1. Welcome to San Diego Chargers NFL Football Podcast and Forum!
    Bolt Talk is one of the largest online communities for the San Diego Chargers.
    We host a regular Chargers podcast during the season.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Create an Account or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

new updated mock draft

Discussion in 'NFL Draft' started by charger1993, Nov 23, 2012.

  1. The LBC

    The LBC I'm a Real Prick

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,251
    Ratings:
    +1,019
    Simple rule of thumb to accept, regardless of whether there's considered to be a consensus top QB or "widely-accepted" franchise QB(s) in the draft class, any team that doesn't have a long-term solution at QB is highly likely to take one. As it stands right now, Oakland (yes, Reggie McKenzie has no reason to find himself tied to Carson Palmer or Terrelle Pryor, both of whom were Hue Jackson's gets not Reggie's), Buffalo, Kansas City, Arizona, Jacksonville (new owner, soon-to-be new GM, and possibly new HC are all components that could read new QB; plus there's not a ton of money tied to Gabbert whose already been benched), and Cleveland (same situation as Jacksonville even if they did spend a late 1st on a QB last year - their GM is likely to lose his job because he didn't package that pick with their other 1st to get RG3) are all legitimate teams that could/would be targeting QB's in some early capacity. Same could be said for Minnesota, who would have to be trading up.
     
  2. MrNafta

    MrNafta BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2012
    Messages:
    14
    Ratings:
    +2
    I agree with all except the Vikings. I think they are pretty happy with Ponder, and just want to get him some targets to compliment Harvin. Buffalo has openly came out and said it's their time to draft a QB and draft one early. I am about Chiefs are going to draft a QB, they almost have to, Cassel and Quinn are both horrible. Palmer isn't getting any younger, and he can't stay healthy, and Pryor hasn't been able to get a firm grasp on their offense. We'll see how far along Pryor is this Sunday. I doubt the Raiders would take a QB in the first though, maybe 2-3rd.
     
  3. The LBC

    The LBC I'm a Real Prick

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,251
    Ratings:
    +1,019
    Harvin wants out. I agree that the Vikings likely will hold onto Ponder, but rather because that team is built to run the ball primarily and pass as a means of freeing up the run. They're following the same path that Atlanta did early on in the Ryan era (not comparing Christian Ponder and Matt Ryan as prospects, just the similarity of the situations). They'll likely focus on continuing to revamp that defense first and add a more legitimate downfield threat than Jerome Simpson, then if Ponder is what's holding them back with that RB, that offensive line, and a revamped defense, they'll be in a position to go all-in on a top QB prospect and plug-and-play.
     
  4. MrNafta

    MrNafta BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2012
    Messages:
    14
    Ratings:
    +2
    If the Vikings can't hold onto Harvin they are going to lose a huge playmaker. I know the guy is a headache, in more ways than one, he has migraine problems, he picks fights with his coaches, but he's a huge talent, and in his prime. They are going to have to go WR early if they want to dump him. Hell maybe the Chargers can trade Meachem snd Royal to the Vikings haha one can dream right?
     
  5. Ikeman83

    Ikeman83 Werter Pöbel

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Messages:
    2,465
    Ratings:
    +629
    Why would they have to go WR early if they dumped him? They're a running team. If anything, they'll sign a middling FA receiver to a cheap contract. They aren't building the Patriots in Minnesota, they're building the 2006 Chargers.
     
  6. matilack

    matilack #therealagent47

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    14,838
    Ratings:
    +2,583
    Because even LT declined eventually. They can't run AP 30 times a game for the next 5 years and get away with it.
     
  7. Ikeman83

    Ikeman83 Werter Pöbel

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Messages:
    2,465
    Ratings:
    +629
    You're assuming that they're making their draft pick today with a vision for 5 years from now. They probably think they can run AP/Gerhart 30 times a game for the next 3 years and get away with it, while building that defense up. They're also likely expecting that if they build their team completely around Peterson, that when his wheels come off they'll be awful and they can select whomever they like.
     
  8. matilack

    matilack #therealagent47

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    14,838
    Ratings:
    +2,583
    Who was the last team to build their team around a RB and win a Super Bowl?

    Who was the last Hall of Fame caliber RB to win a Super Bowl?
     
  9. Ikeman83

    Ikeman83 Werter Pöbel

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Messages:
    2,465
    Ratings:
    +629
    Marshall Faulk, Rams, 2000

    However, the real question is, who was the last team to build their team around a defense and win a Superbowl, and the answer to that would be Pittsburgh, 2009, 2006, Baltimore, 2001.

    I think that what we've seen the last several years has been an unquestioned shift favoring the passing game, however the team with the strongest offense hasn't always won in the playoffs. I also don't think that the Vikings are looking at Ponder as being a Brady/Manning/Brees/Rodgers caliber QB. They know they've got a likely HOF candidate at RB, and probably don't think that there's much they can do on offense to make him better (he gets 100+ yd games against 9 in the box as is), but their defense could still benefit tremendously from investment in high picks.

