1. Sammy Watkins - WR


2. Gabe Jackson - OG


3. Aaron Lynch - DE


4. Tajh Boyd - QB


4. Storm Johnson - RB


5. Jonathan Dowling - FS


5. Jacob Pedersen - TE


5. Phillip Gaines - CB


6. Louis Young - CB


7. Zack Kerr - DT



P.S. - I am assuming we sign a center and a pass rusher in FA.

---

Say no to Tajh

---

"Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot."

1 Waykins

2 Ford

3 McCarron or Garropolo

---

Say no to Tajh

I went with Tajh in the third because of his mobility and the fact that he already has chemistry with Watkins.


I think having Watkins, whom he is already comfortable with, will help Tajh better transition into a potential franchise QB and at the very least a serviceable one (I.e. Andy Dalton)

---

I think Tajh ends up going in the fifth round come May.

---

I think Tajh ends up going in the fifth round come May.

 

I think he ends up going in the 4th, but I took him a round early.

 

I will update my draft and switch him and Aaron Lynch.

---

Tajh is one of the only QBs I wouldn't want over Henne.  And I have made it clear, I don't want Henne re-signed. 

---

Only a chump boos the home team!

1. Sammy Watkins - WR


2. Gabe Jackson - OG


3. Aaron Lynch - DE


4. Tajh Boyd - QB

 

 

 

Good LOrd is this serious??? :pinch:

 

So you want us to draft a WR at 3....over better players who will be there, including (likely) a QB, and a WR who's made his living off of screen & short passes of 5 yards & under...

 

Then in the 2nd, you want a GUard who's likely not a good fit for our ZBS system (which I hate).....I'll agree with you that Gabe Jackson would probably be a good pick there, otherwise or for other teams that don't use ZBS....

 

Lynch in the 3rd round is probably the only pick you make up there that I like. 

 

Then Tajh Boyd is our answer at QB??? He's the future starter?? Oh my.....

 

 

 

Is this a "Waste for Winston" plan? Its gotta be. 

---

Good LOrd is this serious??? :pinch:

 

So you want us to draft a WR at 3....over better players who will be there, including (likely) a QB, and a WR who's made his living off of screen & short passes of 5 yards & under...

 

 

 

Stop pretending that you actually watch college football games.

---

Watkins will be a beast......he is often mocked to Cleveland or Oakland at 4 or 5

---

Stop pretending that you actually watch college football games.

 

Stop living in 9 years ago. I actually do watch college football games. A lot of them. 

---

Stop living in 9 years ago. I actually do watch college football games. A lot of them. 

 

Then what are you basing this claim that Watkins only runs screens and routes under five yards off of? YouTube highlight videos?

---

Then what are you basing this claim that Watkins only runs screens and routes under five yards off of? YouTube highlight videos?

 

WHat I said was meaning to infer that a lot of his catches were of the 5 yards and under category, and its true. 65% of his catches were of that variety. 

 

I want a more balanced producer, like a Mike Evans or a DeVante Adams. I understand Watkins was pretty much doing what was asked of him in the offense he plays, but I'd rather get a more complete producer. We need a WR that will go up and get/ win that jump ball downfield. Evans does that, routinely. I don't see Watkins as that type. 

---

WHat I said was meaning to infer that a lot of his catches were of the 5 yards and under category, and its true. 65% of his catches were of that variety. 

 

I want a more balanced producer, like a Mike Evans or a DeVante Adams. I understand Watkins was pretty much doing what was asked of him in the offense he plays, but I'd rather get a more complete producer. We need a WR that will go up and get/ win that jump ball downfield. Evans does that, routinely. I don't see Watkins as that type. 

 

I've seen Sammy run plenty of NFL routes in his three years at Clemson. Obviously, like you said, that really isn't what he's asked to do in their offense though.

 

I've stated several times that he would have been a top ten pick after his freshman year, and would have gone ahead of Blackmon. I've also seen him go up and get/win jump balls against plenty of DBs.

 

He is an electric playmaker, and he's exactly what we need. He'd be the perfect complement to Blackmon, if he can ever remove his head from his rectum. We don't have anyone in this offense that can take it the distance as soon as they touch it. Is three too high for a receiver not named Calvin Johnson or Larry Fitzgerald? Probably. However, if they feel he is the BAP at the time, I'd be for it. He is a rare playmaker.

---

I've seen Sammy run plenty of NFL routes in his three years at Clemson. Obviously, like you said, that really isn't what he's asked to do in their offense though.

