49 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

IDK they can take Pitts,pretty much finish the offense and go CB in 2 and beyond. he is like a JJ on steroids and we're going to regret letting him get away(like we did JJ). Just another failed re-run of the usual bad decisions. With out round 1 picks the next 2 years,we'd better get guys to cover Pitts lol. Carolina should trade up to 4, putting ATL back to 8. They could take Pitts there also. If they don't I suspect he goes to Dullaz, but we effectively outsmarted oursevles again

He's also an in-betweener that not al coaches would know how to maximize him vs what they do know. Most people in professional roles that always had a prescribed path before them do not handle risk well, or choose paths of less risk. People are more comfortable working with what they know vs adapting their philosophy

46 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

IDK they can take Pitts,pretty much finish the offense and go CB in 2 and beyond. he is like a JJ on steroids and we're going to regret letting him get away(like we did JJ). Just another failed re-run of the usual bad decisions. With out round 1 picks the next 2 years,we'd better get guys to cover Pitts lol. Carolina should trade up to 4, putting ATL back to 8. They could take Pitts there also. If they don't I suspect he goes to Dullaz, but we effectively outsmarted oursevles again

Without round 1 picks the next 2 years?  I’m confused ... we will almost certainly have 3 round 1 picks next year alone.  

26 minutes ago, time2rock said:

Without round 1 picks the next 2 years?  I’m confused ... we will almost certainly have 3 round 1 picks next year alone.  

Should say with "OUR not "OUT" lol. Typo

31 minutes ago, matchew88 said:

He's also an in-betweener that not al coaches would know how to maximize him vs what they do know. Most people in professional roles that always had a prescribed path before them do not handle risk well, or choose paths of less risk. People are more comfortable working with what they know vs adapting their philosophy

SO you're saying we should avoid players with potential,because we don't have the staff to develop them. if that's true,this team will never go anywhere. IDK seems we have a coach from FL that would know exactly how to use him? 

23 minutes ago, time2rock said:

Without round 1 picks the next 2 years?  I’m confused ... we will almost certainly have 3 round 1 picks next year alone.  

Yep, setting us up for  a #1 QB pick(which you can do with 2 round 1's). Pitts is a once in 5 years player that will be a mismatch for nearly any team,so yeah lets' pass that guy up lol. I was right about JJ and I will be right about Pitts too. What kind of shape would we be in next year if we already had JJ and Pitts on our roster??? I'm old. IDK squat lol

If Carolina trades up with ATL ,that puts ATL at 8. Pitts could still be there at 8. If he is we can use draft picks to move from 12 to 8(and I would do that for Pitts). It could be a gamble that pays off for us(getting Pitts at 8 instead of 6), so my hopes for getting Pitts aren't entirely over, even if we had to give up one 3rd and 6th(or whatever) to ATL to go from 12 to 8. We shall see,should be  a really interesting draft!!!!! The key is obviously Carolina making that move to 4

1 hour ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Should say with "OUR not "OUT" lol. Typo

SO you're saying we should avoid players with potential,because we don't have the staff to develop them. if that's true,this team will never go anywhere. IDK seems we have a coach from FL that would know exactly how to use him? 

Not us- Pitts is perfect for us. The coaches of teams before us

1 hour ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Yep, setting us up for  a #1 QB pick(which you can do with 2 round 1's). Pitts is a once in 5 years player that will be a mismatch for nearly any team,so yeah lets' pass that guy up lol. I was right about JJ and I will be right about Pitts too. What kind of shape would we be in next year if we already had JJ and Pitts on our roster??? I'm old. IDK squat lol

I was definitely on the JJ bandwagon last year and I agree, I would have preferred to stay put at 6 and take either Chase or Pitts.  

