NFL Draft 2022

[Shooter McGavin 589]

4 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Then I have an issue with their board. I don’t like the player being taken at that spot with what was available.  I hope the kid is great. Being wrong isn’t something I’m afraid of if it works out. I’ll gladly tip my hat. 

OK, and of course you know more than the collective scouting department of an NFL team that spend thousands of hours watching tape, scouting, interviewing, etc.

I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt until they show that they can't draft a WR worth a d!ck, like the Eagles.

[listen2me 23 1,541]

Wandale is a gadget guy.  43 overall is a steep price for a gadget player.

Maybe he exceeds expectations and becomes a household named slot receiver.   

[MDC 5,890]

4 minutes ago, listen2me 23 said:

The idea that Hurts needs an elite group to be judged if he is good or not.   

Do you think Dallas Goedert is a good TE? 

Do you think Smith is a stud in the making?  If he was in this draft he would have been the consensus number 1 WR in this draft.  He was 10th overall and had a real solid rookie season.  Heisman Trophy winner.

To me that isn't crap weapons but to each their own.  

Devonta looks like a player but it’s a little premature to call him a stud. The receiver group as a whole was among the worst in football. Quez Watkins was seriously miscast as a #2 and Ward, Reagor, Arcega Whiteside etc. are barely NFL players.

Even if Hurts isn’t the long term answer, the unit was terrible and needed to be upgraded. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,631]

5 minutes ago, Shooter McGavin said:

OK, and of course you know more than the collective scouting department of an NFL team that spend thousands of hours watching tape, scouting, interviewing, etc.

I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt until they show that they can't draft a WR worth a d!ck, like the Eagles.

I knew more than the last regime. Everyone does.  But Ok, on a football message board I won’t give my two cents anymore. No one should I guess. 

[Shooter McGavin 589]

3 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

 on a football message board I won’t give my two cents anymore.

finally, thank you.

Although I'm sure this is BS like everything else you say.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,631]

Just now, Shooter McGavin said:

finally, thank you.

Although I'm sure this is BS like everything else you say.

Well, it’s sarcasm whiz kid. 

[IGotWorms 3,311]

3 hours ago, MDC said:

The Eagles had a bottom 5 receiving corps last year (maybe worse) and Reagor is a complete bust. 

Maybe the receiving corps looks bad because Hurts can’t get them the ball?

Maybe investing huge sums of money in a position that is dependent on your crappy QB isn’t a great idea.

I think they would’ve been much better off focusing on building the rest of their team and finding a viable QB. Garropalo is still out there. That first round pick and huge wad of money they just threw at a WR would’ve gone a long way in securing him. Or maybe you take a chance on Mayfield. Or you just work on getting things together for when you can draft, sign or trade for that guy.

[listen2me 23 1,541]

1 hour ago, MDC said:

Devonta looks like a player but it’s a little premature to call him a stud. The receiver group as a whole was among the worst in football. Quez Watkins was seriously miscast as a #2 and Ward, Reagor, Arcega Whiteside etc. are barely NFL players.

Even if Hurts isn’t the long term answer, the unit was terrible and needed to be upgraded. 

Premature to call him a stud?  Heisman trophy winning Bama WR with all thr skills.  Who had a really good rookie season with limited QB?  I mean ok but if I was a Philly fan I would be pretty confident they found their number 1 WR.  

AJ Brown has been hurt every single year and has thr luxury of going against defenses that stack the box vs Henry.  

You can always use an upgrade to a position.   But for my money they had a bonafide number 1 caliber WR who is coming into his 2nd season and a top 10 TE in the league.  

Smith would the Packers top WR and Goedert would be their starting TE.

Essentially they have spent 3 1st round picks (plus more) on WRs the last 3 years.  Holy Detroit Lions Batman

[Mike Honcho 4,027]

18 hours ago, Shooter McGavin said:

My point was that people give out draft grades, good or bad, and we won't know, until a few years.

Obviously the trubisky trade was terrible, what they have up to move one spot was too much, and then the pick was worse.  Trubisky never won anything and only lasted a few years.  That we all know and can agree on.

The fields trade looks bad too.  He didn't win anything, and the nyg got toney and Neal.  Even with toney's slow start, Neal looks to be a 10 year starter, but we'll see if 2 years.

I used to do a "Rate the Draft" thread on the main board inviting everyone to rate their teams draft from 3 seasons prior---as that was a good amount of time to judge.  

[MDC 5,890]

7 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Maybe the receiving corps looks bad because Hurts can’t get them the ball?

