2013 NFL Draft

[Jake]

lol @ Berman getting pissed about being put back on the air

[thxfrthmmrs]

 

Does anyone know what's going on? lol

[SexiAlexei]

I find it amusing that Geno Smith, Lacy, and Te'o were not drafted in the 1st round. I thought all 3 of these guys were over rated, but I thought someone would bite on all of them.

[dasox24]

What a horrendous value for vikes. A lot of picks to give up for a guy who was in Juco last year and started out as the #3 or 4 wr on a bad team

 

They cleaned house getting Floyd tho

I respect you as a poster on here, but in this case I have to completely disagree with you.

 

Patterson started out at the #3 WR in training camp because the guys ahead of him were both Juniors and projected 1st round picks (Hunter and Rogers). Obviously, Rogers got kicked off the team before the season started and that caused his value to drop a lot. Hunter didn't look quite the same after his ACL tear, but he still had a great chance to go in the 1st. He'll be an early 2nd round pick tomorrow. Kind of hard to hate on the guy because he "started out" at the #3 WR with those other guys on the roster. And as you said, it was his first year at Tennessee so it would be kind of hard for him to immediately be a starting WR before ever having practiced with the team. I just don't see how you pointed that out as a negative.

 

Second, the fact that he played on a bad team shouldn't matter at all. The UT offense was awesome. The defense was historically bad. That's why the team was 5-7. All 11 starters from last year's offense will be in the NFL. And he was the most electric player on that offense.

 

If you watched him play, you'd realize he's incredibly electric with the ball in his hands. He does amazing things. He's a bigger version of Percy Harvin. But you're right: he certainly is raw. As you pointed out, he only played 1 year of D1 football. But give him the ball in space and watch him work. He'll be fine.

[2nd_city_saint787]

Had some time to think on the way home and I feel a little better about the Bears pick. Perhaps I'm forcing myself to but I did come up with some logic behind it.

 

The way I'm taking it is the Bears didn't think as highly on Gabe Carimi as I thought they did, or as I do. I also remembered the whole Kromer works the line from the inside out so he needs a good OG tandem. That said if you look at who is left after Long at OG the list pretty much only goes 1 deep with Warford with Dallas Thomas as an honorable mention. Those guys very easily could be gone at #50 and then we're left with some guy named Matt Summers-Gavin as NFL.coms top rated OG.

 

[SexiAlexei]

Had some time to think on the way home and I feel a little better about the Bears pick. Perhaps I'm forcing myself to but I did come up with some logic behind it.

 

The way I'm taking it is the Bears didn't think as highly on Gabe Carimi as I thought they did, or as I do. I also remembered the whole Kromer works the line from the inside out so he needs a good OG tandem. That said if you look at who is left after Long at OG the list pretty much only goes 1 deep with Warford with Dallas Thomas as an honorable mention. Those guys very easily could be gone at #50 and then we're left with some guy named Matt Summers-Gavin as NFL.coms top rated OG.

 

If this was the Bears thought process for their pick, I will be even more disappointed. You have so many holes to fill (OL, LB, CB). You don't draft a G because the next possible G is so much worse... You draft the best player, and worry about who's left in the next round.

[gatnom]

I have no problems with the Long pick. I'm not one who usually plays the generalization card, but the Bears have been given so much crap about not being able to put together an offensive line that I can't criticize them for identifying somebody they liked and drafting them in the first round. You know, trying to solve the atrocity that has been killing the offense and Jay Cutler for the last several years. It wasn't the sexy pick, but I can't say it's the wrong pick either, considering our circumstances.

 

 

[2nd_city_saint787]

If this was the Bears thought process for their pick, I will be even more disappointed. You have so many holes to fill (OL, LB, CB). You don't draft a G because the next possible G is so much worse... You draft the best player, and worry about who's left in the next round.

 

I think then you're ultimately still left with a hole at OG and if Kromer sticks to his whole inside out scheme on the OL you really need a good OG tandem.

 

Supply and demand...or something like that.

[gatnom]

If this was the Bears thought process for their pick, I will be even more disappointed. You have so many holes to fill (OL, LB, CB). You don't draft a G because the next possible G is so much worse... You draft the best player, and worry about who's left in the next round.

 

You're right. The best player on the board always black and white. How do you know that the Bears didn't draft who they thought to be the best player on the board?

 

 

 

 

[SexiAlexei]

You're right. The best player on the board always black and white. How do you know that the Bears didn't draft who they thought to be the best player on the board?

 

My response had nothing to do with who the Bears had as their best player on the board.

 

My comment was in response to 2nd city, you don't draft a player because the next player at the same position is so much worse.

 

That's also why i said "If that was the Bears thought process, I'd be even more disappointed."

 

What I'm trying to say is, you can't look at the board and say "Well, we'd much rather take Ogletree or Eifert over Long, but after Long, there aren't any OG left."

