Is this the most talented yet misused defensive front we've had in years?

[Sandy Monk]

3 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

Ya, when you said evaluate, i didn't know what you mean.  Alex Smith contract doesnt expire until 2023 offseason.

 

I think he means that after 2020, Alex's contract can be parted from more easily (regarding dead cap hits) on a year to year basis. 

[Renegade7]

1 minute ago, Sandy Monk said:

 

I think he means that after 2020, Alex's contract can be parted from more easily (regarding dead cap hits) on a year to year basis. 

Makes sense.  If we draft a QB, he has to be playing within a year or two, thats my opinion and ya, i don't see Alex playing at this level in 2023 anyway.

[Koolblue13]

If you've got a bona-fide starter at a position, you draft them later in the draft and hope they develop. Maybe even push the expensive vet out to get picks and free up cap. 

[Morneblade]

2 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

 

We don't have to agree on Hankins, but were talking hypotheticals in regards to 2020.  Want a first rounder on LG next draft, have to see in 2021.  Hopefully we don't have to use a first rounder on a WR, Dunbar is shocking me at CB, so my preference over next 2-3 years is first rounders in the lines and QB.

 

 

Ya, when you said evaluate, i didn't know what you mean.  Alex Smith contract doesnt expire until 2023 offseason.

Not yet, he was making $9 million a year with Colts before being released.

 

I think we have to do something at WR, but I'd almost rather go FA for that.

 

2 hours ago, Sandy Monk said:

 

I think he means that after 2020, Alex's contract can be parted from more easily (regarding dead cap hits) on a year to year basis. 

 

This. Thank you.

 

1 hour ago, Renegade7 said:

Makes sense.  If we draft a QB, he has to be playing within a year or two, thats my opinion and ya, i don't see Alex playing at this level in 2023 anyway.

 

Agreed.

[Koolblue13]

Next year I'm guessing our first pick will probably be a QB or WR. I don't think it'll be a very high pick though. I'd rather not use that on a guard. 

[Renegade7]

5 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

I think we have to do something at WR, but I'd almost rather go FA for that.

 

Absolutely agree. I don't think we have time to develop another WR in the Alex Smith window and we don't have a good history if that recently anyway.  Here's to hoping Doctson reaches his potential.

 

 

[Commander Wolffe]

Any chance Brantley is active this Week? Be nice to see what he could add to the rotation.

[Morneblade]

2 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

Absolutely agree. I don't think we have time to develop another WR in the Alex Smith window and we don't have a good history if that recently anyway.  Here's to hoping Doctson reaches his potential.

 

 

 

Agree on both counts. I mean, outside of Crowder, when was the last WR that we drafted that became a good receiver? Art Monk? Seriously, I can't think of one guy in between. Everyone was a FA, including guys like Gary Clark.

 

[OVCChairman]

 

 

 

If you click the tweet he makes a few video posts.  

[Sandy Monk]

28 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Next year I'm guessing our first pick will probably be a QB or WR. I don't think it'll be a very high pick though. I'd rather not use that on a guard. 

 

My guess is neither of those. 

 

I am expecting a rush LB, IOL, and TE, if the value is there for these spots. 

[Commander Wolffe]

20 minutes ago, Sandy Monk said:

 

My guess is neither of those. 

 

I am expecting a rush LB, IOL, and TE, if the value is there for these spots. 

I agree with the 3 top draft needs and would add WR to the mix as well. Should be interesting with the amount of picks we have next year. Do we stay put and fill in depth or trade up and go for more impact?

[Koolblue13]

24 minutes ago, Sandy Monk said:

 

My guess is neither of those. 

 

I am expecting a rush LB, IOL, and TE, if the value is there for these spots. 

What's IOL? ILB? Because I'd tend to agree but I think SDH will be a star at one spot. Rush OLB for sure I agree with. I'd add FS as well if Nicholson has injuries again. 

[Sandy Monk]

9 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

What's IOL? ILB? Because I'd tend to agree but I think SDH will be a star at one spot. Rush OLB for sure I agree with. I'd add FS as well if Nicholson has injuries again. 

 

I nterior 

O ffensive 

L ineman

 

I think we'll be good with the ILBs. 

[XxSpearheadxX]

3 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Want a first rounder on LG next draft, have to see in 2021.  

 

 

I think we will be better spent looking at a speed rusher, mlber or safety (unless there is a stud WR/TE/QB) in 2020.  I'd rather sign a solid guard in FA and draft one in the 2nd through 5th. 

