Austin is a hell of a player, but I don't think we're in a position to draft him. We have too many needs on the line as well as a huge need for a pass rusher, so taking a dynamic slot WR is just not smart IMO. As for Geno, I just don't think he is what we need. He struggles against top defenses and his numbers are inflated beyond belief. I like him in the mid first but we should be drafting our QB in 2014 where there is a massive number of solid prospects.
Not saying he shouldn't be, I just don't feel he makes sense for us in the first, even if we had two picks. I'd rather see something like Jones at 9 and Cooper/Warmack at 13 than Geno and Austin or Jones and Austin.
Some of the analysts think Smith is a top 10 pick. Gil Brandt ranks him as the 4th best player in the draft. Others think he is a mid-round pick. That's where Scouts Inc has him. Still others question whether there is a 1st round QB in the draft. That would be Todd McShay. The thing is that almost all of the analysts have Smith going in the top 16 picks of the draft and many, including detractors like McShay, have had him as high as the 3 pick in their mocks. So here's the thing that goes along with that thing: if Todd McShay thinks Smith is going as high as 3 then he's a top 10 talent. It is illogical for an analyst to project him as maybe not a 1st round pick but then to also say he will go in the top 10. Draft value is not strictly speaking where the player is ranked by somebody in terms of skills. It's also about what the player's potential impact is and no position has more impact than QB. That's why the analysts believe that somebody is going to take a chance on Smith early on. So when I hear somebody say that Geno Smith is not a top half of the 1st round player one moment and then turn around and project him as a top 3 pick the next my conclusion is that person sees Geno Smith as actually a top 10 player in this draft. Why they have him ranked much lower doesn't really matter. The fact that they believe he's going in the top 10 is all that is important. They're kind of blowing their own analysis up by projecting him as a top pick. It just doesn't add up. And when that person then says that if he doesn't go to the Raiders at 3 that someone else is very likely to take him by the 9? Think about it.
We have a massive need for a playmaker on offense. Tavon Austin is the best in the class from that sense... He may not be an ideal outside receiver, but he can score every time he touches the ball- someone who can actually scare a defense. WIth that said, I wouldnt mind a passrusher at all either. As for Geno, do you view, say AJ McCarron, Boyd, or Murray as better prospects? Because all had a chance to enter the draft and from what I know, Geno would have been ranked the highest. I only ask that because I dont think we will have a realistic shot at Bridgewater or Manziel. We would need a top 3 pick, and if you win 4 or 5 games, thats not happening. So if Geno was there at 9, would you pass on him to draft one of the above 3? You know, this year is very tricky... Not many can seem to agree on what position should be addressed. I think many can agree on certain prospects they like, but it seems split on what direction the team should go in. Last year everyone thought OLB or T. Now, its not so definitive.
If Nassib or Glennon are there at 72, you have to take them. They could go as high as the late 1st round. At #72 you could sit them behind Sanchez this year and no one would gripe. Draft a guy in the 1st or 2nd round and people would expect them to start at some point this year.
Gil Brandt did the 3 variables analysis on Glennon and graded him out very poorly. His list is a good one in terms of looking at QB value in this draft. http://www.nfl.com/draft/story/0ap1...y-the-numbers-geno-smith-ej-manuel-score-well
Please no Glennon! This guy is one of the stiffest QBs to come out in recent memory, and his accuracy is crap. If we waited that late, select anyone else.
Or, there's the real answer that this person may have his own opinion of a player's abilities, with an understanding that it differs from the norm.
What's happening with Geno Smith this year is pretty simple. He's taking hits for leading his team into a new conference, which means that they played against a lot of opponents they didn't play against previously. He's taking hits for having a lousy defense on the field in a conference that is known for running it up when they can. He's taking hits for not being Andrew Luck or Robert Griffin III. All of the above are true. All of them are relevant in determining whether or not Geno Smith is a good pick in the 1st round. Taking a team into a new conference is a big deal. You're going into an established power structure. The Big 12 is a *much* better football conference than the Big East was. To go into that conference and play near .500 in the first year with the worst defense in the conference was quite an achievement. People see the WVU record last year as a strike against Smith, but the odds on having a better record in a new conference with a bad defense were low. The other huge issue is that Geno Smith is not a prospect in the class of Andrew Luck or Robert Griffin III. Guess what? Nobody is, or is likely to be for the next half decade or so. Teddy Bridgewater is Andrew Luck incarnate? I don't think so. So saying that you can't take Smith because he's not a franchise QB at the same level of a Luck or RGIII or Manning is kind of ridiculous. If that was the bar that needed to be passed then there would be QB's drafted in the top 10 about every 4 of 5 years, tops. If WVU had stayed in the Big East this year they probably win 10 or 11 games and Smith is a top 5 pick in the draft without any questions asked. Having WVU move to a much better conference shouldn't change anything in that equation, given that Smith had a huge year by anybody's standards anyway. WVU was down for the year but that's not because of the QB. It's because they gave up 390 points in 9 conference games.
It seems that Ryan Nassib at #72 is in a nice lead for the poll. As a Cuse fan I would love us to get him, but not before the 3rd round.
Or, he's taking hits for not being a legitimate top ten talent who played in a gimmicky offense that hid his lack of accuracy and inconsistent mechanics?
...because clearly if you're willing to take him in round 1 or 2, you'd also take him in 3. I assume the poll is the earliest you would take one of these QBs, though it would be much better if you could take multiple options.
You dont take Geno at #9 for how good he'll be in 2013, you take him at #9 and develop him into an elite talent and surround him the right supporting cast so he can be great for us for the next 12 years
If we take a quarterback, absolutely it has to be on a guy who can be a long-term answer here. Getting someone who can play well right away would certainly help, but thinking long-term is the most important thing. Just not convinced Geno is the answer at 9. However, I'm disenchanted with most of our options with this pick, so the idea of Geno is starting to grow on me. No other QB at 9.
