PDA

View Full Version : Tony Hunt 2nd round


htownfoozball
12-28-2006, 01:08 AM
A big RB at 230lbs who should run in the 4.55 range. Can help in the passing game and is a decent blocker. Just think of this...Dayne and Hunt RB duo. Defenses would have to go against 2 power backs all game long which would really open up the passing game. He's faster and quicker than Dayne, and should Dayne get injured, we still have a power back.

Goldeagle
12-28-2006, 01:16 AM
Do you think the team will do this though? I would think they would have a change of pace back if they were to draft anyone?

threetoedpete
12-28-2006, 01:18 AM
Ah nope ...much rather have Wright Frezno St. in the fifth or Curtis Brown BYU in the sixith or the Pittsburgh St guy in the seventh..but hey that's just me. Or Jackie Battle as a FA. We don't have to spend a day one pick on a RB. There will be all shapes and sizes on the board...all day long... every round. I promise.

htownfoozball
12-28-2006, 01:21 AM
it was just an idea. why go with a big back and a small back when you can try and run the defense over every down? hunt can still run big plays from time to time, and he's alot faster than some people give him credit for. we can still keep taylor on the team. just cut lundy who hasnt done jack for the most of the season.

threetoedpete
12-28-2006, 01:31 AM
And it is a good thought. But...we have two bangers already in Lundy and Dayne. I think whoever they pick will be a prospect/practice squad guy. I'm just bassing this on the way Kubiak and Shanahan have treated the previous guys they've picked up at running back. Like the old E.F Hutton add, they've make the guy eaaarn it. The carrat stick bing playing time. I could be dead wrong no doubt. But from my tree, if they take one...it'll be as a prospect or a change of pace back. Adrian Peterson, with him slipping might, might mind you, change that. But I really don't think so. This guy has a system. His system works...why would he change it ? You got a guy here who had the cajones to pass up Bush and the towns favorite son. My book says this guy does things HIS way. He may go down. But he'll go down doing what he knows works on the NFL level. I dunno and I ain't in the loop. Just what I believe.

Goldeagle
12-28-2006, 02:12 AM
it was just an idea. why go with a big back and a small back when you can try and run the defense over every down? hunt can still run big plays from time to time, and he's alot faster than some people give him credit for. we can still keep taylor on the team. just cut lundy who hasnt done jack for the most of the season.

I see your reasoning and I dont know why teams dont do it?

htownfoozball
12-28-2006, 02:26 AM
probably because defenses have a general idea on what the play will be if it is indeed a run play.

actually...adrian peterson can really pound it in and run guys over and consistently run off big plays...pair him up with dayne so neither will be exposed to injury and you really have a killer duo. if peterson is available...go for him.

but i really do like the idea of 2 big backs alternating and pounding the defense 50+ times per game. would really wear down defenses and open the passing game through play action. would limit david carr's throws and would thus limit the mistakes he would make. hunt is no slouch and can pound it in and can run off a big play every now and then. use dayne in short yardage situations and use hunt as the relative "change of pace" back, even though its not a big change, the idea is to have 2 big bruisers. could defenses really keep up with bringing down 2 backs who weigh an average 240lbs?

Goldeagle
12-28-2006, 02:30 AM
probably because defenses have a general idea on what the play will be if it is indeed a run play.

actually...adrian peterson can really pound it in and run guys over and consistently run off big plays...pair him up with dayne so neither will be exposed to injury and you really have a killer duo. if peterson is available...go for him.

but i really do like the idea of 2 big backs alternating and pounding the defense 50+ times per game. would really wear down defenses and open the passing game through play action. would limit david carr's throws and would thus limit the mistakes he would make. hunt is no slouch and can pound it in and can run off a big play every now and then. use dayne in short yardage situations and use hunt as the relative "change of pace" back, even though its not a big change, the idea is to have 2 big bruisers. could defenses really keep up with bringing down 2 backs who weigh an average 240lbs?

Heh, the key to beating the Colts was not Mario Williams but Ron Dayne lol! Add another guy his size and the Colts might have to forfeit their next game.

Other than Calvin Johnson, Adrian Peterson is the only guy I will accept and not freak out over if we drafted them. Other than that, Im all about the OL

htownfoozball
12-28-2006, 02:35 AM
the problem with addressing the OL is that there arent any OL worth a 2nd round pick unless brown or blalock fall. its a really weak year for OL with alot of 3rd round worthy OL being taken in the 2nd because of the lack of depth in the class.

painekiller
12-29-2006, 01:40 AM
Heh, the key to beating the Colts was not Mario Williams but Ron Dayne lol! Add another guy his size and the Colts might have to forfeit their next game.

Other than Calvin Johnson, Adrian Peterson is the only guy I will accept and not freak out over if we drafted them. Other than that, Im all about the OL

If you really think the Colts do not address the run defense you are mistaken, that would put Dungy in the hot seat for sure. What good is the $20M QB if he can't get on the field.

Also adding a offensive lineman at picks 6-10 looks to be a moot point. And Johnson will be gone by there also. And why do you want to pay top 10 money to a RB? You can get a Norwood type in the 3rd every year.

cadahnic
12-30-2006, 01:46 PM
A big RB at 230lbs who should run in the 4.55 range. Can help in the passing game and is a decent blocker. Just think of this...Dayne and Hunt RB duo. Defenses would have to go against 2 power backs all game long which would really open up the passing game. He's faster and quicker than Dayne, and should Dayne get injured, we still have a power back.

Why do we need two huge, slow RBs? We need someone with some speed and big play ability in there, and I sure wouldn't use a 2nd rounder on him. If he's available in the mid-late 2nd day I would consider him, but outside of that no.

cuppacoffee
12-30-2006, 03:38 PM
.....This guy has a system. His system works...why would he change it ? You got a guy here who had the cajones to pass up Bush and the towns favorite son. My book says this guy does things HIS way. He may go down. But he'll go down doing what he knows works on the NFL level. I dunno and I ain't in the loop. Just what I believe.

My thoughts exactly.

Kubiak is going to do it his way, as fans we need to accept this. ( ie trade in the 'burned orange' hemlock for some battle red kool aid..:logo:.) :stirpot:

Kubiak was a QB in the NFL and has successfully coached in the pro-game for several years. HE KNOWS FOOTBALL.

MB posters who delude themselves into thinking they know more than Kubiak about the game,and the players who play the game, , are, well,... foolish comes to mind.

As far as running backs go....I think L Booker might be availabe to us in rd 3.
( I forgive him for not attending ND.)

:coffee: