talent, because we'll be getting one in a later round.
This means our 3 biggest weaknesses will not have been addressed adequately. If we didn't have Herremans, then I probably like the pick of Justice. But OT is one position on our offensive line we actually have depth at. It has to be DT SAM LB, or WR in round one. They are too big of holes. Unless you are happy with Walker, Rayburn, Pinkston, and Dhani Jones.
Here's the problem with your logic: You're assuming that by addressing a certain position in round 1, you are automatically "addressing" that position's need. Well, if the Eagles' value board says that the best player available at that position has a 3rd round grade, and you take him at #14 overall, are you really addressing a need at all? No. You're simply adding more mediocre depth players to a position (like DT and WR) where the Eagles are already doing just fine with raw numbers. They could use top-line talent at WR, and they could use a young fresh player to develop in the rotation at DT.
Arguably, there is no top-line WR in this entire draft. Arguably, the rotation DT can be found anywhere through the first 4 rounds. So, if Justice is on top of the value board and you feel he's going to be the best football player at a position you want to address that's available to draft, you farging draft farging Winston Justice.
It's really not rocket science, but you'd think so the way you're looking at it.
Quote from: FFatPatt on April 24, 2006, 09:13:46 PM
Arguably, there is no top-line WR in this entire draft. Arguably, the rotation DT can be found anywhere through the first 4 rounds. So, if Justice is on top of the value board and you feel he's going to be the best football player at a position you want to address that's available to draft, you farging draft farging Winston Justice.
It's really not rocket science, but you'd think so the way you're looking at it.
That's all I have at this point.
Oh.....and.....werd life.
Ok, then forget about WR for a minute. Let's just assume you are right and that Holmes and Jackson won't amount to anything.
Eagles take Justice in round 1. Then Wroten and Watson are gone by round 2 when we pick.
Are you going to be satisfied with the DT rotation next season? What about the SAM LB spot?
Do you think we need Justice when we have Herremans?
I don't, but I understand where you are coming from.
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 24, 2006, 10:07:22 PM
Ok, then forget about WR for a minute. Let's just assume you are right and that Holmes and Jackson won't amount to anything.
Eagles take Justice in round 1. Then Wroten and Watson are gone by round 2 when we pick.
Are you going to be satisfied with the DT rotation next season? What about the SAM LB spot?
Do you think we need Justice when we have Herremans?
I don't, but I understand where you are coming from.
you do realize there are 7 rounds, right?
You'd be ok with addressing our DT issues in the 6th/7th round?
You take Justice because he has the ability to be a dominate player he also could be moved to guard until he is ready to take over at the LT position. You can never have enough good OLinemen. Justice would be a great pick period.
Justice is going to be a damn good player. Damn good. But wouldn't you rather use our best pick on a bigger need? If the draft is 7 rounds like you said, then why not take an OT in a later round?
Did you forget how terrible our pass rush was last season? We need to get a DT with our best pick. Justice isn't the end of the world, but I'd much rather address other needs.
To make things easier, where does Justice rank on the list of players that you want in the first round? Out of the realistic options only. For me it's:
1. Ngata
2. Bunkley
3. Sims
4. Jackson
5. Holmes
6. Justice
I'm not saying I want no part of Justice, but there are 5 players I'd rather have before him. Meaning that if any of those are available and we take Justice instead, of course I'd be disappointed.
Where does Justice rank on your want lists?
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 24, 2006, 10:39:39 PM
Justice is going to be a damn good player. Damn good. But wouldn't you rather use our best pick on a bigger need? If the draft is 7 rounds like you said, then why not take an OT in a later round?
Did you forget how terrible our pass rush was last season? We need to get a DT with our best pick. Justice isn't the end of the world, but I'd much rather address other needs.
To make things easier, where does Justice rank on the list of players that you want in the first round? Out of the realistic options only. For me it's:
I'm not saying I want no part of Justice, but there are 5 players I'd rather have before him. Meaning that if any of those are available and we take Justice instead, of course I'd be disappointed.
Where does Justice rank on your want lists?
1a. Ngata
1b. Bunkley
1c. Sims
1d. Justice
1e. Mike Huff
2. Lawson
3. Wimbley
4a. Watson
4b. Marcus McNeil
4c. Jason Allen
4d. Bobby Carpenter
5. Tye Hill
6. McCargo (yeah, I said it.)
7. Jackson
8. Holmes
Based on talent at what they do, and upside or whatever your want to call it, Jackson and Holmes pale in comparison to all of those guys in my opinion. You don't draft a number two or number three receiver with the fourteenth pick in the draft.
For me he is second on that list followed by Bunkley, Jackson, Holmes, and Sims.
Well then that is why we disagree. If you had Justice 6th on your list of players you wanted I'm sure you'd be a bit angry too if that's who we ended up with.
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 24, 2006, 11:10:58 PM
Well then that is why we disagree. If you had Justice 6th on your list of players you wanted I'm sure you'd be a bit angry too if that's who we ended up with.
That is because you base everything on your perceived needs for the team.
Don't you want our best picks to address our biggest needs?
List your top 5 needs in order for the Eagles.
1.) SAM LB
2.) WR
3.) DT
4.) OL
5.) FB/RB
So wouldn't you prefer our 3 best picks be on our 3 best needs?
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 24, 2006, 11:39:05 PM
So wouldn't you prefer our 3 best picks be on our 3 best needs?
In a perfect world yes, but were clearly are not in such a situation. If it was up to me they would get AJ Hawk but that almost certainly won't happen.
Well we could get Bunkley in round 1, Demeco Ryans in round 2 and maybe somehow find a way to get Stovall by trading back into the 2nd round. That isn't an impossibility.
did u forget in a little signing called darren howard in free agency? our d-line is instantly upgraded with him. look i'd love to have an impact WR, DT or LB 1st, but i don't see it happening. OL looks like our best chance via pick # 14 at this point.
I think we have as good of a chance at Bunkley as we do Justice. Justice has more of a chance to be taken before 14 than Bunkley IMO. So I think we have a great chance of getting DT in round 1.
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 24, 2006, 07:22:51 PM
Quote from: EagleFeva on April 24, 2006, 05:31:48 PM
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 24, 2006, 04:32:51 PM
I hate the idea of Justice, because we have more pressing needs right now. I don't want a player who is going to sit around and learn for a year.
Yet, in the other thread you were talking about how if McNabb got injured, season over. If that's your concern, wouldn't it make sense to draft a top level talent who's job is to protect him?
Why not draft a OT next season? You know, when we actually might need one.
I see that you've been adequately educated on why it's a rediculous idea to have to draft an OT to start his rookie year... so I guess I don't have to revisit that.
Thing is though... for the last 2-3 pages of this thread, you've been pimping Jackson and Holmes at #14... now you want a DT? Quit flip-flopping and make up your mind.
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 24, 2006, 11:39:05 PM
So wouldn't you prefer our 3 best picks be on our 3 best needs?
Absolutely not. That's called "drafting for need" or "not sticking to your value board". It's a good way to put together a really crappy draft. What you need to do is see all the positions that you'd like to address with top-line talent anywhere in the next 2-3 seasons. For the Eagles, those positions are OL (across the board), DL (across the board), LB (MIKE AND SAM), Safety, CB (nickle), and WR in no particular order.
So, if you have a guy rated the highest on your board, and he plays ANY of those positions, drafting him makes sense. Now, if you feel there's a guy available that can be a first-year starter and grades out only a notch or two below your top guy, maybe you explore trade-down opportunities or consider taking the other guy anyway. Either way, you can't stray too far off your value board, or you're drafting poorly.
Say what you will about the Eagles under Reid/Heckert but their previous drafts have proven that they rarely make a huge stretch (althought they did last year with McCoy, IMO) and they usually stick to drafting the best player available on their board regardless of position.
I think that's why they've had some pretty successful drafts over the past few years.
When teams start drafting based on positional needs, they get themselves in trouble.
Just draft the best player available unless the position the players plays at is unquestionably filled by a starter and capable backups.
