PDA

View Full Version : How Good is Paul Oliver?


Thunder&Lightning
07-16-2007, 10:40 AM
was he really gonna be a top 10 pick next year?

Man_Of_Steel
07-16-2007, 10:49 AM
was he really gonna be a top 10 pick next year?

No, he wasnt going to be a top ten pick. Alot of people think he was a late first early second but I think he would have been a solid second. Not too many knocks on him however his speed is sub-par. Jack of all trades to me that does everything you look for but isnt great in everything.

nbarnett56
07-16-2007, 11:04 AM
I thought he was pretty overrated. That game where he "shut Calvin Johnson down" Reggie Ball threw for a whopping 42 yards. Granted Oliver did make some good coverage plays though in that game. Overall I think he will be a solid player. He won't have to come in and start will be behind Jammer and Cromartie so he will pretty much just be a nickleback.

As always, the draft is hit and miss. Players come out of nowhere and become 1st round picks so its tough to say. He is in a good situation though so time will tell.

BamaFalcon59
07-16-2007, 11:12 AM
was he really gonna be a top 10 pick next year?

Yes, but only if he measured in a the reported 6'0 205 and ran the reported 4.3/4.4.

eacantdraft
07-16-2007, 12:52 PM
No he isn't very good. He was the 4th round pick that he was. Probably would be a good nickleback, not that good of a CB.

draftguru151
07-16-2007, 12:55 PM
Have you ever even seen him play ea? For some reason I think you haven't.

Oliver would have been at worst the #2 preseason senior CB and there is a legitimate argument for him being the #1. Him being a top 10 pick next year would have been dependent on his senior season but preseason there is an argument for it.

eacantdraft
07-16-2007, 01:13 PM
Have you ever even seen him play ea? For some reason I think you haven't.

Oliver would have been at worst the #2 preseason senior CB and there is a legitimate argument for him being the #1. Him being a top 10 pick next year would have been dependent on his senior season but preseason there is an argument for it.

Oliver had a slow 40 time. And there was a reason why he was chosen in the 4th round and not the 1st round. One day he may be a good NFL player, but he was not a top 10 prospect in quality.

draftguru151
07-16-2007, 01:18 PM
Is that why Scott has him as the #7 senior? Oliver's 40 time and workout are irrelevant because if he was playing next year none of that would be known. Where you are picked in the supplemental doesn't reflect where you would have actually gone in the real draft. Would Oliver definitely been a top 10 pick, no clue, but if he wasn't in the supplemental he would be projected there.

eacantdraft
07-16-2007, 02:34 PM
Is that why Scott has him as the #7 senior? Oliver's 40 time and workout are irrelevant because if he was playing next year none of that would be known. Where you are picked in the supplemental doesn't reflect where you would have actually gone in the real draft. Would Oliver definitely been a top 10 pick, no clue, but if he wasn't in the supplemental he would be projected there.

Oliver's workout totals would have sent his stock spiraling in the regular draft just like it did the supplemental draft. There has been plenty of players who went in the 1st round of the supplemental draft (surprisingly most were busts), so if Oliver was highly ranked, he would have gone in the 1st or 2nd round.

Workouts can make or break a player's draft status more than anything they did on the field in college.

Moses
07-16-2007, 02:43 PM
Oliver had a slow 40 time. And there was a reason why he was chosen in the 4th round and not the 1st round. One day he may be a good NFL player, but he was not a top 10 prospect in quality.

His slow 40 time likely had a lot to do with a lack of time to train for it.

Paranoidmoonduck
07-16-2007, 02:57 PM
I personally think we would have seen Oliver fall off a little. Georgia lost both of its disruptors on that defensive line in Moses and Johnson, something that played a huge part in the success of that secondary.

I thought Oliver played well last year, but I wasn't sure I saw fantastic lock-down skill. He most certainly would have gone within the first two round barring a terrible season, but I don't think he was the next big thing at cornerback either.

JK17
07-16-2007, 11:19 PM
No he isn't very good. He was the 4th round pick that he was. Probably would be a good nickleback, not that good of a CB.

