Wasn't a fan. With draft grades!

[BenZoo2]

(05-01-2017, 12:10 PM)Benton Wrote: Sweet sassafras. I don't get the offensive line comments.

I've been a vocal minority for months saying we shouldn't pick OL. I'm glad we didn't pick OL. As I've been saying, no one we pick on OL this year would've stepped in and helped anyway. Aside from that, our OL should be better just by the fact that they've had more time to play together.

There's maybe one guy in the draft that could've competed for an OL spot in a couple years. I was OK with not going OL, but I wouldn't have been upset with one or two of those guys either if we had addressed the thing I've been complaining about for years....

The defensive line.


I would disagree with the bold.

This was a strong defensive class. We bypassed that and went offense early, taking a guy that's got plenty of good competition and a guy that is going to depend on how well the OL improves. I like Mixon as a back, but if we don't get some consistency on the line, he's not doing much better than Hill.

And, again, I'm not sure why everyone is focusing on OL here...

It was a strong def class. You could say that hooker or lattimore were among the bpa at 9. Cb wasn't a pressing need this year. They have money locked in to the safety position. The bengals obviously decided to go with speed and athleticism at the skill positions. Hell, burkhead had the best non Cleveland rushing game of the year.

I mentioned o line cuz it seemed you were disappointed we didn't address it earlier.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk