Post draft breakdown

I think you are so off with almost all of your analysis with this draft, I don't even know where to begin. I'll just take this point.

So you want your GM to tell your entire scouting staff to move heaven and earth trying to find the QB of the future - and essentially force the pick of a QB, "some QB with upside" :confused?:... and that is a long term approach? No. That is wasting scouts' precious time at the expense of improving the other 95% of the roster, and likely a waste of a pick.

I'm sure they scouted QBs, but I'm glad that's not the only position they scouted, and they didn't just draft one to draft one.

RR and company have said it a million times, about taking a measured approach, not forcing anything, not mortgaging the future, etc. They have proven that through free agency, and I see nothing that changed that with this draft.

Did they draft needs? Of course they did. Every team did. That's why when it's a team's turn to draft, the analysts talk about what that team NEEDS, not who is their best player on the board.

For me, it's just nice to have grown men in charge for a change.

Concur on grown men, and its okay to disagree, LOL.
In the end, only time will tell, and I hope every pick is a HOFer, LOL.

Imagine thinking a 5th round pick and a selection of a 6th round LS would be considered “mortgaging the future” after a previous regime of Dan and Bruce completely botching multiple high round draft trades and having the unawareness to get value for Cousins/Trent

Scalper we have come a long long way…just a question, would you have been satisfied trading multiple first round picks as well as a couple mid round to pick up Fields?

No, I think moving up would have been terrible, unless someone dropped to 14 or later and trading up was sane, i.e. didn't require any future first round picks. The QB I liked was Lance, outside of top-2 obviously.

Comparing to one of worst FOs in NFL history setting the bar awfully low, LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL.

I stand by my mortgaging comment. A small mortgage is still a mortgage. What is so hard to understand about that? Trading a 5th next year for 6th and 7th this year is a bad trade, especially when the 6th is used to draft a LS. A LS! LOL, LOL, LOL. How can anyone defend this? We sacrificed higher draft capital next year for lower capital this year, that is mortgaging the future. And we made this decision to draft the lowest leverage player on the entire 53 man roster. This is not a move a good FO makes, even if the LS is a HOFer.

I would rather take a flyer on QB when we have no long-term answer, as opposed to drafting a LS when other LSs just as good can be signed off street, or instead of a 10th WR. Everyone acts like this expectation is ridiculous, it is not. While I don't view them as second coming of Montana, Ehlinger or Ramsey are two later round QBs with some potential, even at least to PS (Ehlinger drafted). Everyone cracks me up acting like I'm ridiculous expecting some effort be made to draft and develop a QB when we have NO long term answer. It is inexcusable to have the mediocrity we do at QB and not make at least one late round pick on a developmental QB, for the PS at minimum, period. Addressing QB doesn't have to mean trading a bunch of high picks to move up. NO WAY a real GM leaves QB unaddressed. Love RR, but he should not have GM powers, but this was only way we could get any decent coach because of THE DAN. RR wants Allen as QB3 period, and that's why we didn't take a QB, and it is a HORRIBLE decision.

Just based on what we saw last year Wright > AGG.



AGG didn't show us squat.



No doubt BUT i like AGG potential. Like Cam a couple years ago. And honestly we are stacked enough at WR now that i think we can roll the dice on our number 6. Wright is serviceable at best. And if i knew AGG was a bust id take serviceable but I dont know that yet.

McLaurin, Samuel, Humphries, Brown, C Sims and then one of Harmon or AGG would be my guess. Sims and Wright probably gone and Milne to PS. Not sure if Harmon has PS eligibility but AGG does and they could go that route. I’d say AGG or Harmon over Wright because they know what they have in Wright and I don’t see him displacing the 1st 5 on this list. For the 6th slot (if you keep 6), they might be more inclined to focus on potential. They probably perceive a higher ceiling with Harmon and AGG but injuries have prevented us from seeing what that might be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Amazing how we can go from one wr to a logjam at who number 6 is goin to be in a matter of months.

Just based on what we saw last year Wright > AGG.

AGG didn't show us squat.

I'm going with McLaurin, Samuel, Brown, Harmon, Cam Sims and Humphries.

The rest haven't shown enough to keep around, except maybe 1 or 2 guys on the PS (AGG and Wright?).

I'm going with McLaurin, Samuel, Brown, Harmon, Cam Sims and Humphries.

The rest haven't shown enough to keep around, except maybe 1 or 2 guys on the PS (AGG and Wright?).

That sounds like the 6 we'll most likely keep to me.

I'm going with McLaurin, Samuel, Brown, Harmon, Cam Sims and Humphries.



The rest haven't shown enough to keep around, except maybe 1 or 2 guys on the PS (AGG and Wright?).I think this is what we will go with.

Had heard that AGG was in danger after last year, but I don't think he makes it to the PS

Had heard that AGG was in danger after last year, but I don't think he makes it to the PS

You mean he'll be picked up off waivers or that we won't bother?