2023 NFL Draft Watch and Post Thread - The Hangover Special

[Skinsinparadise]

6 hours ago, PeterMP said:

 

Well, that's not ludicrous, but I think it is pretty useless. 

 

The difference between a bad team and a good team is so much due to one position (QB) and coaching.  If you swap our coaches and QB for KC, we probably don't win the Super Bowl but we become a contender.

 

Do guys that are starters but meh players become good draft picks then?

 

Even the best teams have positions they are weak at which than affects who is/can be a starter.

 

Dotson could probably start on KC.  But he almost certainly would not start on the Eagles.  Does that make him a good draft pick or a bad draft pick?

 

What Kiper said, has been said by plenty others.  It's not a debate I've seen taken on.   Even if the point doesn't feel right for whatever reason, just go through teams drafts over the years, especially with the benefit of time.  On the rare times lets say you got over half a draft of impactful players -- its a wow draft.  Beathard's draft from 1981 on that count is still talked about today because of how rare it is to kill it like that.

 

You are talking about mitigating factors that effect a players success.   It's much more simpler for me than you are taking the point.   Do these players end up having success or not in the NFL. Different outfits judge success in different ways -- that's subjective, but none of those outfits conclude most draft picks are successful by any metric that they adapt.    

 

It's actually not too hard.  Most players end up out of the league.  That's a pretty easy metric to use.   Starters versus backups -- i agree is more flawed but its not that flawed. In the age of the salary cap, not too many studs are on the bench for long even on the good teams.  Even the good teams have weaknesses.  If you got a stud backup, they eventually typically will play and the starter will be dealt or let go for cap reasons.   

 

Sure maybe a dude is poised to be the next Reggie White but some dummy coach missed every sign and he flamed out of the league because of it.  Or some "meh" player was developed into a superstar because Andy Reid coached him up.  But these wild outliers while exist in any type of study -- it's a reason why you always got a margin of error to account for these outliers.

 

As a poster said on this thread yesterday, and I've made similar points in the past, your best chance to have draft success is to increase the odds, build draft capital -- have a lot of shots at the well. 

 

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/feb/2/slam-dunk-hire-special-draft-class-and-more-bobby-/

 The 1981 draft: Is one draft technically one move? OK, maybe not — but we’ll skirt the rules in this case because of how insane Washington’s 1981 draft was. Just look at some of the names taken by Beathard in this class: guard Mark May was selected at No. 20, Grimm at No. 69, defensive end Dexter Manley at No. 119, wide receiver Charlie Brown at No. 201 and defensive tackle Darryl Grant at No. 231. Then, as mentioned, the Redskins added Jacoby as an undrafted free agent. 

In 2017, ESPN ranked Washington’s 1981 draft as the 14th-best class of all time. And the group served as the foundation of Washington’s Super Bowl run. The Redskins won their first Super Bowl to cap the 1982 season. It wouldn’t have been possible without the draft from the year prior.

 

 

https://www.dailynorseman.com/2022/4/26/23042105/nfl-draft-pick-bust-rate-remains-very-high

 

There is a ton of different studies like this below.  They all have their versions of this.  And you can pick each apart.  But the all in their own way reach similar conclusioins.

 

Five years ago I did a piece detailing how most draft picks are busts, based on a study of 1996-2016 draft picks. The results, which are based on the Pro Football Reference AV metric, are sobering:

• 16.7% didn’t play for the team that drafted them
• 37% were considered useless. They either didn’t play much or didn’t make the team.
• 15.3% were considered poor. Had limited playing time and didn’t do well in the time they had.
• 10.5% were considered average. These are mediocre players that had starts or significant contributions over 2-3 years.
• 12.3% were considered good. These could be mediocre or average players that were multi-year starters, Pat Elflein or Christian Ponder for example, or perhaps some genuinely good players that didn’t last all that long for the team that drafted them- Sidney Rice for example. This is where the AV metric can over-rate a player based on the number of starts, rather than their performance while on the field.
• 6.9% were considered Great. This category is the first that includes undeniably good draft picks. In order to be considered great, they would’ve had to play for the team that drafted them into a second contract, and also performed well over those years.
• 1% were considered legendary. These are future Hall of Famers, multi-year All-Pros among the best in the league for most of their relatively long careers.

And so only about 8% of draft picks are players that really make much of a difference beyond replacement value, and only about 30% see much playing time or make a significant contribution to the team.

