Posts: 2,302
Threads: 114
Reputation:
16494
Joined: May 2015
Location: Boise, Idaho
(04-03-2021, 09:17 PM)jason Wrote: I feel like Andrew Luck, both Bosas, Chase Young, Trevor Lawrence, AJ Green, Jamal Adams,and Julio were all pretty close to sure things (is in Lawrence's case). I'm sure I'm forgetting a few, but barring catastrophe, you know for a select few guys.
Forgetting a few?
Today I'm TEAM SEWELL. Tomorrow TEAM PITTS. Maybe TEAM CHASE. I can't decide, and glad I don't have to.
Posts: 2,076
Threads: 28
Reputation:
9632
Joined: May 2015
Location: North Appalachia
No, but he is the cutesy nepotist play who has a buddy who plays here so it's a sure thing that they'll draft him.
Posts: 5,598
Threads: 62
Reputation:
38730
Joined: May 2015
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
(04-03-2021, 09:35 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: I guess Taylor was at Florida’s pro day just for Toney. Kind of bothers me they wouldn’t even consider such a special prospect like Pitts.
Smoke screen to prevent someone from trading in front of us with Atlanta to take Pitts?
Atlanta's biggest need is QB (in the future) and defense.
Tis the season where you have to take everything with a grain of salt.
Posts: 16,866
Threads: 70
Reputation:
58889
Joined: May 2015
Location: Richmond, VA
(04-03-2021, 07:36 PM)ochocincos Wrote: No player is a sure thing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Of course there are.
Otherwise there never would have been a Suck For Sam campaign for Darnold, and look how Clowney and Reggie Bush both surpassed the expectations in the NFL...
Posts: 16,714
Threads: 417
Reputation:
95713
Joined: May 2015
(04-03-2021, 09:35 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: I guess Taylor was at Florida’s pro day just for Toney. Kind of bothers me they wouldn’t even consider such a special prospect like Pitts.
Why would they seriously consider him though? If you have 3 players, Sewell, Chase and Pitts, who are arguably the top 3 non QB's in the draft, and 2 of them play positions of need for the team, why spend a lot of time on the guy that doesn't play one of those positions? They are all 3 Special...... I'm sure they would love to have Pitts, they just need Chase and/or Sewell more. They know they are taking Sewell or Chase, and no way to get Pitts in the second. Waste of time spending a lot of time with him.
Posts: 27,855
Threads: 349
Reputation:
238048
Joined: Aug 2016
(04-04-2021, 11:08 AM)Sled21 Wrote: Why would they seriously consider him though? If you have 3 players, Sewell, Chase and Pitts, who are arguably the top 3 non QB's in the draft, and 2 of them play positions of need for the team, why spend a lot of time on the guy that doesn't play one of those positions? They are all 3 Special...... I'm sure they would love to have Pitts, they just need Chase and/or Sewell more. They know they are taking Sewell or Chase, and no way to get Pitts in the second. Waste of time spending a lot of time with him.
Because Pitts has a good chance of being the biggest impact player out of the 3. And if you don’t think TE is a huge need idk what to tell you. We got a combined 2 TD’s from our entire TE group last season despite throwing the ball a ton. That’s horrendous. Sample is never going to be much of a threat in the passing game, and Uzomah is coming of a torn Achilles. And after those two we have literally nothing.
Posts: 18,617
Threads: 462
Reputation:
118131
Joined: May 2015
Location: Nashville, TN
(04-03-2021, 08:51 PM)Clark W Griswold Wrote: I just don’t know about TEs. He’s talented but I am not as high on him as most. I know he’s a better prospect then Gresham but I remember hearing similar things about him before the Bengals took him. He was pretty good but not a game changer.
Gresham was much slower than Pitts, and bigger.
Gresham was what you think of when you think traditional TE role.
Also, people really undervalue Gresham in the NFL because of his timely mishaps.
Keep in mind he put up a high of 737 yards, 5 TDs on 94 targets in 2012.
737 yards would have been 3rd most by a TE last year behind only Kelce and Waller.
Note too that Kelce and Waller both got 145 targets last year, which was why they produced so much. Feed Pitts that many targets and he’ll likely put up 1100+ yards too, as would Chase.
Zac Taylor 2019-2020: 6 total wins
Zac Taylor 2021-2022: Double-digit wins each season, plus 5 postseason wins
Zac Taylor 2023: 9 wins despite losing Burrow half the season
Zac Taylor 2024: Started 1-4. If he can turn this into a playoff appearance, it will be impressive.
Sorry for Party Rocking!
Posts: 5,598
Threads: 62
Reputation:
38730
Joined: May 2015
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
(04-04-2021, 11:08 AM)Sled21 Wrote: Why would they seriously consider him though? If you have 3 players, Sewell, Chase and Pitts, who are arguably the top 3 non QB's in the draft, and 2 of them play positions of need for the team, why spend a lot of time on the guy that doesn't play one of those positions? They are all 3 Special...... I'm sure they would love to have Pitts, they just need Chase and/or Sewell more. They know they are taking Sewell or Chase, and no way to get Pitts in the second. Waste of time spending a lot of time with him.
I'm as big a fan of the concept of getting Sewell as anyone around here but if Pitts is sitting there at 5, you have to give serious pause and consideration to pulling the trigger on him.
He's a weapon unlike anything else on the team. Think of how good our offense was in the red-zone back when we had a healthy Eifert and then imagine a guy that should actually be better then Eifert was, that certainly is something you need to consider at 5.
Posts: 3,425
Threads: 238
Reputation:
14204
Joined: Oct 2016
(04-05-2021, 01:22 AM)Murdock2420 Wrote: I'm as big a fan of the concept of getting Sewell as anyone around here but if Pitts is sitting there at 5, you have to give serious pause and consideration to pulling the trigger on him.
He's a weapon unlike anything else on the team. Think of how good our offense was in the red-zone back when we had a healthy Eifert and then imagine a guy that should actually be better then Eifert was, that certainly is something you need to consider at 5.
If Pitts is taken at 5, then all of a sudden other DCs facing the Bengals have a dilemma.
"Who do we put our 1 and 2 CBs between Pitts, Boyd,or Higgins?" And now your OLBs cant just tee off and blitz.they have to respect the threat of Pitts attacking the 2nd level.
Now you throw in releasing Mixon on arrow routes, wheel route
Line him up in a bunch formation.
You could have Mixon Perrine and Pitts on the field at the same
Time.
Pitts really opens up more options for the other targets
Posts: 5,598
Threads: 62
Reputation:
38730
Joined: May 2015
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
(04-05-2021, 10:54 AM)impactplaya Wrote: If Pitts is taken at 5, then all of a sudden other DCs facing the Bengals have a dilemma.
"Who do we put our 1 and 2 CBs between Pitts, Boyd,or Higgins?" And now your OLBs cant just tee off and blitz.they have to respect the threat of Pitts attacking the 2nd level.
Now you throw in releasing Mixon on arrow routes, wheel route
Line him up in a bunch formation.
You could have Mixon Perrine and Pitts on the field at the same
Time.
Pitts really opens up more options for the other targets
I think the thing about Pitts that I like the best beyond any of that, is just the points you can get in the red zone.
Being such a big target, makes him ideal down there. The only guy we have like that now, is Tate. Getting 6 over getting FGs can really change a game.
|