-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
-
Popular Now
-
Thread of the Week
-
Topics
-
-
Posts
-
By Yoshinator · Posted
I'm happy about this. Ballard said that he liked Paye a lot still. Not too surprised we picked up his 5th year option. I was 60/40 on it. Love keeping this EDGE room as long as possible! -
By Moosejawcolt · Posted
I would go on the side that they are not happy with him in terms of play. He has been here for 3 years now and really has little impact on the game. Not what you want for the 20th pick in the draft. Not a bust but a huge disappointment. You never notice him in the game at all. -
Correct, the weak side, so we agree. Paye is better suited for the strong side. Now Dayo, talk about a swiss army knife! Can play both ends, 3 tech, and NT on obvious passing downs, love the kid :). -
When you write...Only you have these views...that is singling out me from some group you have in mind. The word Only does that. Including the word VIEWS, it suggests that you are singling out my views from a group. That would be the consensus. It appears that you don't remember what you wrote. I said that teams have their TOP 250 ranked Prospects pretty much the same, because the evaluation process uses the same inputs and metrics, give or take some weighting, and based upon if its the top 30 prospects or the last 220 to 250 prospects. I said their draft boards could be different, and gave an example of having their #12 ranked prospect, JJ McCarthy, ahead of their #3 ranked prospect MHJ on their draft boards. So what you said about draft boards...like anybody pays attention to you over 13 years...probably doesn't disagree with what I said either...so relax. This comment seems full of itself. It doesn't read like a 50/50 disagreement of opinions. Approaching someone who has a different opinion by TELLING them its has gobs of flaws looks more like an 85/15. Sorry, but neither I nor many on this board are going to treat you like the 85/15 knowledgeable guy you want to be treated like (and some others here). You just haven't earned the chops. Hmm. You "explained to me"...and so did others? There goes that 85/15 relationship you...and others...sort of demand. And you...and others...haven't earned. And BTW, you didn't even get my opinion right. This thread should not be talking about opinions you think I've had the past two years...not sure why they are relevant. But you are not representing them correctly so they need to be corrected (I'm sure everybody cares to read it. LOL) As far as Woods: I never said Ballard got lucky with Woods at 73. I said Ballard overvalued Woods relative to other teams at 53. Ballard's own words in his own draft day video showed him debating who to take at 53...AP or JW...and he finally says "lets go with the wide-out". And then Woods fell to 73, where Ballard stopped him from falling who knows how far by picking him. So him debating closely to take JW at 53 shows he strongly considered taking him at 53 when he did not have to strongly consider it. As far as Raimann. I did not ignore the age thing that you..(and others?)...explained to me. I discarded it for being bad. Every GM E.V.E.R.Y one of them would have been glad to spend a first round pick on a 25 year old LT who is playing like a top 10 LT and have that player under a rookie contract for 5 years (except the GMs who already had an All-Pro at LT). EVERY GM who's team needed an LT as badly as the Colts needed an LT probably would have traded up from 53 to get him...if they knew what he would be this early. Being 25 is completely irrelevant. LTs have longevity, and teams still have to deal with a second contract if he was 22. They'll gladly take the top 10 play for the next 5 years (lets see) over the risk of what the situation will be 5 years from now. The same player evaluation process that prevails throughout the NFL failed Raimann, not an age bias. And Ballard got lucky that such a good player was able to be picked with his third pick of the draft. Hmmm, as if NO ONE explained to me? Who would that be? Just another guy on the forum? Or the ones with 5 figure post counts and a decade of history that feel that their role is to explain stuff to others? Saying Ballard got lucky is not negative nor is it belittling. Especially when I also say that ALL GMs get lucky, which I exampled by mentioning Polian/Mathis, Polian/Saturday, NE/Brady, and Lynch/Purdy...etc. They all get lucky. I'm sorry that you feel putting Ballard in the same Commoner bucket as all other GMs belittles his Majesty. Which is what Ballard tended to support by his own words that said "nobody knows how this stuff (the draft day activities...rankings, draft board, and draft pick trades) will play out". Sorry, but for what...7 years...you have been trying to sell this notion of Ballard being Smart and right...like there is a bright line separation between those GMs who are, what, dumb and wrong? Ballard has sort of deflated the idea that there is a bright line between GMs. BTW, the great John Lynch sure did mess up that Trey Lance trade up didn't he? Good thing he got lucky with Purdy pick to sort of bail him out of the important QB position issue. -
By Moosejawcolt · Posted
Latu will occupy the side where he is rushing the passer. That is his job. To get to the qb!! I am not sure who will go where. I expect Paye to play LDE and I am not sure where Sam and Dayo will line up. I really wouldn't be shocked if Paye isnt even a starter to open the season on the left side. I think what will be clear is Latu will be starting and those other 3 will be doing a lot of switching around but I do think Dayo will become a starter soon into the season
-
-
Members
-
.jpg.03c76055d967f51b813e290416ac9bfa.thumb.jpg.b1d64d49e1863163f4eefe42ad172348.jpg)
Recommended Posts