 

I've stated several times that he would have been a top ten pick after his freshman year, and would have gone ahead of Blackmon. I've also seen him go up and get/win jump balls against plenty of DBs.

 

He is an electric playmaker, and he's exactly what we need. He'd be the perfect complement to Blackmon, if he can ever remove his head from his rectum. We don't have anyone in this offense that can take it the distance as soon as they touch it. Is three too high for a receiver not named Calvin Johnson or Larry Fitzgerald? Probably. However, if they feel he is the BAP at the time, I'd be for it. He is a rare playmaker.

 

Part of my reasoning into the type of WR I want us to draft this year is I am not counting on Blackmon being here. I surely hope he is, but by treating him like a "luxury" or as if he's not here, might be the more prudent way to approach this, since were talking a long shot, based on what he has to overcome here. Devante Evans and Evans would be fine replacements for Blackmon. 

 

I guess I can see your point - if Blackmon is definitely over his troubles and will now give us continuous seasons of the kind of football he showed us in the brief time he's played for us then yes, Watkins would be a great compliment to that. I just don't want to take that chance in case Blackmon isn't here. 

---

Good LOrd is this serious??? :pinch:


So you want us to draft a WR at 3....over better players who will be there, including (likely) a QB, and a WR who's made his living off of screen & short passes of 5 yards & under...


Then in the 2nd, you want a GUard who's likely not a good fit for our ZBS system (which I hate).....I'll agree with you that Gabe Jackson would probably be a good pick there, otherwise or for other teams that don't use ZBS....


Lynch in the 3rd round is probably the only pick you make up there that I like.


Then Tajh Boyd is our answer at QB??? He's the future starter?? Oh my.....




Is this a "Waste for Winston" plan? Its gotta be.

Watkins and Clowney are the only players in the draft that are legitimately the best at what they do compared to the rest of the guys in the draft. That is why I have Watkins at #3.


As far as Gabe Jackson goes, from what I have read and the limited video I have seen, he is the best zone blocking guard prospect in the draft.


Finally, I never said Boyd was our "answer" at QB.

---

Watkins and Clowney are the only players in the draft that are legitimately the best at what they do compared to the rest of the guys in the draft. That is why I have Watkins at #3.


As far as Gabe Jackson goes, from what I have read and the limited video I have seen, he is the best zone blocking guard in the draft.


Finally, I never said Boyd was our future at QB.

 

1. Read on post 15 above why I would rather have the WR I chose. 

 

2. I read/ was told otherwise regarding Jackson....that he is more suited for a regular blocking scheme, given his size/ lack of quickness for pulling/ mobility. 

 

3. If thats the QB you have us drafting, wouldn't it be implied that he was considered our future at the position?

---

1. Read on post 15 above why I would rather have the WR I chose.


2. I read/ was told otherwise regarding Jackson....that he is more suited for a regular blocking scheme, given his size/ lack of quickness for pulling/ mobility.


3. If thats the QB you have us drafting, wouldn't it be implied that he was considered our future at the position?

I read you post. And I don't agree with regarding Mike Evans. Sammy Watkins is better by far IMO and is more explosive.


Regarding Gabe, I have read and seen that he is actually quick on his feet and has great quickness and athleticism which I why he would be well suited for zone blocking. You can read that on CBS sports as well as other draft reviews. Plus if you seen what little film is available on him, you will see his has the footwork and quickness but lacks the aggressiveness and power at times. Which is why I further believe he definitely a zone blocking prospect.


As far as the QB goes, I don't think waiting until day three to draft a guy means he is the future at that position. It could have easily been David Fales or some other QB there. My main reason for taking Boyd is because of the chemistry he already has with Watkins.

---

1. Sammy Watkins - WR


2. Gabe Jackson - OG


3. Aaron Lynch - DE


4. Tajh Boyd - QB


4. Storm Johnson - RB


5. Jonathan Dowling - FS


5. Jacob Pedersen - TE


5. Phillip Gaines - CB


6. Louis Young - CB


7. Zack Kerr - DT



P.S. - I am assuming we sign a center and a pass rusher in FA.

In the 4th for Boyd is a huge reach.  6th round at the earliest IMO

 

 

<span>Tony Pauline </span> @<b>TonyPauline</b> Follow


Packers scout "based on what I'm seeing Tahj Boyd is not draftable"

 

and the Packers scout said that before the game yesterday

---

Tajh looked like a joke in the senior bowl. 

---