Jump to content

Spinning Tires: Steelers 2021 Offseason and Beyond...


43M

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Dcash4 said:

Personally, I do not think the Steeler's believe in smoke screens (Just tomlins mentality doesnt allow me to think they do, but I do keep wondering if the push at RBs and how much we are hearing about it is one. 

In the 14 drafts for Tomlin and Colbert, we have taken a 4th year 4 times. Ziggy Hood at 32, Cam Heyward at 31, Jarvis Jones at 17, and Bud Dupree at 22 . So 2 as late as you can get in the first round at a vital position in our defense and 2 at a premium position that was desperately needed at the time. Bud was extremely raw at his position and Jarvis only had 3 seasons under his belt. 

I like both Etienne and Harris, but they both are true 4th year players who have over 700 touches in their college career. Etienne is 22, Harris 23 and the steelers average drafted 1st round age is just over 21. 

I don't know. This stuff is more feeling like a calling card for "Hey, if you want Etienne or Harris better get in front of us" kinda thing where we hope someone does so that other talent falls. 

Honestly I think differently here and that there was some learning from the aftermath of the Bell situation. Bring in an experienced college RB that will start day one, use them, then let them walk. 
 

Hence being ok with an older more experienced back. Now you got a guy that can play on day one, make an impact, and when it comes time to pay them they will likely have too many touches under their belt. 
 

Also as far as the touches thing too....look at some of the NCAA touches for some of the better RBs lately. It was high anyways. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, warfelg said:

Honestly I think differently here and that there was some learning from the aftermath of the Bell situation. Bring in an experienced college RB that will start day one, use them, then let them walk. 

Hence being ok with an older more experienced back. Now you got a guy that can play on day one, make an impact, and when it comes time to pay them they will likely have too many touches under their belt. 

Also as far as the touches thing too....look at some of the NCAA touches for some of the better RBs lately. It was high anyways. 

I'm pro the 5th year option for a RB for that specific reason as well, but breaking a mold for a non-premium position would be a little out of character. 

And the touches are high, but it's more the years of use I was looking at. Snell, Connor, and Bell all had high touches, but those were really 3 year guys. Of the last 5 RBs we have drafted, Snell, Bell, and Mcfarland were underclassmen. Connor was a 4 year, but that was because of his diagnosis and Samuels was a TE/WR/RB. 

When I put the math together for how they operate both via the 1st round and the position, something just doesn't add up to this point. Im pro taking either guy at 24, but I just keep wondering if they are showing their hand continually for a reason. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Dcash4 said:

I'm pro the 5th year option for a RB for that specific reason as well, but breaking a mold for a non-premium position would be a little out of character. 

And the touches are high, but it's more the years of use I was looking at. Snell, Connor, and Bell all had high touches, but those were really 3 year guys. Of the last 5 RBs we have drafted, Snell, Bell, and Mcfarland were underclassmen. Connor was a 4 year, but that was because of his diagnosis and Samuels was a TE/WR/RB. 

When I put the math together for how they operate both via the 1st round and the position, something just doesn't add up to this point. Im pro taking either guy at 24, but I just keep wondering if they are showing their hand continually for a reason. 

On the touches thing broaden your scope beyond the Steelers and look league wide. 
 

We just saw the last two years RB is still a premium position. I don’t see how that can be argued with. Now if you want to say there’s value at this position later then fine. But even then we’ve kinda sucked lately in finding that value. 

Like, I think anymore you are better drafting more established guys at IOL, IDL, RB, TE, DB. Maybe even off the line LBs. You just don’t have the time between shortened workouts, less workouts, less pad days, no two a days in pads to teach them things anymore. But QB, OT, WR, Edge...these rules set up well to draft a young guy and coach him up. 
 

They aren’t tipping their hand as well. You are kinda perceiving that because of the way that the media is covering the RB angle with running game. But take the broader scope for a second. Darrisaw and Fairley said the same thing. So did Parsons. As well as a few other 1st rounders we met with. They all said in person and zoom meetings. 
 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steelers don’t do smokescreens...Schefter is also saying it isn’t.

Its what caused them to lose William Jackson to Cincy.

The Steelers are clearly going to take a RB in the 1st 3 rounds.

They went to his pro day, very productive, Power 5 school and at a position of need.

Them only signing Ballage pre draft makes it obvious.

