We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

i have to admit there were to many post for me to read but for my own two cents i would like to see us go after a real good tackle. we need to get rid of that riley guy. i heard his name a lot this year and im not sure it was ever for a good reason. i would keep gandy. im not sure of his cap hit if its to much or something i guess we would be forced to let him go but if we can restructure him to something reasonable i would like to keep him for another year so that we dont have two new guys at that spot. i\'d like to draft at least one tackle. i wouldnt mind seeing that be our first round pick but only if the tackle that is available is worth the pick. im not sure how many fit into that category. anyway thats my two cents and it is probally worht even less

We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

i reviewed 27 mock drafts services that were updated in the last week. the totals for first round pick are-
LB- 8
CB-8
DT-7
S-2
OT-1
QB-1
i cant quite imagine derrick johnson falling that far. that would be a godsend.

getting something for howard seems numero uno. dallas has 2 first round picks and most have them taking a edge rusher with the flop of wiley. plenty of teams need a sackman of his caliber, please loomy get something, a second... maybe draft insight/info from a team LOL

We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

sdrinker,

You don\'t really think our biggest need is Safety. One of the two of them was our leading tackler. That can only happen if your LBs are failing to make tackles and/or your CBs are getting burnt. We need at least an OT (to replace Riley) and a LB to play the middle or the strong side. I\'m inclined to think that Safety is on the list, but not number one.

We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

I really do feel like Safety is just too glaring a need to be left till next year again...

I also feel like obtaining an upper caliber safety would help to reduce ruhing yards..and help with passes over the middle..and give deep coverage as well...Bellamy is fine and good at tackling, ( just ask David Carr)..but..his cover skills are not up to par...

I feel like if we get a very good safety..we imporve instantly on defense..in key areas where we suffered for most of the season...

We have too weak of a Defense to try to plug in with 4th and 5th rounders..We need serious talent..and not project players either...the real deal...

Last year..all the talk was about..getting at least one LB to come in here and get some play time..and improve..and we got 2 very young..very willfull, and very good LB\'s that have had the year of experience that was a prerequisite of most peoples wish list last year.....I think we are going to be fine at LB..not stunning by any means..but..improved at least...

If we can\'t get a top 3 Safety..we need to get a top 3 CB..period..that should be first on the agenda..as I see it

The tackle position..which is in dire need of help..would be much better addressed in the Free Agent Market...or..a trade..involving Howard...which is a totally different subject...but..as I was shown by a member of this board..a very possible scenario...and quite possibly..our safest route..in retrospect...If we were to trade him at all

[Edited on 27/1/2005 by shadowdrinker]

We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

Gotcha.

I guess I\'m not sold on our LBs. I think Watson is good, but a little small. Buckwoldt had a few good games at the end of the year, but he is really small. But even with those two, who is the third? I feel like, at best, we have two guys who can play and one of those two may actually turn out to be quite darned good. However, that leaves us needing at least one more.

I agree that we need a Safety in the draft, since there are so few available in FA. I\'ve also been convinced a QB would be a good selection in the middle rounds (but I\'m still pondering that). Though, I think you and I will agree that our draft should depend some on our work in FA. If we get at least one OT and an LB in FA, then I\'d consider a second rounder on a Safety; otherwise, I agree with you - we have plenty of mid round safeites (Gleason and Mitchell). Who do you think will be available in the mid-rounds? the second round?

I just think that a first round pick on a Safety is a waste, unless and Ed Reed is available, but that is pretty rare.

If any of those defensive studs make it to us at 16, I just think we have to take them. I haven\'t checked for awhile, but I don\'t remember anyone listing a Safety in the top 25-30 players in the draft.

We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

Actually Kool, Thomas Davis is listed at safety as one of the top picks and shazor could move up depending on combine stats.

We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

Well, lets keep our eye on them then! Do it.

I guess, I don\'t think that I would feel great about a first round Safety pick right now. Of course, FA could change my mind about that pretty easily.

It is my view, in general, that very good Safeties, like FBs, Gs, and TEs can usually be found in the later rounds. Due to the instant productivity of DLinemen, RBs, and OLBs (and the occasional QB), they tend to go faster than a lot of other positions (people put a premium on those); also, developmental players with a big upside, like WRs, are often taken a bit higher than they should. My point: very good players at Safety, Guard, and TE can slip down into the later rounds more easily.

If we were going to go after a Safety in the first round, we could probably trade down and maybe get an extra second or third round pick. Hmmmm.

We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

LOL shadow... yet you approve of Colby B. a 7th rounder being in our starting lineup... don\'t contradict yourself buddy... GAMEOVER!