 

https://www.arrowheadpride.com/2015/2/20/8072877/what-the-statistics-tell-us-about-the-draft-by-round

 

What the stats tell us about drafting positions

by round

Historic Success Chart

The numbers show us the following outline for finding consistent starters:

1st Round - OL (83%) LB (70%) TE (67%) DB (64%) QB (63%) WR (58%) RB (58%) DL (58%)

2nd Round - OL (70%) LB (55%) TE (50%) WR (49%) DB (46%) QB (27%) DL (26%) RB (25%)

3rd Round - OL (40%) TE (39%) LB (34%) DL (27%) WR (25%) DB (24%) QB (17%) RB (16%)

4th Round - DL (37%) TE (33%) OL (29%) LB (16%) WR(12%) DB (11%) RB (11%) QB (8%)

5th Round - TE (32%) DB (17%) WR (16%) OL (16%) DL (13%) RB (9%) LB (4%) QB (0%)

6th Round - TE (26%) OL (16%) DL (13%) WR (9%) DB (8%) RB (6%) LB (5%) QB (0%)

7th Round - DB (11%) OL (9%) QB (6%) WR (5%) DL (3%) LB (2%) RB (0%) TE (0%)

Edited May 2, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

That PFF guy saying our defense could be best in the NFL, and then not knowing who the QB is...I bet he also thinks our DL is "scary". Which is the same narrative it's had since 2020 began. He also probably doesn't know Chase's patellar tendon blew to smithereens.

 

We have defensive talent, but unless it's a down year for the league defensively I really doubt we're near tops unless the rookies really hit the ground running and Sweat makes a leap.

[MartinC]

9 hours ago, 88Comrade2000 said:

It hasn't been determined who's QB 1 on opening day.  If Jacoby is outperforming Sam, he gets the starting nod.  If Sam is outperforming Jacoby, he gets the nod.  

 

 

I think the focus on our Snyder drafts don't really matter.  More likely than not, 2024 will be a new FO and coaching staff.  Only the best of the Snyder era picks/singings will survive the change.  I expect a different roster in year 2 and 3 of the new regime.  So, players we are talking about now might be gone in 1-3 years.

Jacoby will have to outperform Howell by a distance to start. This is Howells shot unless he screws up badly.

 

Ron even referred to Jacoby as the backup in an interview, he caught himself and qualified that with a ‘he’s here to compete’ qualifier but I thought it was an interesting slip in terms of how he’s viewed. The team are reported to be very high on Howell, he’s the starter absent a melt down in camp and preseason.

[Skinsinparadise]

14 minutes ago, Always A Commander Never A Captain said:

That PFF guy saying our defense could be best in the NFL, and then not knowing who the QB is...I bet he also thinks our DL is "scary". Which is the same narrative it's had since 2020 began. He also probably doesn't know Chase's patellar tendon blew to smithereens.

 

We have defensive talent, but unless it's a down year for the league defensively I really doubt we're near tops unless the rookies really hit the ground running and Sweat makes a leap.

 

Some within PFF really like Jacoby Brissett, he was top 10 on some of their metrics.  Some in that group apparently don't seem to believe Howell ends up the starter.  Brad who put up that point is on 106.7 all the time talking about this team -- so I know he's aware Howell exists and is a factor.  

 

And he's not typically pollyana about this team so surprised he went that far post draft.  But I do think their secondary is pretty stacked now for a change.  And PFF is obsessed with the secondary more than the D line as far as their perceived value of those spots.

 

I'll say one thing in his defense, Rivera has certainly not closed the door on Brissett starting.   Basically Howell is in the lead. But its not impossible for Jacoby to start.  I am rooting for Howell of course.  But I don't think its slam dunk.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2023/04/30/commanders-offseason-ron-rivera/

 

They will have not only a promising young quarterback but also a solid veteran backup — and despite insisting all offseason that Sam Howell and Jacoby Brissett will compete for the job, Rivera seemed to make a Freudian slip Saturday.

 

 

During a news conference, Rivera listed all of the upgrades his team had made and called Brissett “a backup quarterback coming off of one of his best years.” Then he added, “I shouldn’t say backup but a guy that’s going to compete to play for us.”

