Draft Day

I've been thinking and want some other people's perspective. But we all know the OL is a mess, but with our running back situation being a little tacky. Should we go OL heavy RB? Safety help, develop guys for ageing players? I want to know what you people want to happen.

Sent from my A462C using Tapatalk

I'd be fine with O-line, RB, or pass rushing DT. Really any position other than QB, Safety, and TE. All depends on the talent available.

Best player at OL,CB or DL in the first. After that we need to focus in on OL, with a sprinkle of everything else minus QB and maybe TE

Few things:

1. Everyone understands the OL is a mess. If this were any other franchise, or business for that matter -- this long running failure would cost job(s). As it stands now, I would hope that we don't address OL at all until there is a meaningful shake up somewhere in the process. Because we've been drafting OL prospects early and/or often with pitiful results.

To me it's a pretty binary question:

1. Can we determine/recognize OL talent?

If no, then we need to alter the process. This means either the input is faulty (what Cable wants), or scouting (interpretation of wants).

If yes it gets stickier:

2a. Are we unwilling to move up to get the necessary talent (e.g. Jack Conklin, Zach Martin)?

If yes, we'd need to get more aggressive to get our guys. That's high level decision making. That's PCJS.

If no, then there's really nothing we can do about that. Deals take willing partners.

2b. We can identify the talent. We just can't develop it.

If yes, then this is on Cable exclusively. Would mean we are getting what we want -- but can't get them to their potential.


It's a huge problem looming IMO. Quite obviously, the cleanest/easiest culprit is Cable. It's easy (although maybe not accurate) to assume that he is failing in one or two areas: Identifying talent and/or developing it. Maybe he isn't a particularly good assessor of talent and he lays out the OL grades totally wrong from the start. If this is the case, then he should be removed from the assessment function.

If it's a development problem, then he just simply has to go.

These are questions we need to resolve. Because as is, any draft capital we expend is basically wasted. A classic case of throwing good money after bad. Our drafts since 2013 forward are littered with painful misses. The quixotic quest to fix the OL is a primary culprit of that.

I don't expect Carroll to relieve Cable. And yet, I can't logically divorce Cable as the primary reason why our OL -- and in turn our recent drafts as a whole -- have been broken. It's not that there haven't been quality players available for us. It's that we opt for other bad options instead or we don't fully recognize how good the ones we pass on are.

There is the hope, that the current OL can evolve into a strength for this team. It's hard to see that considering it's current state. I would have expected it to be better than it is at this stage. Although I did say at the start of the season this OL won't really start to take shape until after training camp in 2017. Not all good veterans tore it up their rookie years. Most took until their second season (Sherman, Thomas, Chancellor are prime examples).

At this point though, I'm not thrilled about letting the same draft process consume yet another day 1/2 pick.

This draft is deep at DB, and has really intriguing WR talents that should be available in R2. Also good with pass rushers.

Ideally, I hope we go:

R1: DL
R2: WR
R3: DB

With some double dipping somewhere at DB and DL. The pool is too good this year. But however we go, I want us to stop fighting the board. We need the next core of talent. I would rather get the next Earl Thomas this year even if it means he's riding pine for most of the next 2 seasons while we have the real deal.

This needs based drafting system is currently allowing great talents -- pro bowl talents -- to pass us by while we get basically a journeyman scrub quality rookie who nobody expects us to consider signing to a second deal.

I would hope we stop using the draft to fill needs. Use UFA as a band aid for that. Start getting difference makers in the draft regardless of where they play. This team is now getting old. Injuries should be expected. Attrition is upon us already. There aren't but a very small handful of positions that should be considered solved.

I don't expect us to change our stripes and do this. The original question was what I wanted to have happen. I expect we'll dump another top 100 pick (maybe two) into imminently failed OL prospects and have yet another 'maybe in year two' draft. These are becoming all too familiar.