    I'm not saying that going defense is the only course of action they could pursue, rather, that it's unreasonable to expect that the departure of Percy Harvin makes them a mortal lock to pursue (through whatever avenue) a number 1 receiver to replace him.

    edit: Though he'll never be a HoF RB, the 2000-2001 Ravens' offense centered around Jamal Lewis, who had an exceptional season, both that year and in his almost-record-breaking 2003-2004 campaign.
     
  10. matilack

    matilack #therealagent47

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    14,838
    Ratings:
    +2,583
    Along with MVP Kurt Warner, Isaac Bruce, Tory Holt etc...

    Point is these days you need a passing game otherwise your chances reduce dramatically.
     
  11. The LBC

    The LBC I'm a Real Prick

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,251
    Ratings:
    +1,019
    You need a passing game, but that's far more on the QB than the WR's. What we've seen the past several years is that typically the QB that gets the hottest down the stretch is the one that ends up in the SB. In a one-game, win or go home format scheme can do a lot to stifle what makes your team great. Look no further than the Niners last season, Green Bay the year before they went to the Super Bowl, Atlanta pretty much every year under Mike Smith up until now.

    Franchise QB's don't grow on trees, but it also doesn't take an elite QB to win a Super Bowl - in fact, there's a bit of irony in the fact that a number of the guys (pretty much outside of Brady and Peyton) weren't actually considered in that "elite" category until after they'd actually won a Super Bowl and it was the performance en route to (and in) the Super Bowl (in the case of one of them in their 2nd) that elevated them.
     
  12. Ikeman83

    Ikeman83 Werter Pöbel

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Messages:
    2,465
    Ratings:
    +629
    Faulk made up 40% of that team's offense, and 25% of Warner's yards. I don't know what else a HoF RB can do in terms of having a team "base their offense around him".
     
  13. matilack

    matilack #therealagent47

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    14,838
    Ratings:
    +2,583
    I agree its on the QB, and the O-line, and the playcaller before I even mention WRs. my question to you is did any if those teams you just mentioned actually end up winning the Super Bowl? Nope.

    Because come January teams have 16 games worth of film on that one dimentional offense. You can't just keep going defense and O-line every year and expect to take the next step.
     
  14. matilack

    matilack #therealagent47

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    14,838
    Ratings:
    +2,583
    Congrats, you found 1 team in the last 12 years...and that team had 2 Pro Bowl WRs stretching out defenses.

    A better example would be the 2000 Ravens who didn't have a HOF RB but were a power running and defense team...who have been steady and admirable but unsuccessful in getting back to that point the last 10+ years with the same formula. My point remains, you need to be able to pass, or at least have the threat of a solid passing game.
     
  15. Ikeman83

    Ikeman83 Werter Pöbel

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Messages:
    2,465
    Ratings:
    +629
    I did, in fact, mention the Ravens, as well as their RB, who might end up having had a better single season than Peterson if AP doesn't absolutely destroy the GB defense on Sunday. I've never said that you don't need to be able to pass, in fact, the ~30 times a game I suggested that the Vikings would seek to rush leaves 30-35 passing plays on the table. However, to think that the Vikings are going to try to retool their offense in the form of a heavier focus on receivers (or a new QB), rather than simply pursue functional targets for their quarterback (read functional as correlating with low-cost) while adding to their defense, then I think that you're underestimating the impact that Brady and Cassel have had on the views of NFL execs. Brady has proved that an exceptional QB doesn't need exceptional targets for his throws, merely ones with reliable hands and time to throw the ball. Likewise, Cassel has proved that giving an average/below average QB exceptional targets won't make him produce exceptionally.

    I think the Vikings look at their passing game as a complement to their running game, rather than the other way around, and I don't expect them to invest heavily in a complement. Whether they should look at their passing game in this way is another issue.

    Also, the 2006 Steelers were certainly a power running team with a strong defense. So were the '09 Steelers. You can win with an adequate passing game and an exceptional rushing attack. What you can't do, is come back from a deep deficit, which is why I think they're likely to invest in their defense.
     
  16. The LBC

    The LBC I'm a Real Prick

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,251
    Ratings:
    +1,019
    Well... not necessarily. It's just that your margin for error is incredibly slimmer. You literally have to have a team that can create turnovers with well above-average regularity and play mistake-free football (or 90-95% mistake-free). Run-dominant, defensively-heavy teams can win in the current format, the problem is that those defenses haven't translated their ability to create turnovers from the regular season to a full slate of post-season games (several have come very close and the Bears made the Super Bowl doing just that... with Rex friggin' Grossman as their QB and no WR worth mentioning). To be honest, a case could be made that at least one, possibly both, of Pittsburgh's last two Super Bowls have been won using this same formula as well.
     
  17. SuperCharger92

    SuperCharger92 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    3,304
    Ratings:
    +633
    To me, the Chargers without a running game.. SUCK. Aside from Rivers' 2010 year, he shined when he had a running game. Opens up the play action, stretches defenses, etc. The last 2 years, we haven't had a running game or offensive line. So I think you need to start with the OL, and pick up a guy in the draft at RB in the top 4-5 rounds. You need a liable and serviceable running back who can fill in for RM when he's out. Clearly, Brown, Battle, and Brinkley haven't done the job. Brown, yes on third downs, but other than that.