Edited May 2, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[redskinss]

50 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

Dotson could probably start on KC.  But he almost certainly would not start on the Eagles.  Does that make him a good draft pick or a bad draft pick?

If you don't consider the 3rd wide receiver a starter then yes probably not but Dotson is much better than Watkins.

 

[mhd24]

Listened to Lombardi's latest podcast and he was really high on on our team sans the issue of QB (too unknown although Howell had a good one game audition) and OL uncertainty.  He actually listed RB as a need area as he felt our backs lack blue-chip talent.  Was really high on our pass catchers.

[Chump Bailey]

1 minute ago, mhd24 said:

Listened to Lombardi's latest podcast and he was really high on on our team sans the issue of QB (too unknown although Howell had a good one game audition) and OL uncertainty.  He actually listed RB as a need area as he felt our backs lack blue-chip talent.  Was really high on our pass catchers.

 

Another minor criticism for me. Passing on Zach Evans repeatedly I disagreed with. The Rams got a steal. I like Chris Rodriguiz - talked about how he would be a good fit last year but Evans is the better prospect for me.

[Conn]

52 minutes ago, Always A Commander Never A Captain said:

That PFF guy saying our defense could be best in the NFL, and then not knowing who the QB is...I bet he also thinks our DL is "scary". Which is the same narrative it's had since 2020 began. He also probably doesn't know Chase's patellar tendon blew to smithereens.

 

We have defensive talent, but unless it's a down year for the league defensively I really doubt we're near tops unless the rookies really hit the ground running and Sweat makes a leap.

 

It’s not that he doesn’t know our QB situation imo, it’s an intentional shot in a way. People who cover the league have a soft spot and underdog loyalty to Brissett bc of the raw deal he got in CLE, giving it his all on a pretty poor team just to hold down the fort for a predator who played worse than him when he finally got on the field. They truly can’t believe we’d entrust anything to a 5th rounder, and are at this juncture more invested in the Brissett story. They want him to have a shot to start somewhere bc he’s a good guy. 
 

I kind of agree though that on a national punditry level our D is still living off of a mostly unearned reputation. But, you know, we did win like 8 games last year with some of the worst QB play you can find in the NFL and no schematic wizardry so I get it. 

Edited May 2, 2023 by Conn

[NYSkins21]

14 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

My last memory wasn't hot there.  i was trying to impress who ended up being my future wife.  And we were drinking too much.  We went to the Park Bench and Carringtons -- around Stony Brook.  Both are no longer there I know.  Was drinking beer at both venues.  But finished up with a Whisky Sour at Tara's, along with one of those cheap burgers.

 

And all I'll say after that is it taught me a lesson i never repeated which is don't mix a lot of beer with a mixed drink as a capper. 

Lol I’ve definitely been there.

 

Wow Carringtons! Definitely spent some nights there. That’s a blast from the past. Actually Park Bench is still there. They dropped the “Park” though. It’s called “The Bench” now.

[PeterMP]

1 hour ago, redskinss said:

If you don't consider the 3rd wide receiver a starter then yes probably not but Dotson is much better than Watkins.

 

 

Watkins started 8 games last year so not somebody I'd consider a starter.

 

And this is also where there has to be some sort of sense of value too.  Watkins was a 6th round pick.  If Dotson isn't a much better player than Watkins, that's a huge issue.

 

And I'm not actually sure that's true.  Watkins struggled last year with his role changing with AJ Brown but in his 2nd year (2021).  He played in all 17 games but only started 12 and had 62 targets, 43 receptions, 10.4 yards/target, and 14.8 yards per a touch.

 

Dotson last year played in 12 games and started 10.  Had 61 targets, 35 receptions, 8.6 yards/target, and 13.9 yards per a touch.

 

One is not clearly better than the other.  Yes, you can talk about the sub par QB play Washington had last year, the injury, and how Dotson played better towards the end of the year.  But just objectively looking at the numbers and saying one is clearly better isn't accurate.

 

(Even last years numbers for Watkins aren't what I'd consider much worse than Dotson.  Targets are down to 51, but he had 33 receptions (a higher percent than Dotson), 6.9 yards/target (so that's actually pretty far down compared to Dotson), and 9.9 per a touch (lower than Dotson).  So a higher percent of caught balls with them being for fewer yards.)

 

Profootball reference does an accumulated value.  Over 3 years, Watkins has accumulated a value of 40 or 13.33/year.  Dotson last year was a 12.  They also do sort of a ranked value and there Watkins sits right at a 12 with Dotons.

