Ok so what would you do if say, the draft goes like this:
1. Houston-reggie
2.N.O.-Mario
3.Titans-leinart
4.Jets-Hawk
5.Packers??
would you take vernon, or trade down and nab someone like huff?
Printable View
Ok so what would you do if say, the draft goes like this:
1. Houston-reggie
2.N.O.-Mario
3.Titans-leinart
4.Jets-Hawk
5.Packers??
would you take vernon, or trade down and nab someone like huff?
I think Davis would be a terror on offense. Just my opinion though.
I gotta go with the trade down. But,Davis would be good too... If another team gets Hawk..... Can't stand the thought of it. I still say A.J Hawk for prez. :razz:
Between Davis and Huff, I take Davis.
Between Da Brick and Huff, I take Da Brick.
I'm not that big on Huff.
Would you trade down if you had the choice of da brick and huff?Quote:
Originally Posted by HarveyWallbangers
I really think they need to trade down and get alot of early picks. Collins and Murphy (until he got hurt) proved Polar BEar can pick em.Quote:
Originally Posted by billy_oliver880
Absolutely.Quote:
Originally Posted by billy_oliver880
Vernon Davis in a heartbeat. He'd spread out the D better than Keith Jackson did!Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick Barnett
I would take Young without even letting the clock tick down.
TT is likely to do something different, but you didn't ask what TT would do.
I like VD over Huff (long threads at C-E prove that!) from the choices given.
But if the draft went as you described in the first post, the answer is Brick.
Trade down. I think TT will be leaning towards trading down right from the start. I will be surprised it he doesn't.
The zone-blocking scheme doesn't seem to call for O-line studs like Brick. I'd actually be disappointed if we picked of D'Brickshaw or one of the QB's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guiness
1. Hawk
2. Davis
3. Trade down
Vernon don't look so good anymore.
Nor does Vince YoungQuote:
Originally Posted by gex
If Mobb bumped this one, I was gonna go nuts.
Gex, lemme go half nuts.
Will you goofs quit bumping threads,
Please?
(We all know who the Michael Huff freak was, don't we?)
The bottom line was that draft in 2006 had what we thought a shit load of talent in the top portion of the draft. Really only Williams and Hawk have played reasonably well. Ferguson has been mediocre for the Jets, Huff isn't even starting, Davis is a freak athletically but can't seem to figure out the game of football, Young is a nut case, Reggie Bush is what he is a Dave Metcalf type. He can't be effective running the football 20 times a game, but will always be threat with the ball in his hand, he is a super third down back.
Hawk was drafted not because he had the highest of ceilings, he was drafted because he was going to be an above average, very solid pro football player that might not make 2 or 3 dynamic plays a game, but that he would play close to mistake free football.
I don't think that Hawk has been a great player, but when compared to the other top 10 or top 5 players of that draft I am sure glad the Packers took him and not Vince Young, who reportedly Thompson had a fudgie for.
Wasn't there a Terry Metcalf, also, Nutz? I get geeked every time someone makes a reference to a player from the 70's or 80's.
My favorite running back combo - MacArthur Lane and John Brockington.
I's still take Young in a heartbeat. But I'd also draft world renowned psychotherapist, Dr. John Holmes, MD, Ph.D.
You gotta be kidding. Who can ever forget Howard Cosell yelling....Quote:
Originally Posted by Fritz
"Mr Versitility, Terry Metcalf!"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fritz
For Fritz.....
Harold Carmichael.
By the way, good choice on RB's!
Terry Metcalf was the daddy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fritz
Eric was his son, mainly a return guy, but a very good player.
Dave Metcalf is a figment of Nutz's very vivid imagination. I think Nutz morphed Dave Meggett with Eric Metcalf. Understandable, given all the shit going on in Nutz's head.
MacArthur Lane and John Brockington? One of the best RB tandems in NFL history. One would toss a great lead block and next play, the other guy would return the favor.
Hahaha.. great thread.
Huff has gotta be the better of the two since he has physical talent and is just trapped as a Raider. Davis just doesn't seem to get it.
I was a Mario first, Davis second guy... still stand by that. Hawk has been okay, and I had made my peace with the pick, but at #5 I think you have to target a guy with more upside and potential to make an impact - Hawk's not an impact guy.
As I said then, LB's in Hawks mold come along all the time. Hawk's an okay player, maybe even a good player, and can't be called a bust, but still, you're not going to see game changing plays from the guy. I want a game changer at #5.
Mario, Davis, trade down, Hawk.
As many of you recall, I was all for drafting Marques Colston with our top pick. Although most had never heard of him, I was sure he was going to be a top producing WR in the NFL.
In all seriousness, looking at all the picks after Hawk, TT made the best possible choice.
I am not sure what Wist means by targeting a guy with more upside, nobody selected after him has as much upside. If VD does, you also have to factor in the likelihood of achieving the level of success to match that potential and VD was very low in that regard, whereas Hawk is extremely high. You only have to look at VDs college career to see that there was a major problem there. With his measureables and athletic skills, he should have dominated at that level. He did good, but he didn't dominate.
Darren Sharper could probably be considered a 'game changer'. Although he made a few plays a year that were 'game changing', he also blew a bunch of plays that could have cost us games. I would much rather take an Al Harris - who rarely makes 'game changing' plays, but is instead a very excellent player who plays his role well and contributes every week to a win.Quote:
Originally Posted by wist43
So you're telling me that today, you would still take Davis over Hawk?Quote:
Originally Posted by wist43
Davis may have all the athletic ability in the world but, as proven on Sunday, he is immature and doesn't know how to use it.
Man, Ras, that guy was the consummate professional. A tight end that the Eagles could count on, all the time. I liked that dude.
Thanks for the name, Ras. Good stuff. There were lots of old NFL players that have been left in the dustbin of memory who were damn good NFLers.
And MacArthur Lane on that halfback option...he was pretty good at that, too.Quote:
Originally Posted by KYPack
And I still miss the Cards being in St. Louis, though I know they were the Rams way back in the day. Who was the Cards' QB back in the 70's and early 80's - the guy was a little bit brittle, but man, he was a good QB. Led 'em to a playoff appearance in the 80s, if I recall correctly.
I'm thinking Jim Hart was the QB back then..