Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 23 of 23

Thread: Michael Floyd

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,920
    vCash
    1437
    Given that we really don't know what we're going to have, I think I'd like to see us just draft the absolute best prospect/best overall prospect in regards to their position. If Claiborne isn't there I don't want to see us "settle" for whoever they're calling the #2CB. But I personally think Floyd is the best WR in the draft over Blackmon, but I still don't think we need it.

    I'm thinking either Kuechly (LB), Coples (DE), or DeCastro (G) with the first. All three of these players would definitely make an impact, and either of the defenders could help with potential 3-4 packages. My opinion, Kuechly (imo the sure fire best LB in the draft) could do 3-4 packages as an ILB, or he could just do rotations with Davis for OLB. Also, I think he's a good insurance plan if Beason turns out to be worse off than expect. Coples has some downside, but I think he has a huge upside that we can't overlook.

    As far as the 2nd pick, I think just pick the player who you think will absolutely play in the NFL. This way, I think you're almost guaranteed to have two great additions. Then, 4th pick needs to be CB. Josh Norman, Donnie Fletcher, and Jamell Fleming could all be available, and even though they're not big names, they have potential.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    43,277
    vCash
    7100
    Quote Originally Posted by manbearchef View Post
    Given that we really don't know what we're going to have, I think I'd like to see us just draft the absolute best prospect/best overall prospect in regards to their position. If Claiborne isn't there I don't want to see us "settle" for whoever they're calling the #2CB. But I personally think Floyd is the best WR in the draft over Blackmon, but I still don't think we need it.

    I'm thinking either Kuechly (LB), Coples (DE), or DeCastro (G) with the first. All three of these players would definitely make an impact, and either of the defenders could help with potential 3-4 packages. My opinion, Kuechly (imo the sure fire best LB in the draft) could do 3-4 packages as an ILB, or he could just do rotations with Davis for OLB. Also, I think he's a good insurance plan if Beason turns out to be worse off than expect. Coples has some downside, but I think he has a huge upside that we can't overlook.

    As far as the 2nd pick, I think just pick the player who you think will absolutely play in the NFL. This way, I think you're almost guaranteed to have two great additions. Then, 4th pick needs to be CB. Josh Norman, Donnie Fletcher, and Jamell Fleming could all be available, and even though they're not big names, they have potential.
    You would take a pure guard at #9 overall? DeCastro is a huge reach that early in my opinion. Not nearly enough positional value because he will never play tackle in the league.
    On Cam Newton:

    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    So it's official.

    This jerk off is going to be the first QB taken in the first round (or maybe the first 5) in the modern era to throw less than 300 passes at DI level. and he might go #1 overall.


    hahahahahahahahahahahaha

    Nfl scouting is a joke.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,925
    vCash
    1500
    I would take DeCastro at #9 overall, no doubt. I'm tired of the "only a guard" argument. He's the best player at his position, not just this year, but over the last several years. He would be able to step in and replace Wharton without missing a beat. Sure, I've seen mocks where he's taken around #20, but I've also seen mocks where he's taken around #11. If the only reason he's not a top-10 pick is because of his position, I'm perfectly okay with "reaching", though I don't consider it a reach: he's the single player who has the best opportunity to come in and make an impact for this team right away and for the next 10 years.

    Sometimes you gotta break away from the so-called rules. If we had followed the rules last year, we might be drafting Luck this year.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    6,214
    vCash
    1500
    If Claiborne and Kuechly are both gone... I’d be okay with DeCastro. Not thrilled, but okay. It is true that D2 is the best guard to come along in a long time. I mean when you have a guy that will start day one and be all pro level, you can’t be mad at it.

    BRING BARRETT TO CAROLINA, GETTLEMAN!