Since there's no clear-cut SAM available where the Eagles draft @ 14, they should stick to the plan and take the best player available regardless of position. Hopefully a player will be there that will help them in a position of need. If not, they should trade down and acquire more picks in the 2nd and/or 3rd rounds.
Quote from: Jerome99RIP on April 25, 2006, 08:51:47 AM
although they did last year with McCoy, IMO
Here's to hoping he proves you wrong this year.
Quote from: FFatPatt on April 24, 2006, 09:56:32 AM
Quote from: hunt on April 24, 2006, 09:09:59 AM
they'll draft simms.
Why, because he's the guy you least want?
nah...because i think bunkley, ngata, & justice will already be gone.
Ah. I like Sims a lot. I am still trying to figure out where he could fit in to the D long-term.
Ernie Sims is a player. Like FF said, though, I don't know where he'd fit in on the Eagles defense.
Hey, if he's the best player available, then take him. The Eagles could do worse than him @ 14 (namely Greenway, Holmes, Jackson, etc.).
An explosive athletic linebacker with great speed would be nice.... :yay
...and as I've said, even if Sims is better-suited to play WIL, why not alter the scheme a little and put two WIL-type guys at the OLB positions? If the guys are solid tacklers and have the speed to rush the passer and awareness to play in space, who cares if they are prototypical SAM LB's?
whoever drafts Sims better have the special helmet ready. 5 concussions before he even gets to the NFL. Bad ones or not that is playing with fire.
Quote from: MURP on April 25, 2006, 09:25:12 AM
whoever drafts Sims better have the special helmet ready. 5 concussions before he even gets to the NFL. Bad ones or not that is playing with fire.
i did not know that.... :boom :boom :boom
Quote from: MURP on April 25, 2006, 09:25:12 AM
whoever drafts Sims better have the special helmet ready. 5 concussions before he even gets to the NFL. Bad ones or not that is playing with fire.
True, but the injury argument is also pretty good for Brodrick Bunkley. Red flags all over him, too.
no doubt plenty of guys have injury histories... I just think the brain injuries are more concerning. IMO.
OT is definetly a need this year. Who knows if Tra can step it up and even be healthy the entire year. I'd much rather have a 1st round pick from this year sit behind Tra and learn and be ready to go next year or mid-year if Tra goes down. Lets face it, worst manneans isn't then next coming of Christ.
you can say the same thing but replace OT with WR tra with pinky and herremans with lewis
does anyone even really believe justice is going to be there at 14...i dont...which is why sims is the pick...or trade down..or of course trade up and get one of the big boys
It's arguable whether the knees or the brain is more important, but I know a lot of guys with an extensive concussion history that take a licking and keep on ticking.
Anyway, with all this said... I don't think the Eagles take Sims anyway. Maybe they trade down to 23 and let the Bucs take him. I dunno.
there always the possibility to move down though, IGY
Polamalu had similar issues coming out of USC and it turned out ok for him, my big issue with Sims is his size and the fact they drafted McCoy last season.
football players get concussions all the time...what they rarely get is the high grade concussions that other athletes get because of the protection the helmet gives them...in fact football players often play with concussions because the helmet often prevents a more serious injury
Sims is a classic case for me of... whatever.
If he's there and the Eagles take him at #14, I'll be cool with it, because I know the guy can make plays.
If he's there and the Eagles don't take him, I'll be cool with it, because I'm not sure where he fits in on the defense and he has a history of head injuries.
Quote from: Drunkmasterflex on April 25, 2006, 09:38:25 AM
Polamalu had similar issues coming out of USC and it turned out ok for him,
yep, and the Steelers gave Polamalu a special helmet.
Quote from: MURP on April 25, 2006, 09:25:12 AM
whoever drafts Sims better have the special helmet ready.
:deion
the hair helmet
Special helmet?
(http://www.stereokiller.com/boards/profiles/thumb_special_ed_a3.jpg)
"Bread makes me poop. Yaaaayyyyy!"
I am so thoroughly confused that I have ZERO idea what the Eagles might do in this draft. ZERO.
I honestly think that if Ngata isn't there if they trade up and Justice is gone @ 14 then the Eagles should trade down a bit. There are so many players in the late first, second and early third rounds who are going to be excellent pro's that they could really load up on depth there.
I know they need immediate help in places but if none is forthcoming, why force a bad pick? Just trade down and significantly improve the talent on the roster. That's what I would do anyway.
Have Winston Justices' off the field issues been discussed here at all?
if they dont make a trade i just figured out that the eagles will pick at 3:46
thats actually a good idea for a pool
do it up
Quote from: Jerome99RIP on April 25, 2006, 09:53:44 AM
I honestly think that if Ngata isn't there if they trade up and Justice is gone @ 14 then the Eagles should trade down a bit. There are so many players in the late first, second and early third rounds who are going to be excellent pro's that they could really load up on depth there.
I know they need immediate help in places but if none is forthcoming, why force a bad pick? Just trade down and significantly improve the talent on the roster. That's what I would do anyway.
i agree that they
should trade down if bunkley, ngata, & justice are gone at 14....but the problem is finding a team that wants to move up to that spot.
This "munch" analysis of many mock drafts (http://www.fanmonster.com/public/muncher/SuperMuncher/best.asp?site=211) gives a great picture of the lack of likely value at #14. Also, if you click on the individual players, you can see how their draft stock has changed in the last couple of months.
It's really not that new for people that have been following all along, but to recap, it looks like this is what we'll see on Saturday:
-- The top 7 will be some combination of Bush/Ferguson/Leinart/Williams/Hawk/Davis/Young
-- The Eagles will attempt to trade up with Buffalo (#8) or Arizona (#10) to get one of the DTs. Buffalo could take one of them for themselves, but they have a bigger need at OT and might want Justice instead. Getting to this spot would take the #14, the 3rd and one of the 4ths. Arizona at #10 could trade down to take Cutler. Getting to this spot would take the #14 and the 3rd (no 4th needed).
-- If the Eagles can't trade up and both DTs are gone, they'll hope that Justice falls to #14.
-- If Ngata, Bunkley and Justice are gone in the top 13, the Eagles will trade out of that spot. They will not take Jackson or Holmes, and it doesn't sound like they're interested in taking Simms or Greenway (at least not that high). If they trade down, they'll take whoever they have rated highest, which could be anybody at this point.
now after all of that, Ed, they will actually stay put and take Kiwanuka and it will have all come 360. ha.
some guy i never heard of is answering draft questions on that other board if anyone's interested.
on SAM position:
QuoteI think a lot can happen and any one of the scenarios could happen. I will not venture a guess. I think Jones must play better. No question. I think the Eagles could use a high draft pick at SAM. I think they could trade for a guy and I think they could get a guy who is cut.
Trade for rights to Hillenmeyer! Holler at your boiy!
Asked him about Gradkowski:
Quote
He's a very good prospect. Gradkowski is very mobile and an accurate quarterback, but he doesn't have the strongest arm. My concern with Gradkowski is whether he can make the crucial out-route in the NFL. His height is a concern; he measured in at just over 6-foot-1, but his mobility will by him some time. He was very impressive at Toledo and was really productive. I see the comparison to Garcia and maybe with some coaching he will develop into a starting quarterback. One player Gradkowski reminds me of is Giovanni Carmazzi, who was drafted by the Niners in the third round of the 2000 draft.
He had the Birds taking Drew Olson in the fifth round. I say farg that - get Gradkowski!
Chris Steuber is the guy on DraftHype.com. His picks aren't that great, but he spent a lot of time creating a Flash animation mock draft for his homepage...
lawlers buddy was gettin run on angelo this morning
Quote from: EagleFeva on April 25, 2006, 07:43:43 AM
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 24, 2006, 07:22:51 PM
Quote from: EagleFeva on April 24, 2006, 05:31:48 PM
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 24, 2006, 04:32:51 PM
I hate the idea of Justice, because we have more pressing needs right now. I don't want a player who is going to sit around and learn for a year.
Yet, in the other thread you were talking about how if McNabb got injured, season over. If that's your concern, wouldn't it make sense to draft a top level talent who's job is to protect him?
Why not draft a OT next season? You know, when we actually might need one.
I see that you've been adequately educated on why it's a rediculous idea to have to draft an OT to start his rookie year... so I guess I don't have to revisit that.
Thing is though... for the last 2-3 pages of this thread, you've been pimping Jackson and Holmes at #14... now you want a DT? Quit flip-flopping and make up your mind.
I've always wanted a DT first. I only want a WR if Bunkley and Ngata are gone and we can't get Walker.
Jets | Rumor alert: NFL Draft trade
Tue, 25 Apr 2006 08:46:30 -0700
Rich Cimini, of the New York Daily News, reports one rumor making the rounds has the New York Jets (No. 4) swapping their first-round pick with the Oakland Raiders (No. 7), who want a quarterback. The Jets then select Oregon DT Haloti Ngata with the seventh pick. The Jets don't have a pure nose tackle for their new 3-4 scheme.
We might have to get to 6 to get Ngata now.
If the Jets move to 7 with the intent of selecting Ngata, the Eagles aren't going to get Ngata.
Exactly.
errr
Quote from: hunt on April 25, 2006, 12:39:41 PM
some guy i never heard of is answering draft questions on that other board if anyone's interested.
so i guess this guy is somehow affiliated with the Birds? Considering he joined the EMB yesterday and already has his own section I'm guessing yes. He seems to know what he's talking about, even though he thinks every single player is going to be drafted in the 3rd or better.
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 25, 2006, 02:28:42 PM
Jets | Rumor alert: NFL Draft trade
Tue, 25 Apr 2006 08:46:30 -0700
Rich Cimini, of the New York Daily News, reports one rumor making the rounds has the New York Jets (No. 4) swapping their first-round pick with the Oakland Raiders (No. 7), who want a quarterback. The Jets then select Oregon DT Haloti Ngata with the seventh pick. The Jets don't have a pure nose tackle for their new 3-4 scheme.
We might have to get to 6 to get Ngata now.
If this is true, I'm really surprised that Oakland is giving up on Walter already. They were pimping him big time last year as the QB of the future. I still don't see it happening, especially with them having Brooks now too.
Oakland might actually be trading up for Hawk.
The Eagles would have to give up multiple picks to get to 6. Does anyone actually foresee Andy doing this?
Come on...
First 3rd and 4th to get to 8. I'd see him doing that.
tis the week of misleading information....and everyone is bitin'!
read on Igglephans that Vai called into WIP and spoke about Reid attempting to help recruit NGata to BYU. anyone else got the word on that?
Quote from: FFatPatt on April 25, 2006, 04:18:06 PM
Oakland might actually be trading up for Hawk.
That would make some sense. Otherwise, I can't see Oakland's motivation for moving up... since they've had a hard on for Vince Young for months now. Because if Young is there at #4... he'll be there at #7 since GB or SF don't seem interested. Makes no sense to give up extra picks to move up to get someone who will likely fall to you anyway.
if the birds move to 8 it better be for huff
werd
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 25, 2006, 04:50:52 PM
if the birds move to 8 it better be for huff
Couldn't agree more. The value isn't there for anyone else.
Ngata at 8 would be good.
And as much as I love Bunkley, I think I would prefer Ngata first.
I agree, Jay. "8" for Ngata would be as far as I'd go considering what they'd have to give up to get him.
Quote from: FFatPatt on April 25, 2006, 04:54:35 PM
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 25, 2006, 04:50:52 PM
if the birds move to 8 it better be for huff
Couldn't agree more. The value isn't there for anyone else.
You are way too caught up in value IMO. Bunkley or Ngata at 8 is fine value. They are very good DTs. Is Bunkley ideal for around 12? Probably, but you don't trade up to take a player you don't need just because his value is better. We need a DT. If we trade up it better be for a DT.
Brian Dawkins will be re-signed along with Lewis anyway. We have little need for Huff.
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 25, 2006, 08:13:08 PM
Quote from: FFatPatt on April 25, 2006, 04:54:35 PM
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 25, 2006, 04:50:52 PM
if the birds move to 8 it better be for huff
Couldn't agree more. The value isn't there for anyone else.
You are way too caught up in value IMO. Bunkley or Ngata at 8 is fine value. They are very good DTs. Is Bunkley ideal for around 12? Probably, but you don't trade up to take a player you don't need just because his value is better. We need a DT. If we trade up it better be for a DT.
Brian Dawkins will be re-signed along with Lewis anyway. We have little need for Huff.
Drivel. 100%, pure drivel.
not only do they need huff to one day take over for dawk...but he also would be the third corner next year...hell he might be that this year
its not about value at 8...its about having to give up multiple draft picks to get there...no dt in this draft is that good
Huff is a stud. If they got him, I'd be happy/sad.
Sad because Dawk would likely be done, unless Huff plays SS. And that means Mike would be gone.
But happy because he'd be a stud.
But, and I'll break out IGY's favorite term here because I know he'll love it, they have to get better at the POINT OF ATTACK :) and need another stud DT.
Quote from: PhillyPhaninDC on April 25, 2006, 08:25:31 PM
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 25, 2006, 08:13:08 PM
Quote from: FFatPatt on April 25, 2006, 04:54:35 PM
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 25, 2006, 04:50:52 PM
if the birds move to 8 it better be for huff
Couldn't agree more. The value isn't there for anyone else.
You are way too caught up in value IMO. Bunkley or Ngata at 8 is fine value. They are very good DTs. Is Bunkley ideal for around 12? Probably, but you don't trade up to take a player you don't need just because his value is better. We need a DT. If we trade up it better be for a DT.
Brian Dawkins will be re-signed along with Lewis anyway. We have little need for Huff.
Drivel. 100%, pure drivel.
Then let's trade up for Cutler if he falls. It would be a rgeat value pick. Because we have as much need for Cutler as we do Huff, considering the secondary is the biggest strength on the team.
The difference is that Huff would actually contribute this season and QB is not a position you want to tie that much money in.
Wouldn't contribute a lot this year. He'd be at safety and would be behind Dawk and Lewis.
The Eagles are plenty deep in the secondary. Huff would just be a bad pick. Great player, but we don't need him.
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 25, 2006, 11:35:05 PM
Wouldn't contribute a lot this year. He'd be at safety and would be behind Dawk and Lewis.
The Eagles are plenty deep in the secondary. Huff would just be a bad pick. Great player, but we don't need him.
Well, he also can play corner which would make him a valuable nickle/dime back. Also in case you haven't noticed AR and company like to draft with an eye toward the future and Dawk is not getting any younger and both Lewis and Hood could be UFAs after next season. I don't think they would trade up for Huff but if they did I would be very happy he is an impact player. Also don't forget he would immediately help on special teams.
I understand eyeing toward the future, but I want to make a push for the Superbowl this year. We need to get the best or second best DT in this draft.
My philosophy has always been to address the needs when they arise, not before. Sometimes you plan for the future, but IMO it's better to draft a project in the 4th round to takeover for a future need.
Well to me the Eagles are not a Super Bowl team this year they are a playoff a contender they hopefully be a SB contender for 07.
Maybe it's just me, but I can't endure another season having the opponent's QB having 8 seconds to pick his targets.
The lower the pick in the draft, the percentage of landing a stud also declines. If we trade up for Huff, then we'd either give up a 2nd or a 3rd. That would mean we'd only have one other pick in the first 3 rounds to address DT, WR, OLB. That is a scary thought IMO.
Don't hold your breath waiting for a great LB to be drafted on day one. In fact, I'm starting to think they're waiting for Emmons to be cut so they can bring him back cheap...
Quote from: BigEd76 on April 25, 2006, 11:53:55 PM
Don't hold your breath waiting for a great LB to be drafted on day one. In fact, I'm starting to think they're waiting for Emmons to be cut so they can bring him back cheap...
Emmons, Trott, and Barber/McCoy that wouldn't be so bad provided Emmons and Barber can stay healthy.
Quote from: BigEd76 on April 25, 2006, 11:53:55 PM
Don't hold your breath waiting for a great LB to be drafted on day one. In fact, I'm starting to think they're waiting for Emmons to be cut so they can bring him back cheap...
I talked about Emmons being cut in another topic.
