Quote:If they do go Matthews at 3, it's basically them punting. There are higher positions of need that can be drafted there, and ones that are arguably more important as well, so Matthews would have to be quite a bit better than the DE or QB prospects for us to draft him. All of that is entirely plausible.
I think it comes down to BAP and not need. As far as how Bradley has players ranked we do not know, and thats his view.
Quote:So far he's winning.
It's not because of Fisher that's for sure.
Quote:It's not because of Fisher that's for sure.
Thats what I was thinking. IIRC, Fisher didn't really have all that great of a rookie season.
Quote:I think a select number of players from this class would have a reasonable chance.
When you look at Matthews, everything you want from a Tackle, he's got.
That is just not true.
He's not a great athlete and he's got short arms.
Quit acting like he's Jonathan Ogden.
Quote:Thats what I was thinking. IIRC, Fisher didn't really have all that great of a rookie season.
Everything I can remember reading is that he was a disappointment (at RT) last season. As was Joeckel. Both will get the opportunity to move to their natural LT position this season and I think we see a big turnaround from both players.
Quote:So far he's winning.
How? Outside of Fisher playing the whole season and not getting injured, neither player played well at all at RT.
The Chiefs' turnaround had nothing to do with Eric Fisher's play at RT.
Quote:That is just not true.
He's not a great athlete and he's got short arms.
Quit acting like he's Jonathan Ogden.
welp, put that ignorance to bed
Quote:I think it comes down to BAP and not need. As far as how Bradley has players ranked we do not know, and thats his view.
Exactly. If he's easily the BAP on Caldwell's board, then it makes sense that he would take him. If he's not, then I think they go with a more premium position and/or one of more need.
Quote:I think a select number of players from this class would have a reasonable chance.
When you look at Matthews, everything you want from a Tackle, he's got.
Except for his T-Rex arms...
Quote:Thats what I was thinking. IIRC, Fisher didn't really have all that great of a rookie season.
By virtue of playing. Both were below average and playing out of position.
You know what they say about the best ability being availability.
What happens if Mathews is a better LT than Joekel? I'm hearing that might be the case.
Joekel wasn't very good at RT. Are we going to have to dump another LT at a depreciated value in order to put the best player at the more important position?
I'd be perfectly happy with Matthews if Clowney isn't available when we are on the clock.
Or Teddy.
Or Mack.
Or Watkins.
Or Evans.
Or Donald.
Or Bortles.
Or even Robinson.
Quote:Except for his T-Rex arms...
Less of an issue at ORT than OLT
Quote:I think it is all a moot point. They aren't taking Matthews.
They are likely just doing their due diligence. Probably also trying to get StL to think twice about trading down.
Also consider this. Maybe he ends up in Buffalo or Tennessee. You can pick his brain knowing he could be on the other sideline at some point this year, or in future years.
Duh, Sneed and Caldwell are known allies. True brohs don't do things like that.
Quote:If they do go Matthews at 3, it's basically them punting. There are higher positions of need that can be drafted there, and ones that are arguably more important as well, so Matthews would have to be quite a bit better than the DE or QB prospects for us to draft him. All of that is entirely plausible.
Fifty sacks in 2012. Fifty sacks in 2013.
What could possibly be a higher need than loading up the offensive line unit with the best talent available?
Carrying five to six quarterbacks on your active roster is
ignoring the problem is punting the problem?
BTW, what about this Bodine guy from NC? Terrific strength. Center prospect as well?
Quote:Fifty sacks in 2012. Fifty sacks in 2013.
What could possibly be a higher need than loading up the offensive line unit with the best talent available?
Carrying five to six quarterbacks on your active roster is<del> ignoring the problem</del> is punting the problem?
BTW, what about this Bodine guy from NC? Terrific strength. Center prospect as well?
Seahawks 44 sacks allowed, Super Bowl champs.
What's your point?
Quote:Seahawks 44 sacks allowed, Super Bowl champs.
What's your point?
He's just talking out of his you know what.. The guy is clueless
Quote:Seahawks 44 sacks allowed, Super Bowl champs.
What's your point?
Less sacks means less wear and tear on your quarterback. Less sacks means less wasted plays. Sacks increase negative yards and thwart drives.
You forgot to examine and post the number of plays the Jaguars wasted on batted down balls, throw aways to avoid even more than fifty sacks, and the one to two yard gains by Jaguars' quarterbacks to avoid the negative results sacks have.
Fifty sacks is nothing to ignore. Producing stats from Seattle means nothing. They had less passing offense then Gabbert and Henne combined.
.gif "Laughing")
They won the Super Bowl running the football and playing solid defense.
Go ahead research that and get back to us.