Ask David Carr ROFLROFLROFL... about what? About how anyone can get to him with that poor line forcing him to make bad decisions? What is that going to prove lol!

ONCE AGAIN BELLAMY WAS BEATEN OUT FOR THE JOB... REPEAT HE WAS BEATEN OUT FOR THE JOB... REPEAT HE WAS BEATEN OUT FOR THE JOB... so obviously he isn\'t a project and people on the staff knows he has the talent...

Stop contradicting yourself buddy and maybe anything you say I\'ll take you a little more seriously. Otherwise LOL! what a funny guy!

We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

Where does all this talk about Watson being small come from?
I don\'t understand it...Watson is 6\'-1\", 246 lbs.
Here are the top MLB\'s in the league.
237 J. Armstead
245 Dan Morgan
243 Dat Nyguen
230 Zach Thomas
225 Shelton Quarles
234 Mark Simineau
230 Mike Peterson
245 Ray Lewis
247 Teddi Bruschi
262 Jeramiah Trotter
245 James Farrior
240 Antonio Pierce

Average Weight = 240.25 lbs

I don\'t think Watson needs to add 1 lb. He may need to strengthen up some, but he is the perfect size for a MLB in todays NFL.

We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

...call me crazy, but I think we have 2 solid young LB\'s in Colby and Courtney...
.. on the defensive line, we got pass rush but no run stop. I think we need a true nose tackle, and some coaching... (just to mention one example) I am tired of seeing Grant make the same mistake over and over again. Someone needs to teach the young man to hold his ground when it\'s a run... he\'s got a great pass rush, but outside pass rush (going outside the tackle) when the play is a run just about always gives the other team 5-7 yds, if not more...
.. I still think Tebucky is a liability out there...

.. on offense , definitely a true LT... I still think this 2 TE set is there to help both tackles because they can\'t hold their side on their own... if the Saints could get at least one solid tackle who doesn\'t need constant help to cover his side, , either left or right, it would be a great improvement...

We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

I say we get fred smoot for the cornerback positon draft davis as a safety and if we can grab johnson or one of the top linebakers with our first--we need a playmaking linebacker that can give us depth, we need a safety that can hit and cover, and we need a cornerback--fred smoot in FA, draft lb and safety early..focus the rest of our picks on o line, backupqb and backup rb.

We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

Danno, I think I remember you pointing out Watson\'s weight to me before - I\'ve always respected your view when it comes to player knowledge. What I meant was, and I should have said it better, is that he plays small. He backs up, he doesn\'t stick guys that often (he is a solid tackler though), and he\'s not so good at blowing up blocks. So, I guess we agree - he needs to be stronger (which is all that I meant). Good to point that out though, it was my fault for not saying what I meant very clearly.

T-R, nice point about Grant. I suggested around mid-season that we employ a defense that allows him to rush more often (where he has less gap responsibility), what do you think about that?

Also, I had never really considered the 2TEs as as help for the Ts. I don\'t think that is true, as Gandy is a true LT, and was considered a very fine replacement for Roaf by many in the industry when we got him. He\'s just getting older. However, your suggestion is an interesting one - I\'ll consider further.

baronm, I couldn\'t agree more! A CB and a playmaker LB would improve our defense a good deal. I still am not convince that we NEED a Safety. IMO Tebucky isn\'t that bad (not great mind you), and Mitchell still has a chance to be good (though little evidence is forthcoming for that).

We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

or it would allow us to utilize the te more in our offense.

We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

Kool, I agree with the LB part. But a CB is now way down on my list now.
I think the positions to upgrade that would impact this defense the most are...

1. SLB. I dont care how good Allen played down the stretch, the way he played the 1st half is enought to convince me we need help.

2. WLB. A Rookie 7th rounder claimed this spot by seasons end. Enough said. If they decide to move Watson here replace WLB with MLB.

3. DT. A solid 2-gap DT would allow Young to do what he does best. Shoot his gap and disrupt the backfield. He doesn\'t have to be the high-dollar stat guy, just a good run stuffing gap clogger.

4. FS. A ball hawking FS would be the icing on the cake if 1 thru 3 are done. Our CB\'s are solid enough and I think between Mitchell and Bellamy the need at SS falls below FS for now.

5. SS. Bellamy is aging, and Mitchell is still a relative unknown. I\'d like to see anouther youngster brought in to compete with Mitchell.

6.CB. The final piece of the puzzle and the last position I\'d address on defense. Another young CB to start grooming would be nice though.

We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

let me ask you a few questions about things you have said...since you are so willing to try to disprove whatever I say...let\'s begin..shall we...