But as long as we get a DT or WR in day one I'm happy.
I dont understand why the Eagles need to live in the past with Barber and Emmons if that is indeed the plan. If these guys were that good in the first place they should have never let them leave. This kind of stuff just doesnt make any sense. Save money? please. 18 million with nothing to spend on.
They know JJ's defense, they can be trusted knowing it, they're cheap, they're humble (i.e. big "ha I told you so" ego boost for Banner and Reid), and they aren't a waste of draft picks. Not saying that's a great plan, but that's their theory....
Doug Pederson fit that theory too. ha.
So is Emmons actually going to be cut? When I brought it up, it was just a theory on my part because Arrington is going to play SAM most likely, and Emmons kept getting hurt.
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 25, 2006, 11:35:05 PM
Wouldn't contribute a lot this year. He'd be at safety and would be behind Dawk and Lewis.
The Eagles are plenty deep in the secondary. Huff would just be a bad pick. Great player, but we don't need him.
You're so short sighted, it's not even funny.
Btw... if Andy thought the same way you do about the secondary back in 2002, there'd be no Lito, Sheldon or Mike Lewis. I recall being "plenty deep" in the secondary then too. You seem to blow off the fact that both safeties are FA's after this season... and Dawkins ain't getting any younger. We've heard nothing from you but everything will be fine because
"Brian Dawkins will be re-signed along with Lewis anyway." I appreciate the optimism, but it's going to take a lot more than you saying so for that to happen. We all love Dawkins, but with him turning 33 this coming season and Mike Lewis' high contract demands with his mediocre play right now... there is a VERY realistic chance that one or both of those guys don't come back after the 2006 season. You gotta be prepared for those things... and a player like Huff is a great way to do that.
Huff is a guy who would be able to get on the field now and contribute. Maybe not right away at safety, but as a nickel/dime CB since he can play that too. Are you forgetting about the uncertainty with Rod Hood there as well or will we "resign him anyway"? Not to mention... if either Dawk or Lewis were to go down at any point this season, we'd be looking at something better than Sean Considine. Huff's damn sure set to contribute this year more than a Chad Jackson or Santonio Holmes.
I'm not knocking you for wanting to address the DT position now but you need to wake up if you think that Huff would be a "bad" pick.
I understand eyeing toward the future, but I want to make a push for the Superbowl this year
this hope ended a long time ago...they eagles arent making a push for it therefore you can put away your hope for it
when free agency is essentially over and you have 17 million dollars left its pretty clear the superbowl is not your goal
the giants are going for a superbowl this year
the taterskins are going for a superbowl this year
the eagles are not
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 26, 2006, 07:59:42 AM
when free agency is essentially over and you have 17 million dollars left its pretty clear the superbowl is not your goal
exactly.
Quote from: EagleFeva on April 26, 2006, 05:51:01 AM
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 25, 2006, 11:35:05 PM
Wouldn't contribute a lot this year. He'd be at safety and would be behind Dawk and Lewis.
The Eagles are plenty deep in the secondary. Huff would just be a bad pick. Great player, but we don't need him.
You're so short sighted, it's not even funny.
Btw... if Andy thought the same way you do about the secondary back in 2002, there'd be no Lito, Sheldon or Mike Lewis. I recall being "plenty deep" in the secondary then too. You seem to blow off the fact that both safeties are FA's after this season... and Dawkins ain't getting any younger. We've heard nothing from you but everything will be fine because "Brian Dawkins will be re-signed along with Lewis anyway." I appreciate the optimism, but it's going to take a lot more than you saying so for that to happen. We all love Dawkins, but with him turning 33 this coming season and Mike Lewis' high contract demands with his mediocre play right now... there is a VERY realistic chance that one or both of those guys don't come back after the 2006 season. You gotta be prepared for those things... and a player like Huff is a great way to do that.
Huff is a guy who would be able to get on the field now and contribute. Maybe not right away at safety, but as a nickel/dime CB since he can play that too. Are you forgetting about the uncertainty with Rod Hood there as well or will we "resign him anyway"? Not to mention... if either Dawk or Lewis were to go down at any point this season, we'd be looking at something better than Sean Considine. Huff's damn sure set to contribute this year more than a Chad Jackson or Santonio Holmes.
I'm not knocking you for wanting to address the DT position now but you need to wake up if you think that Huff would be a "bad" pick.
Every bit of this makes sense Feva...good write up
It would be good to have a Longhorn on the Eagles. Who's the last UT person the Eagles drafted anyhow?
Quote from: reese125 on April 26, 2006, 08:59:18 AM
Quote from: EagleFeva on April 26, 2006, 05:51:01 AM
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 25, 2006, 11:35:05 PM
Wouldn't contribute a lot this year. He'd be at safety and would be behind Dawk and Lewis.
The Eagles are plenty deep in the secondary. Huff would just be a bad pick. Great player, but we don't need him.
You're so short sighted, it's not even funny.
Btw... if Andy thought the same way you do about the secondary back in 2002, there'd be no Lito, Sheldon or Mike Lewis. I recall being "plenty deep" in the secondary then too. You seem to blow off the fact that both safeties are FA's after this season... and Dawkins ain't getting any younger. We've heard nothing from you but everything will be fine because "Brian Dawkins will be re-signed along with Lewis anyway." I appreciate the optimism, but it's going to take a lot more than you saying so for that to happen. We all love Dawkins, but with him turning 33 this coming season and Mike Lewis' high contract demands with his mediocre play right now... there is a VERY realistic chance that one or both of those guys don't come back after the 2006 season. You gotta be prepared for those things... and a player like Huff is a great way to do that.
Huff is a guy who would be able to get on the field now and contribute. Maybe not right away at safety, but as a nickel/dime CB since he can play that too. Are you forgetting about the uncertainty with Rod Hood there as well or will we "resign him anyway"? Not to mention... if either Dawk or Lewis were to go down at any point this season, we'd be looking at something better than Sean Considine. Huff's damn sure set to contribute this year more than a Chad Jackson or Santonio Holmes.
I'm not knocking you for wanting to address the DT position now but you need to wake up if you think that Huff would be a "bad" pick.
Every bit of this makes sense Feva...good write up
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 26, 2006, 07:59:42 AM
I understand eyeing toward the future, but I want to make a push for the Superbowl this year
this hope ended a long time ago...they eagles arent making a push for it therefore you can put away your hope for it
when free agency is essentially over and you have 17 million dollars left its pretty clear the superbowl is not your goal
the giants are going for a superbowl this year
the taterskins are going for a superbowl this year
the eagles are not
If the Eagles had given a punt returner $30 million dollars would you then say they are going for a superbowl?
Every team is "going for a superbowl."
Kiper "answers" a question about Mangold to Philly:
QuoteBruce(Phila. Pa): Do you think the Eagles might go for Nick Mangold?
SportsNation Mel Kiper: (1:17 PM ET ) Mangold, they did try to do some things in free agency to secure the OL. I think he goes in the late first, early second.
Early second is fine. Eagles taking Mangold @ 14 is beyond retarded.
If the Eagles had given a punt returner $30 million dollars would you then say they are going for a superbowl?
when you call him a punt returner you lose what little credibility you ever had
again if you think hes overpaid then i cant argue...i really could care less about the money...but if you think hes a punt returner there is no need for further discussion
if he comes out this year has 30 catches no tangible impact on the offense and no impact on the return game you know where to find me and ill be here to admit i was wrong...meanwhile enjoy greg lewis and todd pinkston this year at the same amount of money
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 26, 2006, 01:51:49 PM
If the Eagles had given a punt returner $30 million dollars would you then say they are going for a superbowl?
when you call him a punt returner you lose what little credibility you ever had
again if you think hes overpaid then i cant argue...i really could care less about the money...but if you think hes a punt returner there is no need for further discussion
if he comes out this year has 30 catches no tangible impact on the offense and no impact on the return game you know where to find me and ill be here to admit i was wrong...meanwhile enjoy greg lewis and todd pinkston this year at the same amount of money
Am I wrong? Randle El
didn't return punts?