One thing to mention, previous years we were strapped on cap room - not the case in 2017. We will have the 6th most cap flexibility in the league, so I imagine some of our bigger needs will be addressed in FA and trade.

Once that becomes clearer, so does our draft board. For example, if we were to add a couple pieces to the OL via FA, suddenly WR/RB is a bigger possibility in R1. Conversely if they went out and got an Alshon Jeffrey (I doubt this happens, but just saying), WR is no longer a possibility that early.

The standard they have done for the past few years is not draft in the first round. Trade down for a couple picks and usually their guy is there or within striking distance. That said, I would probably expect a defensive back or defensive line.

On Offense, not sure if that line we have at the moment is done scrapping yet. We have not seen any consistency in it as of yet and I believe there is still some rosterchurn available for them to be complete. I think it will be within what we have or one or two outside players. I still think that they have not had time to see each others skillsets and abilities to block or man assignments. I dont see a change until they figure that out. That being said, I would not expect to see a draft on the oline until the 5th round or later. I think a backfill is what they will be seeing happen with only one exception....LONG SNAPPER. LOL.

I think we have to go OLine early and often. There are a few names that I wouldn't mind us taking if they fall to us. If Dalvin Cook somehow falls to the late first round, I'd be more than happy to take him. I wouldn't mind taking Sidney Jones either, it would solidify the secondary for quite some time.

Well before we all go guessing and putting time into this, we need to know if the Front Office feel they need upgrades on the O line, we see them as a problem, they may see them as young and learning and here for a long time. That a years experience and a off season to fine tune technique and watch last years film will make them a much improved unit choke, choke, cough, cough.

I think until we get a better idea on how they see them we're not going to get a good feel for the draft.

chris98251":2g10pl9b said:

Well before we all go guessing and putting time into this, we need to know if the Front Office feel they need upgrades on the O line, we see them as a problem, they may see them as young and learning and here for a long time. That a years experience and a off season to fine tune technique and watch last years film will make them a much improved unit choke, choke, cough, cough.

I think until we get a better idea on how they see them we're not going to get a good feel for the draft.

Click to expand...

I wouldnt be surprised if they felt fine about everything other then Sowell/Gilliam. I think the consist swapping of those 2 indicates there not happy with the RT spot. I hope they address the tackle position early and I'm surprised they haven't giving Rees Odhiamubo a shot there yet.

The top of the draft is particularly strong at EDGE, S, and RB.

Putting the OL to the side for a minute, we are close to being in a dire situation at edge rusher. Clark has shown he can be a contributor rushing from both inside and out, but he's not yet a consistent dominator. Bennett and Avril are on the wrong side of 30 and reaching the end of their contracts. Aside from those three there's not much left - Jefferson could make an impact inside but that's about it. I'm in favor of using the biggest slice of our draft capitol on 1-2 top pass rushers, which lines up very well with the talent in this draft.

At S I think we need to add some young talent. When Kam and Earl are healthy this might not seem like an area of need, but we play so much nickel now that your 5th and 6th DBs are critical. Add injuries to the equation and it makes a lot of sense to spend at least one pick in the first 3 rounds on a DB.

With young backs like Rawls, Prosise, and even Collins, I'd be surprised if we went RB early unless there are strong concerns about the long-term durability of those guys. If healthy they look like they could be a good group, with Rawls as the primary, Prosise on passing downs, and Collins as a guy that can handle a lot of carries should Rawls need a rest. Pope is in the mix as well.

I would like to echo the statement about cap space - we have a chance to make 2-3 pretty big moves in free agency. I would like to see that money spent a) offensive line, and b) possible a SAM/Leo. There are some very good guards near their prime that may be available in FA - if we can build a very solid middle I think that would buy some time for Fant, Gilliam, Odhiambo, and possibly Ifedi to develop in to decent tackles with upside.

