2011 Senior Bowl Week

Very true. I think it is more important to have size at the ILB position than outside in a 3-4 due to ILB having to take on interior linemen. The OLB doesn't have to be as big IMO because he will often be in coverage, therefore a need to be faster, or rushing the QB on the edge.

I think we do need more picks but I think Miller would be perfect in this system as he is both a great rusher and good in coverage. If he is not there then I am definitely with the trade back to get more picks group. You have to realize though, there may be no one wanting to trade and you might have to take someone.

I just hope if we can't trade out at #10 we don't take a QB. I think that would be a reach as there is so much defensive talent that is more worthy of #10 pick than any QB in this draft IMO.

That's my fear too, though if Gabbert or Newton were on the board I would be cautiously optimistic if we took either. I would like to see a trade back & get a qb late 1st or in 2nd.

I like what Smootsmack said; there was talk that they would draft a 2nd or 3rd round qb (pending trade of course) this year to develop as a backup, while going for a qb next year to be the long-term starter. That sounds like a good plan, basically plan to draft QBs 2 years in a row. One of them should become a decent starter.

If Miller is gone at 10 I'd like to see us trade back, as mentioned, or take DE Cameron Jordan. This would add teeth to our front 3. If we are following the examples of teams like the Steelers and Ravens, we will invest first round picks on our defensive front 3.

That's my fear too, though if Gabbert or Newton were on the board I would be cautiously optimistic if we took either. I would like to see a trade back & get a qb late 1st or in 2nd.

I like what Smootsmack said; there was talk that they would draft a 2nd or 3rd round qb (pending trade of course) this year to develop as a backup, while going for a qb next year to be the long-term starter. That sounds like a good plan, basically plan to draft QBs 2 years in a row. One of them should become a decent starter.

Um, that's not exactly what I said. I said it wouldn't surprise me if they took a QB this year and then again next year. But there's not necessarily talk of the Skins doing that

http://www.thewarpath.net/780723-post159.html

Um, that's not exactly what I said. I said it wouldn't surprise me if they took a QB this year and then again next year. But there's not necessarily talk of the Skins doing that

http://www.thewarpath.net/780723-post159.html

sorry dude, that was a misquote, just wanted to give you credit for the info., or as it turns out - the idea. It would be a good approach, my only fear is that Locker = Heath Shuler, who will = Gus Frerotte?

sorry dude, that was a misquote, just wanted to give you credit for the info., or as it turns out - the idea. It would be a good approach, my only fear is that Locker = Heath Shuler, who will = Gus Frerotte?

It's cool. I just know that sometimes people misinterpret my posts here sometimes as "inside info" I don't want confusion. I try to make it pretty clear when it's something I've heard vs. something I think

Actually, Miller at 9 would probably benefit the Cowboys, as someone would trade with them to avoid us taking him. Somehow, they are gonna screw our draft up :madani:

True, but there could also be a player available to the cowboys on the board like a Marcell Dareus who they would need, or the could be very convinced that we get Cam Newton that they just keep that pick. Anything, and I mean Anything could happen.

NFL.com news: Packers', Steelers' architects draft same plan to reach SBXLV (http://www.nfl.com/superbowl/story/09000d5d81e058f1/article/packers-steelers-architects-draft-same-plan-to-reach-sbxlv)

I said I found Mayock's comment interesting. I said it may possibly mean one of Locker's issues may be partially fixable.

That does not mean I said "this is a reason we should take him at tenth in the first round".

That does not mean I said "so-and-so should not be taken".

That does not mean "Locker is better than every other QB out there".

I said what Mayock said was interesting. I said it may possibly mean one of Locker's issues may be partially fixable. That is all. I did not even mention what I would do. What I would do, given my gigantic ignorance in all things draft, is burn a [nonexistent] 3rd rounder on him in a hypothetical world.


Not nailing you CP, just the media's love affair with Locker. I figured you were just going along with the article. I found it rather amusing how all the booth guys for the Nebraska vs Wash bowl game were fawning over the kid, even though his passing game was crap. The kid blows chunks for a 4 year starter. As for Cam, I rather get Gabbert or Ponder, but Cam gets the nod over Locker anyday. When guys were talking about Locker in here last year as a possible QB for us I gagged. Guy was a INT machine.

I'd rather load up else where with an eye for taking a qb next season unless someone falls to us that would just be silly to pass on. I'd be interested in taking someone like Mitch Mustain in the 6th or 7th round or as a UDFA. With all the hype he had going into college, it would be nice to see what he has to offer at the combine/pro day.

Well this won't help Mustain

Ex-USC QB Mitch Mustain arrested on drug charge - ESPN Los Angeles (http://sports.espn.go.com/los-angeles/ncf/news/story?id=6083009)

If Miller is gone at 10 I'd like to see us trade back, as mentioned, or take DE Cameron Jordan. This would add teeth to our front 3. If we are following the examples of teams like the Steelers and Ravens, we will invest first round picks on our defensive front 3.We have a winner. Great call.