- Joined
- Feb 10, 2014
- Messages
- 5,278
- Name
- Dave
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #41
I absolutely agree we want game changers. But personally I've always had a "BPA informed by Need" policy. So, IMO, Clowney and the QBs are out because we have those positions entirely stocked with high 1st round players. However, I would approve of taking one if the talent differential between them and other top picks was massive. (Although Clowney and Manziel both have massive red flags to me.)Unlike many, Im not really an advocate of drafting a certain position (sure I've joked around in threads) but my overall stance has been and remains, out of the top talent available, our scouting department needs to determine if they think one of those guys will be a game changer and if so, proceed accordingly. That is a luxury made easier by the fact we have 2 first round picks.
Thats the reason to me, both Clowney, and Watkins are still in play. If we think Clowney is going to be Julius peppers, or Watkins is megatron, you have to take them and make it work. I just want impact players/game changers on our team, by my account we only have 1 true player that fits that mold in Robert Quinn.
The tackles wouldn't be quite the same scenario as I am taking Long's injury history into account and they can be moved to other positions easier than Clowney could (and much easier than a QB could unless we want Manziel at receiver or something).
But #1 WR we don't have at all, and I do think it could help the offense. (I know some disagree with me, and that's their right.) So if talent is roughly equal, that's my priority. But talent could adjust the list.
And if we don't do SOMETHING for Guard, OL line need in general could be much more than any of us should be really comfortable with. Even if we did get Robinson/Matthews AND a top guard... two rookie guards... I'm not quite as prepared to declare the OL fixed just yet.