Edited by AFF
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, MOSteelers56 said:

Should have been when we lost Revis to the Jets all those many moons ago. 

In a way I’ll give them a pass on that one because that first round was so loaded with talent. Seriously. 17 of 32 made a Pro Bowl out of round 1. Plus...Revis would have been gone after his rookie contract because of how he handled contract demands. And Timmons was a really good player. 
 

I think they learned more from Jackson because even though he wasn’t great we panicked and took Burns way too early. The very next DB taken was Xavien Howard then Mackenzie Alexander. Even looking at a few “next picks” you got Kenny Clark, Jaylon Smith, Chris Jones. 

Edited by warfelg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, warfelg said:

On the touches thing broaden your scope beyond the Steelers and look league wide.

As I mentioned in my second post, it's more about the years of touches than the # itself. Practice with pop, play action where you get hit, runs called back on holds, etc....4 years of quality work vs 3 years is where the difference is. 

In broadening my scope of the league............ the last 5 drafts of the top 5 RB's taken, there are 7 total RB's of 25 that were 4th year guys. Only 2 (of eight) in the first round: Sony Michele and Rashaad Penny. 

Im talking about breaking the mold. Taking a 4th year guy at RB at 24 overall is breaking the mold for us and for the league. Hence, my questioning. 

29 minutes ago, warfelg said:

We just saw the last two years RB is still a premium position. I don’t see how that can be argued with.

I don't agree that RB it's self a premium position. RB's cannot stand up and stand out on their own, which is what I consider a premium position. Running back success relies on too many other factors. OC, QB, OL, etc. 

Put a top 5 RB on this team as if, we probably are not vastly different. Add an elite T, OLB/DE, CB, or QB and you instantly change things. 

There are premium players and great OC/situations...I do not agree the position itself is a premium position. Production is too replaceable situationally, especially against cost (draft or cash). 

44 minutes ago, warfelg said:

Like, I think anymore you are better drafting more established guys at IOL, IDL, RB, TE, DB. Maybe even off the line LBs. You just don’t have the time between shortened workouts, less workouts, less pad days, no two a days in pads to teach them things anymore.

I can agree with this in general, but drafting the bold at 24 means they have to be downright studs because history shows similar value in later rounds. 

46 minutes ago, warfelg said:

They aren’t tipping their hand as well. You are kinda perceiving that because of the way that the media is covering the RB angle with running game.

Sure, but that's also how the game works. Teams don't tweet "hey, we like Harris and are drafting him". They ride the media wave. Its kinda how that works....

Teams know steelers talk openly about improving run game, Tomlin/Colbert go to pro days at Clemson and Alabama to scout any number of players, Harris and Etienne openly talk about how they chatted with the Steelers, media carrier that water for them......then Teams like Miami start thinking about Harris at 18 and the Bills start thinking about trading ahead of the Steelers and all of a sudden you turned the 24th pick into the 17th (5 QB's you weren't going to get and 2 RB's you were not going to take) and then add in 2-4 receivers and its the 13th and all along you like the kid from UNC or Sermon in the second and get a better play that falls in the 1st. 

Again, I dont think the Steelers will do a smoke screen, and this is far more pre-draft chat fodder....but if they were gonna do a smoke screen, doing it at the RB position would be a great one and the things at least add up here that it might be (but probably isnt because Tomlin). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dcash4 said:

As I mentioned in my second post, it's more about the years of touches than the # itself. Practice with pop, play action where you get hit, runs called back on holds, etc....4 years of quality work vs 3 years is where the difference is. 

In broadening my scope of the league............ the last 5 drafts of the top 5 RB's taken, there are 7 total RB's of 25 that were 4th year guys. Only 2 (of eight) in the first round: Sony Michele and Rashaad Penny. 

Look past this little scope.  This is players picked in rounds 1 & 2 and their college rushes (* = 4 year player, ^ JuCo/2 year player, # = 1 year starter):

2017:

McCaffery 632, Cook 687, Mixon^ 300, Kamara^ 210, Hunt* 782, Fournette 616

2018:

Barkley 671, Penny* 488, Michel* 590, Chubb* 758, Ronald Jones* 591

2019:

Josh Jacobs# 251, Sanders# 276

2020:

Edwards-Hellair 370, Swift 440, Jonathan Taylor 926, Cam Akers 586, JK Dobbins 725, AJ Dillon 845

So it seems there that you could say there's a real sweet spot in the 600-750 touch range to be able to project a RB into the pros, regardless of how many years they stayed in school.  Only exceptions being Kamara and Sanders there in terms of being good despite the lack of rushes.