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2020/draft.htm

 

I think Dotson is better than Watkins.  I suspect at the end of their careers he'll be much better.  But currently, the numbers don't actually bear that out.  I'm not at all sure that Dotson last year was better than Watkins 2 years ago, and I don't know how Dotson would do if you brought in a 1A type WR.

[mhd24]

51 minutes ago, Chump Bailey said:

 

Another minor criticism for me. Passing on Zach Evans repeatedly I disagreed with. The Rams got a steal. I like Chris Rodriguiz - talked about how he would be a good fit last year but Evans is the better prospect for me.

Yeah.  According to Keim, we had a 3rd round grade on Rodriguez.  I can see how getting a backup power back for Robinson is a need.  EB liked him

[redskinss]

10 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

Watkins started 8 games last year so not somebody I'd consider a starter.

 

And this is also where there has to be some sort of sense of value too.  Watkins was a 6th round pick.  If Dotson isn't a much better player than Watkins, that's a huge issue.

 

And I'm not actually sure that's true.  Watkins struggled last year with his role changing with AJ Brown but in his 2nd year (2021).  He played in all 17 games but only started 12 and had 62 targets, 43 receptions, 10.4 yards/target, and 14.8 yards per a touch.

 

Dotson last year played in 12 games and started 10.  Had 61 targets, 35 receptions, 8.6 yards/target, and 13.9 yards per a touch.

 

One is not clearly better than the other.  Yes, you can talk about the sub par QB play Washington had last year, the injury, and how Dotson played better towards the end of the year.  But just objectively looking at the numbers and saying one is clearly better isn't accurate.

 

(Even last years numbers for Watkins aren't what I'd consider much worse than Dotson.  Targets are down to 51, but he had 33 receptions (a higher percent than Dotson), 6.9 yards/target (so that's actually pretty far down compared to Dotson), and 9.9 per a touch (lower than Dotson).  So a higher percent of caught balls with them being for fewer yards.)

 

Profootball reference does an accumulated value.  Over 3 years, Watkins has accumulated a value of 40 or 13.33/year.  Dotson last year was a 12.  They also do sort of a ranked value and there Watkins sits right at a 12 with Dotons.

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2020/draft.htm

 

I think Dotson is better than Watkins.  I suspect at the end of their careers he'll be much better.  But currently, the numbers don't actually bear that out.  I'm not at all sure that Dotson last year was better than Watkins 2 years ago, and I don't know how Dotson would do if you brought in a 1A type WR.

According to the stats I saw he started all 17 games last year but that could be wrong I guess.

Watkins has 5 touchdowns in 40 games played over 3 seasons.

Dotson has 7 over a 12 game rookie season and yes with atrocious quarterback play.

If you cherry pick stats and use those strictly for the basis of comparison you can make a case for them being equal. 

If you asked every talent evaluator in the league I'm willing to bet it would be nearly unanimous that Dotson us much better than Watson.

Edited May 2, 2023 by redskinss

[KDawg]

1 hour ago, Conn said:

 

It’s not that he doesn’t know our QB situation imo, it’s an intentional shot in a way. People who cover the league have a soft spot and underdog loyalty to Brissett bc of the raw deal he got in CLE, giving it his all on a pretty poor team just to hold down the fort for a predator who played worse than him when he finally got on the field. They truly can’t believe we’d entrust anything to a 5th rounder, and are at this juncture more invested in the Brissett story. They want him to have a shot to start somewhere bc he’s a good guy. 
 

I kind of agree though that on a national punditry level our D is still living off of a mostly unearned reputation. But, you know, we did win like 8 games last year with some of the worst QB play you can find in the NFL and no schematic wizardry so I get it. 

It was definitely a shot. You’d think someone posting from a analytics account would stay away from that kind of thing, though. Guess not!

1 hour ago, Chump Bailey said:

 

Another minor criticism for me. Passing on Zach Evans repeatedly I disagreed with. The Rams got a steal. I like Chris Rodriguiz - talked about how he would be a good fit last year but Evans is the better prospect for me.

I agree Evans, Rocshon, McBride, etc are better prospects than Rodriguez. But backs are VERY skill set oriented. Rodriguez is the best pass protector of the group and a power runner. Rocshon is more well rounded but can run with power. Evans is more finesse and receiver. McBride is more traditional RB than versatile. It’s all in the flavor.