If he's so slow, as you say he is in your next quote, nickelback is not a good position for him. You're nickel should be a quick guy if he's gonan be matched up on a speedy receiver usually...why would you want a slow guy there...he makes a better #2 corner.

Oliver had a slow 40 time. And there was a reason why he was chosen in the 4th round and not the 1st round. One day he may be a good NFL player, but he was not a top 10 prospect in quality.

Maybe he was chosen in the 4th because it was the supplemental draft. I don't know many teams who would be willing to throw out a first rounder for next year in a supplemental draft.


Oliver's workout totals would have sent his stock spiraling in the regular draft just like it did the supplemental draft. There has been plenty of players who went in the 1st round of the supplemental draft (surprisingly most were busts), so if Oliver was highly ranked, he would have gone in the 1st or 2nd round.

Workouts can make or break a player's draft status more than anything they did on the field in college.

Oliver also had less time to prepare, like all the other prospects did. But even so, assuming he's slow I doubt it drops him to day two. It could but who knows. At this point though, he's not a fourth rounder. I know a few players have gone in round two, but who are these players who have gone in round one? I could be wrong I haven't researched the Supplemental draft history, but I can't think of too many 1st round supplemental players.

Edit: After looking it up a little, I only see about 5-6 players taken in the first round, and a couple more taken in round two, and most of the first rounders are from a longer time back, like Kosar, Bosworth, Rob Moore, Steve Walsh, Bobby Humphrey, and Dave Wilson. None of those guys were drafted in the past ten years though, so clearly there has been a trend away from using first rounders in the supplemental draft. The whole "he would've been drafted in the first if he was that good" argument doesn't have much weight.

Average OT LB
07-16-2007, 11:25 PM
Is that why Scott has him as the #7 senior? Oliver's 40 time and workout are irrelevant because if he was playing next year none of that would be known. Where you are picked in the supplemental doesn't reflect where you would have actually gone in the real draft. Would Oliver definitely been a top 10 pick, no clue, but if he wasn't in the supplemental he would be projected there.

jon clayton on espn says that the supplemental draft translates roughly to one round lower from the draft in april...

Average OT LB
07-16-2007, 11:29 PM
If he's so slow, as you say he is in your next quote, nickelback is not a good position for him. You're nickel should be a quick guy if he's gonan be matched up on a speedy receiver usually...why would you want a slow guy there...he makes a better #2 corner.



Maybe he was chosen in the 4th because it was the supplemental draft. I don't know many teams who would be willing to throw out a first rounder for next year in a supplemental draft.




Oliver also had less time to prepare, like all the other prospects did. But even so, assuming he's slow I doubt it drops him to day two. It could but who knows. At this point though, he's not a fourth rounder. I know a few players have gone in round two, but who are these players who have gone in round one? I could be wrong I haven't researched the Supplemental draft history, but I can't think of too many 1st round supplemental players.

You're pretty much right on, nobody is silly enough to submit a first round bid for a supplemental player... However Oliver's slow speed and low intelligence alone could easily drop him to day two, especially considering his position.

JK17
07-16-2007, 11:31 PM
jon clayton on espn says that the supplemental draft translates roughly to one round lower from the draft in april...

That's definitely not an exact science, but Oliver is/was being talked about as a first rounder...So were some third rounders this year, at this point, last year, but I don't know if Oliver would have fallen that far. It's possible but the point remains the same, Your draft status in the supplemental draft has little correlation wtih your actual draft value.

JK17
07-16-2007, 11:34 PM
You're pretty much right on, nobody is silly enough to submit a first round bid for a supplemental player... However Oliver's slow speed and low intelligence alone could easily drop him to day two, especially considering his position.

Yeah, it definitely could have, but I don't know if it drops him that far still. Then again, look at Daymeighon Hughes who had a good senior year and fell to the end of the third because he was slow. Definitely wasn't going to be a top ten pick I don't think, and could easily have fallen to day two...I don't know how much of his poor speed though can be attributed to his lack of preparation time. The other guys numbers' who prepare for the combine and pro days have a lot of time to get ready and workout, whereas Oliver didn't really. No excuses still, but its all guesswork to know where he would have been at next year, at the combine.