I personally would like to see:
Draft:
1. EDGE
2. S
3. RB/WR
Free Agency
1. OL (1-2)
2. SAM/EDGE

chris98251":3h9r9aqc said:

Well before we all go guessing and putting time into this, we need to know if the Front Office feel they need upgrades on the O line, we see them as a problem, they may see them as young and learning and here for a long time. That a years experience and a off season to fine tune technique and watch last years film will make them a much improved unit choke, choke, cough, cough.

I think until we get a better idea on how they see them we're not going to get a good feel for the draft.

Click to expand...

Obviously you did take your happy pills today. I was thinking the same thing. It takes a while to get a good group of team mates to work together. Several times in the same under the gun situations to make it happen. I was in a tri-person situation that was necessary for all 3 to work in tandem...it takes a lot. On the other side it was 2 persons that took more than the trifecta to make it happen. I feel that it may be just getting them in a realm that they know all and trust each other to make it happen. That may be in a week or so or next season. I dunno yet.

getnasty":kh9f40j6 said:

I wouldnt be surprised if they felt fine about everything other then Sowell/Gilliam. I think the consist swapping of those 2 indicates there not happy with the RT spot. I hope they address the tackle position early and I'm surprised they haven't giving Rees Odhiamubo a shot there yet.

Click to expand...

Someone can probably speak to this better than I can, but when Odhiambo was drafted didn't something come out that he was considered strictly a "left side" guy?

RT or of so Ifedi can kick out to RT.

Attyla the Hawk":bnkj7fxg said:

Few things:

1. Everyone understands the OL is a mess. If this were any other franchise, or business for that matter -- this long running failure would cost job(s). As it stands now, I would hope that we don't address OL at all until there is a meaningful shake up somewhere in the process. Because we've been drafting OL prospects early and/or often with pitiful results.

To me it's a pretty binary question:

1. Can we determine/recognize OL talent?

If no, then we need to alter the process. This means either the input is faulty (what Cable wants), or scouting (interpretation of wants).

If yes it gets stickier:

2a. Are we unwilling to move up to get the necessary talent (e.g. Jack Conklin, Zach Martin)?

If yes, we'd need to get more aggressive to get our guys. That's high level decision making. That's PCJS.

If no, then there's really nothing we can do about that. Deals take willing partners.

2b. We can identify the talent. We just can't develop it.

If yes, then this is on Cable exclusively. Would mean we are getting what we want -- but can't get them to their potential.


It's a huge problem looming IMO. Quite obviously, the cleanest/easiest culprit is Cable. It's easy (although maybe not accurate) to assume that he is failing in one or two areas: Identifying talent and/or developing it. Maybe he isn't a particularly good assessor of talent and he lays out the OL grades totally wrong from the start. If this is the case, then he should be removed from the assessment function.

If it's a development problem, then he just simply has to go.

These are questions we need to resolve. Because as is, any draft capital we expend is basically wasted. A classic case of throwing good money after bad. Our drafts since 2013 forward are littered with painful misses. The quixotic quest to fix the OL is a primary culprit of that.

I don't expect Carroll to relieve Cable. And yet, I can't logically divorce Cable as the primary reason why our OL -- and in turn our recent drafts as a whole -- have been broken. It's not that there haven't been quality players available for us. It's that we opt for other bad options instead or we don't fully recognize how good the ones we pass on are.

There is the hope, that the current OL can evolve into a strength for this team. It's hard to see that considering it's current state. I would have expected it to be better than it is at this stage. Although I did say at the start of the season this OL won't really start to take shape until after training camp in 2017. Not all good veterans tore it up their rookie years. Most took until their second season (Sherman, Thomas, Chancellor are prime examples).

At this point though, I'm not thrilled about letting the same draft process consume yet another day 1/2 pick.

Click to expand...

I agree, that Cable is the main problem with our poor offensive line play. He seems to have waaaaaaay too much input on which offensive lineman the team drafts. Then he can't coach them up to be a functional unit. Carroll has unwavering loyalty to his coaches, which may be his biggest flaw as a coach.