8 hours ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Yep Parsons is right around that range,but "we dont draft LB's" lol

Well it's about time they change up their stragedy. Spelling intended on stragedy

45 minutes ago, EaglesTD123 said:

Well it's about time they change up their stragedy. Spelling intended on stragedy

😆

1 hour ago, matchew88 said:

Not us- Pitts is perfect for us. The coaches of teams before us

If we get that Carolina trade to 4 and ATL at 8,we still have a shot at him

1 hour ago, matchew88 said:

Not us- Pitts is perfect for us. The coaches of teams before us

IDk that "other teams" hire lame coaches either

6 hours ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Carolina. Thats a big move and the Pats would have to move all the way from 15. I dont see how they can do it

From 15 to 7?    Right in front of Carolina and Denver.    I think they could do it, especially with a team like Detroit at 7 that has a new coach. I can see them looking for more picks. 

To me a smart move for a team like Detroit.   You aren't passing Green Bay any time soon,  build up your squad with picks .

6 hours ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

If he gets to 10 you think Dullaz would pass on him??? I dont THINK SO. They would LOVE to have a guy better than Witten and we opened that door right up for them

The Giants is my gut feeling.  Their coach is a local guy too.  They need the pass rusher, but Pitts may be hard to pass up to put in an offense with Golladay, Barkley and the rest.  Solidify that skill unit for a while... like a good thing to do for your QB who has shown he can make all the throws. 

5 hours ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

IDK they can take Pitts,pretty much finish the offense and go CB in 2 and beyond. he is like a JJ on steroids and we're going to regret letting him get away(like we did JJ). Just another failed re-run of the usual bad decisions. With our round 1 picks the next 2 years,we'd better get guys to cover Pitts lol. Carolina should trade up to 4, putting ATL back to 8. They could take Pitts there also. If they don't I suspect he goes to Dullaz, but we effectively outsmarted oursevles again

I have to be honest.   To me the logical trade has always been Carolina and the Jets.    Idk but you keep obsessing about Atl and Carolina trading.   

2 things why I don't see it..

1. They are division rivals.   Why if you are ATL would you allow a division rival to move up that high to get their QB?

2.  Especially now with SF trading to #3.   Doesn't it make sense to move in front of them?   To ensure you get the guy you want?   

And here is a bonus for you... ATL, Cincy, Miami ( who just traded down) Detroit...  do you see any going QB?     So why trade up to 4 if you are Carolina?     Barring a New England trading up in front ( which you said you can't see how they do it)

The logical trade is with the Jets at #2.    Unless one is totally convinced the Jets are selecting a QB and are totally out on Darnold?   But I see them wanting more picks.   ATL at 4 is a great position to add Pitts, the first WR or the first OL.  Makes sense for them to take that guy to mix in ASAP with Ryan, Julio and the other WR whose name escapes me for some reason.   

15 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

The Giants is my gut feeling.  Their coach is a local guy too.  They need the pass rusher, but Pitts may be hard to pass up to put in an offense with Golladay, Barkley and the rest.  Solidify that skill unit for a while... like a good thing to do for your QB who has shown he can make all the throws. 

Mmmm they already of a TE that similar to Pitts in Engram not sure I see them going TE... Paye the Mich. DL makes the most sense for NY. 

2 hours ago, time2rock said:

I was definitely on the JJ bandwagon last year and I agree, I would have preferred to stay put at 6 and take either Chase or Pitts.  

I will tell you why I disagree.   If we has a QB that can make all the throws like our last one, yes go skill position.   But with the current guy, I don't see him maximizing what the skill guys can do.  So it's better to build up the defense with young picks , and 12 seems to be a good spot.  Hurts will run and run, and you have to cater to that style.   Those running QB types need a dominating D.   Or you add in an OL.  The WR or TE that would fit with a true passing type QB.  

Trading down for more picks,  especially getting a first round pick next year... no Brainerd.

The potential mistake that I see... BG already said it.   If the choice is between Parsons and a DL.  I could see the Eagles taking a DL strictly because it goes with their philosophy of priotitizing positions.   I agree somewhat with that, but they go overboard.   To the point where they pass up a potential pro bowl LB for a decent DL.   

