Re: NFL Chat 3 : Mon Jan 25, 2010 2:59 pm  

Jeez at this rate if a few more QBs pull out JaMarcus Russell will be starting

Re: NFL Chat 3 : Mon Jan 25, 2010 3:04 pm  

Andy Gilder wrote: Another nail in the coffin of the Pro Bowl. It was actually more competitive and taken more seriously when it was a jolly to Hawaii the week after the Superbowl than it is now. If it carries on at this draft they'll be getting undrafted free agents in off the street to play in it. Although the new format means London Fletcher will, finally, get the pro bowl spot he's deserved for so long (he was 1st alternate to Vilma) it is a joke. Pro Bowl rosters getting ridiculous

Andy Gilder wrote: Another nail in the coffin of the Pro Bowl. It was actually more competitive and taken more seriously when it was a jolly to Hawaii the week after the Superbowl than it is now. If it carries on at this draft they'll be getting undrafted free agents in off the street to play in it. Although the new format means London Fletcher will, finally, get the pro bowl spot he's deserved for so long (he was 1st alternate to Vilma) it is a joke. Pro Bowl rosters getting ridiculous

Re: NFL Chat 3 : Mon Jan 25, 2010 3:10 pm  

ST_CONROY wrote:

Lions would go Suh IMO.

They have so many problems but don't see LT as one, even though protecting Stafford should be item #1. The passed on Oher last year with the second pick and they have always said Backus is their guy. They won't take a QB, no RB is rated that high, Millen is gone so no WR. Others like CB or MLB aren't worth that high pick. The only reasonable position is DT with Suh or McCoy. I think the Bucs end up with McCoy with Suh to the Lions.

Suh could be Sapp Mk II so for that reason i hope you get him. I don't want him in our division.

HH any of your O-Line going to be FA's? I heard we could be going after a Bucs lineman to sure up our RT position.

Some gave Klausen going quite late mainly due to needs though. Im guessing well go linebacker as were pretty set on offence.

Re: NFL Chat 3 : Mon Jan 25, 2010 3:33 pm  

Mark wrote:

Some gave Klausen going quite late mainly due to needs though. Im guessing well go linebacker as were pretty set on offence.

I don't see how he could go late.

Rams
Skins
Seahawks
Browns
Raiders
Bills
Denver

Those are all in the top 11 teams. All of who have varying degrees of need for a QB. Skins, Hawks, Browns, Bills all have new coaches/GM's/staff etc and generally new staff mean a new QB. Raiders could be done with Jamarcus Russell, Denver could do with somebody to develop who is better than Orton. Browns could be done with Quinn. Let alone people trading up or back in etc.

I really don't see him going any later than 4 at the lowest.

The guy just had a better season in every category than: Peyton, Eli, Rivers, Roethlisberger, Ryan had in their junior seasons. All have had success in the NFL.

Re: NFL Chat 3 : Mon Jan 25, 2010 4:02 pm  

Skins have multiple needs, especially OL and may carry on with Campbell for another year or two. But any talk of drafting a Franchise QB for us, and there has been some, has all been about Bradford NOT Clausen. You may not be sold on the DTs but Mike Mayock, who is pretty solid in his draft assessments, is clear they're the two best players in the draft. He rates them way ahead of any QB but his top QB is also Bradford and not Clausen. http://www.mlive.com/lions/index.ssf/2010/01/mike_mayock_ndamukong_suh_and.html

Skins have multiple needs, especially OL and may carry on with Campbell for another year or two. But any talk of drafting a Franchise QB for us, and there has been some, has all been about Bradford NOT Clausen. You may not be sold on the DTs but Mike Mayock, who is pretty solid in his draft assessments, is clear they're the two best players in the draft. He rates them way ahead of any QB but his top QB is also Bradford and not Clausen. http://www.mlive.com/lions/index.ssf/2010/01/mike_mayock_ndamukong_suh_and.html

Re: NFL Chat 3 : Mon Jan 25, 2010 4:30 pm  

G1 wrote:

Skins have multiple needs, especially OL and may carry on with Campbell for another year or two. But any talk of drafting a Franchise QB for us, and there has been some, has all been about Bradford NOT Clausen.

Oh, yeah definately, i know the talk has been of Bradford (because he may well be the best QB available to you), but my point was you need a QB and you have to think if Clausen is available there is a chance you'd take him.

G1 wrote:

You may not be sold on the DTs but Mike Mayock, who is pretty solid in his draft assessments, is clear they're the two best players in the draft. He rates them way ahead of any QB but his top QB is also Bradford and not Clausen.

I'm sold on the DT's. I haven't said anything bad about them. Infact i've said Suh could very well be the second coming of Warren Sapp. I haven't seen as much of McCoy but again he is very good in what i have seen.

It's a risk taking any player. Clausen or Suh could bust, but i think based on the fact that Clausen comes from a pro-style offence, has played for longer than most juniors and has had one of the best junior seasons for any QB ever means that pressuming he has a decent combine and looks good when he is brought in by the teams then any team that needs a QB (ie Rams) has to take Clausen every day ahead of Suh. Even if Suh goes on to have an excellent career. You can win without excellent DT's. You can't win with Keith Null and Marc Bulger as your QB's.

They might be the best two players like Mayock says, but that doesn't really mean anything compared to draft needs. For example last year Mayock rated Eugene Monroe as his number player overall and had Sanchez at 11 and Stafford at 13.

Re: NFL Chat 3 : Mon Jan 25, 2010 6:16 pm  

LFCRhino wrote:

I love the Superdome I wouldnt mind going

It's a lot of fun

...and yes, the WHO DAT chant sounds pretty cool with 70k doing it. I also loved the touchdown celebration music and 'dance cam'.

Re: NFL Chat 3 : Mon Jan 25, 2010 8:20 pm  

We have that many needs that I can see us taking either of the big 2. We may well draft Clausen but we have that many holes that any player could be taken. A rookie QB aint gunna get us wins next year. An average QB with a considerably improved D may see us be somewhere near competitive.

Re: NFL Chat 3 : Mon Jan 25, 2010 8:50 pm  

El Pac Carnegie wrote:

We have that many needs that I can see us taking either of the big 2. We may well draft Clausen but we have that many holes that any player could be taken. A rookie QB aint gunna get us wins next year. An average QB with a considerably improved D may see us be somewhere near competitive.

Like the Lions last year you need a QB and if there is a franchise one available you don't pass up on them. Say you go Suh and in your own words end up near competitive then you miss out on Locker and are poor again with nobody in the future to lead your team.

Not only from a playing standpoint is a QB more important but financially it's important to have a "face of the franchise" and with the Rams being touted as one of the potential teams to move to LA since they wouldn't require re-aligning an LA franchise they could just put them in the NFC West having Clausen is that much more important. Likewise first round (top 10?) money on 3 D-lineman is a really high amount.

I really like Suh, he is excellent, but if the organisation thinks Clausen is going to make it as a QB (all indications are he will) then you'd be crazy not to take him.

I suppose the other option is to take Jason Campbell and draft Suh. Is Campbell a guy for the future, could you win the division with him? I don't know.

It'll certainly be an interesting decision and one which will have serious long term ramifications. If you go Suh and Clausen ends up as a top 10 QB you'd want him. If you go Clausen and Suh turns out like Sapp Mk. II then you'd want him.

Re: NFL Chat 3 : Tue Jan 26, 2010 10:14 am  

I hope Brett Favre doesn't retire. He still has it at 40 years of age. Bloody legend !!!