Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
You're just too young to grasp how stylin' I really was. All the boys wanted to do me when I was 5. Actually the girls did too. My haircut was confusing.
sang_xcx Sammy adjusted to 4.43 official time. And guess what? Still the top WR off the board.
Obviously. He said he was going to go to there and be the fastest. so that's what I wanted to see him do. Martavis actually beat him, which is good for his stock, Even though he was listed at 6'5 at Clemson and measured 6'3 there.
sang_xcx Sammy adjusted to 4.43 official time. And guess what? Still the top WR off the board.
Obviously. He said he was going to go to there and be the fastest. so that's what I wanted to see him do. Martavis actually beat him, which is good for his stock, Even though he was listed at 6'5 at Clemson and measured 6'3 there.
All colleges list their players bigger than they actually are, no one expected him to actually measure 6'5".
Obviously. He said he was going to go to there and be the fastest. so that's what I wanted to see him do. Martavis actually beat him, which is good for his stock, Even though he was listed at 6'5 at Clemson and measured 6'3 there.
All colleges list their players bigger than they actually are, no one expected him to actually measure 6'5".
Sammy was listed pretty much the same. I know they usually list them bigger but being 2 inches off is kinda drastic, no?
Post by Dave Maynar on Feb 27, 2014 9:03:28 GMT -5
I almost forgot about this.
I think my overall favorite moment of the Combine was during Mariucci's talk with Blake Bortles. Mariucci asked him to diagram the last TD pass in their win over Baylor in the Fiesta Bowl. He is answering questions about it when the following exchange occurs:
Bortles: "...so then this receiver comes across and sets a pick on the DB." Mariucci: "Is that a legal pick?" Bortles: (short pause) "It's legal if you don't get caught."
Post by muppetstakethefarm on Feb 27, 2014 10:22:33 GMT -5
Just took a look back at the last week of comments here.
1) Sammy Watkins will be the first WR off the board. All signs point to him being a top 5 pick and there was some (very little) talk about him going #1 in Indy solely because of all the guys being discussed at #1, he is the "safest" pick. He has the lowest probability of being a bust in comparison to the QB's. That said, he wont go #1 and thats not a knock. If you dont have someone to throw it to him, it doesnt matter how good he is so you have to expect a QB to go #1 (especially with the changes to the rookie salaries in the new CBA) and nobody will trade up to #1 to take anything other than a QB.
2)While it could be fair to make comparisons about Bo Jackson the player in both sports to other players as a way to identify the type of player someone will be at the highest level, there is just no comparison to Bo Jackson the athlete. He could hit a 95mph fastball 420 feet to dead center while he was running sub 4.2 40 and carrying two defenders the whole way filming a Nike commercial at the same time.
3)Aaron Donald has proven to be a beast on the field, at the all star games and at the combine and yet he still has yet to rise to the top 10 of the board. No question his height is the reason why and a 6 foot 1 sub 300 lb defensive lineman is at a disadvantage but since he would be a DT, I dont think its as big of an issue as a DE and I would have no concerns with my Bears taking him at #14 and sticking him at DT in the 4-3 (or modified version of the 4-3 they will run this year)
Post by Jake Jortles on Feb 27, 2014 13:11:37 GMT -5
How did Bortles' throwing look? Missed it. Did hear a commentator mention they were worried about him staring down the number 1 option more than anything. Think I brought that up early and its really my only beef with him as a top ten pick.
How did Bortles' throwing look? Missed it. Did hear a commentator mention they were worried about him staring down the number 1 option more than anything. Think I brought that up early and its really my only beef with him as a top ten pick.
He threw very well. Precision on the deep ball, strong and accurate. It probably helped him the other top tier QB's did not throw. The concern you bring up however is not something that can't be validated at the combine. What was going around, and this is no secret, is that Bortles is not the guy you draft and can put in on day one. He has a super high ceiling but also of the QB's at the top of the list, he would be the one labeled "project". With the changes in the CBA, teams can afford to draft a QB high and let him sit if he has too since they are not paying him $40 mil.
Last Edit: Feb 27, 2014 15:32:21 GMT -5 by muppetstakethefarm: can't not can. One letter and an apostrophe and you have the exact opposite of what you meant! - Back to Top
Donald is pretty much the exact type of player the Bears need in the first round. That guy is going to wreck house in the NFL.
Every mock draft since the title game has had the Bears taking Jernigan at that spot. He is explosive but is labeled with some of the same concerns (warranted or not for both guys) as Clowney. He takes plays off, he lacks focus etc. I did not get to see his day at the combine but asked two people whose opinion I value highly and you would have thought they were watching two different players. One raved about his quickness out of the blocks and side to side movement, the other said he was slow and did not help himself with his performance.
The height of Donald is slightly concerning and while I understand he was playing against college all-stars and not the NFL, it was obvious from the first drill to the last snap that he was the best DT on the field at the Senior Bowl. I think of the two I'd take Donald. If there is a partner, could possibly trade down 5-10 slots and still come away with one of them. Bears HAVE to draft the defensive line in the first round but would hate to see them take a guy at 14 they could get at 20-25.
If there is a partner, could possibly trade down 5-10 slots and still come away with one of them.
FUNNY YOU SHOULD BRING THAT UP.