Look, he made a great throw on a trick play in the superbowl. Other than that he's a 35 catch #3 WR. Between Portis, Moss, Cooley, & Lloyd.. do you really think he's going to get much more than 35 catches this year? He'll make a contribution on special teams, but that's a run first offense with at least 3 or 4 better options than him in the pass game.
hell have a better year than any eagle wr...unless brown is way better than i think hell be...gibbs/saunders is going to have him all over the field in spots and roles that will allow him to have a big year imo...the fact that their offense is loaded will hold him back somewhat in terms of numbers....but thats the point of going out and getting talent in your wr corps...they all help each other...meanwhile the eagles have a second year guy trying to help greg lewis get open
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 26, 2006, 02:10:22 PM
hell have a better year than any eagle wr...unless brown is way better than i think hell be...gibbs/saunders is going to have him all over the field in spots and roles that will allow him to have a big year imo...the fact that their offense is loaded will hold him back somewhat in terms of numbers....but thats the point of going out and getting talent in your wr corps...they all help each other...meanwhile the eagles have a second year guy trying to help greg lewis get open
First, Greg Lewis will be helping Brown get open. He's the #1 guy here. Greg Lewis is a slot guy, although so is Jabar Gaffney...
I think Randle El would have been an interesting piece to add here, but in no way would he have solved the WR situation here and he was grossly overpaid in Washington.
Yay for two threads in this section now devoted to Antwaan farging Randle-El!
I am curious as to what people would think of Eric Winston in the first not at 14 but trade down and picking him up?
I'd be cool with Winston if they trade WAY down to just barely out of the first.
Quote from: EagleFeva on April 26, 2006, 05:51:01 AM
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 25, 2006, 11:35:05 PM
Wouldn't contribute a lot this year. He'd be at safety and would be behind Dawk and Lewis.
The Eagles are plenty deep in the secondary. Huff would just be a bad pick. Great player, but we don't need him.
You're so short sighted, it's not even funny.
Btw... if Andy thought the same way you do about the secondary back in 2002, there'd be no Lito, Sheldon or Mike Lewis. I recall being "plenty deep" in the secondary then too. You seem to blow off the fact that both safeties are FA's after this season... and Dawkins ain't getting any younger. We've heard nothing from you but everything will be fine because "Brian Dawkins will be re-signed along with Lewis anyway." I appreciate the optimism, but it's going to take a lot more than you saying so for that to happen. We all love Dawkins, but with him turning 33 this coming season and Mike Lewis' high contract demands with his mediocre play right now... there is a VERY realistic chance that one or both of those guys don't come back after the 2006 season. You gotta be prepared for those things... and a player like Huff is a great way to do that.
Huff is a guy who would be able to get on the field now and contribute. Maybe not right away at safety, but as a nickel/dime CB since he can play that too. Are you forgetting about the uncertainty with Rod Hood there as well or will we "resign him anyway"? Not to mention... if either Dawk or Lewis were to go down at any point this season, we'd be looking at something better than Sean Considine. Huff's damn sure set to contribute this year more than a Chad Jackson or Santonio Holmes.
I'm not knocking you for wanting to address the DT position now but you need to wake up if you think that Huff would be a "bad" pick.
And what Superbowl have the Eagles won doing this?
Yeah, that secondary draft looks great now, but I'm sure if we didn't address it then, somewhere down the line we would've fixed this secondary after Bobby and Troy left the team.
If the Eagles trade up in the first down, it is inexcusable to not take a DT if both are sitting there for you to take. Yes, inexcusable. DT is too big of a hole to pass it up for a position where
maybe one player in our secondary won't be here next year. If we trade up for the best player we can get it has to be DT because that is our biggest need, it's that simple.
If we trade up for a safety, where exactly are we going to get our DT help? 3rd round? 4th round? Maybe the 2nd? Do you want to address our biggest need with significantly lesser talent?
I understand your premise of looking down the road, but there's one thing I can see down the road that you didn't see. If we draft Huff, DT will still be a problem next year.
Position aside, Huff is a much more elite talent than Ngata or Bunkley. Shouldn't that factor into it?
Quote from: sallad selgae on April 26, 2006, 12:02:36 PM
It would be good to have a Longhorn on the Eagles. Who's the last UT person the Eagles drafted anyhow?[
Chris Akins FS 1998 7th round
Tommy Jeter DT 1992 3rd round
Brit Hagar LB 1989 3rd round
Lawerence Sampleton TE 1982 2nd round
Best UT draft choice by the birds? Bill Bradley S 1968 2nd round. One of my all time Eagles favorite. 11 ints in 1972.
Jerry Siesmore 1973 OT 1st round was also a stud. Part of a great Eagles OL.
(http://www.philadelphiaeagles.com/uploads/photos/perm/main/CGAJCLKDKEKN/061004-bradley2.jpg)
Quote from: FFatPatt on April 26, 2006, 03:07:01 PM
Position aside, Huff is a much more elite talent than Ngata or Bunkley. Shouldn't that factor into it?
Unless he was one of the best safety prospects ever. It's basically the same issue in Houston with the Texans. Some people think Bush is a bad pick, because they already have a good RB. I personally think Bush is the right pick because I see him being one of the 5 best RBs in the history of the game. But, if he was just another Ronnie Brown coming out, I don't think there is any way they pick him.
At some point or another we have to get a DT with our best pick. Let's take care of it now, while we have other positions secure, and take care of those when they become an issue.
If Dawk isn't here in 2007, then we can draft a safety then or have Considine fill in for a year or so until we do get one. That wouldn't be disastrous. Having Walker and Rayburn next year would be disastrous.
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 26, 2006, 03:13:54 PM
If Dawk isn't here in 2007, then we can draft a safety then or have Considine fill in for a year or so until we do get one. That wouldn't be disastrous. Having Walker and Rayburn next year would be disastrous.
So, the prospect of Considine starting is less scary to you than the prospect of Darwin Walker and Sam Rayburn being vital parts of a DT rotation? I see you're not even in the same solar system as planet reality.
Considine is one player in a secondary. You can cover up for a weakness at safety with a pass rush. If we get a stud DT in this draft, I'd expect we'd have a very good pass rush again. So we'd be able to cover up that weakness. You can't really cover up a weakness at DT. Unless you have a super dominant DE.
Now that your lack of sanity is proved, I really see no need to continue this argument or present more logic.
If it makes you feel better, you can declare yourself the winner.
As his sponsor, since it is still the coolest thing to do, I can assure you, Sean Considine is a beast.
Quote from: FFatPatt on April 26, 2006, 03:21:33 PM
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 26, 2006, 03:13:54 PM
If Dawk isn't here in 2007, then we can draft a safety then or have Considine fill in for a year or so until we do get one. That wouldn't be disastrous. Having Walker and Rayburn next year would be disastrous.
So, the prospect of Considine starting is less scary to you than the prospect of Darwin Walker and Sam Rayburn being vital parts of a DT rotation? I see you're not even in the same solar system as planet reality.
First off, we don't really know anything about Considine. I think it's too early to write him off. Now, if you asked me now I would certainly not tell you that I'd be comfortable seeing him start in 07... but he deserves some time.
I think the DT situation is dire. We got killed last year there. Not only did they get run up the gut, but the lack of push made is easy for QBs to just step up to easily avoid the edge rush by Kearse. I can't count the amount of times he came from the outside to have the QB step up and buy another few seconds. Our secondary, LBs, the whole defense was left out to dry at that point. Those guys in the interior need to at least hold their ground and eat up some blocks for the scheme to work, they didn't do that and the entire defense collapsed around them.
You proved my point.
We know nothing about Considine, whereas we know that both Walker and Rayburn can be decent rotational players when healthy. We also know that last year, they were certainly not healthy at all. Neither of them.
Hey, I'd love to see DT get upgraded, but to say that you're fine with Sean farging Considine getting significant playing time, but you're scared to death of Walker and Rayburn is an absolutely ridiculous point of view.
A free safety is ONE player in a defensive backfield that has 4 players.
2 DTs play on a defensive line. It's less of an issue to have one question mark in the secondary than one at DT.
You can get by with questions in the secondary if you have a pass rush. Without a pass rush even Dawkins and Lewis look like shtein. Look at last year. Pass rush is the #1 priority. Then you work at the secondary.