11 minutes ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

Mmmm they already of a TE that similar to Pitts in Engram not sure I see them going TE... Paye the Mich. DL makes the most sense for NY. 

Engram drops too many balls.  His skill set comes in once the ball is in his hands.   Pitts #1 skill is going to get the ball.  They may have similar physical abilities,  but different skill sets or strengths.  

12 hours ago, joemas6 said:

I have to be honest.   To me the logical trade has always been Carolina and the Jets.    Idk but you keep obsessing about Atl and Carolina trading.   

2 things why I don't see it..

1. They are division rivals.   Why if you are ATL would you allow a division rival to move up that high to get their QB?

2.  Especially now with SF trading to #3.   Doesn't it make sense to move in front of them?   To ensure you get the guy you want?   

And here is a bonus for you... ATL, Cincy, Miami ( who just traded down) Detroit...  do you see any going QB?     So why trade up to 4 if you are Carolina?     Barring a New England trading up in front ( which you said you can't see how they do it)

The logical trade is with the Jets at #2.    Unless one is totally convinced the Jets are selecting a QB and are totally out on Darnold?   But I see them wanting more picks.   ATL at 4 is a great position to add Pitts, the first WR or the first OL.  Makes sense for them to take that guy to mix in ASAP with Ryan, Julio and the other WR whose name escapes me for some reason.   

 Idk we just moved BEHIND 2 of OUR division rivals(so why did we do that voluntarily???) 

7 hours ago, joemas6 said:

 ATL at 4 is a great position to add Pitts, the first WR or the first OL.

Yep ATL is the threat to take Pitts, so moving back signals to me we would let Dullaz or the Gnats have him if ATL doesn't take him(and I dont care who they have a TE because Pitts is more than a TE). I know they have their hearts set on Surtain(Dullaz does),but if Pitts is there I also dont think they are stupid enough(unlike us) to let him get by them. You are talking Witten on steroids and I'm sure they would love to have him and take their CB in round 2. Once again I am picturing what we could offer a QB draftee in 2022, if last year we had taken JJ and this year got Pitts. Those are 2 nice weapons right there that we missed on(or will potentially miss on)

7 hours ago, joemas6 said:

I will tell you why I disagree.   If we has a QB that can make all the throws like our last one, yes go skill position.   But with the current guy, I don't see him maximizing what the skill guys can do.  So it's better to build up the defense with young picks , and 12 seems to be a good spot.  Hurts will run and run, and you have to cater to that style.   Those running QB types need a dominating D.   Or you add in an OL.  The WR or TE that would fit with a true passing type QB.  

Trading down for more picks,  especially getting a first round pick next year... no Brainerd.

The potential mistake that I see... BG already said it.   If the choice is between Parsons and a DL.  I could see the Eagles taking a DL strictly because it goes with their philosophy of priotitizing positions.   I agree somewhat with that, but they go overboard.   To the point where they pass up a potential pro bowl LB for a decent DL.   

So what happens if after seeing Hurts all of 2021 they decide he isn't the guy and go grab their QB next year that fits the description of a true passing type QB?  Then similar to your DL/LB situation, you would have passed on a generational type skill position player for what would likely be a lesser player at another position.  

7 minutes ago, time2rock said:

So what happens if after seeing Hurts all of 2021 they decide he isn't the guy and go grab their QB next year that fits the description of a true passing type QB?  Then similar to your DL/LB situation, you would have passed on a generational type skill position player for what would likely be a lesser player at another position.  

