01-19-2014, 07:44 PM
01-20-2014, 03:34 PM
I will never understand what Russell Wilson was thinking when he held the ball like that on the first snap. That made no sense at all. But even Peyton Manning didn't hold it right every time he took a snap, so you can't judge a quarterback that way. Bryan Anger also never threw an interception. Why not? Because he is not a quarterback.
One thing that will never make any sense to me is why people on this board think just because punters are rarely picked in the third round, it was a mistake to pick Anger there. Duh, we had to because the Buccaneers had our fourth round pick and he would have been gone by the fifth round. People seem to only care about the fact he is a punter. Russell Wilson may be a very good quarterback in Seattle but that does not mean he would have been great in Jacksonville with the coaches we had that year. I think if fans looked at the whole picture and not just the player's job title, they would agree with me Anger was not a bad pick even though Wilson is a quarterback.
One thing that will never make any sense to me is why people on this board think just because punters are rarely picked in the third round, it was a mistake to pick Anger there. Duh, we had to because the Buccaneers had our fourth round pick and he would have been gone by the fifth round. People seem to only care about the fact he is a punter. Russell Wilson may be a very good quarterback in Seattle but that does not mean he would have been great in Jacksonville with the coaches we had that year. I think if fans looked at the whole picture and not just the player's job title, they would agree with me Anger was not a bad pick even though Wilson is a quarterback.
01-20-2014, 03:39 PM
Quote:I will never understand what Russell Wilson was thinking when he held the ball like that on the first snap. That made no sense at all. But even Peyton Manning didn't hold it right every time he took a snap, so you can't judge a quarterback that way. Bryan Anger also never threw an interception. Why not? Because he is not a quarterback.
One thing that will never make any sense to me is why people on this board think just because punters are rarely picked in the third round, it was a mistake to pick Anger there. Duh, we had to because the Buccaneers had our fourth round pick and he would have been gone by the fifth round. People seem to only care about the fact he is a punter. Russell Wilson may be a very good quarterback in Seattle but that does not mean he would have been great in Jacksonville with the coaches we had that year. I think if fans looked at the whole picture and not just the player's job title, they would agree with me Anger was not a bad pick even though Wilson is a quarterback.
Even if you don't choose Russell Wilson, there are players that would have far more impact than a punter. There's no value in taking a punter in the third round, and I'm not sure what's hard to understand about this. Punters aren't just 'rarely selected' in the third round. Their value is rarely there. The value was not there for Anger. It doesn't matter if we didn't have a 4th round pick or not. We shouldn't have taken him with the 4th either because the value still wasn't there.
01-20-2014, 03:44 PM
Quote:Even if you don't choose Russell Wilson, there are players that would have far more impact than a punter. There's no value in taking a punter in the third round, and I'm not sure what's hard to understand about this. Punters aren't just 'rarely selected' in the third round. Their value is rarely there. The value was not there for Anger. It doesn't matter if we didn't have a 4th round pick or not. We shouldn't have taken him with the 4th either because the value still wasn't there.
Yes the value was there for Anger. He was projected a third or fourth round pick. Therefore, we were not reaching nearly as high as most people on this board believe.
01-20-2014, 03:53 PM
Quote:Yes the value was there for Anger. He was projected a third or fourth round pick. Therefore, we were not reaching nearly as high as most people on this board believe.
He was projected to go as high as 3, but as low as in the 5th or 6th. The value wasn't there just because he went where he was projecedt at best to go. Not when there are far better players available in the third round.
01-20-2014, 06:19 PM
Quote:He was projected to go as high as 3, but as low as in the 5th or 6th. The value wasn't there just because he went where he was projecedt at best to go. Not when there are far better players available in the third round.
He was one of the best punters in the NFL during his rookie season. That made him look like a third round pick to me. Maybe not early in the third, but certainly higher than fourth.
People keep saying he was a bad pick because other players were available, but the only other player they can name is Russell Wilson. Who else could have been picked instead?
01-20-2014, 11:43 PM
Quote:He was one of the best punters in the NFL during his rookie season. That made him look like a third round pick to me. Maybe not early in the third, but certainly higher than fourth.
People keep saying he was a bad pick because other players were available, but the only other player they can name is Russell Wilson. Who else could have been picked instead?
Three players that come to mind are DT Akiem Hicks, WR T.Y. Hilton, and QB Nick Foles.
01-21-2014, 12:31 AM
Quote:Three players that come to mind are DT Akiem Hicks, WR T.Y. Hilton, and QB Nick Foles.
We picked Justin Blackmon the day before, so I can understand not picking Hilton. Nick Foles is doing good now in Chip Kelly's offense, but never earned the starting job with Andy Reid.
01-21-2014, 01:00 AM
Quote:We picked Justin Blackmon the day before, so I can understand not picking Hilton. Nick Foles is doing good now in Chip Kelly's offense, but never earned the starting job with Andy Reid.Just because you picked a receiver in the first round it doesn't mean you can't pick another later.
You do realize that you can sometimes have five wide receivers on the field at once?
01-21-2014, 01:08 AM
Quote:Just because you picked a receiver in the first round it doesn't mean you can't pick another later.
You do realize that you can sometimes have five wide receivers on the field at once?
I did not say it would have been stupid to pick another receiver.
01-21-2014, 01:10 AM
We should have picked Hilton, would have really hurt the Colts as well.
01-21-2014, 01:14 AM
Quote:We should have picked Hilton, would have really hurt the Colts as well.
20/20 hindsight
There was no way anybody could have known the Colts wanted him.
01-21-2014, 01:26 AM
Quote:I did not say it would have been stupid to pick another receiver.I didn't say you did. I reminded you that usually more than one receiver is on the field at a time.