I have been thumping the "Jets trade the 18th overall pick and the Bucs' 3rd rounder they received in the Revis trade (5th overall pick of the 3rd round) to the Bears for the 14th overall pick" narrative for weeks already. It checks out nearly perfectly on the value chart (Bears actually come away with a slight edge), the Jets can move up and get their guy (hopefully Mike Evans, right before the Ravens/Steelers get a crack at him) while only losing a pick that was a surplus anyway, the Bears pick up an extra mid-rounder, which they desperately need for defensive depth, and slide back only a few picks behind teams that don't run the same defenses as they do (Jets, Ravens, Steelers and Dallas all run 3-4's or 3-4 hybrids, meaning they won't be looking for an undersized 4-3 DT like the Bears would be).
I dunno man, that trade looks pretty prime for both teams, the Jets move up and nab their big play receiver, the Bears get an extra selection in a deep draft, plus still have a very good chance of landing the guy they would have at 14 anyway.
I'm inviting people to shoot holes in the logic here, because from where I'm sitting it looks nearly perfect. I'm interested in your thoughts as a Bears fan who seems to know what he's talking about.
If there is a partner, could possibly trade down 5-10 slots and still come away with one of them.
FUNNY YOU SHOULD BRING THAT UP.
I have been thumping the "Jets trade the 18th overall pick and the Bucs' 3rd rounder they received in the Revis trade (5th overall pick of the 3rd round) to the Bears for the 14th overall pick" narrative for weeks already. It checks out nearly perfectly on the value chart (Bears actually come away with a slight edge), the Jets can move up and get their guy (hopefully Mike Evans, right before the Ravens/Steelers get a crack at him) while only losing a pick that was a surplus anyway, the Bears pick up an extra mid-rounder, which they desperately need for defensive depth, and slide back only a few picks behind teams that don't run the same defenses as they do (Jets, Ravens, Steelers and Dallas all run 3-4's or 3-4 hybrids, meaning they won't be looking for an undersized 4-3 DT like the Bears would be).
I dunno man, that trade looks pretty prime for both teams, the Jets move up and nab their big play receiver, the Bears get an extra selection in a deep draft, plus still have a very good chance of landing the guy they would have at 14 anyway.
I'm inviting people to shoot holes in the logic here, because from where I'm sitting it looks nearly perfect. I'm interested in your thoughts as a Bears fan who seems to know what he's talking about.
I would be all for it. As much as I think if the Bears were drafting a different need that those guys could fall farther, I also dont want to get too cute and trade down too far and miss out. I did not look at the value chart and I assume it takes into consideration the different salay structure of the new CBA for rookies as well as the fact that because the draft is split on different days, teams are getting it right more often than they were in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th rounds specifically. I say that because at first glance I would think the Bears would get more than just a slight edge in that scenario. If we were the GM's, I would sign off on it now but alas, we are not. The only hole I can shoot in that is that last year the Bears kept the 4-3 in tact much because of the success of the prior season's defense and the type of players they had on the roster left from the prior regime. The Bears would prefer to go to a 3-4 scheme and this year will run some some 4-3 and hybrid 3-4 but clearly prefer to move away from the 4-3 over time which begs the question how much does that impact the way they draft. The Bears feel they are close enough to make a run so they should take the player they think can help them the most right now regardless of scheme. If they weigh the future desire of being in a 3-4 heavily, they scope of players they want shrinks making it less likely to trade down and more likley they make sure they "get thier guy" . I personally think Donald is athletic enough to play both styles and has played both styles but clearly his size would be better suited in a 4-3. Throw in a case of Sleemans and we have a deal.
Okay, I hadn't read that the Bears were shifting their defense. I knew they were going to experiment with it, but it sounds more like a systemic change the way you're talking about it.
If that's the case, I would point to my boy Sheldon Richardson as Donald's blueprint. Smallish interior DL who is just a ridiculously explosive man. Quick feet, strong hands, and relentless. The more I've watched Donald, the more I've thought "that's Sheldon." If I was hurting for talent up the middle of my defense, I would be all over that guy.
Thanks for the insight. As I said earlier, I've been pushing this idea on the blog I comment on, and no one's really been able to weigh in from the Bears' side. I realize you don't speak for the fans as a whole, or the team, but it's nice to get some fan-expertise from the other side.
Post by muppetstakethefarm on Feb 27, 2014 17:11:43 GMT -5
The issue is that most of the Bears D coaches that have been hired under Trestman are 3-4 guys and most of the players still there from the Smith regime fit the 4-3 mold. That was a big attribute to the lack of defense last year (and an more than normal amount of injuries). In order to change completely right now, it would require quite an overhaul on the defensive side which would cost quite a bit of money unless you get a bunch of old or questionable guys on one year deals. They have to make sure they have enough money to go around after signing Cutler so the end result is drafting the best player available now so you can win now (they were one TD bomb away from winning the division) while looking to the future. I cant see them hiring all these 3-4 coaches (Trestman, Pasqualoni, Herring etc) then firing them when the players struggle in the 4-3. Its the toughest problem the Bears have. So, like last year where they drafted two OL and signed 2 OL, I expect them to do the same this year on the other side of the ball. They are moving McClellan to LB from DE and will have many opening on the line. They will probably draft guys that fit the future scheme and sign guys that can play now and run mutliple schemes throughout the year.
All that said, it would still make sense to make the trade now because if this is the strategy, and we saw it last year on the other side of the ball, I agree that getting as many guys as we can on the roster to see who sticks (add the 3rd round pick) is more valuable than picking 14 instead of 18 when the guys you are looking at might not be a perfect fit for an imperfect system anyway.