\'\'He is bigger than Jones and Bellamy, as fast as Jones, and tackles better than both of them.

How can you prove that?...How do you know how well he can tackle..He has never started at Safety..and getting the big hits is much easier on Special teams...(and he hasn\'t had a whole lot of those either)..It is just not enough evidence to say how well he can play..because..you\'ve never seen him play...other than Pre Season..and Special teams...he has done nothing...and certainly not enough to even begin to compare to Harrison...

We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

Danno.

We agree on the first three on your list, definitely!

The difference among acquiring a FS, SS, or CB, to me is pretty negligible.

Bellamy would be ok if he didn\'t lose a beat, which he will. Tebucky, IMO, is not that bad - not great, but not bad. After McKenzie, do you really think we are ok at CB? I guess, I\'m not taht confident that Brown or Thomas is better than Tebucky, Bellamy, or Mitchell. This puts CB higer up than S for me, BUT ONLY MARGINALLY.

I think we\'re pretty close on this one.

In this thread, I was merely noting that a CB would improve our defense (of course, I suppose a Safety would too), when combined with a good LB.

What do you think about Colby? I don\'t really have much of an opinion myself. IMO he is better than Allen, and probably as good as Rodgers. That doesn\'t really inspire confidence. He does have heart though, and with some strength training he has the right size, right?

We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

That\'s kind of the point I was trying to get at...

We need a top 3 player..from whichever position they choose to draft..

LB is pretty much out of the question...Johnson is not going to be there..and Brooks went back to college..chances are slim we would get the sort of guy we would need to constitue spending a 1st round pick on in this position...

Cb\'s go much faster then Safety in the Draft..and while we may be able to get a top 7?..maybe ...I think we would be much better suited getting the number 1 Safety...and instantly improving a very neglected spot...

If we can\'t get a top 3 safety..we need a top 3 corner..I said that before..and I stand by it..I would be very pleased to see us land Jamaal Brimmer...not only is he one of the very best Safeties in the draft..he is one of the Best Defensive players in the Draft...and we have a very good chance of getting him..without having to trade up or anything like that

It would be an excellent pick..then..we still have the 2nd round picks..and the possibility of trading Howard, either in the draft..or somwhere in between...

We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

Jkool, on Colby, I know I sound like a broken record because I\'ve commented on him several times. But he has skills. The scouts knocked him because he wasn\'t strong enough, and got overpowered on running plays. But he\'s EXTREMELY fast, fastest time for a LB at the combine. Scouts said he just needed a year or more in a solid NFL strength/conditioning program. One scout said he would love to see how this kids plays after a couple years, another said he\'s too weak to ever play. So who knows?
He\'s got the size, speed and smarts, he just needs to get NFL strong. I think he was the kid who chased down Vick in the 1st game.

We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

I\'ve said enough already, go back and look at everything. Then take notes and see what I\'ve said and have not. Then stop contradicting yourself about low rounders with tons of talent. It\'s people like you who would draft Terrell Davis in the 6th round and cut him the year after. LOL what a funny guy, you crack me up. I can name HUNDREDS of players who were picked in the lower rounds, and when given the chance, they proved to be PROBOWL CALIBER PLAYERS. You obviously are a negative thinking type of person who can\'t see talent when it slaps you in the face.

One thing I can agree with you on is getting a top 3 player for whatever position... wait... but isn\'t that obvious? We do have a first round pick and OBVIOUSLY whoever we pick there has that type of talent... IT\'S THE FIRST ROUND and IT\'S THE 16th PICK.

[Edited on 27/1/2005 by papz]

We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

..on Grant, it baffles me... either he\'s not getting properly coached, or the defensive scheme is not there.. if they want Grant to rush all the time, fine, give him some support at the gap.. if he\'s not getting it that he needs to be patient and have position on running plays and just wants to rush all the time, fine, give him some support at the gap... but don\'t let the guy on his own.. he\'s a very good player, but he definitely needs coaching, either teach him to hold his ground and be patient on running plays, or give him some gap support...

..Gandy has been somewhat solid, no Willie Roaf, but solid... I just don\'t see why the 2 TE set if you don\'t really use the TEs in the passing game... maybe I\'m over-rationalizing the whole thing, I don\'t know... :)

We need LBs, Ts, DT, and S.
 

My current view on the 2TE set is that it was implemented to give us a slightly more balanced attack. Our runs wouldn\'t be quite as predictable and we could use the passing game to spread the field a bit for Duece. I think also the hype about Boo and having acquired Conwell (and needing a reason to justify that) have something to do with it.