Etienne - 686

Harris - 638

So despite being 4 year players, they are really reflecting more what 3 year guys do based on splitting carries early and only being the guy for about 2 years.

Quote

Im talking about breaking the mold. Taking a 4th year guy at RB at 24 overall is breaking the mold for us and for the league. Hence, my questioning. 

I think it more 'breaks the mold' because, especially in Etienne's case, the mold was broken in staying rather than anything else.

Quote

I don't agree that RB it's self a premium position. RB's cannot stand up and stand out on their own, which is what I consider a premium position. Running back success relies on too many other factors. OC, QB, OL, etc. 

By this logic the only premium positions are QB, LT, CB1, Pass Rusher 1.  Every position in football is dependent on another one.  In reality the issue here that you could argue is the difference between the best and average RB isn't that great compared to other positions, but then the counter is the difference between average and bottom is HUGE IMO compared to other positions.

Quote

Put a top 5 RB on this team as if, we probably are not vastly different. Add an elite T, OLB/DE, CB, or QB and you instantly change things. 

There are premium players and great OC/situations...I do not agree the position itself is a premium position. Production is too replaceable situationally, especially against cost (draft or cash). 

Disagree here.  I honestly need to reference nothing but the fact that we thought our OL was great and thought Connor was a "poor man's Bell", and that turned out to be so wrong.

Quote

I can agree with this in general, but drafting the bold at 24 means they have to be downright studs because history shows similar value in later rounds. 

Not quite as high of a correlation as you think TBH.  It happens for about 1-2 guys per draft, but they tend not to last.  In fact on on the top 10 active rushers only 2 were not a top 2 round pick.  So that to me is a premium because it's a premium pick.  Teams expect 1st and 2nd round picks to be major players ASAP.

Quote

Sure, but that's also how the game works. Teams don't tweet "hey, we like Harris and are drafting him". They ride the media wave. Its kinda how that works....

Teams know steelers talk openly about improving run game, Tomlin/Colbert go to pro days at Clemson and Alabama to scout any number of players, Harris and Etienne openly talk about how they chatted with the Steelers, media carrier that water for them......then Teams like Miami start thinking about Harris at 18 and the Bills start thinking about trading ahead of the Steelers and all of a sudden you turned the 24th pick into the 17th (5 QB's you weren't going to get and 2 RB's you were not going to take) and then add in 2-4 receivers and its the 13th and all along you like the kid from UNC or Sermon in the second and get a better play that falls in the 1st. 

Again, I dont think the Steelers will do a smoke screen, and this is far more pre-draft chat fodder....but if they were gonna do a smoke screen, doing it at the RB position would be a great one and the things at least add up here that it might be (but probably isnt because Tomlin). 

I mean....everything is a smoke screen.  Would I love for what happened to come into play? Sure. Heck even if Harris and Etienne are there I would maybe trade down to get extra assets from the Bills and take the one that falls to us.

The only reason the media is carrying the water of Tombert at Clemson and Alabama's media days because of the talk of fixing the rush game.  They will cover the RB's too because they are "sexy" picks.  But here's the other 1st round guys that we've done all the same with that the media isn't talking about: Jaycee Horn, Jalen Mayfield, Micah Parsons, Jayson Oweh, Christian Darrisaw, Caleb Farley, Asante Samuel Jr, Zaven Collins. Tombert Pro days: Clemson, Georgia, Auburn, Florida State, Alabama 1, Penn State, Michigan, Ohio State, Notre Dame.  So why no talk about potential 1st round picks from the 7 other schools that they visited? Because they aren't positions that are sexy to talk about when it comes to the Steelers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, warfelg said:

So it seems there that you could say there's a real sweet spot in the 600-750 touch range to be able to project a RB into the pros, regardless of how many years they stayed in school.  Only exceptions being Kamara and Sanders there in terms of being good despite the lack of rushes.

Intersting numbers for that. But ill make my third mention of it not being about the number of carriers, but the years associated with those guys college careers of being an active ball carrier. (its my fault, I never should have mentioned touches in my first post -- I was meaning to describe years of touches). 

