reo Posted April 25 Report Share Posted April 25 Just now, Legaltitan said: Oh wait I see I double posted somehow. The second of those has my full thoughts. I am fully willing to accept they had Tate over bailey Was gonna say.. lol I don't remember that part Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamalisms Posted April 25 Report Share Posted April 25 1 hour ago, Thrill said: To me there is nothing dumber than media people questioning pick value or quality of players based on mock drafts made by guys not in NFL front offices. Tate was clearly the ideal pick for multiple teams in the top 10. I've always found it somewhat funny that "reaches" actually detail the inaccuracy of amateurs predicting professional assessment. In reality, it's a slight against the amateurs but people tend to lean towards amateur consensus being meaningful, so they treat it as a slight against the professionals. Justafan, Thrill, and Alcibiades 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted April 25 Report Share Posted April 25 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Justafan said: They didn't draft that guy to be a wide 9 outside guy. They drafted him to play 5T, more like what Denico Autry used to play. Different positions, so it's not really a fair comparison to how they would have viewed Bailey or other pass rushers who would have been drafted to play LEO. The point is about which they valued more. They valued the 275-285 guy over a classic 34 OLB or 43 situational pass rusher. Bc they traded up for the bigger guy who can handle the run, not a smaller guy who can't play 1st down in a 43. Most wide 9 guys who actually play on 1st down are at least in the 265 range iirc, not struggling to bulk up to 250 to make weight. Sometimes you find a smaller guy but its rare or its a hybrid scheme and a lot of those teams are bad against the run for a reason. Edited April 25 by reo Pragidealist 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callidus Posted April 25 Report Share Posted April 25 1 hour ago, Legaltitan said: If I had to guess I would say our board was bailey, Tate, then maybe love. Just looking at their excitement over the pick and using common sense that's my guess. Love was definitely over tate. Plenty of people were in the fine if its them category for both but the number of love fans was bigger than the tate fans. Pragidealist 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legaltitan Posted April 25 Report Share Posted April 25 1 minute ago, Callidus said: Love was definitely over tate. Plenty of people were in the fine if its them category for both but the number of love fans was bigger than the tate fans. I meant the guys actually doing the drafting not this board. Board as in draft board. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justafan Posted April 25 Report Share Posted April 25 5 minutes ago, reo said: The point is about which they valued more. They valued the 275-285 guy over a classic 34 OLB or 43 situational pass rusher. Bc they traded up for the bigger guy who can handle the run, not a smaller guy who can't play 1st down in a 43. Most wide 9 guys who actually play on 1st down are at least in the 265 range iirc, not struggling to bulk up to 250 to make weight. Sometimes you find a smaller guy but its rare or its a hybrid scheme and a lot of those teams are bad against the run for a reason. No. It doesn't mean that at all. Borgo and Saleh straight-up said that Femi is playing that wide-9 role, so they already had a young guy to develop at that spot. It means they had a need for a 5T, and we overestimated their desperation for a 9T, but it doesn't mean that they didn't have Bailey or others on their board or rated highly in their system. rns90, and ChemEngr79 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callidus Posted April 25 Report Share Posted April 25 1 minute ago, Legaltitan said: I meant the guys actually doing the drafting not this board. Board as in draft board. Ahhh. As for the nfl, idk. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justafan Posted April 25 Report Share Posted April 25 No way to really know how the Titans viewed Love or Bailey but based on the interview that came out afterwards it appears pretty clear that Tate was their guy all the way. Callidus, and rns90 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted April 25 Report Share Posted April 25 43 minutes ago, Justafan said: No. It doesn't mean that at all. Borgo and Saleh straight-up said that Femi is playing that wide-9 role, so they already had a young guy to develop at that spot. It means they had a need for a 5T, and we overestimated their desperation for a 9T, but it doesn't mean that they didn't have Bailey or others on their board or rated highly in their system. Yeah they have Femi (who incidentally is 260) which is why they didnt value a 240-250 situational pass rusher more than they valued a 275-285 DE who could set the edge and they traded up for the 275 guy instead of a guy struggling to hit 250. You guys are struggling to continue to believe they were interested in these pass rusher that would just be a situational player in this scheme when that PASSED on Reese while trading up for a 275 guy. Its hilarious to watch the cognitive dissonance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justafan Posted April 25 Report Share Posted April 25 2 minutes ago, reo said: Yeah they have Femi (who incidentally is 260) which is why they didnt value a 240-250 situational pass rusher more than they valued a 275-285 DE who could set the edge and they traded up for the 275 guy instead of a guy struggling to hit 250. You guys are struggling to continue to believe they were interested in these pass rusher that would just be a situational player in this scheme when that PASSED on Reese while trading up for a 275 guy. Its hilarious to watch the cognitive dissonance. Their starting wide 9 is 250 lbs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsntLifeFunny Posted April 25 Report Share Posted April 25 (edited) 9 minutes ago, reo said: Yeah they have Femi (who incidentally is 260) which is why they didnt value a 240-250 situational pass rusher more than they valued a 275-285 DE who could set the edge and they traded up for the 275 guy instead of a guy struggling to hit 250. You guys are struggling to continue to believe they were interested in these pass rusher that would just be a situational player in this scheme when that PASSED on Reese while trading up for a 275 guy. Its hilarious to watch the cognitive dissonance. Seeing as he's being profiled as an Off-ball LB by the Giants I think you're pushing this a step too far. You don't know how they viewed Bailey. Your argument doesn't make any sense if the lynchpin is us not drafting Reese. You don't even know if they saw him as an edge. Edited April 25 by IsntLifeFunny Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justafan Posted April 25 Report Share Posted April 25 3 minutes ago, IsntLifeFunny said: Seeing as he's being profiled as an Off-ball LB by the Giants I think you're pushing this a step too far. You don't know how they viewed Bailey. Your argument doesn't make any sense if the lynchpin is us not drafting Reese. You don't even know if they saw him as an edge. Don't worry, he'll be off to the gym soon. oldschool, and rns90 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted April 25 Report Share Posted April 25 5 minutes ago, IsntLifeFunny said: Seeing as he's being profiled as an Off-ball LB by the Giants I think you're pushing this a step too far. You don't know how they viewed Bailey. Your argument doesn't make any sense if the lynchpin is us not drafting Reese. You don't even know if they saw him as an edge. Giants run a 34. That's a different needs skillset and conversation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted April 25 Report Share Posted April 25 2 minutes ago, Justafan said: Don't worry, he'll be off to the gym soon. On a Saturday? Today is yard work. Its hilarious you guys use to think I was lying about going to the gym when it was literally 4 or 430 every day back then. Sidenote, update your trash talking. That was 10 years ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justafan Posted April 25 Report Share Posted April 25 5 minutes ago, reo said: On a Saturday? Today is yard work. Its hilarious you guys use to think I was lying about going to the gym when it was literally 4 or 430 every day back then. Sidenote, update your trash talking. That was 10 years ago. Be right for once. It's boring just telling you how dumb and thin skinned you are all the time. reo, and oldschool 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.