Maybe investing huge sums of money in a position that is dependent on your crappy QB isn’t a great idea.

I think they would’ve been much better off focusing on building the rest of their team and finding a viable QB. Garropalo is still out there. Maybe you take a chance on Mayfield. Or you just work on getting things together for when you can draft, sign or trade for that guy.

Given the Eagles history at receiver I’m pretty sure outside of Devonta their wideouts suck. Hurts’ shortcomings don’t help, but guys like Reagor and Arcega Whiteside wouldn’t be getting targets on any decent team.

If you want to argue that AJ Brown was a misallocation of resources that’s another story and I wouldn’t necessarily disagree.

I’d much rather have Hurts this year and draft his replacement than spend picks and big $ on Garrapolo or Mayfield. Hurts isn’t the long term answer but he’s making $1.5m per.

4 minutes ago, listen2me 23 said:

Premature to call him a stud?  Heisman trophy winning Bama WR with all thr skills.  Who had a really good rookie season with limited QB?  I mean ok but if I was a Philly fan I would be pretty confident they found their number 1 WR.  

AJ Brown has been hurt every single year and has thr luxury of going against defenses that stack the box vs Henry.  

You can always use an upgrade to a position.   But for my money they had a bonafide number 1 caliber WR who is coming into his 2nd season and a top 10 TE in the league.  

Smith would the Packers top WR and Goedert would be their starting TE.

Essentially they have spent 3 1st round picks (plus more) on WRs the last 3 years.  Holy Detroit Lions Batman

What Devonta did in college is irrelevant in the NFL. If he grows into a Pro Bowler, great. Right now he’s not good enough to singlehandedly carry a receiving corps of busts, late rounders and UDFAs. 

It’s not news to anyone that the Eagles can’t draft or develop receivers. All the more reason to bring in a good one.

[IGotWorms 3,311]

2 minutes ago, MDC said:

Given the Eagles history at receiver I’m pretty sure outside of Devonta their wideouts suck. Hurts’ shortcomings don’t help, but guys like Reagor and Arcega Whiteside wouldn’t be getting targets on any decent team.

If you want to argue that AJ Brown was a misallocation of resources that’s another story and I wouldn’t necessarily disagree.

I’d much rather have Hurts this year and draft his replacement than spend picks and big $ on Garrapolo or Mayfield. Hurts isn’t the long term answer but he’s making $1.5m per.

Garropalo has taken his team to multiple conference title games and the super bowl. I think you go get him a million times over before throwing a first round picks and huge sums of money at an oft-injured WR.

[MDC 5,890]

2 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Garropalo has taken his team to multiple conference title games and the super bowl. I think you go get him a million times over before throwing a first round picks and huge sums of money at an oft-injured WR.

I totally get not liking the AJ Brown trade. Of the Eagles big draft day moves, it was my least favorite because of the $ involved. 

Trading for Garrapolo would have been an even bigger blunder. He’s a low end starter who will get paid like a franchise QB. No thanks.

[IGotWorms 3,311]

2 minutes ago, MDC said:

I totally get not liking the AJ Brown trade. Of the Eagles big draft day moves, it was my least favorite because of the $ involved. 

Trading for Garrapolo would have been an even bigger blunder. He’s a low end starter who will get paid like a franchise QB. No thanks.

A low end starter with a history of significant success in the playoffs?

Can you find me another example of one, ever?

[listen2me 23 1,541]

6 minutes ago, MDC said:

What Devonta did in college is irrelevant in the NFL. If he grows into a Pro Bowler, great. Right now he’s not good enough to singlehandedly carry a receiving corps of busts, late rounders and UDFAs. 

It’s not news to anyone that the Eagles can’t draft or develop receivers. All the more reason to bring in a good one.

Agree to disagree.  Smith looks like a bright young WR in the league to me.. with an elite pedigree. 

[MTSkiBum 1,594]

Just now, IGotWorms said:

A low end starter with a history of significant success in the playoffs?

Can you find me another example of one, ever?

Nick Foles

[MDC 5,890]

Just now, IGotWorms said:

A low end starter with a history of significant success in the playoffs?

Can you find me another example of one, ever?

Joe Flacco. Brad Johnson. 

1 minute ago, listen2me 23 said:

Agree to disagree.  Smith looks like a bright young WR in the league to me.. with an elite pedigree. 

I’m not disagreeing with this. I’m saying despite Devonta, the receiving corps was awful. Teams generally like to have 2 good receivers.

[Mike Honcho 4,027]

2 minutes ago, MTSkiBum said:

Nick Foles

Well played.  