 

Now, if the Bears legit thought Long was better, then I disagree, but I'm ok with it. If their pick was, as 2nd city said, out of fear, then I strongly disagree with the choice.

[gatnom]

My response had nothing to do with who the Bears had as their best player on the board.

 

My comment was in response to 2nd city, you don't draft a player because the next player at the same position is so much worse.

 

That's also why i said "If that was the Bears thought process, I'd be even more disappointed."

 

What I'm trying to say is, you can't look at the board and say "Well, we'd much rather take Ogletree or Eifert over Long, but after Long, there aren't any OG left."

 

Now, if the Bears legit thought Long was better, then I disagree, but I'm ok with it. If their pick was, as 2nd city said, out of fear, then I strongly disagree with the choice.

 

I generally agree, but on some level positional need does play a role. If the best player available was a quarterback, would you want them to pick one?

 

 

 

 

 

[2nd_city_saint787]

My response had nothing to do with who the Bears had as their best player on the board.

 

My comment was in response to 2nd city, you don't draft a player because the next player at the same position is so much worse.

 

That's also why i said "If that was the Bears thought process, I'd be even more disappointed."

 

What I'm trying to say is, you can't look at the board and say "Well, we'd much rather take Ogletree or Eifert over Long, but after Long, there aren't any OG left."

 

Now, if the Bears legit thought Long was better, then I disagree, but I'm ok with it. If their pick was, as 2nd city said, out of fear, then I strongly disagree with the choice.

 

My point is if the Bears value the OG position like the Saints did (Kromer was their OL coach) and they are left with really nothing there then wouldn't it become a pretty high priority?

 

 

[SexiAlexei]

I generally agree, but on some level positional need does play a role. If the best player available was a quarterback, would you want them to pick one?

 

I think we're arguing 2 different things here.

 

No, I don't think the Bears should take a QB if it's the best on the board.

[gatnom]

I think we're arguing 2 different things here.

 

No, I don't think the Bears should take a QB if it's the best on the board.

 

I was more or less trying to say that even though the Bears may not have thought in a vacuum that Long was better than Eifert, the fact that Long is a guard may have given him more value than Eifert at TE.

 

 

[SexiAlexei]

My point is if the Bears value the OG position like the Saints did (Kromer was their OL coach) and they are left with really nothing there then wouldn't it become a pretty high priority?

 

Not when you have a lot of other positions that need help.

 

Your top 2 CB's aren't under contract next year. You could argue that you can upgrade 2 of the 3 LB positions, and that your DL is aging.

 

If you think Long is a 1st round pick, then good. If you have players that fill your other needs that you rank higher than Long, but you pick Long because the next OG isn't nearly as good, that's a bad decision.

[SexiAlexei]

I was more or less trying to say that even though the Bears may not have thought in a vacuum that Long was better than Eifert, the fact that Long is a guard may have given him more value than Eifert at TE.

 

I'm not arguing Long vs Eifert. I'm arguing Long vs every other position of need. There were highly rated DTs, LBs, and CBs on the board. All positions of need. If they thought Long was the best of the bunch, then ok. Again, I disagree, but they have a valid reason. If they said the next guy after Long wasn't good, but other DTs, LBs, and CBs are better than Long, you take the better player that fills your need. You can't worry about who will or who won't be there next round, because it's a crap shoot, and you don't know. You take the best player that fills a need.

[2nd_city_saint787]

I'm not arguing Long vs Eifert. I'm arguing Long vs every other position of need. There were highly rated DTs, LBs, and CBs on the board. All positions of need. If they thought Long was the best of the bunch, then ok. Again, I disagree, but they have a valid reason. If they said the next guy after Long wasn't good, but other DTs, LBs, and CBs are better than Long, you take the better player that fills your need. You can't worry about who will or who won't be there next round, because it's a crap shoot, and you don't know. You take the best player that fills a need.

 

I will say that I did want Floyd but when I looked at it further if they wanted to upgrade OG then 20 was the place to do it. You're not gonna find an upgrade later IMO. DT and CB are both pretty deep this year, and I think with Williams and Anderson the Bears can grab a LB later, groom him for the year and start him next year.

 

 

[Chisoxfn]

I have to think they could have traded down 15 spots and gotten long

Casserly thought Long had a late 1st round grade. I was surprised at what I thought was a reach, but sounds like Bears liked him a lot. He's got the right build and good athletism. Very raw though and I think they could have moved down, especially since there were other quality prospects on the board. That said, if Bears wanted a guard, this was there best shot cause there wouldn't have been s*** around at 50.

[gatnom]

I'm not arguing Long vs Eifert. I'm arguing Long vs every other position of need. There were highly rated DTs, LBs, and CBs on the board. All positions of need. If they thought Long was the best of the bunch, then ok. Again, I disagree, but they have a valid reason. If they said the next guy after Long wasn't good, but other DTs, LBs, and CBs are better than Long, you take the better player that fills your need. You can't worry about who will or who won't be there next round, because it's a crap shoot, and you don't know. You take the best player that fills a need.

