View Single Post
Old 04-23-2012   #16
TimeKiller
Awaiting Email Confirmation
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: This giant tree, standing 10,000 ft. high but not reaching the ground. It's roots must hold the sky.
Section: 521/Couch
Age: 28
Posts: 7,648
Rep Power: 0 TimeKiller is a quality contributor and well respectedTimeKiller is a quality contributor and well respectedTimeKiller is a quality contributor and well respectedTimeKiller is a quality contributor and well respectedTimeKiller is a quality contributor and well respectedTimeKiller is a quality contributor and well respectedTimeKiller is a quality contributor and well respectedTimeKiller is a quality contributor and well respectedTimeKiller is a quality contributor and well respectedTimeKiller is a quality contributor and well respectedTimeKiller is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: No receiver in first?

I think our positioning and the prospects likely to be available aren't overwhelmingly good values, especially when you are probably letting a better player go to get a WR.

Blackmon, Floyd I think pretty much anyone would be surprised if either of these guys fell to 26. I also think the Texans would have the cue card on stage before Gooddell got through announcing the previous player's name for either receiver.

Hill- long term development athlete with suspect hands. High risk.
Wright- smallish and benefitted from a spread offense being run by a Heisman winner.
Sanu- my own feelings aside, I think most people would consider this a pretty lofty reach. Would be better if they traded down to get him.
Jeffry- character questions.
Randle- huge reach IMO. Same jam as Hill except this guy isn't in the same athletic category as Hill.

Who else could even be considered in the 1st?

The one we've been over that could actually make a little sense is Fleener. He plays like a supersized WR anyway. Alas, I do not believe a receiver (of any kind) is coming in the first.
TimeKiller is offline   Reply With Quote