I appreciate the work, but my issue is years of work, not one/two year windows of high carry marks at age 19 and 20. A 23 year old has more football wear and tear on him than a 21 year old. Are you getting a guys prime at pick 24? I'm not sure at this position. 

And again, I like Harris and Etienne for us at 24, but I'm just asking the question you need to ask of a RB in general. The league values younger rushers as they can better control their prime years. I definitely agree with the 5th year option for RB's, but I want 5 years of their prime. IMO age at RB is truly an important factor. From high school to college, lotta wear and tear on those tires by this point. 

54 minutes ago, warfelg said:

By this logic the only premium positions are QB, LT, CB1, Pass Rusher 1

IMO, yes. Tackle can probably go RT or LT at this point and is more about who they defend against (and is lower on the tier), but these are the positions they change the landscape of your team. 

53 minutes ago, warfelg said:

In reality the issue here that you could argue is the difference between the best and average RB isn't that great compared to other positions

Which is why I am talking smoke screen potential at 24 and taking their runner in the second. 

58 minutes ago, warfelg said:

I honestly need to reference nothing but the fact that we thought our OL was great and thought Connor was a "poor man's Bell", and that turned out to be so wrong.

IMO your reference here is confirming my stance. Conner was good when the OL was good and was not when the OL was not. The RB success was driven by others. Bell was past his prime (at age 25), but his awful situation lead to awful production. If we had a better OL, Conner would have produced better numbers. If we had a better RB, we probably see near the same. 

1 hour ago, warfelg said:

In fact on on the top 10 active rushers only 2 were not a top 2 round pick.  So that to me is a premium because it's a premium pick.  Teams expect 1st and 2nd round picks to be major players ASAP

Did you copy and paste this from me in the past ;)

I have made this argument numerous times against the "you can draft a RB anywhere" thought. But the money spot recently is the 2nd round -- when top rushing talent falls because the NFL doesn't value the position as much. 

Semantics, but that's not a premium pick to me...its a value pick. You are getting a guy who might be the 25th best player in the draft at 33+ because the NFL doesn't value the pick. I wouldn't pass on the 18th best player in the draft to take the 25th best because he is a RB and we need one, if that's how the draft fell - and that's kinda what I am suggesting is going to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, warfelg said:

QB situation: Get ready for Ben in 2022 unless someone unexpectedly falls.  Although I have seen some stories talking about how we are poised to rip is all apart next offseason, but I just don't think that's going to happen TBH.  I think it's more likely Ben will be back between being too good to suck into a top 5 pick and not willing to trade multiple 1sts to move up.

 

Draft: I keep bouncing around on my thought here.  Part of me thinks that Harris would be a good pick.  Part of me really hopes that one of these better LT/CB's get pushed down the board.  Those guys will have a bigger and better impact IMO than Harris/Etienne.  To me if Darrishaw/Fairley/Harris/Etienne were all there at 24, the only thing I would swap in that order is Harris/Etienne.

I truly believe 2022 is up in the air for Ben and the Steelers. Ben may say he wants to come back after next season, but will the Steelers want him back for another season? For Ben, he would need stay healthy (which I think is the biggest question) and will he still have the “competitive fire” to want to compete as he will have a revamped O-Line. 
 

I would imagine Steelers would like to bring in another qb arm into training camp as they typically go in with 4. Do you think they target a qb in this draft? It sounds like they have some level of interest in the qb’s that could potentially go on day 2 and 3. I am intrigued by Davis Mills, but it doesn’t seem like Steelers have expressed much interest (couldn’t find anywhere if they sent anyone to attend Stanford’s pro day). I say all this as, the qb situation is a huge question mark heading into the 2022 season. I would imagine Steelers may look at another mid-round selection to compete for Mason and Dwayne’s spot.

 

I am not advocating for a mid round pick to be spent on another qb as history tells me Steelers have not been competent at drafting the position (Ben being the outlier), but I certainly would not be surprised if a guy they like is nabbed in rd 3 or 4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Dcash4 said:

Intersting numbers for that. But ill make my third mention of it not being about the number of carriers, but the years associated with those guys college careers of being an active ball carrier. (its my fault, I never should have mentioned touches in my first post -- I was meaning to describe years of touches). 