Should I point out the obvious that there are only 2 safeties in a defensive backfield of 4 overall players and 2 DT's in a defensive line of 4 overall players? Your logic is completely laughable. Stop trying.
What good are your safeties going to do if you can't get a pass rush? Just look at last season. Dawk and Lewis looked bad. That was because we had no pass rush. So I don't care who you have playing in the secondary. Huff is going to look like trash too if we don't get a pass rush. Getting Bunkley or Ngata is getting on the right track.
With all the secondary issues the Patriots had 2 years ago, they disguised them because they could get to the QB. They had second stringers and a WR(Troy Brown) playing DB.
So I don't really care who we have at safety or corner. Defensive line is the most important part of a defense, and we have a huge hole at DT, and it must be addressed in the first round.
If it's all about the pass rush, then the only conceivable first round DT target is Bunkley.
Your re-attempt at logic just eliminated Ngata from contention also. He's not a pass rusher.
I think Ngata is the type of guy who will take a double team to free up the edges. Sorta like Simon was supposed to do here.
But yes, I would probably prefer Bunkley here over Ngata because Bunkley IMO has less of a bust risk.
Ha! Simon was supposed to be a pass-rushing specialist. Then, he got lazy and fat.
I think the DT situation is dire. We got killed last year there. Not only did they get run up the gut, but the lack of push made is easy for QBs to just step up to easily avoid the edge rush by Kearse. I can't count the amount of times he came from the outside to have the QB step up and buy another few seconds. Our secondary, LBs, the whole defense was left out to dry at that point. Those guys in the interior need to at least hold their ground and eat up some blocks for the scheme to work, they didn't do that and the entire defense collapsed around them.
Quote
It wouldn't hurt for Kearse to use an inside move from time to time. The reason the QB's were comfortable stepping up was that they knew he wasn't going to be there. I do agree, the interior needs to be more of a force this year as well.
Reading all of this shtein about Randle El and PhillyForever's posts makes my head want to explode. I just had to talk my brain out of it.
Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on April 26, 2006, 09:52:37 PM
Reading all of this shtein about Randle El and PhillyForever's posts makes my head want to explode. I just had to talk my brain out of it.
But... 4 is more than 2! And we have 4 defensive backs but only 2 defensive tackles! FLAWLESS LOGIC!
My logic was that if you get a pass rush it helps the secondary. Making Considine at FS perfectly fine if Dawkins has to leave. I honestly can't believe you tried to argue that Huff would help this team more than Bunkley or Ngata. I mean you can't be frickin serious.
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 26, 2006, 10:01:31 PM
My logic was that if you get a pass rush it helps the secondary. Making Considine at FS perfectly fine if Dawkins has to leave. I honestly can't believe you tried to argue that Huff would help this team more than Bunkley or Ngata. I mean you can't be frickin serious.
Oh yeah?
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 26, 2006, 05:30:14 PM
A free safety is ONE player in a defensive backfield that has 4 players.
2 DTs play on a defensive line. It's less of an issue to have one question mark in the secondary than one at DT.
You can get by with questions in the secondary if you have a pass rush. Without a pass rush even Dawkins and Lewis look like shtein. Look at last year. Pass rush is the #1 priority. Then you work at the secondary.
I can't make stuff this funny up.
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 26, 2006, 10:01:31 PM
My logic was that if you get a pass rush it helps the secondary. Making Considine at FS perfectly fine if Dawkins has to leave. I honestly can't believe you tried to argue that Huff would help this team more than Bunkley or Ngata. I mean you can't be frickin serious.
Dude no one knows what Considine is capable of at this point.
He doesn't have to be capable. You can get by with an average to below average defensive backfield if your defensive line is very good.
The Panthers did it in 2003.
QuoteI can't make stuff this funny up.
What I meant was the secondary is a conensus group. You can have one zesty player in your secondary and it still be a great unit. Even if Considine sucks as a safety, I don't even think you'd notice if we had a pass rush.
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 26, 2006, 10:07:39 PM
He doesn't have to be capable. You can get by with an average to below average defensive backfield if your defensive line is very good.
The Panthers did it in 2003.
QuoteI can't make stuff this funny up.
What I meant was the secondary is a conensus group. You can have one zesty player in your secondary and it still be a great unit. Even if Considine sucks as a safety, I don't even think you'd notice if we had a pass rush.
I understand your point but if Considine really sucks it will have an impact.
That's where I disagree. I think even if he totally blows, if you have a defensive line of Kearse, Bunkley/Ngata, Patterson, Howard with Walker, Rayburn, Cole, McDougle in the rotation, it wouldn't have an impact at all.
But still this is jumping way way far ahead. That is assuming if Dawkins leaves, that we don't replace him. This team values safeties, so I'm very confident they'd get someone in here to replace him, but once the time comes. That time is not now.
Watched the '05 Texas @ Ohio State game on ESPNU and I gotta tell ya I don't mind if the Eagles end up with any of OSU's Top dogs in the first round my draft weekend will be OK.
I don't care if they trade back and get Mangold. Dude is a tactition that really explodes off the ball to get position and leverage on the defender and take him out of the play.
Also, his weight is not an issue for me. The guy is 6'4". He easilly has the frame to put on 15-20lbs.
I don't gare if they trade back and take Carpenter. Kid is all over the field very disruptive and has good size.
I don't mind if they pull off a bolckbuster and get Hawk. Guy is a beast and an incredible athlete.
I don't mind if they stay put and get Holmes. He can catch the ball in traffic and he has the smarts to come back to his Qb when he is trouble and has to move out of the pocket.
I am with you on that except I don't want Mangold at 15, as a PSU fan I hate OSU but as an Eagles fan I would be very happy with a player from OSU.
All of those guys played at an extremely high level. Those two linebackers reminded me of the Pats LBs of a couple years back.
I know people here say they don't like Holmes but I do. His size just scares me. A receiver under 6'0 in this offense. :-\
I'd rather have Jackson. He's got the tools to be a stud. I've seen him pull down some really nice grabs.
Quote from: Philly Forever on April 26, 2006, 11:56:00 PM
I know people here say they don't like Holmes but I do. His size just scares me. A receiver under 6'0 in this offense. :-\
I'd rather have Jackson. He's got the tools to be a stud. I've seen him pull down some really nice grabs.
I hear ya on the Jackson thing. I love the idea of a guy with his size and speed. The fact that the offense he came from emphasized the short passing game suggests to me that he may be the more complete of the two because of his measureables combined with his experience.
This WR thing has me so anxious though. It can go so many different ways.
-- We trade for Walker
-- We trade up in the first round using either a 2nd or 3rd making our options at WR even more limited.
-- We stay put and take a WR
-- We trade down take a player, and then look for a WR with another pick or use that extra pick to try to get Walker.
I just hope we get out of day one with a WR that can play opposite Brown. If not... :boom
Again, whatever WR they draft will only start immediately if Gaffney completely busts and/or Pinkston is not back from injury. Otherwise, you'll see Brown/Pinkston/Gaffney in 3 WR sets, with Gaffney and Pinkston alternating in on different 2 WR packages. I don't care if they drafted Jesus Himself to play WR. They aren't starting a rookie unless injuries deplete them big-time... especially not one from this class.
And why are you so afraid of a receiver 6'0" or less in "this offense"? Hell, the WCO was practically designed for the guy that can turn the underneath route into a home run (a la Steve Smith). T.O. was an exception. Big receivers usually don't have that kind of fluidity and game speed.
My thinking is they will already have plenty of size in the receivers in the red zone if that's what they want with the 2 TE's and either McMullen or McCants (one of them will make the team). Brown is a big guy compared to most DB's too.
Height isn't everything.
Again, whatever WR they draft will only start immediately if Gaffney completely busts and/or Pinkston is not back from injury. Otherwise, you'll see Brown/Pinkston/Gaffney in 3 WR sets, with Gaffney and Pinkston alternating in on different 2 WR packages. I don't care if they drafted Jesus Himself to play WR. They aren't starting a rookie unless injuries deplete them big-time... especially not one from this class.
another reason i like moss....while he is learning the war and peace playbook for the next four years he can contribute on special teams...and hes a guy that can make an impact on the field via reverses or other specialty plays that take advantage of his superior athleticism
Well, I have good news for you, then. I have the Eagles trading their 2nd and one of the 4ths to move up and take Moss at #39 overall in my Eagles mock. Since I'm brilliant, it will obviously happen.
if they could only figure out why Reggie Brown had no problems learning the playbook... whatever chromosome he has they need to find in whatever WR they draft next.
Skyler Green > Sinorice Moss.
:paranoid
Quote from: MURP on April 27, 2006, 09:40:58 AM
if they could only figure out why Reggie Brown had no problems learning the playbook... whatever chromosome he has they need to find in whatever WR they draft next.
I think there are two simple things that contributed to Reggie's first-year *success*:
1. He is a confident/talented guy, but he's also relatively humble. Guys like Freddie Mitchell and, to a lesser extent, Billy McMullen think they're so good that they should be able to succeed just doing whatever they want to do.
2. As soon as Pinkston went down, he knew that he'd have a great opportunity to get in there and play. It's gotta be hard for a lot of rookies when they know they are relatively buried on the depth chart, especially as a WR in Philadelphia. Brown saw an opportunity, and he worked at making the most of it.
if they could only figure out why Reggie Brown had no problems learning the playbook
once TO and donovan went out and they realized what the qb situation was and that reggie was going to be the number one guy they simplified his requirements and that of the offense as mcmahon certainly was incapable of running the normal andy offense
look at reggies stats before TO went out...yes i know TO will obviously take numbers from him....but he was absolutely invisible...i think he had like 7 catches in the first six games....and that was with donovan throwing all over sf and kc
Well, I have good news for you, then. I have the Eagles trading their 2nd and one of the 4ths to move up and take Moss at #39 overall in my Eagles mock. Since I'm brilliant, it will obviously happen.
you should be shot for trying to predict trades in the second round of a mock draft...even prediciting what exact spot the trade up will be for wtf?
i still like it
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 27, 2006, 09:50:47 AM
if they could only figure out why Reggie Brown had no problems learning the playbook
once TO and donovan went out and they realized what the qb situation was and that reggie was going to be the number one guy they simplified his requirements and that of the offense as mcmahon certainly was incapable of running the normal andy offense
look at reggies stats before TO went out...yes i know TO will obviously take numbers from him....but he was absolutely invisible...i think he had like 7 catches in the first six games....and that was with donovan throwing all over sf and kc
stats were they way they were for any number of reasons. That is really besides the point. From day one everyone acknowledged that Reggie Brown was not having problems learning the playbook like previous rookie WR's had. That came from everywhere... coaches, media, other players etc.
Does anyone think that with the way things seem to be shaping up (Bush, Williams, Young, Leinhart, D'Brickashaw,..) that AJ Hawk could fall down further than expected and maybe create a ripple affect for Bunkley/Ngata?
I have a feeling that if a DT or Justice arent there at 14, the birds are going to trade back and pick a SAM(strong OLB) and a DT early in the second.
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 27, 2006, 09:53:55 AM
you should be shot for trying to predict trades in the second round of a mock draft...even prediciting what exact spot the trade up will be for wtf?
i still like it
Ha! Well, it's all in good fun. I figure predicting the Eagles not to trade picks around is about as dumb as guessing exactly which ones they'll make.
From day one everyone acknowledged that Reggie Brown was not having problems learning the playbook like previous rookie WR's had
his play showed otherwise
ill believe it when he comes out this year when he will be in the opponenets eyes the #1 wr on the eagles and in the full offense in real meaningful nfl games produces
im not saying he wont do it but i wanna see it before i give him his phd in andys offense...to say well his rookie year was better than freddie mitchells or all the other bums theyve had before him is not enough for me
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 27, 2006, 11:11:34 AM
From day one everyone acknowledged that Reggie Brown was not having problems learning the playbook like previous rookie WR's had
his play showed otherwise
ill believe it when he comes out this year when he will be in the opponenets eyes the #1 wr on the eagles and in the full offense in real meaningful nfl games produces
im not saying he wont do it but i wanna see it before i give him his phd in andys offense...to say well his rookie year was better than freddie mitchells or all the other bums theyve had before him is not enough for me
The thing is there are a lot of rookie receivers that go on to have good careers and don't show as much as he did in his first season. One example would be Eric Moulds.
The thing is there are a lot of rookie receivers that go on to have good careers and don't show as much as he did in his first season. One example would be Eric Moulds.
most definitely....but he also might never be more than a #3 guy
all im saying is people are annointing reggie brown because of a couple good games last year ignoring how many games he was absolutely invisible in...they are treating it as fine that hes the number 1 wr...when he really should be starting out as the #3 guy next year and move up from there
each players situation is much different but the attitiude towards brown right now is the same as it was towards greg lewis last offseason...where it was just an absolute lock that lewis would be fine and have a breakout year
Yeah but the thing is Greg Lewis had players around him when he was productive Brown didn't. Take for instance the last game against the taterskins he was basically the only receiver that was any sort of threat, yet they were still unable to stop him. In that game the Skins were fighting for a playoff spot so it wasn't like they were playing their chumps like we were.
well i could say the taterskins thought they were gonna come in and just roll all over a team missing half their starting lineup and didnt take reggie or the eagles seriously...and when they finally did they dominated...i mean we could go on and on forever...the season will tell the truth...i just hope people arent bitterly disappointed in reggie this year
while my the prediciton in my sig is still what I think, for the CF contest i had them trading up to Oakland's spot and taking Huff.
Quote from: Drunkmasterflex on April 27, 2006, 12:49:37 PM
The thing is there are a lot of rookie receivers that go on to have good careers and don't show as much as he did in his first season. One example would be Eric Moulds.
Reggie had 43 rec and 4TDs. Chad Johnson(who he has drawn comparisons to) had 28 catches and 1 TD in his rookie year. TO had 35 rec & 4Tds. Larry Fitzgerald had 58 catches. Steve Smith caught 10 balls. Santana Moss caught 30 balls in his first full year. Holt got 52. Burress caught 22. Hines Ward caught 15 balls. Reggie Wayne got 27. Chris Chambers got 48. Rod Smith caught 6, Jimmy Smith caught 22. These are the most of the top WRs in football right now and Reggie's rookie year was on par or better than nearly all of them. What's even more impressive is that he did in 9 NFL starts, most of which Mike McMahon was at QB.
Who knows if he will blossom into the WRs these guys have, but he sure is off to a good start.
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 27, 2006, 01:38:24 PM
well i could say the taterskins thought they were gonna come in and just roll all over a team missing half their starting lineup and didnt take reggie or the eagles seriously...and when they finally did they dominated...i mean we could go on and on forever...the season will tell the truth...i just hope people arent bitterly disappointed in reggie this year
It sounds to me like you are saying that that was a trap game for the Skins. Yes?
Quote from: SidFarkus on April 27, 2006, 04:46:20 PM
Quote from: Drunkmasterflex on April 27, 2006, 12:49:37 PM
The thing is there are a lot of rookie receivers that go on to have good careers and don't show as much as he did in his first season. One example would be Eric Moulds.
Reggie had 43 rec and 4TDs. Chad Johnson(who he has drawn comparisons to) had 28 catches and 1 TD in his rookie year. TO had 35 rec & 4Tds. Larry Fitzgerald had 58 catches. Steve Smith caught 10 balls. Santana Moss caught 30 balls in his first full year. Holt got 52. Burress caught 22. Hines Ward caught 15 balls. Reggie Wayne got 27. Chris Chambers got 48. Rod Smith caught 6, Jimmy Smith caught 22. These are the most of the top WRs in football right now and Reggie's rookie year was on par or better than nearly all of them. What's even more impressive is that he did in 9 NFL starts, most of which Mike McMahon was at QB.
Who knows if he will blossom into the WRs these guys have, but he sure is off to a good start.
All of those receivers were not basically thrown into a #1 role, on on a depleted offense, like a very fortunate Brown either. Although he could blossom, these comparisons are non-comparable.
