Report: Burrow pushing for Bengals to draft Chase

[Whatever]

(04-12-2021, 12:34 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: 1. I see. So you're arguing against a careless statement made by Bengals67? Just because he was technically incorrect about any QB "always" getting 4 seconds, it seems kinda petty to focus on "always" to ignore the validity of the overall point.

2. I don't want to be locked in, but we don't have to take a guy in the 2nd. I was being facetious when I said that. My point was that the Steelers clearly didn't view WR3 (based on targets) to be such a dire need that they burned a 1st on it...let alone the 5th overall pick...and our duo of Higgins/Boyd is every bit as good as their duo of Johnson/Schuster was/is. They probably only took the guy because he fell to them, as you point out.

As for that draft class, there are many who view this WR class in a similar light:

https://www.pff.com/news/draft-2021-nfl-draft-ranking-wide-receiver-prospects-lsu-jamarr-chase




I could list more if you want, but we all love PFF, right?

3. Guys only punch with the wrong hand, etc if they switch sides. That wouldn't be an issue with Reiff if we played him at LG. Although he's switched sides in his NFL career successfully before. For every coach who says "it's not as easy as people think", I can list 5 players who switched successfully. It's not guaranteed to work out, but - again - you're making it seem far more dubious than it actually is.

I have little doubt that someone as talented and hard working as Sewell could switch sides.

4. No, I meant 2016...because that's when the line fell off...along with Andy's deep ball numbers. I remember because Andy's deep passing was a constant debate on here and I always had to look up the numbers. Unfortunately, my source for deep stats (ESPN) removed them, I guess. But I remember Dalton's deep stat decline coincided with the fall of the o-line.

Fwiw, AJ Green played 35 games between 2016 to 2018, and was still an elite player when he played.

5. What? No. The WR class is overall deeper than the overall OL class. Yes, you try to get need and value to intersect, but it doesn't always work out that way. A smart GM would know this. You can't plan for what the other 31 teams will do on draft day. One run on o-lineman (for example) would throw a giant wrench in your plans.

------------

I knew you'd bring up TE's or RB's. We're talking WR's here. You even mentioned WR's specifically when you were talking about Brady, and the current "era". You weren't talking about TE's or defense, or any other position...and even if you were, the argument here isn't to draft Pitts...is it?

I'll just ignore the rest. You seem like you're getting frustrated, bringing up stuff about the Pats cheating, etc...as if that has anything to do with our debate.

This feels like it could go on forever, so I'm going to do you a favor and bow out. Have a good night dude, no hard feelings. Good debate.

1.Except I even downplayed his statement in my response to consistently.  So, if we both acknowledge he made an incorrect statement, why are you continuing to debate it?

2.Except the Steelers didn't have a 1st round pick last year due to the Fitzpatrick trade.  So they spent the 1st pick they had on a WR when they already had a Pro Bowler in JuJu.

The guy's Top 10 in his article has 4 guys from this class vs 6 from last year's, which tells you right there that this year's class isn't as good.  

3.For every guy who moved without a drop off, there's a bunch of guys who couldn't.  That's why coaches and players say it's not so easy, because they remember all the failures.  Sewell has been knocked for his work ethic and when asked about playing G said he would try to prove that he's a LT, which doesn't sound like he wants to switch.

4.Well, Whit and Zeitler didn't leave until '17, which is what most if us consider the line collapsing.  AJ majorly dropped off from '17 on.

5.Again, the numbers for OL vs WR in the Top 50 are 13 to 8.  Top 100 is 20 to 14 in favor of OL.  Top 150 is 26 to 24 in favor of OL. WR doesn't pull ahead until you go down to the Top 200, which is in the middle of round 6, where you're looking at project players and depth guys.  We need immediate starters at both spots.  The best chance to accomplish that is with picks in the Top 50 and we realistically don't have much of a chance of grabbing one at either position outside of the Top 100.  There are more OL in the Top 50 than WR's.  It's mathematically more likely that a run on WR's will take you out of a position to get one at a reasonable value in 2 than a run on OL.   We pick 38th in the second.  Even if 1 out of every 3 picks to that point is OL, there should still be one there.  

No, you stated "weapons" repeatedly in reference to the point you made about the Pats and Eagles.  If you just meant WR's, you should have said WR's.  You opened that particular discussion up to include RB's and TE's when you said "weapons."

I'm not frustrated with you or the discussion.  I'm just tired of people repeatedly bringing up a team that we all know taped opponents and stole signals as their fallback to the argument that you need elite weapons to compete for the SB.  The fact that they stole signals, jammed the defensive headsets, and videotaped opponents (including us) is very pertinent, as it gave their offense an unfair advantage to help overcome their lack of weapons.