There is a huge difference between playing Dt in a 4-3 and end in a 3-4, plenty of scouts have talked about his poor stamina, the combine is a workout, he hasn't played well against the better teams he played. And I didn't say they didn't put defensive talent i sauid OFFENSIVE talent, which is who he plays against. Irregardless of this argument my point is that taking a guy at 17 that noone else is taking above at the very best the late 20s but far more likely the 40s is stupid, you HAVE to drop back if he is really #1 on your board. back to your argument, I didn't contradict myself at all DRC dominated the senior bowl against very good players, he had excellent technique, sure he's a risk, but more importantly, if zona doesn't take him he's going in the next 5 picks after that, so he's less of a reach. Gilbert has no technique, you can't get by on athleticism in the NFL, because Jarron Gilbert isn't strong enough to overpower a G or T in the NFl, and he doesn't have the kind of speed that Freeney does. I think he's an excellent late 2nd round pick, maybe you trade to the early 2nd for him, but to take him 25 picks too early is insane.
I love those first three picks. If the draft manages to play out like this then I will be one of the happiest Jets fans on Friday. However, I don't really see Barden being there in the third. Anyone have an opinion on Patrick Turner (USC WR)? 6'5" 223lbs. - good size for the game and at least could prove to be a redzone target. Good hands but kind of slow. He ran a 4.59 at his pro day but his size could make up for that.
Good post, thanks. I very much appreciate your well considered points of view which are typically very clearly made. In fact, other than your occasional use of the word "irregardless" I can't remember noticing any other flaws in either your rationale or presentation in any of your posts. Well done.
thanks, I like the flow of irregardless in terms of sound, it finally made the dictionaries so now i can get away with it
It is still a cringe inducing double negative to me. While it has been appearing in dictionaries for quite a while, in the more respected editions it is generally characterized as incorrect or nonstandard. Merriam-Webster has this to say: usage: Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that ?there is no such word.? There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead. I am always a bit surprised to see someone who writes as well as you do using it but if it makes you happy, who am I to judge?
