(10-11-2023, 02:19 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote:

(10-11-2023, 12:42 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: No, but my point is, if you apply your rule as strictly as some people are suggesting, "I would never pick a RB in the first round," then, theoretically, you'd pass on Barry Sanders, and take Joe Blow because he plays a more valuable position.    

Position value is important, but so is talent level.  You have to factor in both of those.  With the 25th pick in the draft, Travis Etienne was a great pick.  Position value was not that great, but talent level made up for it.

Well, that hasn't been my position so I guess you can quit tying that take to me now.

---

(10-11-2023, 01:54 PM)Caldrac Wrote: At least I can spell Engram correctly. 

Until Strange shows anything in the receiving department I'll continue to assume we over drafted an H-back option that had a penchant for blocking coming out of Penn St. and was primarily lauded for his ability as a blocker and not a pass catcher. At this level he's only shown a penchant for false starts and holding.

Most analysts had this kid with a 4th RD grade on him as well. Including the NFL website experts. We failed in RD2 and RD3. No need to simp for Baalke. He sucks and he's been heavily carried by a franchise QB and competent coaching staff on offense that can succeed in spite of [BLEEP] box decision making in the annual war room. 

Emgram.... lololololololololololol. Enhance your knowledge base on this roster's names. I was joking about tanking for Bowers by the way. I would rather win with guys like Strange and Engram Vs. losing on purpose. Bowers will be more surefire than Pitts was coming out though. Hopefully he doesn't end up in the AFC South for anybody else.

My fat finger typo doesn't make your bad take any smarter.

"What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king."