[IGotWorms 3,311]

1 minute ago, MTSkiBum said:

Nick Foles

One very magical year.

Garropalo has done it several times.

[IGotWorms 3,311]

1 minute ago, MDC said:

Joe Flacco. Brad Johnson. 

Flacco is a pretty good analogy, I’ll give you that. He’s a guy that was good though, then fell off a cliff. You would not have called him a low end starter in the first 5-6 years of his career.

Brad Johnson, I mean I’m not even going to look him up. Why not throw out Terry Bradshaw if we’re going back to different eras?

[IGotWorms 3,311]

I mean I’m not guaranteeing Garropalo is the answer, though I personally would wager that he is. I’m saying I’d much rather throw significant resources at hoping he is the missing piece of your puzzle than a WR.

[MDC 5,890]

4 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Flacco is a pretty good analogy, I’ll give you that. He’s a guy that was good though, then fell off a cliff. You would not have called him a low end starter in the first 5-6 years of his career.

Brad Johnson, I mean I’m not even going to look him up. Why not throw out Terry Bradshaw if we’re going back to different eras?

In 6 career playoff games Garrapolo has 4 TDs and 6 INTs with a 74 QBR.

C’mon man. 

[RLLD 3,455]

Looking back Flacco peaked for about 6 weeks, it just so happens that he peaked during a playoff run to a super bowl. 

[IGotWorms 3,311]

Just now, MDC said:

In 6 career playoff games Garrapolo has 4 TDs and 6 INTs with a 74 QBR.

C’mon man. 

He also has a 5-2 career playoff record.

Oh it’s just that he’s been on a good team?

Niners are 35-15 with him and 8-27 without him. That’s astounding. The guy wins, period.

[IGotWorms 3,311]

Just now, RLLD said:

Looking back Flacco peaked for about 6 weeks, it just so happens that he peaked during a playoff run to a super bowl. 

That’s true but he was also pretty good before hitting that apex.

It’s just that he’s been fairly bad since, so people forget his early success.

[listen2me 23 1,541]

4 minutes ago, MDC said:

Joe Flacco. Brad Johnson. 

I’m not disagreeing with this. I’m saying despite Devonta, the receiving corps was awful. Teams generally like to have 2 good receivers.

They do.  Smith and Goedert.   Ok Goedert isn't a WR.  They need to upgrade the room.  All I am saying is they really didn't need to be that aggressive to get another one.  Thats a lot of resources, valuable ones to get a middling QB weapons.    

I don't think Eagles are contenders what so ever, so to me trading a 1st rounder for a guy that id about to get paid is a bad plan.  If they didn't draft Smith 10th overall last year I could understand it more.  

Now they have 2 good WRs and a good TE.  Only 3 teams passed the ball less than Philly last year.  

[TBayXXXVII 2,116]

46 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Maybe the receiving corps looks bad because Hurts can’t get them the ball?

Maybe investing huge sums of money in a position that is dependent on your crappy QB isn’t a great idea.

This is where I'm at with respect to the Eagles.

[MDC 5,890]

31 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

He also has a 5-2 career playoff record.

Oh it’s just that he’s been on a good team?

Niners are 35-15 with him and 8-27 without him. That’s astounding. The guy wins, period.

What does Garrapolo’s playoff record mean if he’s mostly sucked in those games? The Niners would have had the same record with Tannehill.

27 minutes ago, listen2me 23 said:

They do.  Smith and Goedert.   Ok Goedert isn't a WR.  They need to upgrade the room.  All I am saying is they really didn't need to be that aggressive to get another one.  Thats a lot of resources, valuable ones to get a middling QB weapons.    

I don't think Eagles are contenders what so ever, so to me trading a 1st rounder for a guy that id about to get paid is a bad plan.  If they didn't draft Smith 10th overall last year I could understand it more.  

Now they have 2 good WRs and a good TE.  Only 3 teams passed the ball less than Philly last year.  

You’re making 2 different arguments here. The Brown trade probably was a misallocation of resources, but the Eagles WR corps absolutely was not good enough even with Devonta and Goedert. 

HTH

[Hawkeye21 1,853]

41 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

A low end starter with a history of significant success in the playoffs?

Can you find me another example of one, ever?

Trent Dilfer?

[taco breath 419]

3 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

Trent Dilfer?

jim mcmahan?

[Hawkeye21 1,853]

1 minute ago, taco breath said:

jim mcmahan?

I was just a toddler back then.

