dcat Posted April 17, 2020 Author Share Posted April 17, 2020 9 minutes ago, Gopher said: No worries. Thanks. The last part of my post was simply a suggestion, if we are indeed looking for a way to speed things up. That said, it's probably better to just stick to the original rules/plan than change it, even if it means we don't finsh Round 7 or whatever. the 90 minute clock is only for rds 1-3. 4-7 will have a 60 minute clock. Since we are lagging due to the weekend delay, maybe we should change the third round to 60 minutes? I'll listen to your opinions on it. There is still significant back and forth in trades for rd 3 so I'll go with the consensus on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 29 minutes ago, dcat said: the 90 minute clock is only for rds 1-3. 4-7 will have a 60 minute clock. Since we are lagging due to the weekend delay, maybe we should change the third round to 60 minutes? I'll listen to your opinions on it. There is still significant back and forth in trades for rd 3 so I'll go with the consensus on it. My two cents, after giving it some thought... Just leave it. I'm not sure how much changing the clock for Round 3 would really impact things. It may increase the chances that somebody misses their pick, but that's about it. Let's just try to get as much done and hope for the best. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 Looks like CHI's clock is now expired. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 I think changing the clock in Round 3 is a good idea. 60 minutes is a long window, people are gonna start to drop off around that time anyway, and you can leave a big board. It's not that hard. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcat Posted April 17, 2020 Author Share Posted April 17, 2020 Bears have a missed pick and can submit any time. If not submitted, then we will put in a consnsus pick. @CowboysDiehard is OTC and @Heymangold on deck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLCbear Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 sorry at pick #50 Bears take S Kyle Dugger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcat Posted April 17, 2020 Author Share Posted April 17, 2020 (edited) 2 minutes ago, SLCbear said: sorry at pick #50 Bears take S Kyle Dugger OK... just in time @CowboysDiehard 1 hr for the Cowboyzzzzzzzzzz Edited April 17, 2020 by dcat 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animaltested Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 Throwing this out there now, Seattle is always looking to trade down ; Both 59 and 64 on the table. Came at me with offers. Looking to add picks; FYI. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcat Posted April 17, 2020 Author Share Posted April 17, 2020 (edited) perfect choice for the Raiders. Ferrell on one end with Baun behind him (so he's a risk for some PED suspensions... no worries.... it's the raiders....). Where would they play him? WLB I'm thinking. I wonder where Baun would have been taken in this draft without the positive test? Did anyone pass on him because of that? Baltimore? Edited April 17, 2020 by dcat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 18 minutes ago, dcat said: perfect choice for the Raiders. Ferrell on one end with Baun behind him (so he's a risk for some PED suspensions... no worries.... it's the raiders....). Where would they play him? WLB I'm thinking. I wonder where Baun would have been taken in this draft without the positive test? Did anyone pass on him because of that? Baltimore? He went much earlier in the FFMD. I just don't like him as a prospect, speed rusher, doesn't offer much else. Good value pick if you're not down on him though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcat Posted April 17, 2020 Author Share Posted April 17, 2020 (edited) Just now, Daniel said: He went much earlier in the FFMD. I just don't like him as a prospect, speed rusher, doesn't offer much else. Good value pick if you're not down on him though. FFMD round 1 and 2 were before news of the failed drug test, IIRC. Edited April 17, 2020 by dcat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laxdad24 Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 52 minutes ago, dcat said: perfect choice for the Raiders. Ferrell on one end with Baun behind him (so he's a risk for some PED suspensions... no worries.... it's the raiders....). Where would they play him? WLB I'm thinking. I wonder where Baun would have been taken in this draft without the positive test? Did anyone pass on him because of that? Baltimore? If he was there this pick Baltimore was picking him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcb1213 Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 Bills would have taken baun here if he was available. Sniped Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swoosh Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 Pretty thrilled to be able to add Chaisson, Fulton, and Gallimore so far. I feel teams in this mock are a little too eager to trade down. I get it, it's fun to have a lot of picks, but if this were real I'd be doing backflips. I basically turned two fourths into a first, while sliding down in the second and third. Worked out for me as Gaillmore would've been a good pick at 47. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 I know who I'll pick, but if anyone wants to make it interesting, I'll consider trading down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.