If Clowney is gone, we cant get a good trade offer, and Dave isnt sold on any of the QBs  this early, who would you rather have at 3.

 

If it comes down to these 2 who would you rather have?

 

I made a thread like this a couple months ago but 2 weeks away from the draft just want to see if it goes the same way!

---

I'm not sold on Mack. I just don't see elite with him. If Clowney's gone, Watkins would be my pick

---

10 years ago we had Bob Hope, Johnny Cash, and Steve Jobs..... Please don't die, Kevin Bacon.

Can't go wrong either way they are both fantastic prospects obviously, but if we're splitting hairs we will be able to very solid WR throughout the draft whereas pass rusher might already be laregly dried up before we even get to pick at 39 if Lawrence and Attachou go as early as people are suggesting lately. Gimme Mack by a tad. 

---

I take Watkins as I am not sold on Mack either...

---

As much as I want a dominant defense, I don't think Mack is the guy.  Watkins makes an immediate impact for lackluster offensive lineup.   Making Shorts a #2 and Ace #3 makes our WR core legit.

---

its close for me like most but right now if Dave dont like JFF and Clowney is gone my wish list for the 1st 2 rounds looks like this

 

1. Watkins

2. Amaro or Van Noy

---

I'd go Mack, probably. This is a super deep draft for WRs, and you'll be able to get a good one in the mid rounds.

---

I like the way our defense is being built.   I think Mack will accelerate the process.   So I voted for Mack.   By a hair.  

---

Something like Mack, then Martin/Richburg, then Norwood just makes a bit more sense to me than Watkins, Martin/Richburg, then oh crap no more pass rushers.

---

I'd go Mack, probably. This is a super deep draft for WRs, and you'll be able to get a good one in the mid rounds.

You wont be able to get a Watkins in the mid rounds

---

You wont be able to get a Watkins in the mid rounds

Of course not, but you'll get a lot closer to a Watkins in the mid rounds than you will get to a Mack. 

---

Something like Mack, then Martin/Richburg, then Norwood just makes a bit more sense to me than Watkins, Martin/Richburg, then oh crap no more pass rushers.

Thats bad logic to me.  If this team was close and we needed the pass rusher that bad then it makes sense but we cant fill every position so who ever Dave feels is the best player out of the 2 is who he should take.  Dont take Mack because the pass rushing class isnt as deep.   I like both though so I will be happy with either.

---

Of course not, but you'll get a lot closer to a Watkins in the mid rounds than you will get to a Mack. 

Its always harder to get pass rushers after the 1st round than it is WR.  So that will be every year.

---

Thats bad logic to me.  If this team was close and we needed the pass rusher that bad then it makes sense but we cant fill every position so who ever Dave feels is the best player out of the 2 is who he should take.  Dont take Mack because the pass rushing class isnt as deep.   I like both though so I will be happy with either.

Right, but like I said earlier they are graded damn near dead even. The positional depth is just the splitting hairs tie breaker. 

---

Coin toss.

 

But as jaggy said, you can't go wrong either way.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

You wont be able to get a Watkins in the mid rounds

You won't get a Watkins level talent, no, but you'll get a starting caliber WR in the mid rounds.

---

Can't go wrong either way they are both fantastic prospects obviously, but if we're splitting hairs we will be able to very solid WR throughout the draft whereas pass rusher might already be laregly dried up before we even get to pick at 39 if Lawrence and Attachou go as early as people are suggesting lately. Gimme Mack by a tad. 

 

Yep. Theres gonna be a quality WR there in the 2nd round. Cant say that for pass rushers. 

---

I'd take Watkins.

 

The only concern I have with him is his previous suspension due to Marijuana.

 

Mack, OTOH, is also a fine player.  I just think that WR is by faaaaar a much bigger need for us.  

 

I see us taking 2 WRs in the draft.  Watkins and another one in RD 3-4

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

Something like Mack, then Martin/Richburg, then Norwood just makes a bit more sense to me than Watkins, Martin/Richburg, then oh crap no more pass rushers.

 

Havent watched any lineman really. Who are some decent 3rd round prospects? I think a borderline #1 WR will be there in the 2nd and that will be too good to pass up.  I was thinking Stork but thats really only based on other peoples rankings. Have no idea if hes actually any good or not. 

---

Right, but like I said earlier they are graded damn near dead even. The positional depth is just the splitting hairs tie breaker. 

Maybe to you but you dont know how Dave will grade them.  I dont think Mack is an elite pass rusher like a Von Miller when he came out.  I see Mack better in most other areas, I think he is a good but not great pass rusher.  If they draft Mack I just hope we use him in multiple sets and looks and move him all over the place.  I hope they get creative with him and not just use him as a leo. 

---