[taco breath 419]

29 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Looking back Flacco peaked for about 6 weeks, it just so happens that he peaked during a playoff run to a super bowl. 

and look how much they had to pay him.

flacco is the prime example of spending too much at qb, that it takes your team out of contention.

[TimHauck 1,799]

Doesn't Garoppolo have a pretty good record in the regular season too?  I thought the knock on him was just that he can't stay on the field.

[RLLD 3,455]

7 minutes ago, taco breath said:

and look how much they had to pay him.

flacco is the prime example of spending too much at qb, that it takes your team out of contention.

Agree completely. 

[Utilit99 4,099]

3 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Doesn't Garoppolo have a pretty good record in the regular season too?  I thought the knock on him was just that he can't stay on the field.

That is the knock on him. He's a good QB. You just need a really good back up to pick up for him. 

[IGotWorms 3,311]

25 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Doesn't Garoppolo have a pretty good record in the regular season too?  I thought the knock on him was just that he can't stay on the field.

Yes that is the legitimate knock, and it’s a significant one. The rest is just silly 

[IGotWorms 3,311]

38 minutes ago, MDC said:

What does Garrapolo’s playoff record mean if he’s mostly sucked in those games? The Niners would have had the same record with Tannehill.

What it means is the team rallied around him and he did enough to win.

Tannehill isn’t a bad analogy. He also has a way of rallying the guys around him. I think Garropalo is better but even Tannehill I would not call “a low end starter.”

[TBayXXXVII 2,116]

2 hours ago, IGotWorms said:

Flacco is a pretty good analogy, I’ll give you that. He’s a guy that was good though, then fell off a cliff. You would not have called him a low end starter in the first 5-6 years of his career.

Brad Johnson, I mean I’m not even going to look him up. Why not throw out Terry Bradshaw if we’re going back to different eras?

Flacco isn't even a very good example.  The Ravens had elite defenses during Flacco's entire career.  The year they won the Super Bowl, they ranked 12th in yards and 17th in points, but what gets forgotten is that Ray Lewis missed the last 10 games of the regular season, but played in the playoffs. What gets forgotten is that Terrell Suggs missed 8 games that year, and played in the playoffs.

From 2008 to 2012, Flacco completed 60.5% of his passes, had a 3.9:2.5 TD/Int% ratio and an 83 passer rating.  Prior to 2012, his playoff numbers mirrored that.  He was nothing special.  Ever.  Flacco's 2012 playoff run is equivalent to Nick Foles.  It was a fluke run.  After he got paid, the rest of his tenure in Baltimore wasn't really anything different than the 5 prior seasons.  He completed 62.6% of his passes, had a 3.5:2.5 TD/Int% and an 82.3 passer rating.  The only thing that changed was that he no longer had an elite defense to cover his but and a RB to carry the load.

Flacco is the perfect example of "the guy who can not screw it up, as long as you have a great team around him".  The problem was, they paid him like he was a franchise QB.  If the Ravens were smart, they would've tagged him for 2013 and let him walk and draft someone in 2014.  No, there weren't any studs in that draft, but Bridewater, Carr, and Garoppolo were all taken in the first 2 rounds.  All would've been upgrades to Flacco.

[TBayXXXVII 2,116]

2 hours ago, Hawkeye21 said:

Trent Dilfer?

He didn't have significant success.  He was pretty crappy.  In that playoff run, he completed 48% of his passes, threw only 3 TD's, had 1 pick, and a passer rating of 83.7

[MDC 5,890]

Just now, TBayXXXVII said:

He didn't have significant success.  He was pretty crappy.  In that playoff run, he completed 48% of his passes, threw only 3 TD's, had 1 pick, and a passer rating of 83.7

Better postseason passer rating than Garrapolo. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,116]

2 hours ago, IGotWorms said:

What it means is the team rallied around him and he did enough to win.

Tannehill isn’t a bad analogy. He also has a way of rallying the guys around him. I think Garropalo is better but even Tannehill I would not call “a low end starter.”

You know what I find is pretty humorous?  Tennessee was 6-2 in their first 8 games, Tannehill completed 65.7% of his passes, had 10 TD's and 7 Int's.  In the last 9 games, Tannehill completed 68.8% of his passes, had 11 TD's and 7 Int's, and the Titans were 6-3.  You know who didn't play in those last 9 games?  Derrick Henry.  AJ Brown missed 3 of those and Julio missed 4.  Yet, Tannehill gets condemned.  Go figure.  He keeps the team winning at the same rate without his stud RB for 9 game, 3 of which he was without his top 2 WR's and another game where he was missing just one of them.