I appreciate the work, but my issue is years of work, not one/two year windows of high carry marks at age 19 and 20. A 23 year old has more football wear and tear on him than a 21 year old. Are you getting a guys prime at pick 24? I'm not sure at this position. 

And again, I like Harris and Etienne for us at 24, but I'm just asking the question you need to ask of a RB in general. The league values younger rushers as they can better control their prime years. I definitely agree with the 5th year option for RB's, but I want 5 years of their prime. IMO age at RB is truly an important factor. From high school to college, lotta wear and tear on those tires by this point. 

Honestly a few things here:

Touches matter more than age.  As I laid out in some of these cases the guys did not touch the ball much their 1st or 2nd year.  Harris 23, Etienne 22.  Take a look at some breakout year ages of running backs (age they came into the league in paratecies): Bell 21 (20), McCaffrey 22 (21), Chubb 23 (22), Kamara 23 (22), Mixon 22 (21), Barkley 21 (21), Henry 25 (22), Cook 22 (24-ish), Jacobs 21 (21), Jones 23 (25), Ingram 25 (22).  So basically if you look, those two are at the age for the most part that RB's tend to break out and hit a 4-5 year prime.

But the bigger issue to me is touches and usage.  Yes a 23 year old can have more football wear and tear, but it's more about the touches and regulating them based on looking at some of the above.

PFF has done the research across the board and the conclusion they have come to is a RB's prime is 23-27/28 years old.  If you get one younger than that, they haven't typically had enough touches to really gain the necessary vision and pass-protection.  In fact most players primes are 24-30.  The exceptions are QB (26-34) and LT (24-33).  Outside of that their research showed if you want a player that will produce faster, pick a guy slightly older.  If you want to mold a guy, pick someone slightly younger.  

Quote

IMO, yes. Tackle can probably go RT or LT at this point and is more about who they defend against (and is lower on the tier), but these are the positions they change the landscape of your team. 

Which is why I am talking smoke screen potential at 24 and taking their runner in the second. 

I don't think it's a smoke screen.  I think there's legit interest, but with 5 QB's potentially going in the first 5 picks and interest in players being more mixed than usual (can't express how much the combine plays into knowing this better which is why the Steelers don't need to use smoke screens) they are just doing across the board interest.

Quote

IMO your reference here is confirming my stance. Conner was good when the OL was good and was not when the OL was not. The RB success was driven by others. Bell was past his prime (at age 25), but his awful situation lead to awful production. If we had a better OL, Conner would have produced better numbers. If we had a better RB, we probably see near the same. 

I think this is an agree to disagree situation.  Conner's Y/A was 4.5, 4.0, 4.3.  The difference is attempts per game falling 16.5, 11.6, 13.0.  Conner was never really "good" per say but rather his touches were high early on in replacing Bell.  Combine this with injuries and you get a quickly overrated peak.

But you kinda missed my point there.  It's not that he was good when the line was good and not when it was bad, but rather he's the same RB regardless of the line.  So because he's not that good, then the base for when the line isn't good is far lower of a quality run game.  VS a better RB who can give you a better base line run game even with a worse line means a better line will make it even greater.  I feel like this is a lot like the Dupree argument in that he's got a baseline of a bottom 1/3 starting EDGE, but when he's across from Watt on the right side, he's a top 15 EDGE.  I rather have the guy that's a top 30 edge on his own but only elevates to a top 20 status because you know even if something happens to the situation there's only so much slide there will be.

Quote

Did you copy and paste this from me in the past ;)

I have made this argument numerous times against the "you can draft a RB anywhere" thought. But the money spot recently is the 2nd round -- when top rushing talent falls because the NFL doesn't value the position as much. 

Semantics, but that's not a premium pick to me...its a value pick. You are getting a guy who might be the 25th best player in the draft at 33+ because the NFL doesn't value the pick. I wouldn't pass on the 18th best player in the draft to take the 25th best because he is a RB and we need one, if that's how the draft fell - and that's kinda what I am suggesting is going to happen.