    There's no way we find a serviceable starter in FA, because they will not consider a team like the Chargers due to RM being the #1 back here, and also they could get more $$ and a guaranteed starting gig. So the draft is your best bet if you ask me.

    But a guy like Reggie Bush or even, I know I bashed this one, Steven Jackson could be a good fit. But they'll look for starting gigs. Ricky Williams was rumored last offseason, doubt he leaves his pot smoking couch, and probably won't be worth the risk.

    Draft a RB in the first 4-5 rounds PLEASE.
     
  18. AnteaterCharger

    AnteaterCharger Calibrating Bolttalk, Podcast by Podcast Staff Member Super Moderator Podcaster

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    18,448
    Ratings:
    +2,593
    Since we are mentioning running backs and I doubt we select one before round two, anyone have any suggestions who we should take a look at? Admittedly I'm focusing primarily on OL, LBs and CBs
     
  19. The LBC

    The LBC I'm a Real Prick

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,251
    Ratings:
    +1,019
    As far as guys who can come in capable of blocking as well as running and catch:
    (I'm excluding Eddie Lacy and Giovanni Bernard as I figure both are going to take 2nd round selections - which I'm not in favor of spending on an RB given our other areas of need)
    - Stepfan Taylor (Stanford) is similar to Doug Martin in that he's a jack of all trades, master of none type, but he's an effective grinder that can be an every-down back if lacking that "dynamic" spark (a la a Jamaal Charles type). He's a bit more Steven Ridley than Doug Martin, but that's not necessarily a bad thing either.
    - Christine Michael (Texas A&M) is one of my favorite for the middle (4th or so) round. Durable, dependable, good vision, understands pass-blocking concepts extremely well.
    - Dennis Johnson (Arkansas) has a limited sample size to go off of, but shows a lot of promise in what we did see of him when he had to step into the shoes vacated by Knile Davis this year.
    - And then there's Marcus Lattimore (S. Carolina), who yes... there's an obvious gamble in taking a guy who just shredded his knee this season. But Lattimore was (sorry, Trent Richardson) the closest athlete at RB we've seen to Adrian Peterson since AP; and Peterson has demosntrated that great athletic ability and determination can allow for quicker recovery time and not necessarily cause a loss in ability. Would I gamble a 2nd round pick on him? Probably not. You give me a crack at him in the 3rd, particularly when we still have the benefit of at least trying to see what we've got left in Mathews, and I'd be pretty tempted.
     
  20. SuperCharger92

    SuperCharger92 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    3,304
    Ratings:
    +633
    I was gonna mention Lattimore's name. I don't think he goes in the 2nd round, 3rd possibly but even I'd consider that a reach.
     
  21. SuperCharger92

    SuperCharger92 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    3,304
    Ratings:
    +633
    Quick question...

    would you guys take a QB in the 3rd or 4th round? Ryan Nassib, Landry Jones, or an Aaron Murray? I mean if Rivers does have another year like the previous two, he's a FA after next season.. We will be in trouble..

    Just a thought..
     
  22. The LBC

    The LBC I'm a Real Prick

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,251
    Ratings:
    +1,019
    Really depends on how the knee checks out. It's not unlikely that the injury was worse than it looked; don't get me wrong tearing the ACL and MCL is no picnic but by all accounts it wasn't a full-blown rupture (i.e. complete tear). Despite the visual of the injury, this really isn't a terribly different situation from Bruce Carter's two year's ago - a prospect who, had they not been injured, was on the fast-track to Top 10-15 draft selection because of elite athleticism and high-level production.

    Like I said, I'm not expecting a Frank Gore or Willis McGahee type 2nd round selection - at least not an early one (I wouldn't be shocked by a value-conscious playoff team taking a flier on him in the late 2nd. But you have to remember that with the advent of the rookie wage system now, there's not nearly the kind of guaranteed monies tied to these guys so often they're a bit more worth the gamble. And in this case this was a player who, pre-injury, was far and away the top RB in the draft class (and would have been in last year's had he come out or the year prior's). Is it a gamble? Yes. Though it's a gamble that if it pays off nets likely the closest thing to another LaDainian Tomlinson that this franchise will ever see.
     
  23. The LBC

    The LBC I'm a Real Prick

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,251
    Ratings:
    +1,019
    Why? On the off-chance that Rivers doesn't rebound?

    If he doesn't rebound we're likely right back in the same position we are right now, if not worse, which means we simply invest a 1st round pick in a replacement for Phil. Landry Jones has career-backup (if that) written all over him. Murray pretty much the same.
     
  24. matilack

    matilack #therealagent47

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    14,838
    Ratings:
    +2,583
    I've been a huge advocate of Mike Glennon all year long, its a shame it looks like he's going to go in the 2nd round now...if not take a Joe Flacco type leap into the 1st.

    I don't know that I'd spend anything higher than a 5th on a QB. I think PR is gonna be here a long while.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1

Share This Page