Yeah,that fact we "wanted" to move up for Wilson,already tells me Hurts is only a fill in.Sadly we gave up JJ last year and it appears we will give up Pitts THIS year,and if he doesn't go to ATL,he will go to Dullaz,because they aren't stupid. Assuming Wentz does well in Indy we'd have 2 firsts which is more than enough to move to get your QB, but greedy Howie doesn't see it that way. having 3 firsts next year is great, but you just gave up a player who will impact the game for a decade, was it worth it? Personally, I dont think so. If ATL passes on Pitts,I could see us moving back up a bit,maybe like Joe said to 7,but I dont see any way he gets past Dullaz

56 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Yeah,that fact we "wanted" to move up for Wilson,already tells me Hurts is only a fill in.Sadly we gave up JJ last year and it appears we will give up Pitts THIS year,and if he doesn't go to ATL,he will go to Dullaz,because they aren't stupid. Assuming Wentz does well in Indy we'd have 2 firsts which is more than enough to move to get your QB, but greedy Howie doesn't see it that way. having 3 firsts next year is great, but you just gave up a player who will impact the game for a decade, was it worth it? Personally, I dont think so. If ATL passes on Pitts,I could see us moving back up a bit,maybe like Joe said to 7,but I dont see any way he gets past Dullaz

The rumor that we wanted to move up to 3 to get Wilson (I wouldn't call it fact because, well you know ... the media) tells me that if true, the earlier "reports" that Lurie instructed Howie to do whatever possible to build around Hurts was false.  So a true rumor to squash a false one, or a false one that contradicts an earlier possibly true one.  It's anyone's guess.  It's the silly season ... a lot of inaccurate info is purposely put out there by the teams so I try not to put much faith in them as being true.  

It seems most were on either Chase or Pitts (and quite a few also on Smith and Waddle).  It wouldn't surprise me in the least if 2 or 3 of those 4 are still there at 12.  If we still end up landing either Chase or Pitts (my 2 preferred targets) after trading back imagine how the perception of Howie will change (well at least temporarily).  lol

16 minutes ago, time2rock said:

The rumor that we wanted to move up to 3 to get Wilson (I wouldn't call it fact because, well you know ... the media) tells me that if true, the earlier "reports" that Lurie instructed Howie to do whatever possible to build around Hurts was false.

The fact that the trade between the Eagles and Dolphins came right after the 49ers trade makes me think there was a conversation between the Dolphins and Eagles about the 3 pick, but the Eagles passed on moving up.

Rapoport walked back his report pretty quickly, which makes me think the conversations that took place between the Dolphins and Eagles only focused on the Fins moving back up to 6, which makes me think they have a definite non qb target in mind, which to me has to be an olineman. There are four top receiver/TE prospects, but only two OT prospects, so that makes more sense to me. 

8 hours ago, joemas6 said:

Engram drops too many balls.  His skill set comes in once the ball is in his hands.   Pitts #1 skill is going to get the ball.  They may have similar physical abilities,  but different skill sets or strengths.  

I mean in terms of similar yes meant the physical and the fact both guys are not the most traditional inline TE neither are plus blockers(yet) and there biggest skill is what they can do after the catch.

But the fact they have a TE they like and major holes everywhere else makes me think it’s hard for them to take Pitts even if on the board. I’d think Dallas is more likely to take Pitts before NY... But honestly not sure either would take him other really good players in areas they need help in. 

Just now, Bleedinggreen93 said:

I mean in terms of similar yes meant the physical and the fact both guys are not the most traditional inline TE neither are plus blockers(yet) and there biggest skill is what they can do after the catch.

But the fact they have a TE they like and major holes everywhere else makes me think it’s hard for them to take Pitts even if on the board. I’d think Dallas is more likely to take Pitts before NY... But honestly not sure either would take him other really good players in areas they need help in. 

Dallas seems like a lock to take a corner. They are a team that fills holes in the draft, and they have a huge hole at corner.

NY isn't taking Pitts. They need oline and pass rushing help.

Pitts is getting a lot of press now, but the reality is that five teams in the top 11 need a qb, three of them have young qbs playing behind crap olines and two of them have good offenses and bad defenses. That leaves us and Detroit, so my guess is that Pitts or Chase is available at 12, and I think it will be Pitts.