Nope, but again most of what I'm saying is coming from quotes of GM's.  Rounds 1&2 are premium picks because you expect starters from these roungs.  So yes, if the 25th best player slides to 33+, it's still a premium pick.  Value picks by a GM definition is 5th+ round.  Tom Brady, Antonio Brown.....those are value picks.  Juju, that's a premium pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, warfelg said:

Take a look at some breakout year ages of running backs (age they came into the league in paratecies): Bell 21 (20), McCaffrey 22 (21), Chubb 23 (22), Kamara 23 (22), Mixon 22 (21), Barkley 21 (21), Henry 25 (22), Cook 22 (24-ish), Jacobs 21 (21), Jones 23 (25), Ingram 25 (22).  So basically if you look, those two are at the age for the most part that RB's tend to break out and hit a 4-5 year prime.

I would be interested to see where the loss or prime comes with most of these guys -- because that is my worry. Some of these guys are way too young to know yet. But maybe it's just 6 of 1 and half dozen of the other of missing prime to early vs losing it too early. Ive said I fully agree with the 5-6 year turn and burn of a first round RB to use em and lose em, but I want those years to be prime. Bell fell off at 25. Im less worried about a 20-21 year old losing his prime at 25 because I get 5 years. A 23, I only get 2. 

28 minutes ago, warfelg said:

Conner's Y/A was 4.5, 4.0, 4.3.  The difference is attempts per game falling 16.5, 11.6, 13.0.  Conner was never really "good" per say but rather his touches were high early on in replacing Bell.

We can stick with agree to disagree, because I don't understand the correlation between number of carriers and YPC and how that effects having to avoid 2 defenders in the backfield each rushing attempt or having no counter attack to springing everything to the outside with puller blockers who sucked. 

I don't argue a better running back could have been better than James. But if he was at 4.3 with our total rushing attack last year, it's not like someones coming in and averaging 6.0. The change wouldn't have been vastly different, which is my argument. How many of those guys in the top 10 of rushing didn't have a quality O-Line? Robinson at 4.5? Montgomery at 4.3? Even just looking at YPC average league leaders there is one consistency -- good O-Line and/or good coordinators/schemes. 

51 minutes ago, warfelg said:

So yes, if the 25th best player slides to 33+, it's still a premium pick.

We are taking semantics again, but you are calling the pick itself premium....that doesn't mean the player/position is. By that -- Terrell Edmunds would be a premium player because we took him with a premium pick. 

Quarterback is a premium position which means when a guy like Mac Jones might rank 25th overall in terms of talent but he is taken at 3rd overall because of the position premium. 

That's the same where a running back who might be a top 20 talent falls to the end of the first round/early second round because the lack of premium on his position. 

QB premium, moves guys up. RB lack of premium moves them down....hence the value in the second -- which is where all the studies tell you the home-runs are being hit in quality of player at that position. You are getting a first round value at a second round cost. 

There's a different between a premium asset and a premium player/position. The value is where that player is projected/should go vs where you get them. You have crap value when you take Terrell Edmunds in the first, but its great value when you take David Decastro at 24. That's where the Steelers have found the sweet spots on WR. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man the more I watch of JOK the more I’d be happy with him in the first. His coverage ability and versatility would make him such a good fit for our defense and he would be a perfect pairing with Bush on passing downs. He is fearless and hits like a freaking tank, has great closing speed, and has a knack foe turnovers which are qualities we typically look for. So much speed and versatility on the field with Bush, JOK, Minkah, Sutton etc. He kinda reminds me of Derwin James when he was at FSU.

My updated big board of semi-realistic targets would be

1. Darrisaw 

2. Etienne

3. Najee Harris

4. JOK

5. Farley

6. Javonte Williams

7. Teven Jenkins

8. ASJ

9. Zaven Collins

10. Friermuth

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, bigben07MVP said:

Man the more I watch of JOK the more I’d be happy with him in the first. His coverage ability and versatility would make him such a good fit for our defense and he would be a perfect pairing with Bush on passing downs. He is fearless and hits like a freaking tank, has great closing speed, and has a knack foe turnovers which are qualities we typically look for. So much speed and versatility on the field with Bush, JOK, Minkah, Sutton etc. He kinda reminds me of Derwin James when he was at FSU.

My updated big board of semi-realistic targets would be

1. Darrisaw 

2. Etienne

3. Najee Harris

4. JOK

5. Farley

6. Javonte Williams

7. Teven Jenkins

8. ASJ

9. Zaven Collins

10. Friermuth

Thoughts?

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...