DreadNaught wrote:Bootz2004 wrote:
But I'm guessing that you do believe we'll add 4 combined draft picks and UDFAs? Given the current roster/depth chart along the Dline
Maybe, but that is irrelevent since adding UDFA's just something you're arguing with yourself on. Here are the 12 Dlinemen the Bucs currently have on the roster. There is still room to add 21 more players until we reach 90.
94 Clarke, Will DE 6-6 275 26 5 West Virginia
97 Curry, Vinny DE 6-3 279 29 7 Marshall
92 Gholston, William DE 6-6 281 26 6 Michigan State
79 O'Connor, Patrick DE 6-4 270 24 1 Eastern Michigan
90 Pierre-Paul, Jason DE 6-5 275 29 9 South Florida
57 Spence, Noah DE 6-2 251 24 3 Eastern Kentucky
71 Ward, Channing DE 6-4 279 25 2 Mississippi
75 Lambert, DaVonte DL 6-2 282 23 3 Auburn
91 Allen, Beau DT 6-3 327 26 5 Wisconsin
93 McCoy, Gerald DT 6-4 300 30 9 Oklahoma
96 Tu'ikolovatu, Stevie DT 6-1 320 26 2 Southern California
98 Unrein, Mitch DT 6-4 301 31 8 Wyoming
Let's say the Bucs draft Chubb at 7, then Hurst is also sitting there as the clear BPA at 38 so we draft him also (which NOBODY is arguing against). Why on earth would we spend two more draft picks on Dlinemen in the late rounds at that point while ignoring CB, RB, S, OL? Any Dlinemen we would draft AFTER already taking Chubb and Hurst would have almost zero chance of making the 53 man roster. Which is MY point about why the Bucs won't be drafted FOUR Dlinemen.
terrytate wrote:This escalated quickly. We certainly dont need to draft 4 dlinemen as Cheb explained. The whole point behind the moves we made was that we were no so desperate for DL that we had to spend the whole draft on it. We could certainly stand to get a guy though, as the new faces are all older. I most certainly wouldn't pass on Chubb at 7, not would I ignore Hurst or Bryan in the second if they were there.
Let's not forget that we have other needs too, some even more important than DL. OL is certainly not an elite, world beating unit. We have an absurd need for a RB. We have needs all over in the secondary. Ignoring all of that to spam picks a deep DL Corp is foolish at best.
Bootz2004 wrote:DreadNaught wrote:Let's say the Bucs draft Chubb at 7, then Hurst is also sitting there as the clear BPA at 38 so we draft him also (which NOBODY is arguing against). Why on earth would we spend two more draft picks on Dlinemen in the late rounds at that point while ignoring CB, RB, S, OL? Any Dlinemen we would draft AFTER already taking Chubb and Hurst would have almost zero chance of making the 53 man roster. Which is MY point about why the Bucs won't be drafted FOUR Dlinemen.
So your position is we should pass on adding Dlinemen in the draft and should wait until UDFA? Right?
DreadNaught wrote:Bootz2004 wrote:
So your position is we should pass on adding Dlinemen in the draft and should wait until UDFA? Right?
You have serious reading comprehension issues.
We aren't drafting 4 Dlinemen just like we won't be drafting 4 defensive backs, or 4 Olinemen even though we're even thinner at DB and OL than we are currently at Dline due to the offseason moves.
Bootz2004 wrote:DreadNaught wrote:
You have serious reading comprehension issues.
We aren't drafting 4 Dlinemen just like we won't be drafting 4 defensive backs, or 4 Olinemen even though we're even thinner at DB and OL than we are currently at Dline due to the offseason moves.
I've moved past your point and now I'm asking you a new question. One you're dodging. I'll ask again: So your position is should pass on adding Dlinemen in the draft and should wait until UDFA?
Cheb wrote:Bootz2004 wrote:
I've moved past your point and now I'm asking you a new question. One you're dodging. I'll ask again: So your position is should pass on adding Dlinemen in the draft and should wait until UDFA?
I'll have to remember "I've moved past your point" the next time I disagree with my wife. I'm sure that'll go over well.
Bootz2004 wrote:DreadNaught wrote:
You have serious reading comprehension issues.
We aren't drafting 4 Dlinemen just like we won't be drafting 4 defensive backs, or 4 Olinemen even though we're even thinner at DB and OL than we are currently at Dline due to the offseason moves.
I've moved past your point and now I'm asking you a new question. One you're dodging. I'll ask again: So your position is should pass on adding Dlinemen in the draft and should wait until UDFA?
Bootz2004 wrote:Cheb wrote:
I'll have to remember "I've moved past your point" the next time I disagree with my wife. I'm sure that'll go over well.
I'm sure you deflect and beat around the bush with her more than you do on here.
