OLINE: "Syracuse's Justin Pugh blazes a new trail at Senior Bowl"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soulman

Just one thing to consider when trading down. A mid third is worth about 200 points give or take 25 points so that means we trade out of #20 back to anywhere from around #27 to #29. Personally I don't see the wisdom of taking the risk if the guy we absolutely want may be gone before that and there is always that risk. The only way that trade down makes sense is if there are a couple of guys you could take that late and be happy with either of them.

For example; if we want a guy like Warmack or Cooper badly and either or both are there I don't think we trade back hoping that just because they're OGs they'll drop farther. Both are ranked in the top 20 prospects overall and either would be a great pick at #20.

Conversely if those two are gone and we're looking at Jones and/or Fluker and those two rank as #52 and #49 overall there's a real good chance one or both will still be there later in one so there a trade back 7-9 spots to pick up a third makes some sense.

Grizz I know your guy is Jones so that does make some sense but the caution is this. There's a pretty big drop off in the current grading between Warmack and Cooper and the next group of OGs and that has to come into play if one of the top OGs is still on the board at #20. Guys like Warmack and Cooper are graded and ranked much higher than either Jones, Fluker or Pugh and much higher than Warford, Travis Fredrick or Kyle Long.

So if you can get an OG like a Randall McDaniel or a John Hannah type do you pass on him for an OC like one of the Pouncey brothers or an OT like a Michael Oher? My comparisons may not be perfect but I think they're close.

Just sayin'.

---

Great points. I agree. I hope I don't stroke out before this is all over. My brain is doing a meltdown over the possibilities. I'm pretty much a babbling idiot worrying. I trust the new regime of Emery/Trustman. I hope for the best.

If for some reason we get screwed again though, I think my poor heart can't take it. Another failed GM/HC would do me in :sad44:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JustAnotherBearsFan99

Great points. I agree. I hope I don't stroke out before this is all over. My brain is doing a meltdown over the possibilities. I'm pretty much a babbling idiot worrying. I trust the new regime of Emery/Trustman. I hope for the best.

If for some reason we get screwed again though, I think my poor heart can't take it. Another failed GM/HC would do me in :sad44:

---

well dont get too caught up in the draft. Nobody is able to turn around a team via a single draft. As long as we get one stud, one starter and a couple depth, i would consider it a success. Besdies, Emery has shown he is able to make smart moves in FA as well like Marshall and Bush. We should trust in Emery until he proves otherwise, but so far it has been positive.

Quote:

---

I hope I don't stroke out before this is all over. My brain is doing a meltdown over the possibilities. I'm pretty much a babbling idiot worrying.

---

I recommend a Drink, I'm a Captn' & Coke guy myself. But perhaps a Beer or 6(or 12 or 18) may also help. "Drink until the (off)season looks pretty!"

What if we dont get him ? At least fall back on some music :



:18_1_205:

I'd be happy with any 2 of the following : Justin Pugh , Dallas Thomas , Barret Jones , Lane Johnson . All have enough size and good feet . I'm not as interested in the 330+ pounders ( like Warford ) cuz they're usually clods who wear down and get beat by quicker players too often . Tackles who exceed 310 usually have the same problem , so it's better when they're about 300 because their feet are better vs quick DE's.

I'd take the 300 pounders with the better feet over the super heavy guys every time .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alf The Ref

I'd be happy with any 2 of the following : Justin Pugh , Dallas Thomas , Barret Jones , Lane Johnson . All have enough size and good feet . I'm not as interested in the 330+ pounders ( like Warford ) cuz they're usually clods who wear down and get beat by quicker players too often . Tackles who exceed 310 usually have the same problem , so it's better when they're about 300 because their feet are better vs quick DE's.

I'd take the 300 pounders with the better feet over the super heavy guys every time .

---

I would be looking at talent to play the position ... funny thing about size and weight ... what gets the job done?

Wheres the HEART ... wheres the EMOTION ? First things I'd be looking for, in the fourth quarter ... are you there for us ?

Its fourth and 1 at the one yard line in the SuperBowl with the game on the line and we score and we win ...

can I count on you ?

Wanna know what cracks me up ?

Barret Jones is the opposite of Clay Matthews.

Well golly gee JJ we dont know what the fuck that means ...

Yes ... you do know what the fuck that means.

Matthews is an IMPACT player for G.B.on defense.

Day motherfuckin one ... Jones (along with his foot)

is an IMPACT player on our CHICAGO BEARS offense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackiejokeman

I would be looking at talent to play the position ... funny thing about size and weight ... what gets the job done?

Wheres the HEART ... wheres the EMOTION ? First things I'd be looking for, in the fourth quarter ... are you there for us ?

Its fourth and 1 at the one yard line in the SuperBowl with the game on the line and we score and we win ...

can I count on you ?

---

From what I've heard all these guys pass the attitude / passion test . These aren't the guys who are gonna get paid then stop working ( like many teams have seen with alot of highly touted college players ).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JustAnotherBearsFan99

Great points. I agree. I hope I don't stroke out before this is all over. My brain is doing a meltdown over the possibilities. I'm pretty much a babbling idiot worrying. I trust the new regime of Emery/Trustman. I hope for the best.

If for some reason we get screwed again though, I think my poor heart can't take it. Another failed GM/HC would do me in :sad44:

---

Well that's why I keep saying RELAX.........:3_2_101v[1]: Try a massage.

Here's where I'm coming from about this. For years and years I've read all kinds of criticism around here blaming Angelo for constantly trading away higher picks for more mid round picks and we seldom got lucky with any of them. Not the guy we took with the later second round pick or with those extra third and fourths we may have picked up in the process. The list is long and very undistinguished.

This year we may have a shot at one of the top LGs in this draft and maybe one of the best to come along and the last decade. If a guy like Cooper is that good, and we most definitely need a LG even more than we do an OC, why pray tell is it a good idea to trade down, take the lesser of the two players, and then start him playing out of his natural position because the guy we have playing OC isn't a very good LG so we have to leave him at OC?

I don't know about you guys, but as Henry described it, that seems more like Angeloean logic than plain old fashioned common sense to me. :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soulman

Well that's why I keep saying RELAX.........:3_2_101v[1]: Try a massage.

Here's where I'm coming from about this. For years and years I've read all kinds of criticism around here blaming Angelo for constantly trading away higher picks for more mid round picks and we seldom got lucky with any of them. Not the guy we took with the later second round pick or with those extra third and fourths we may have picked up in the process. The list is long and very undistinguished.

This year we may have a shot at one of the top LGs in this draft and maybe one of the best to come along and the last decade. If a guy like Cooper is that good, and we most definitely need a LG even more than we do an OC, why pray tell is it a good idea to trade down, take the lesser of the two players, and then start him playing out of his natural position because the guy we have playing OC isn't a very good LG so we have to leave him at OC?

I don't know about you guys, but as Henry described it, that seems more like Angeloean logic than plain old fashioned common sense to me. :confused:

---

Hey lets trade our 1st 2nd and 4th 5th and 6th rounders so we wind up with 7-8 3rd rounders . Think about it - 8 3rd rounders in one draft . That could put serious starter quality depth in lots of places ( some of whom would be starter material anyways ). Crazy ? Not as crazy as you might think .