 

Rodriguez ticked the most boxes. 
 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

29 minutes ago, KDawg said:

It was definitely a shot. You’d think someone posting from a analytics account would stay away from that kind of thing, though. Guess not!

 

 

 

Recalling some of his radio apperances felt more about Brissett.  The PFF guys for example mostly hated Wentz for example.  But they like Brissett is actually good.

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

25 minutes ago, Chump Bailey said:

 

Another minor criticism for me. Passing on Zach Evans repeatedly I disagreed with. The Rams got a steal. I like Chris Rodriguiz - talked about how he would be a good fit last year but Evans is the better prospect for me.

 

I pushed a bunch of RBs including Evans over Rodriguez.  But I never really dove in hard to Rodriguez.  i was disinterested in him because i kept hearing that want speed not more power in their next back.  

 

My favorite late round back, actually went higher than I expected Evan Hull to go lower. I liekd Vaughn as a lower RB, too.   Evans, McBride, McIntosh I thought were more mid rounders.

 

but now that I watched Rodriguez closely I dig the pick.  As Logan Paulsen said he likes the idea of having two bruisers that can just wear down a defense.  Rodriguez is such a violent runner.  He's fun.  And I regret not watching him much -- i watched a zillion other RBs ironically.

 

 

[PeterMP]

2 hours ago, redskinss said:

According to the stats I saw he started all 17 games last year but that could be wrong I guess.

Watkins has 5 touchdowns in 40 games played over 3 seasons.

Dotson has 7 over a 12 game rookie season and yes with atrocious quarterback play.

If you cherry pick stats and use those strictly for the basis of comparison you can make a case for them being equal. 

If you asked every talent evaluator in the league I'm willing to bet it would be nearly unanimous that Dotson us much better than Watson.

 

I generally agree.  Dotson looks like the better player.

 

But, the stats I gave aren't cheery picked.  The profootball reference stat is about total value.

 

TDs with no context is a cheery picked stat.  The Eagles run the ball to score.  Using TDs as your stat, Dotson is better than Smith (same number of TDs but Smith played every game) and McLaurin (more TDs in fewer games)

 

Dotson has a low catch %.  It is odd because when you watch him play, it isn't like he seems to drop a lot of balls.  And it isn't just on the QB.  All of the other "good" skill position players (McLaurin, Samuel, Gibson, Thomas, McKissic, Bates) have reasonable values (>60%).  To have a guy that is supposed to be a really good #2 WR to have one of the lowest catch % on the team is odd.

 

And PFF sees it about the same.  Last year, they had Dotson ranked 74 and Watkins ranked 78.  The difference between Watkins and Dotson isn't that big.

 

In 2021, Watkins was ranked 61.  In a down year for Watkins, Watkins and Dotson were simiar.

 

Dotson seems like he's a much better player when you just watch the game.  But the numbers tell a different story.

[skinny21]

Considering the situation the FO found itself in leading up to the draft - looming ownership change and subsequently needing to fill holes in order to win in the short term … there are some things I really like about how they went about it.  They seemed to focus on several aspects):

- Athletic upside

- Multi-year experience

- Level of competition

- High end character

- Production 

- Filling needs (including depth)

 

Not saying we should ignore questions of value, telegraphing targets, not adding picks, or how they seemed to lean heavily on need, that stuff absolutely matters.  And obviously there’s no telling how it works out for them… I just tend to think there’s something to be said for hitting those bullet points above (again, considering their situation).

[redskinss]

6 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

I generally agree.  Dotson looks like the better player.

 

But, the stats I gave aren't cheery picked.  The profootball reference stat is about total value.

 

TDs with no context is a cheery picked stat.  The Eagles run the ball to score.  Using TDs as your stat, Dotson is better than Smith (same number of TDs but Smith played every game) and McLaurin (more TDs in fewer games)

 

Dotson has a low catch %.  It is odd because when you watch him play, it isn't like he seems to drop a lot of balls.  And it isn't just on the QB.  All of the other "good" skill position players (McLaurin, Samuel, Gibson, Thomas, McKissic, Bates) have reasonable values (>60%).  To have a guy that is supposed to be a really good #2 WR to have one of the lowest catch % on the team is odd.

