How would getting a 1st rd 3rd WR change our scheme?

[Carne Asada]

We would be moving from heavy sets to 11 personnel at least 50% the time. I guess we would borrow some from the Rams' playbook. Much more duo and ISZ, I know, yuck but our passing game!

Brian Thomas Jr carried the rock a little at LSU, too. That also means he might do so a bit here.

It would really add a whole dimension to our playbook which has its ups and downs too, but the way our offense seems to get figured out adding such dimension would be really helpful.

 

[Atila]

what did they figure out about our offense?

The part where we had no offensive line left so just pressure the QB and it will all fall apart?

It’s crazy how so many people keep wanting more shiny toys. You got Hill, Waddle, Achane, Mostert… there is maybe 1-2 other teams in the entire NFL with the quality of offense skill players we have.

OUR PROBLEM IS OFFENSIVE LINE.

But yeah… let’s talk about more receivers.

 

[Carne Asada]

what did they figure out about our offense?

The part where we had no offensive line left so just pressure the QB and it will all fall apart?

It’s crazy how so many people keep wanting more shiny toys. You got Hill, Waddle, Achane, Mostert… there is maybe 1-2 other teams in the entire NFL with the quality of offense skill players we have.

OUR PROBLEM IS OFFENSIVE LINE.

But yeah… let’s talk about more receivers.

If they can't cover our WRs long enough for the pass rush to hit home they'll have to devote more bodies to coverage.

I think FO and coaching suscribe to this theory.

It was a waste rolling the bums we did as 3rd WRs.

 

[Feverdream]

Mark me down as a 'look for a big receiver in the third through fifth rounds' guy.

Yes, I'd like to work another WR into the rotation, but if we do this right, our new #3 in targets will be Jonnu Smith and our #4 in targets might even be a RB.

I think we need a receiver who possesses a DIFFERENT SKILL SET than Waddle and Hill. Offerdahl mentioned Johnny Wilson tonight... we've discussed the Rice kid... Cornelius Johnson, Luke McCaffrey...

There are several X receiver types who should be available on the third day.

 

[Carne Asada]

Mark me down as a 'look for a big receiver in the third through fifth rounds' guy.

Yes, I'd like to work another WR into the rotation, but if we do this right, our new #3 in targets will be Jonnu Smith and our #4 in targets might even be a RB.

I think we need a receiver who possesses a DIFFERENT SKILL SET than Waddle and Hill. Offerdahl mentioned Johnny Wilson tonight... we've discussed the Rice kid... Cornelius Johnson, Luke McCaffrey...

There are several X receiver types who should be available on the third day.

I don't love the OL prospects that'll be available. It just feels like they would either ride the bench at LT or start at OG.

Just because Tunsil did it it doesn't mean you'll find a year 1 iOL starter who can also start at LT next year.

If we pick Barton or Fuatanu or some other tweener I think we would end up with iOLs we wouldn't give a second contract to.

If we pick Latham or some other LT prospect, I'm afraid they would end up red shirting their rookie year.

An Edge or WR have better immediate impact than a LT and better long term positional value than an iOL.

 

[Feverdream]

I don!t love the OL prospects that'll be available. It just feels like they would either ride the bench at LT or start at OG.

Just because Tunsil did it it doesn't mean you'll find a year 1 iOL starter who can also start at LT next year.

If we pick Barton or Fuatanu or some other tweener I think we would end up with iOLs we wouldn't give a second contract to.

If we pick Latham or some other LT prospect, I'm afraid they would end up red shirting their rookie year.

An Edge or WR have better immediate impact than a LT and better long term positional value than an iOL.

I have absolutely zero problem with a redshirt year for an OT... none. I use the first round to try to identify 10 year players, not to find immediate help.

That said... with Armstead's injury profile... and Wynn's even worse history of being injured every single year, I really doubt that a guy like Latham, Guyton, or Mims wouldn't see some (or even a lot of snaps).

 

[Avigatorx]

If they can't cover our WRs long enough for the pass rush to hit home they'll have to devote more bodies to coverage.

I think FO and coaching suscribe to this theory.

It was a waste rolling the bums we did as 3rd WRs.

You have it backwards.

3 receivers cant get open fast enough when there are 7-8 defenders dropping into coverage. It's a numbers game. Opposing D's got to Tua rushing only 3-4.

You need to stop their 4 with your 5-6 linemen and force them into blitzing (or at least rushing 5-6 guys) to open up receivers.

We consistently lost the numbers game at the point of attack. Fix that and you fix the offense.

 

[Ryan1973]

I have absolutely zero problem with a redshirt year for an OT... none. I use the first round to try to identify 10 year players, not to find immediate help.

That said... with Armstead's injury profile... and Wynn's even worse history of being injured every single year, I really doubt that a guy like Latham, Guyton, or Mims wouldn't see some (or even a lot of snaps).

Sorry but I couldn't disagree with you more. Whoever they pick in the first round needs to be able to make an immediate impact or it will be a wasted draft pick. I don't want anybody picked in the first round to redshirt for a year. They don't have a lot of draft picks to begin with so they can't afford to pick someone who will be on the bench for a year. Most players picked in the first round are usually instant starters.

 

[Mach2]

Sorry but I couldn't disagree with you more. Whoever they pick in the first round needs to be able to make an immediate impact or it will be a wasted draft pick. I don't want anybody picked in the first round to redshirt for a year. They don't have a lot of draft picks to begin with so they can't afford to pick someone who will be on the bench for a year. Most players picked in the first round are usually instant starters.

That's a short sighted view, IMO.

When you look a little deeper, not all first rounders are equal. A top 10 pick is seen as having a ceiling/talent much superior to a bottom third selection. You can also assume a top 10 pick is going to a bad team with a lot of holes, where there likely isn't a lot of quality ahead of him.

I'm not sure "Most players picked in the first round are usually instant starters" is accurate to begin with, but I am sure that is not true of players picked in the bottom of the round.

 

[Ryan1973]

That's a short sighted view, IMO.

When you look a little deeper, not all first rounders are equal. A top 10 pick is seen as having a ceiling/talent much superior to a bottom third selection. You can also assume a top 10 pick is going to a bad team with a lot of holes, where there likely isn't a lot of quality ahead of him.

I'm not sure "Most players picked in the first round are usually instant starters" is accurate to begin with, but I am sure that is not true of players picked in the bottom of the round.

I bet it is more often than not. Just looking a last year's draft as an example. The Ravens drafted Zay Flowers at #22, the Vikings drafted Jordan Addison at #23, the Bills drafted Dalton Kincaid at #25, the Eagles drafted Nolan Smith at #30, and the Chiefs drafted Felix Anudike-Uzomah at #31. All those players made a huge impact as rookies. The bottom line is most teams that draft a player in the first round aren't going to redshirt him for a year.

 

[Pacer]

I don't love the OL prospects that'll be available. It just feels like they would either ride the bench at LT or start at OG.

Just because Tunsil did it it doesn't mean you'll find a year 1 iOL starter who can also start at LT next year.

If we pick Barton or Fuatanu or some other tweener I think we would end up with iOLs we wouldn't give a second contract to.

If we pick Latham or some other LT prospect, I'm afraid they would end up red shirting their rookie year.

An Edge or WR have better immediate impact than a LT and better long term positional value than an iOL.

I am ok if the second round pick is a redshirt (quality) LT. Amegadjie from Yale is one with prototypical size and traits but needs a year to learn footwork etc. He might be there at 55.

First round, if not a trade down, should probably go to defense if that's where the most value is expected.

 

[Fin-Loco]

It's all going to depend on who is there. BTJ I take 100% of the time if he gets to 21. If not, is someone there OL wise that is worth it? Or, can you make a deal to trade back a bit, maybe give up something from next year for a swap of 2nds and pick up a third? Snag Leggete or McConkey and then still be able to get Beebe in round 2?

I think we need to both upgrade the OL and upgrade WR3. There are ways of doing both by the time we're done with round 2.

I don't make defense an early priority. Our offense is where our bread is buttered with Hill playing out of his skull and Waddle definitely in a prove it mode. Get the offense to be a consistent top offense and even field a top 20 D and we SHOULD be in the big dance.

 

[TFK]

I highly, highly doubt we go WR in round 1. We need to strengthen the O line. That can't even be intelligently debated.

That being said, out offense desperately needs to add the non speed dimensions we were sorely lacking last year. We need a big possession receiver who can get open when our speed is locked down, we need a bruising RB who can wear down defenses and lock up games for us, and we need a TE who will play a role in the offense that includes more than blocking. All we had was speed last season, and when teams lock down our speed, we had nothing else to offer them.

Whether we draft these players, pick up more free agents, or they are already on our roster (Jonnu, Brooks, etc), if we go into the season with the same one dimensional offense that we did last season, we can expect no better than last season's results.

 

[Danny]

what did they figure out about our offense?

The part where we had no offensive line left so just pressure the QB and it will all fall apart?

It’s crazy how so many people keep wanting more shiny toys. You got Hill, Waddle, Achane, Mostert… there is maybe 1-2 other teams in the entire NFL with the quality of offense skill players we have.

OUR PROBLEM IS OFFENSIVE LINE.

But yeah… let’s talk about more receivers.

I want OL with our top pick but getting a WR in the 2nd round would make me happy as well

 

[Danny]

That's a short sighted view, IMO.

When you look a little deeper, not all first rounders are equal. A top 10 pick is seen as having a ceiling/talent much superior to a bottom third selection. You can also assume a top 10 pick is going to a bad team with a lot of holes, where there likely isn't a lot of quality ahead of him.

I'm not sure "Most players picked in the first round are usually instant starters" is accurate to begin with, but I am sure that is not true of players picked in the bottom of the round.

I'm pretty sure any OL we draft with our top pick would start day one at guard when you look at what we have now.....people think Wynn is so amazing but the guy can’t stay healthy. We can get OL that can start as a rookie and still play for 10 years