Quote from: Sun_Mo on April 27, 2006, 02:54:14 PM
while my the prediciton in my sig is still what I think, for the CF contest i had them trading up to Oakland's spot and taking Huff.
What I did was just maneuvered around and got Ngata to 14. I believe they'll trade up for Ngata, but I dont want to farg up the rest of the draft if im wrong with the trade. I think they'll trade up to 12 with Cleveland, Cleveland takes Wimbley at 14.
Quote from: reese125 on April 27, 2006, 05:44:11 PM
Quote from: SidFarkus on April 27, 2006, 04:46:20 PM
Quote from: Drunkmasterflex on April 27, 2006, 12:49:37 PM
The thing is there are a lot of rookie receivers that go on to have good careers and don't show as much as he did in his first season. One example would be Eric Moulds.
Reggie had 43 rec and 4TDs. Chad Johnson(who he has drawn comparisons to) had 28 catches and 1 TD in his rookie year. TO had 35 rec & 4Tds. Larry Fitzgerald had 58 catches. Steve Smith caught 10 balls. Santana Moss caught 30 balls in his first full year. Holt got 52. Burress caught 22. Hines Ward caught 15 balls. Reggie Wayne got 27. Chris Chambers got 48. Rod Smith caught 6, Jimmy Smith caught 22. These are the most of the top WRs in football right now and Reggie's rookie year was on par or better than nearly all of them. What's even more impressive is that he did in 9 NFL starts, most of which Mike McMahon was at QB.
Who knows if he will blossom into the WRs these guys have, but he sure is off to a good start.
All of those receivers were not basically thrown into a #1 role, on on a depleted offense, like a very fortunate Brown either. Although he could blossom, these comparisons are non-comparable.
Moss, Johnson, and Chambers were so don't say they aren't comparable. We also are simply trying to illustrate how receivers take time to develop in the NFL.
It sounds to me like you are saying that that was a trap game for the Skins. Yes?
no...they full well knew how bad the eagles were...and that they could flip a switch anytime they wanted to and win the game...which is exactly what they did
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 27, 2006, 07:15:21 PM
It sounds to me like you are saying that that was a trap game for the Skins. Yes?
no...they full well knew how bad the eagles were...and that they could flip a switch anytime they wanted to and win the game...which is exactly what they did
So with their playoff lives on the line... the Skins decided to wait until the mid/late 4th quarter to "flip the switch"?
pretty much....their defense locked down after the eagles scored their last touchdown...i think the eagles had three pts in the last 40 minutes or soemthing like that...i mean there wasnt anyone in the country including every last taterskin that thought the eagles ever had a chance to win that game even when they were leading at half time
Why has no one else just accepted that as his brain is pumped full of pro-skins propaganda all the time, IGY simply cannot separate fiction from fact about them anymore and obviously respects the team/organization more than he should? You're not going to talk him out of it. It's too late.
From Brookover's article today:
Quote"He's going to be a really good football player," Heckert said. "I don't think [the bench press] is going to hurt his draft stock. He's a guy you haven't heard a ton about, but I think he's really good. He's a great competitor, he makes plays, and he's smart."
Greenway, according to Heckert, can play either outside linebacker position.
Two other outside linebackers on the radar screen are North Carolina State's Manny Lawson and Florida State's Kamerion Wimbley, both of whom were defensive ends in college. Lawson is 6-foot-5 and 240 pounds and Wimbley is 6-3 and 245 pounds. Heckert sees both as strong-side linebackers.
Lawson's time of 4.41 seconds in the 40-yard dash at the combine was an eye-opener. Wimbley ran a 4.63.
"The way college football has been going, most of our strong-side linebackers are projected as defensive ends in the draft," Heckert said. "Those guys are going to go a lot earlier than they have in the past. We see them as linebackers, but by the same token, they're not a wash at defensive end."
It's starting to look like I might be right about Lawson or Wimbley... but wrong in that the Eagles would not use them as DE's, but would seem to be looking at them exclusively to play the strong side.
I'll take either one of them over Greenway all day long.
me three
Can I be both 1 and 4?
Quote from: FFatPatt on April 28, 2006, 07:47:00 AM
From Brookover's article today:
Quote"He's going to be a really good football player," Heckert said. "I don't think [the bench press] is going to hurt his draft stock. He's a guy you haven't heard a ton about, but I think he's really good. He's a great competitor, he makes plays, and he's smart."
Greenway, according to Heckert, can play either outside linebacker position.
Two other outside linebackers on the radar screen are North Carolina State's Manny Lawson and Florida State's Kamerion Wimbley, both of whom were defensive ends in college. Lawson is 6-foot-5 and 240 pounds and Wimbley is 6-3 and 245 pounds. Heckert sees both as strong-side linebackers.
Lawson's time of 4.41 seconds in the 40-yard dash at the combine was an eye-opener. Wimbley ran a 4.63.
"The way college football has been going, most of our strong-side linebackers are projected as defensive ends in the draft," Heckert said. "Those guys are going to go a lot earlier than they have in the past. We see them as linebackers, but by the same token, they're not a wash at defensive end."
It's starting to look like I might be right about Lawson or Wimbley... but wrong in that the Eagles would not use them as DE's, but would seem to be looking at them exclusively to play the strong side.
I am really getting on the Lawson and Wimbley bandwagon I think if they could be a LB/DE hybrid that could really do damage in the Eagles defense. David Pollack made a fairly successful transition to LB in the NFL and he is not nearly as athletic as these two.
with the workout times he had, you hope that he is not just that....a workout warrior. Coaches might be a little aprehensive and try not get caught up in the Mamula theory.
I like the guy though and IMO, think the attributes he has cant be denied
Quote from: reese125 on April 28, 2006, 08:58:47 AM
with the workout times he had, you hope that he is not just that....a workout warrior. Coaches might be a little aprehensive and try not get caught up in the Mamula theory.
I like the guy though and IMO, think the attributes he has cant be denied
He also has been very productive on the field, the only question about that is was it a result of playing opposite Mario Williams.
If Lawson or Wimbley are picked at 14, I would be cool with that. Actually, I would be more than cool with that.
Even though I want a DT, I still maintain that defensive playmakers are needed and Lawson and Wimbley both are in that category.
They'd be the SAM and Dhani can go hold up traffic and dance in the streets of South Beach all he wants.
Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on April 29, 2006, 01:24:57 AM
Even though I want a DT, I still maintain that defensive playmakers are needed and Lawson and Wimbley both are in that category.
Amen.
New wrinkle to Lawson: Mayock reported last night that the kid got a 43 on the Wonderlic.
You think he'll be able to play LB in Jim Johnson's system? Yes.
QuoteMANNY AMONG BOYS
Saturday is going to be a gi-normous day for North Carolina State's defensive line. Williams is now expected to go No. 1 and his other end counterpart, Manny Lawson, could sneak into the draft's top 15 picks, higher than many mock drafts are expecting.
Lawson probably has this figured out by now -- he scored a remarkable 43 on the Wonderlic test that measures a person's intelligence. But it was not just Lawson's Wonderlic that stood out. So do some of his other numbers:
Lawson is 6-foot-6, 249 pounds. He runs the 40 in 4.41 seconds. He bench pressed 225 pounds 25 times. He vertical jumped 39 ½ inches. He long jumped 10.6 feet. Lawson is an engineering major, captain of his football team, ran track at North Carolina State and never has been injured.
Gotta say this guy is mighty impressive. The only thing that scares me is that some of these guys were ok comming off the season; the last time they did something and now they have grown to Paul Bunyon proportons in value and ability.
GET LAWSON. KILL DHANI.
That is all. I'll be playing some poker during the draft, so I look forward to taking all night tonight to catch up on :CF.
GO BIRDS!
QuoteLawson is 6-foot-6, 249 pounds. He runs the 40 in 4.41 seconds. He bench pressed 225 pounds 25 times. He vertical jumped 39 ½ inches. He long jumped 10.6 feet. Lawson is an engineering major, captain of his football team, ran track at North Carolina State and never has been injured.
Damn, I like those numbers. Great size height for a shutdown TE SAM.