So you believe the front office will allow the guy they paid $16.5 million guaranteed to be benched? Much less in enough time to make Ridley or any 1st rd WR a worthwhile pick? Lets also consider this WR class is one of the weakest in awhile and Ridley is now the 3rd WR to come off the board. Then add to that we are a run heavy offense who would love to run the ball every single play if they could. Continuing, we drafted the Biletnikoff Award winner and added a UDFA who finished 3rd in rookie WR yardage last year in our aforementioned run heavy offense. IT's simply utter non-sense to consider a WR in the 1st round. We are NOT going to burn a 1st rd pick to go 5 deep at WR. I would a million times rather grab an OL or TE than pick someone who would suppress the development of our younger guys we got last year, because with the money invested in them, Moncrief and Lee are the #1 and #2 whether any of you like it or not.

Wow... you don't know Doug Marrone at all.

Doug couldn't give a flip how much anyone on the team makes. He's going to let them compete, and he's going to pick the guys doing the best job. If you think I'm wrong, you need a serious sit down with the man so he can set you straight.

So which WRs do you want to get next to zero playing time? Our 1st rd pick? Our Biletnikoff Award winner and the preseason yardage leader? Our best performing WR last year who was also a rookie? Our $10 million FA signing? Our $16.5 million Free Agent signing?

---

Wow... you don't know Doug Marrone at all.

Doug couldn't give a flip how much anyone on the team makes. He's going to let them compete, and he's going to pick the guys doing the best job. If you think I'm wrong, you need a serious sit down with the man so he can set you straight.

So which WRs do you want to get next to zero playing time? Our 1st rd pick? Our Biletnikoff Award winner and the preseason yardage leader? Our best performing WR last year who was also a rookie? Our $10 million FA signing? Our $16.5 million Free Agent signing?

LOL

Which one? Blackmon? Lee?

---

You are creating a problem that doesn't exist by the way.  

I want you to write this on the chalk board 100 times, OK? 

Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem...


( I really don't think they'll select a receiver in round one BTW)

---

For the record I am completely against WR in the first and am DJ Moore>> Ridley.

I also believe you can never have enough competent WRs. The more you have the more effective you will be.

---

Moore > Sutton > Washington is the first tier of WRs to me. I wouldn't quibble with anyone who had Sutton over Moore though.

Ridley doesn't belong in their conversation IMO.

---

Anthony Miller is the most underrated WR in the draft

---

You guys want to vote on the Vikings pick?

---

Moore > Sutton > Washington is the first tier of WRs to me. I wouldn't quibble with anyone who had Sutton over Moore though.

Ridley doesn't belong in their conversation IMO.

Moved Ridley ahead of Washington after another few watches. 

Can see Ridley getting production much easier than Washington in the NFL.

---

You guys want to vote on the Vikings pick?

I'm not sure about voting just yet, but let's at least begin the discussion.

I'm thinking Conner Williams.

---

'02

You guys want to vote on the Vikings pick?

Yeah bro. He is taking too long.

---

You guys want to vote on the Vikings pick?

Yeah bro. He is taking too long.

Let's give him 'til 8 pm and then we'll vote.

In the meantime, I'd really like to have a good discussion on the pick first.


BTW, my wife asked me what the Jaguars are looking for in the draft. I said... "pretty much everything except for a RB on offense or maybe a LB on defense." I told her I was basically looking at a couple WRs, a couple QBs, a couple TEs, a couple Gs, a couple OTs and a couple LBs. 

---

'02

Yeah bro. He is taking too long.

Let's give him 'til 8 pm and then we'll vote.

In the meantime, I'd really like to have a good discussion on the pick first.


BTW, my wife asked me what the Jaguars are looking for in the draft. I said... "pretty much everything except for a RB on offense or maybe a LB on defense." I told her I was basically looking at a couple WRs, a couple QBs, a couple TEs, a couple Gs, a couple OTs and a couple LBs. 

He has been on for a while today and was on different threads.  We should keep this thing moving imo. We will never even make it threw 2 rounds if we give everyone this much time.  Its not like he hasnt been on.

---

So which WRs do you want to get next to zero playing time? Our 1st rd pick? Our Biletnikoff Award winner and the preseason yardage leader? Our best performing WR last year who was also a rookie? Our $10 million FA signing? Our $16.5 million Free Agent signing?

LOL

Which one?  Blackmon?  Lee?

---

You are creating a problem that doesn't exist by the way.  

I want you to write this on the chalk board 100 times, OK? 

Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem...


( I really don't think they'll select a receiver in round one BTW)

I think he is referring to Dede Westbrook.

---

LOL

Which one?  Blackmon?  Lee?

---

You are creating a problem that doesn't exist by the way.  

I want you to write this on the chalk board 100 times, OK? 

Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem...


( I really don't think they'll select a receiver in round one BTW)

I think he is referring to Dede Westbrook.

Def. wasnt Lee, dont think it was Westbrook.  It had to of been Blackmon

---

LOL

Which one?  Blackmon?  Lee?

---

You are creating a problem that doesn't exist by the way.  

I want you to write this on the chalk board 100 times, OK? 

Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem. Too many good receivers is not a problem...


( I really don't think they'll select a receiver in round one BTW)

I think he is referring to Dede Westbrook.

I was attempting humor.  I know what he meant. Never seen someone so upset over the prospect of five good receivers on one team. How dare they sit a Biletnikoff winner to play (gulp) another Biletnikoff winner?? LOL
 

---

Let's give him 'til 8 pm and then we'll vote.

In the meantime, I'd really like to have a good discussion on the pick first.


BTW, my wife asked me what the Jaguars are looking for in the draft. I said... "pretty much everything except for a RB on offense or maybe a LB on defense." I told her I was basically looking at a couple WRs, a couple QBs, a couple TEs, a couple Gs, a couple OTs and a couple LBs. 

He has been on for a while today and was on different threads.  We should keep this thing moving imo. We will never even make it threw 2 rounds if we give everyone this much time.  Its not like he hasnt been on.

8:00 is less than an hour away, and nobody is even discussing the pick. Why the urgency?

---

'02

Somebody make the pick. Vikings have Cook coming back. I think they will select Moore, WR.

---

CBS just updated their team draft needs and the Vikings #1 was RT/G, so I throw my vote toward Connor Williams as well.

---

Williams would be my choice.

They also need DT and CB.

---

Williams would be my choice.

They also need DT and CB.

Mike Hughes makes sense then. So would Jaire Alexander.

There's also that DT Hurst that some compare right up there with Via and Payne.  I've seen Taven Bryan in the top 30 as well.

---

'02

If a team is comfortable with Hurst's heart condition then he is a steal at this point for sure.

---