 

We agree.

 

I will say that I think guard is a way bigger position of need than those on the defense. With an offensive minded coach and the players we have on offense, we can't really afford to let our offensive line to continue to fester. I really don't think we can compete with Cutler getting his brains scrambled every Sunday, no matter how good our defense is.

 

 

[daa84]

I respect you as a poster on here, but in this case I have to completely disagree with you.

 

Patterson started out at the #3 WR in training camp because the guys ahead of him were both Juniors and projected 1st round picks (Hunter and Rogers). Obviously, Rogers got kicked off the team before the season started and that caused his value to drop a lot. Hunter didn't look quite the same after his ACL tear, but he still had a great chance to go in the 1st. He'll be an early 2nd round pick tomorrow. Kind of hard to hate on the guy because he "started out" at the #3 WR with those other guys on the roster. And as you said, it was his first year at Tennessee so it would be kind of hard for him to immediately be a starting WR before ever having practiced with the team. I just don't see how you pointed that out as a negative.

 

Second, the fact that he played on a bad team shouldn't matter at all. The UT offense was awesome. The defense was historically bad. That's why the team was 5-7. All 11 starters from last year's offense will be in the NFL. And he was the most electric player on that offense.

 

If you watched him play, you'd realize he's incredibly electric with the ball in his hands. He does amazing things. He's a bigger version of Percy Harvin. But you're right: he certainly is raw. As you pointed out, he only played 1 year of D1 football. But give him the ball in space and watch him work. He'll be fine.

All valid points to which I agree. When I posted that I was boozed up and looking to bash two teams I dislike (Min and UT). And frankly the bears also took a Juco guy with even less experience than Patterson

[clyons]

I have no problems with the Long pick. I'm not one who usually plays the generalization card, but the Bears have been given so much crap about not being able to put together an offensive line that I can't criticize them for identifying somebody they liked and drafting them in the first round. You know, trying to solve the atrocity that has been killing the offense and Jay Cutler for the last several years. It wasn't the sexy pick, but I can't say it's the wrong pick either, considering our circumstances.

 

I certainly can't fault them for addressing the OLine, but like others I question the value of that pick at that spot. Everything I've heard and read screams "reach," and for the second year in a row. I don't buy at all that they "identified" and "targeted" Long as their guy at 20 all along. That's typical draft day PR, and if true, seems cause for serious concern after they said and did the same thing last year and got limited contributions from McClellin. This looks like a bit of a panic pick after an unusual bypass on skill players in favor of a run on linemen. I hope I'm wrong. By all accounts he's extremely talented and athletic, but raw and comes with some personal baggage. Fingers are crossed.

[southsider2k5]

I'm thrilled that the NFL is working these activist causes into their broadcast, but they have done a very poor job of doing it with time efficiency. They constantly are doing things like speech AFTER the pick is in but BEFORE it is announced.

 

I did love the meathead NFL fans who were chanting Boston Sucks.

[bmags]

I respect you as a poster on here, but in this case I have to completely disagree with you.

 

Patterson started out at the #3 WR in training camp because the guys ahead of him were both Juniors and projected 1st round picks (Hunter and Rogers). Obviously, Rogers got kicked off the team before the season started and that caused his value to drop a lot. Hunter didn't look quite the same after his ACL tear, but he still had a great chance to go in the 1st. He'll be an early 2nd round pick tomorrow. Kind of hard to hate on the guy because he "started out" at the #3 WR with those other guys on the roster. And as you said, it was his first year at Tennessee so it would be kind of hard for him to immediately be a starting WR before ever having practiced with the team. I just don't see how you pointed that out as a negative.

 

Second, the fact that he played on a bad team shouldn't matter at all. The UT offense was awesome. The defense was historically bad. That's why the team was 5-7. All 11 starters from last year's offense will be in the NFL. And he was the most electric player on that offense.

 

If you watched him play, you'd realize he's incredibly electric with the ball in his hands. He does amazing things. He's a bigger version of Percy Harvin. But you're right: he certainly is raw. As you pointed out, he only played 1 year of D1 football. But give him the ball in space and watch him work. He'll be fine.

 

You would know better than me, but I was blown away by Patterson at that UT game I went to. His routes to the ball were so strange and effective, you knew he had that sixth sense great players have.

 

[bmags]

The fact that it seems like the Bears are the only team that rated Long as top-20 caliber, you have to think something is off with the Bears here. Hope I am wrong. But now, you assume Matt Slauson starts at one guard spot and now regardless, one first-round pick of the club in the last three years will not be starting when the season starts (Carimi or Long).

 

Reports like that day of draft are almost always bulls***. Teams aren't telling people their board.

[southsider2k5]

Ed Bouchette ‏@EdBouchette 8h

 

No RB drafted in round 1 since 1963. Should be a run on them Friday