 

And PFF sees it about the same.  Last year, they had Dotson ranked 74 and Watkins ranked 78.  The difference between Watkins and Dotson isn't that big.

 

In 2021, Watkins was ranked 61.  In a down year for Watkins, Watkins and Dotson were simiar.

 

Dotson seems like he's a much better player when you just watch the game.  But the numbers tell a different story.

Well you certainly know a lot more about analytics than I do so I'll take you at word for that but I agree, watching the game Dotson looks like the superior player.

[88Comrade2000]

4 hours ago, MartinC said:

Jacoby will have to outperform Howell by a distance to start. This is Howells shot unless he screws up badly.

 

Ron even referred to Jacoby as the backup in an interview, he caught himself and qualified that with a ‘he’s here to compete’ qualifier but I thought it was an interesting slip in terms of how he’s viewed. The team are reported to be very high on Howell, he’s the starter absent a melt down in camp and preseason.

Jacoby would have to do that but it’s possible he outperforms Sam in camp. If that happens, they are going to go with qb that will win them games. If Sam fails to show that in camp, they aren’t going to go with him.

 

Sam enters camp as QB1 but his performance in camp will tell whether he remains there.  
 

Ron’s #1 job is to win and make the playoffs. He hopes it’s Sam but if Sam doesn’t show him that, he will move on pretty quickly.

 

If Dan was still remaining the owner, he would ride the whole season with Sam. Since Harris should be the owner by the time camp starts, Ron will go with which qb he thinks will win. Sam will be given every chance to be that guy but if he doesn’t show that in camp, no way can he ride with Sam.

[bowhunter]

16 minutes ago, 88Comrade2000 said:

Jacoby would have to do that but it’s possible he outperforms Sam in camp. If that happens, they are going to go with qb that will win them games. If Sam fails to show that in camp, they aren’t going to go with him.

 

Sam enters camp as QB1 but his performance in camp will tell whether he remains there.  
 

Ron’s #1 job is to win and make the playoffs. He hopes it’s Sam but if Sam doesn’t show him that, he will move on pretty quickly.

 

If Dan was still remaining the owner, he would ride the whole season with Sam. Since Harris should be the owner by the time camp starts, Ron will go with which qb he thinks will win. Sam will be given every chance to be that guy but if he doesn’t show that in camp, no way can he ride with Sam.

This right here. I think we all want/Hope for Sam to kill it. Cinderella story, low cost QB locked up for a few years vs a veteran on a one year rental.Ron certainly wants Sam to be the guy. Wins and with a QB they DRAFTED give a little more credence to his chances of being here next year. So I do feel that the team will make every effort for Sam to be coached up and be successful. Ultimately Sam will be the decision maker on that front.

[MartinC]

28 minutes ago, 88Comrade2000 said:

Jacoby would have to do that but it’s possible he outperforms Sam in camp. If that happens, they are going to go with qb that will win them games. If Sam fails to show that in camp, they aren’t going to go with him.

 

Sam enters camp as QB1 but his performance in camp will tell whether he remains there.  
 

Ron’s #1 job is to win and make the playoffs. He hopes it’s Sam but if Sam doesn’t show him that, he will move on pretty quickly.

 

If Dan was still remaining the owner, he would ride the whole season with Sam. Since Harris should be the owner by the time camp starts, Ron will go with which qb he thinks will win. Sam will be given every chance to be that guy but if he doesn’t show that in camp, no way can he ride with Sam.

Don’t disagree with that overall except that I think Jacoby will have to clearly outplay Sam by a margin to win the job. Anything even semi close they will go with Sam to see what he’s got. 

[RandyHolt]

Its nice to hear for the handful of us that lobbied to stop ****ing around and draft a QB to hear that we were trying to land Richardson.

 

 

[bowhunter]

3 minutes ago, MartinC said:

Don’t disagree with that overall except that I think Jacoby will have to clearly outplay Sam by a margin to win the job. Anything even semi close they will go with Sam to see what he’s got. 

...To PROVE what he's got. I think RRs future is closely tied to Sams success.

[Morneblade]

2 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

Its nice to hear for the handful of us that lobbied to stop ****ing around and draft a QB to hear that we were trying to land Richardson.

 

 

 

That is literally the worst thing we could have done. I think Richardson is going to bust hard.

[Est.1974]

Hurney clearly has a ton of influence on Rivera