 

Skins have done exceptional at drafting O and D lineman in the mid to late rounds lately, I'd rather get a blue chip piece that is hard to come by and find another Roullier, settle, or ionainnidis later on. Just my 2 cents 

[Morneblade]

29 minutes ago, Sandy Monk said:

 

I nterior 

O ffensive 

L ineman

 

I think we'll be good with the ILBs. 

 

You mean a LG? Yeah, well I think that's pretty much in line with most of us.

[Darth Tater]

How did this morph into the draft thread?  We got one of those don't we?

[Koolblue13]

4 minutes ago, Darth Tater said:

How did this morph into the draft thread?  We got one of those don't we?

Good call. 

5 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

You mean a LG? Yeah, well I think that's pretty much in line with most of us.

 

35 minutes ago, Sandy Monk said:

 

I nterior 

O ffensive 

L ineman

 

I think we'll be good with the ILBs. 

I just type C/G and no. I don't want one in the first unless we're drafting at the end of the round. 

[Renegade7]

8 minutes ago, XxSpearheadxX said:

I think we will be better spent looking at a speed rusher, mlber or safety (unless there is a stud WR/TE/QB) in 2020.  I'd rather sign a solid guard in FA and draft one in the 2nd through 5th. 

 

Skins have done exceptional at drafting O and D lineman in the mid to late rounds lately, I'd rather get a blue chip piece that is hard to come by and find another Roullier, settle, or ionainnidis later on. Just my 2 cents 

 

This is why i wanted to flip Preston for Mack so bad because i don't think he's going to turn into the force we need him to be but would be beyond frustrated to let him walk for nothing.  Drafting a SS in the 1st is interesting, gotta see what happens with Nicholson, i guess, but totally get not needing to use a first on a LG.  I jus look at that line Dallas had with all those high picks on the line and say "i want that".  It does sound like overkill, though 

[Morneblade]

2 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

This is why i wanted to flip Preston for Mack so bad because i don't think he's going to turn into the force we need him to be but would be beyond frustrated to let him walk for nothing.  Drafting a SS in the 1st is interesting, gotta see what happens with Nicholson, i guess, but totally get not needing to use a first on a LG.  I jus look at that line Dallas had with all those high picks on the line and say "i want that".  It does sound like overkill, though 

 

I really don't understand this.

 

Ok, let's start with Mack. He's a heck of a player, but I don't see him living up to the cost it took to get him, and the cost of his contract. 2 firsts and change, and what, $141 million dollars with $98 million guaranteed? Nah, sorry. I don't even want to think about what that does to the ability of the team to keep other players.

 

Now, let's talk about Smith. If he's not going to be a force, he isn't going to demand that much, and hence, you can resign him...............if you want to. If he's a force, he STILL isn't going to get Khalil Mack Money. So you figure out if he's worth it, and you go from there.

 

To close, I'd rather Draft a LG high than a SS at this time. SS is not a huge deal for me (I like to build from the lines out) and LG is a big hole. An elite OL makes your RB's look good, and your QB's stay upright. I'll take that over a SS, just about any day. And as it is, our SS has question marks, but he could be good. We know our LG sucks, and is very injury prone. Yeah, draft that LG all day.

[Renegade7]

2 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

I really don't understand this.

 

Ok, let's start with Mack. He's a heck of a player, but I don't see him living up to the cost it took to get him, and the cost of his contract. 2 firsts and change, and what, $141 million dollars with $98 million guaranteed? Nah, sorry. I don't even want to think about what that does to the ability of the team to keep other players.

 

If you don't want to think about it you aren't going to get it.  It coulda been Preston and a 1st instead of two firsts.  Whatever you don't want to pay Mack, imagine what you will have to overpay to keep Preston, someone who has never had more then 9 sacks in his career.

 

2 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

Now, let's talk about Smith. If he's not going to be a force, he isn't going to demand that much, and hence, you can resign him...............if you want to. If he's a force, he STILL isn't going to get Khalil Mack Money. So you figure out if he's worth it, and you go from there.

 

Define "force"?  Like if he has a season on par with Mack he stands to make MORE if anything because he's younger.  With Mack you know what you get and know it will be worth it.  Lets out it this way, if Preston gets 9 sacks, thats actually worst case scenario.  Someone will overpay him and if we keep him we overpaid a guy who cant get more then 9 sacks. Mack's first year is $13 million then goes up to 22 with the bonus money front loaded.  By time he's 30 its super easy to get out that contract.  Thats an over the top player, you need those to get rings instead of playoff berths.

 

2 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

To close, I'd rather Draft a LG high than a SS at this time. SS is not a huge deal for me (I like to build from the lines out) and LG is a big hole. An elite OL makes your RB's look good, and your QB's stay upright. I'll take that over a SS, just about any day. And as it is, our SS has question marks, but he could be good. We know our LG sucks, and is very injury prone. Yeah, draft that LG all day.

 

Agreed.  Ill need to see draft board when that time comes, it won't be a top 10 pick.  I know LG is a weakness, but if Nicholson busts (which i don't think he will) thats more of a liability.  Line is pretty good, but i don't want people to get behind us and eaten up by TE's all day.

[OVCChairman]

19 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

I really don't understand this.

 

Ok, let's start with Mack. He's a heck of a player, but I don't see him living up to the cost it took to get him, and the cost of his contract. 2 firsts and change, and what, $141 million dollars with $98 million guaranteed? Nah, sorry. I don't even want to think about what that does to the ability of the team to keep other players.

 

Now, let's talk about Smith. If he's not going to be a force, he isn't going to demand that much, and hence, you can resign him...............if you want to. If he's a force, he STILL isn't going to get Khalil Mack Money. So you figure out if he's worth it, and you go from there.

 

To close, I'd rather Draft a LG high than a SS at this time. SS is not a huge deal for me (I like to build from the lines out) and LG is a big hole. An elite OL makes your RB's look good, and your QB's stay upright. I'll take that over a SS, just about any day. And as it is, our SS has question marks, but he could be good. We know our LG sucks, and is very injury prone. Yeah, draft that LG all day.

 

 

YES.

 

Give me a LG at no. 5 if he's going to turn into Brandon Scherff 2.0 over and over again.  

[Vanguard]

5 hours ago, UK_HOG said:

 

We need more than 3 starting calibre inside linemen and hopefully Settle develops like we hope he can.  This gives Manusky the chance to rotate the linemen and keep them fresh.

The snap count from week 1 shows no one was over worked and we still had a very good defensive line

Daron Payne: 30

Jonathan Allen: 28

Matt Ioannidis: 27

Ziggy Hood: 20

Tim Settle 8

 

The Cardinals had 55 snaps on offence.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not surprised Ziggy didn't do much in his 20 snaps.  Let him lead from the sideline.  Put someone in there that has an impact.  I'm sorry, but it's true.

[Darth Tater]

47 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

I just type C/G and no. I don't want one in the first unless we're drafting at the end of the round. 

Well, the only bust offensive lineman we've taken in round 1 (in my lifetime but the sample if small, just 5) was one taken at the end of the first (although he was a tackle).  We have never taken a true guard in the first (May and Scherff did end up there as rookies though). After 1 game, the only positions that would surprise and upset me are QB, RB and DL.  Hopefully by end-of-season, we also are not looking at DB or WR.  OL picks NEVER upset me.

[Darth Tater]

32 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

If you don't want to think about it you aren't going to get it.  It coulda been Preston and a 1st instead of two firsts.  Whatever you don't want to pay Mack, imagine what you will have to overpay to keep Preston, someone who has never had more then 9 sacks in his career.

 

 

Define "force"?  Like if he has a season on par with Mack he stands to make MORE if anything because he's younger.  With Mack you know what you get and know it will be worth it.  Lets out it this way, if Preston gets 9 sacks, thats actually worst case scenario.  Someone will overpay him and if we keep him we overpaid a guy who cant get more then 9 sacks. Mack's first year is $13 million then goes up to 22 with the bonus money front loaded.  By time he's 30 its super easy to get out that contract.  Thats an over the top player, you need those to get rings instead of playoff berths.

 

 

Agreed.  Ill need to see draft board when that time comes, it won't be a top 10 pick.  I know LG is a weakness, but if Nicholson busts (which i don't think he will) thats more of a liability.  Line is pretty good, but i don't want people to get behind us and eaten up by TE's all day.

If we could have gotten Mack for Smith straight up, no way we should have done that.  Mack would be just chasing the wave again.

[Renegade7]

Just now, Darth Tater said:

If we could have gotten Mack for Smith straight up, no way we should have done that.  Mack would be just chasing the wave again.

I don't understand why when someone proposes a trade it isn't automatically assumed the person is expecting an extension before agreeing to the trade.  Is that what you are saying?