DreadNaught wrote:Bootz2004 wrote:
I've moved past your point and now I'm asking you a new question. One you're dodging. I'll ask again: So your position is should pass on adding Dlinemen in the draft and should wait until UDFA?
It's not dodging if it's already been addressed *****. Once again Bootz nobody here has stated we should "pass on drafting Dlinemen" completely. You conjured up that strawman and are trying to get someone to argue it with you.
Chubb is the #1 player for me and I'd love if we got him at 7. I also think Hurst or Bryan would be steals at 38 even if we already drafted Chubb since our roster could use young and talented 3-tech DT. But if we went that route early in the draft it would be dumb imo to use TWO more additional picks on more Dlinemen who would have virtually no chance at making the 53 at that point given what we have and just drafted in rounds 1-2. Those remaining picks would be WAY better served providing some depth at CB, S, RB, OL where we are much thinner at.
DreadNaught wrote:Bootz2004 wrote:
I've moved past your point and now I'm asking you a new question. One you're dodging. I'll ask again: So your position is should pass on adding Dlinemen in the draft and should wait until UDFA?
It's not dodging if it's already been addressed *****. Once again Bootz nobody here has stated we should "pass on drafting Dlinemen" completely. You conjured up that strawman and are trying to get someone to argue it with you.
Chubb is the #1 player for me and I'd love if we got him at 7. I also think Hurst or Bryan would be steals at 38 even if we already drafted Chubb since our roster could use young and talented 3-tech DT. But if we went that route early in the draft it would be dumb imo to use TWO more additional picks on more Dlinemen who would have virtually no chance at making the 53 at that point given what we have and just drafted in rounds 1-2. Those remaining picks would be WAY better served providing some depth at CB, S, RB, OL where we are much thinner at.
DreadNaught wrote:Bootz2004 wrote:
I'm sure you deflect and beat around the bush with her more than you do on here.
That's rich. You move past points you can't ague with and conjure up strawmans then proceed to accuse others of deflecting.
Never change *****...
Bootz2004 wrote:DreadNaught wrote:
That's rich. You move past points you can't ague with and conjure up strawmans then proceed to accuse others of deflecting.
Never change *****...
You haven't made any points. You're pulling an RBF now, standing there holding your breath saying "we won't draft X number of dlinemen and that's that". Mark of petulant children who have nothing else to say.
Buc2 wrote:Bootz2004 wrote:
You haven't made any points. You're pulling an RBF now, standing there holding your breath saying "we won't draft X number of dlinemen and that's that". Mark of petulant children who have nothing else to say.
Nice come back, Ghostrap.
Bootz2004 wrote:DreadNaught wrote:
That's rich. You move past points you can't ague with and conjure up strawmans then proceed to accuse others of deflecting.
Never change *****...
You haven't made any points. You're pulling an RBF now, standing there holding your breath saying "we won't draft X number of dlinemen and that's that". Mark of petulant children who have nothing else to say.
Bootz2004 wrote:DreadNaught wrote:
That's rich. You move past points you can't ague with and conjure up strawmans then proceed to accuse others of deflecting.
Never change *****...
You haven't made any points. You're pulling an RBF now, standing there holding your breath saying "we won't draft X number of dlinemen and that's that". Mark of petulant children who have nothing else to say.
DreadNaught wrote:Bootz2004 wrote:
You haven't made any points. You're pulling an RBF now, standing there holding your breath saying "we won't draft X number of dlinemen and that's that". Mark of petulant children who have nothing else to say.
My only point in this discussion has been in response to the nonsensical idea that the Bucs would spend four draft picks on Dlinemen that had been previously brought up already.
But since you want to be stuborn let's make a bet. If the Bucs draft four Dlinemen I'll accept whatever terms you want, but if they don't spend four draft picks on Dlinemen than you can't disagree with anyones post here for 1 month. All you can do is start topics or agree with people.
Deal?
DreadNaught wrote:Bootz2004 wrote:
I've moved past your point and now I'm asking you a new question. One you're dodging. I'll ask again: So your position is should pass on adding Dlinemen in the draft and should wait until UDFA?
It's not dodging if it's already been addressed *****. Once again Bootz nobody here has stated we should "pass on drafting Dlinemen" completely. You conjured up that strawman and are trying to get someone to argue it with you.
Chubb is the #1 player for me and I'd love if we got him at 7. I also think Hurst or Bryan would be steals at 38 even if we already drafted Chubb since our roster could use young and talented 3-tech DT. But if we went that route early in the draft it would be dumb imo to use TWO more additional picks on more Dlinemen who would have virtually no chance at making the 53 at that point given what we have and just drafted in rounds 1-2. Those remaining picks would be WAY better served providing some depth at CB, S, RB, OL where we are much thinner at.
Return to College Football/Draft Talk
Users browsing this forum: Alpha, Baidu [Spider] and 10 guests