    MMA FIGHTERS: WERDUM, JONES, SONNEN, MAYHEM, BELFORT, HENDRICKS, MAYNARD, ALDO, WINELAND

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    43,277
    vCash
    7100
    Quote Originally Posted by N.E.PanthersFan View Post
    I would take DeCastro at #9 overall, no doubt. I'm tired of the "only a guard" argument. He's the best player at his position, not just this year, but over the last several years. He would be able to step in and replace Wharton without missing a beat. Sure, I've seen mocks where he's taken around #20, but I've also seen mocks where he's taken around #11. If the only reason he's not a top-10 pick is because of his position, I'm perfectly okay with "reaching", though I don't consider it a reach: he's the single player who has the best opportunity to come in and make an impact for this team right away and for the next 10 years.

    Sometimes you gotta break away from the so-called rules. If we had followed the rules last year, we might be drafting Luck this year.
    This isn't a rule, it's common sense. Guards are not that valuable. You can find quality starting guards for cheap on the market. I don't care how good of a prospect he is, he's only a ****ing guard. There's always a chance a player doesn't develop, and the risk/reward for a guard is frankly not that good. How do you KNOW he's going to step in and replace Wharton? Frankly, I think we've addressed our starting guard situations in an adequate manner at this point, and I certainly wouldn't do something stupid like reach for a guard in the top 10 of the draft.

    As far as your last sentence, I'm not sure if drafting Luck this year is supposed to be a good thing or a bad thing.
    On Cam Newton:

    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    So it's official.

    This jerk off is going to be the first QB taken in the first round (or maybe the first 5) in the modern era to throw less than 300 passes at DI level. and he might go #1 overall.


    hahahahahahahahahahahaha

    Nfl scouting is a joke.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    43,277
    vCash
    7100
    Quote Originally Posted by NCBoSoxfan21 View Post
    If Claiborne and Kuechly are both gone... Iíd be okay with DeCastro. Not thrilled, but okay. It is true that D2 is the best guard to come along in a long time. I mean when you have a guy that will start day one and be all pro level, you canít be mad at it.
    A statement like this is pure insanity. All-pro level? You think DeCastro from the moment he steps into the league a top 2-ish guard in the whole NFL? I sure as hell do not, I need to see any player prove something on an NFL field before I'm going to call him an all-pro player.
    On Cam Newton:

    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    So it's official.

    This jerk off is going to be the first QB taken in the first round (or maybe the first 5) in the modern era to throw less than 300 passes at DI level. and he might go #1 overall.


    hahahahahahahahahahahaha

    Nfl scouting is a joke.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Raleigh
    Posts
    43,297
    vCash
    1675
    NEEED MOARRRRRRRR Running Backs!!!!!!!!!

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,920
    vCash
    1437
    Quote Originally Posted by homestarunner93 View Post
    This isn't a rule, it's common sense. Guards are not that valuable. You can find quality starting guards for cheap on the market. I don't care how good of a prospect he is, he's only a ****ing guard. There's always a chance a player doesn't develop, and the risk/reward for a guard is frankly not that good. How do you KNOW he's going to step in and replace Wharton? Frankly, I think we've addressed our starting guard situations in an adequate manner at this point, and I certainly wouldn't do something stupid like reach for a guard in the top 10 of the draft.

    As far as your last sentence, I'm not sure if drafting Luck this year is supposed to be a good thing or a bad thing.
    While I do agree that guards are a dime a dozen, I see nothing whatsoever that would make me think he won't be a good player. I'm not crowning him an all-pro before he plays a down, but if he's the BPA and fits a potential need, I see no wrong in taking him. People always say "Insert name will be an all-pro..." but I couldn't care less. Patrick Peterson got in the PB (as well as Cam, Dalton, and a ton of others who shouldn't have been), anyone can get in. But I think he looks like he will be an above average player if you assume he continues to progress.

    Again, you can say the exact same thing about every player. I'd just hate to miss out on a great player because we thought it was too early.

    ATM, I'd rather see an OG drafted at 9 than a DT. Same risk/reward in my opinion.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •