Art Posted April 21, 2002 Share Posted April 21, 2002 Giving it some thought I think Royal was selected for a reason, though this takes a lot of effort to figure out . My guess is Royal will probably replace Flemister, and three players at TE and fullback combined will be kept with Royal being able to lead block on short yardage situations. Maybe this is why we did that . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All In Posted April 21, 2002 Share Posted April 21, 2002 Hmm... that does make some sense, especially since we only have Brian Johnson. He could be used as an H back ala Wycheck. I'd like to see what our FO and coaching staff has to say on our picks and why they went with them... maybe look through the trash for Cerrato's and Ron Nay's notes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrangeSkin Posted April 21, 2002 Share Posted April 21, 2002 What is wrong with Flem? He developed nicely last year, and the last thing we need is another project TE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted April 21, 2002 Author Share Posted April 21, 2002 Orange, I don't think anything is wrong with Flem. But, Rasby is too valuable as a blocker on the edge to release and Flem might not have the ability to be a lead blocker from the backfield, where Royal may. I don't think in this offense we'll keep more than three total players at Tight End and Fullback, so, this might be the reason we went for Royal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted April 21, 2002 Share Posted April 21, 2002 to be honest, I don't think Spurrier likes Flemister as much as the previous staff did. He sees Royal as perhaps being the combination of a blocker and receiver at TE in the future. Royal is a big guy at almost 6'5 and 260. Having a guy like Royal alleviates the need to keep specialist tight ends who either catch or block, at least down the road. This might not be a bad pick at all. After we let the horse out the barn door in the early and mid rounds, trying to stock up on guys that play OL or DL just for the skake of adding to the numbers would be counterproductive. If Royal was the best player available at that point (160) than so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddha Posted April 21, 2002 Share Posted April 21, 2002 I always like to check my Lindy's from the previous season to see how they had our picks rated going into their senior season. Royal was ranked by Lindy's as the #2 TE (ahead of Shockey and Graham, behind Stevens). The comment was, "A sure first round pick who could move into the Top 10 with a big season." I've been a little superstitious about Lindy's picks ever since they ranked Stephen Davis as the top back with the comment, "Talented as Bo Jackson, tough as William Andrews." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted April 21, 2002 Share Posted April 21, 2002 How does the Retroactive Lindy Gambit work as applied to Ramsey, Betts, Bauman, Russell & Co.? Inquiring minds want to know ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. D Posted April 21, 2002 Share Posted April 21, 2002 Long snapper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddha Posted April 21, 2002 Share Posted April 21, 2002 Lindy's didn't pick up on Ramsey, Betts, or Russell, but they did on our new DBs: Rashad Bowman (ranked #6 corner behind Sheppard, Jammer, Rumph, Weathersby [JR], and Craver). "Despite being hindered by injuries, he has shown glimpses of excellence." Andre Lott (ranked #6 safety behind Mike Doss [JR], Prather, Roy Williams, Tank Williams, and Marques Anderson). "Capable of playing either corner slot as well." Coleman wasn't listed either but I'm holding out hope for some of our 7th rounders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.