(08-31-2017, 01:48 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Never liked the Dielman pick. I don't really see anything in him besides the fact he's played some OT along with C. I can understand why he was expected to be a UDFA by various sites/scouts.
Seems like a good PS candidate.

(08-31-2017, 01:53 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Spent a lot of time on the ground at Utah. 

(08-31-2017, 01:55 PM)ochocincos Wrote: So he's Bodine?

(08-30-2017, 09:40 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Why is it okay to cut Elliot (5th rounder) and not Dielman?

He hasn't actually played a snap yet has he? I missed the very end of the last game so I didn't see if he got in.

If he hasn't played, shouldn't IR be a viable option at this point?

EDIT:

Apparently he has played a little bit. Well then...would still be an odd use of a roster spot.

(08-31-2017, 02:03 PM)grampahol Wrote: I don't see Elliot getting cut simply because he's going to be financially cheaper, $90,000 per season cheaper than Bullock and pretty close in competition. It's really tough to cut Bullock, but it's dollars and cents we're talking about.. 

(08-31-2017, 02:05 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: I just dont get how, they seemingly gave Bullock all the chances at big kicks and know they had a kicking problem BULLOCK WAS A PART OF, then draft a kicker in the 5th round (1st STer off the board) and yet now he may not even make the roster?

I feel like if you drafted a specialist that high, he should all but be a lock over a guy who was part of a problem you had the year before...something about it just seems odd. 

(08-31-2017, 02:21 PM)grampahol Wrote: He wasn't around long enough to be a problem last season. He misses one kick coming straight off the street.. That's not part of the problem in the grand scheme of things.  But to the bean counters of the world he is.. 

(08-31-2017, 02:05 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: I just dont get how, they seemingly gave Bullock all the chances at big kicks and know they had a kicking problem BULLOCK WAS A PART OF, then draft a kicker in the 5th round (1st STer off the board) and yet now he may not even make the roster?

I feel like if you drafted a specialist that high, he should all but be a lock over a guy who was part of a problem you had the year before...something about it just seems odd. 

(09-02-2017, 10:02 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Throwing out my 53 before the announcements:

QB: Dalton, McCarron (2)
RB: Hill, Bernard, Mixon, Carson (4)
WR: Green, LaFell, Boyd, Ross, Erickson, Malone, Core (6)
TE: Eifert, Kroft, Hewitt, Uzo (4)
Oline: Ced, Boling, Bodine, Hopkins, Fisher, Smith, Westerman, Johnson, Deilman (9)

DL: Johnson, Atkins, Sims, Dunlap, Smith, Billings, Glasgow, Willis (8)
LB:  Vigil, Rey, Evans, Lawson, Minter, Nickerson, Dawson (7)
DB: Jackson, Kirkpatrick, Williams, Iloka, Smith, Dennard, Russell, Shaw, Fej, McRae (10)

ST: Elliott, Huber, Harris (3)

After waivers: Uzo goes to IR and we bring back Core

McRae to PS after week 1 and Adam comes back

Nickerson and Dawson have a 3 week battle before Burfict comes back.

(09-03-2017, 12:01 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Marv ball.

Spend a draft pick on a guy, then give him and the guy you picked up last year--who isn't all that great for his career--strict, every other kicks--then pick the proven average guy because he did better in preseason, even though he's never been known as anything close to clutch.