CC.SD
07-16-2007, 11:37 PM
We'll never know, will we?

The guy ran a 4.4 out of high school, he just had no time to train. I'm not worried about his speed. The guy is in an ideal situation for a corner to learn and develop; monster pass rush, experienced veterans, no pressure. I think he has a very solid career ahead of him.

Average OT LB
07-16-2007, 11:38 PM
Yeah, it definitely could have, but I don't know if it drops him that far still. Then again, look at Daymeighon Hughes who had a good senior year and fell to the end of the third because he was slow. Definitely wasn't going to be a top ten pick I don't think, and could easily have fallen to day two...I don't know how much of his poor speed though can be attributed to his lack of preparation time. The other guys numbers' who prepare for the combine and pro days have a lot of time to get ready and workout, whereas Oliver didn't really. No excuses still, but its all guesswork to know where he would have been at next year, at the combine.

yeah the preperation is a good point, and maybe he isnt as slow as we think he is. What i do know is that hes not fast, and if hes not fast he cant play nickel. If he cant play nick he might as well not play cb casue where would he play. That would mean hed have to be a backup to the safeties, mccree hart jue weddle.. wow 5th safety? im liking his chances of making the team..
heres a thought, maybe we drafted him to replace hank milligan, on special teams. I bet that positions worth a 4th rounder..

JK17
07-16-2007, 11:42 PM
yeah the preperation is a good point, and maybe he isnt as slow as we think he is. What i do know is that hes not fast, and if hes not fast he cant play nickel. If he cant play nick he might as well not play cb casue where would he play. That would mean hed have to be a backup to the safeties, mccree hart jue weddle.. wow 5th safety? im liking his chances of making the team..
heres a thought, maybe we drafted him to replace hank milligan, on special teams. I bet that positions worth a 4th rounder..

We'll also have to see where his game speed is at though. I'm not an expert on Oliver and to be honest, as much as I love the draft, I don't know too much about the prospects until the draft comes closer, because I'm a much bigger NFL fan then NCAA fan. I do know though, that lots of times game speed differs from workout speed. Maybe Oliver can keep up as the nickel maybe not. Maybe he's not intended to play nickel, maybe he'll be a better backup safety, backup cornerback, situational player who knows. Maybe they're doing it to push Cromartie to play when Florence is gone after this year, maybe its just for cornerback and safety depth in general. Maybe they want him to start one day at cornerback or safety, who knows what they want, but I'm willing to wait on ruling out the positions he can't play until we see him on the field and see that he's too slow.

ChargerCohen just said he ran a 4.4 out of High School. Whether he can still do that, whether it was mistimed, who knows, but if he can run that speed, and does it towards TC or the season, thats not to slow for a nickelback, if you ask me.

Average OT LB
07-16-2007, 11:45 PM
We'll also have to see where his game speed is at though. I'm not an expert on Oliver and to be honest, as much as I love the draft, I don't know too much about the prospects until the draft comes closer, because I'm a much bigger NFL fan then NCAA fan. I do know though, that lots of times game speed differs from workout speed. Maybe Oliver can keep up as the nickel maybe not. Maybe he's not intended to play nickel, maybe he'll be a better backup safety, backup cornerback, situational player who knows. Maybe they're doing it to push Cromartie to play when Florence is gone after this year, maybe its just for cornerback and safety depth in general. Maybe they want him to start one day at cornerback or safety, who knows what they want, but I'm willing to wait on ruling out the positions he can't play until we see him on the field and see that he's too slow.

ChargerCohen just said he ran a 4.4 out of High School. Whether he can still do that, whether it was mistimed, who knows, but if he can run that speed, and does it towards TC or the season, thats not to slow for a nickelback, if you ask me.

yeah well 4.4 was 4 years ago and im sure alot less bulk.. remember you dont walk into the nfl the same weight you walk into college as..

as for the positions sure who knows where hes going but it makes you wonder what the hell we're doing.. just like scott chandler... please tell me a charger fan understands that pick.

JK17
07-17-2007, 12:01 AM
yeah well 4.4 was 4 years ago and im sure alot less bulk.. remember you dont walk into the nfl the same weight you walk into college as..

as for the positions sure who knows where hes going but it makes you wonder what the hell we're doing.. just like scott chandler... please tell me a charger fan understands that pick.

Yeah I'm not really impressed by something he did 4 years ago, its just something to ponder.


Apparently, Chandler has been doing good...When he'll play, or what he'll be used for beats me. But from what I hear, he looks like a player...

Average OT LB
07-17-2007, 12:20 AM
Yeah I'm not really impressed by something he did 4 years ago, its just something to ponder.


Apparently, Chandler has been doing good...When he'll play, or what he'll be used for beats me. But from what I hear, he looks like a player...

while we're speaking of players that seem to have no point.. what about legedu what of him? i dont exactly like the idea of him going antwaan randle el on us and playin qb or smething stupid.. whats his future anybody know?

JK17
07-17-2007, 12:25 AM
while we're speaking of players that seem to have no point.. what about legedu what of him? i dont exactly like the idea of him going antwaan randle el on us and playin qb or smething stupid.. whats his future anybody know?

I read they are using him as an H-Back, and possibly someone to fill in for Neal down the road? (I think I heard that somewhere, but it doesn't make much sense to me)....

Maybe he'll do good as an H-Back, but who knows...it was a weird draft.

Average OT LB
07-17-2007, 12:34 AM
I read they are using him as an H-Back, and possibly someone to fill in for Neal down the road? (I think I heard that somewhere, but it doesn't make much sense to me)....

Maybe he'll do good as an H-Back, but who knows...it was a weird draft.

i have a feeling hes purely for special teams.. and that a couple guys who played last year wont make the team..

its crazy to think wed draft someone for special teams, but i guess that maybe if you're as good as we are you can do that?

JK17
07-17-2007, 12:47 AM
i have a feeling hes purely for special teams.. and that a couple guys who played last year wont make the team..

its crazy to think wed draft someone for special teams, but i guess that maybe if you're as good as we are you can do that?

Well now you're just being cocky...and you will get destroyed for that. You better hope it doesn't bite you in the ass either, and we really flop.

Average OT LB
07-17-2007, 12:58 AM
Well now you're just being cocky...and you will get destroyed for that. You better hope it doesn't bite you in the ass either, and we really flop.

hahaha you say cocky like you say it all the time.. cause i know you didnt just call me cocky for saying the chargers dont have any glaring holes.. THEY DONT!

JK17
07-17-2007, 01:12 AM
hahaha you say cocky like you say it all the time.. cause i know you didnt just call me cocky for saying the chargers dont have any glaring holes.. THEY DONT!

Except the whole being unproven thing at safety, ILB, and WR.

Average OT LB
07-17-2007, 01:24 AM
Except the whole being unproven thing at safety, ILB, and WR.

yeah which is why our first three picks were WR S and ILB ... then we had nothing to do so we picked a special teams guy.. is that so complicated?

JK17
07-17-2007, 01:33 AM
yeah which is why our first three picks were WR S and ILB ... then we had nothing to do so we picked a special teams guy.. is that so complicated?

No, but you just said we had no glaring holes, then I said we did, then you agreed with me, meaning we do have glaring holes, meaning you were wrong.

You also said something along the lines of "when your as good as we are, you can do that", which I said was cocky.

You seem to miss the point of everything I post, I didn't say I don't think he's a ST guy, or we could afford to draft a ST guy, I said your being too cocky, which has no relevance whatsoever to why we drafted Legedu Nannee, or Paul Oliver, or anyone you mentioned.


EDIT: I don't mean glaring that is a bit of an overstatement, but there are certainly holes.

CC.SD
07-17-2007, 06:47 PM
No, but you just said we had no glaring holes, then I said we did, then you agreed with me, meaning we do have glaring holes, meaning you were wrong.

You also said something along the lines of "when your as good as we are, you can do that", which I said was cocky.

You seem to miss the point of everything I post, I didn't say I don't think he's a ST guy, or we could afford to draft a ST guy, I said your being too cocky, which has no relevance whatsoever to why we drafted Legedu Nannee, or Paul Oliver, or anyone you mentioned.


EDIT: I don't mean glaring that is a bit of an overstatement, but there are certainly holes.

I agree that no NFL team doesn't have holes, but fast forward to the 2008 draft; where can we draft someone in the first round where they'd start immediately?

Not on the D-line. If Cooper or Wilhelm totally bust, then maybe. But they've shown a lot in limited time. Dear God not in the secondary. None of the skill positions. Maybe the O-line. It's a pretty stacked team. I think that's the jist of what he was saying.

Xenos
07-18-2007, 04:48 PM
yeah well 4.4 was 4 years ago and im sure alot less bulk.. remember you dont walk into the nfl the same weight you walk into college as..

as for the positions sure who knows where hes going but it makes you wonder what the hell we're doing.. just like scott chandler... please tell me a charger fan understands that pick.

We drafted Chandler because we have no other pass catching TE after Gates. Manu is more a blocking TE. Legendu Naanee has potential and lot of upside. He can be used almost anywhere on the field because of his freakish abilities.

myinnerself
07-18-2007, 05:08 PM
Chandler was drafted because we had precisely two TE's, Gates and Manu, and that's it. If you don't understand that pick than you probably don't understand how to read a Charger roster or depth chart. Naanee will play some wide out, some h-back, and some TE. The kid had a real good camp, and can be used all over, including special teams. I loved our draft this year.

And to the Paul Oliver stuff. Realize that football players don't train to maximize their 40 yard dash times during a season. They train to get big and to stay quick and have stamina. After the season every guy that entered the draft last year worked for MONTHS at the exact drills that would be at the combine and pro days, which means they worked on 40 times, cone drills, and vert, stuff like that. A 4.5 isn't that slow, and when you consider that he doesn't look slow and game tapes, which is pretty unanimour about him, and that he only trained for what, a month maybe for the pro day stuff, I think his speed is JUST FINE. We'll see how he shapes up, but he has a whole season to learn and adjust and I see him as a great pick up.

JK17
07-18-2007, 05:20 PM
Chandler was drafted because we had precisely two TE's, Gates and Manu, and that's it. If you don't understand that pick than you probably don't understand how to read a Charger roster or depth chart. Naanee will play some wide out, some h-back, and some TE. The kid had a real good camp, and can be used all over, including special teams. I loved our draft this year.

I don't think he doesn't get the concept of depth. But why, when we need depth on both our offensive and defensive lines among other positions, would we draft a TE, where we already have Gates and Manu. Depth could have been found later, since the position, although significant in our offense, is not as important as some of the other line positions that have little depth.

It's not like he's criticizing drafting a superstar at a position we need. It was a questionable pick, so I don't think its that he doesn't understand how to read a roster or depth chart. Personally I'm not huge on the pick either. I know he's playing well and I'm glad we have the depth, but there are other positions that needed more serious consideration to depth.

JK17
07-18-2007, 05:21 PM
I agree that no NFL team doesn't have holes, but fast forward to the 2008 draft; where can we draft someone in the first round where they'd start immediately?

Not on the D-line. If Cooper or Wilhelm totally bust, then maybe. But they've shown a lot in limited time. Dear God not in the secondary. None of the skill positions. Maybe the O-line. It's a pretty stacked team. I think that's the jist of what he was saying.

Oh yeah, obviously we have few holes, but there are some, like ILB that could turn out to be potential problems for us.

CC.SD
07-18-2007, 06:59 PM
I could understand why some people question the Chandler pick, but so much of our aerial attack goes through the TE spot; if Gates goes down, we had no one, since we let Krause go. Manu is a blocker and spot catcher. Chandler was the best tight end on the board in the fourth round, and depth there was more urgent than on the lines.

Obviously the FO likes guys like Lekkerkerker, Mruckowski and Oben for O-line depth. and every once in a while an article will get released about how well Ryon Bingham is doing, and obviously Cesaire is a gamer. Our line depth is passing grade. Our TE depth was critical at the time of the draft.



I'm not too worried about our ILBs; Cooper and Wilhelm have shown a lot during their tenure, and remember how absolutely monstrous Dobbins was in the preseason last year? It was obvious he didn't belong with the second and third stringers. Throw in the potential of Waters and Siler and I'd say we're pretty set at the position. I wouldn't mind having Godfrey back, but this youth movement has been in motion for a while.

Average OT LB
07-18-2007, 07:14 PM
No, but you just said we had no glaring holes, then I said we did, then you agreed with me, meaning we do have glaring holes, meaning you were wrong.

You also said something along the lines of "when your as good as we are, you can do that", which I said was cocky.

You seem to miss the point of everything I post, I didn't say I don't think he's a ST guy, or we could afford to draft a ST guy, I said your being too cocky, which has no relevance whatsoever to why we drafted Legedu Nannee, or Paul Oliver, or anyone you mentioned.


EDIT: I don't mean glaring that is a bit of an overstatement, but there are certainly holes.


Okay obviously you seem to misunderstand everything i post so let me go all the way back and walk you through it.
First i asked what that hybrid player was up to, to which you responded that he might play H-back. Since he doesnt really fill a need for us, i concluded that he would be a special teams player since there is no where else he could play right now. What that means is the positions in which we had unproven players- we had already drafted. Therefore we had no real problems and could draft just the best athlete- and he could play special teams. Never did i agree with you when you said we had glaring holes. I agreed that we had players who were considered unproven. A glaring hole is when theres nobody at that spot. what more did you want us to do? draft each unprvoen spot twice?

Now the cocky thing- I said "its crazy to think wed draft someone for special teams, but i guess that maybe if you're as good as we are you can do that?"
SInce this isnt really hard to decipher but you got tripped up on it anyway let me break it down. First, notice the question mark. What that indicates is that there is uncertainy in the sentence. Next, notice how i started with .. its crazy to think.. which indicates something ..crazy... to... think... All that probably means that it would be crazy to suspect the chargers would draft a special teams guy... but since the guy doesnt fill any real purpose... is that wrong?

No sir, i am not cocky. You over reacted, misunderstood, and basically tried to make me look foolish by listing what you didnt say and then said i acknowledged i was 'wrong'.... when i never did..

JK17
07-18-2007, 11:12 PM
I could understand why some people question the Chandler pick, but so much of our aerial attack goes through the TE spot; if Gates goes down, we had no one, since we let Krause go. Manu is a blocker and spot catcher. Chandler was the best tight end on the board in the fourth round, and depth there was more urgent than on the lines.

Obviously the FO likes guys like Lekkerkerker, Mruckowski and Oben for O-line depth. and every once in a while an article will get released about how well Ryon Bingham is doing, and obviously Cesaire is a gamer. Our line depth is passing grade. Our TE depth was critical at the time of the draft.



I'm not too worried about our ILBs; Cooper and Wilhelm have shown a lot during their tenure, and remember how absolutely monstrous Dobbins was in the preseason last year? It was obvious he didn't belong with the second and third stringers. Throw in the potential of Waters and Siler and I'd say we're pretty set at the position. I wouldn't mind having Godfrey back, but this youth movement has been in motion for a while.

I just don't agree that the depth at the lines were less of a need then the depth at TE. But that's just my opinion on why I think it was questionable. I don't hate the pick at all, I know Chandler's a player, but there were other options at the time too, which is why it was questionable.

I'm not terribly worried about the ILB's either. For the most part I like all of them, it could potentially be a problem though.

JK17
07-18-2007, 11:18 PM
Okay obviously you seem to misunderstand everything i post so let me go all the way back and walk you through it.
First i asked what that hybrid player was up to, to which you responded that he might play H-back. Since he doesnt really fill a need for us, i concluded that he would be a special teams player since there is no where else he could play right now. What that means is the positions in which we had unproven players- we had already drafted. Therefore we had no real problems and could draft just the best athlete- and he could play special teams. Never did i agree with you when you said we had glaring holes. I agreed that we had players who were considered unproven. A glaring hole is when theres nobody at that spot. what more did you want us to do? draft each unprvoen spot twice?

I didn't debate for a second Nannee would probably be used as a special teamer so just about all of this is irrelevant, and just used to make your post longer. I already said glaring was an overstatement, so I don't think your going to get much of an argument out of me there either.

Now the cocky thing- I said "its crazy to think wed draft someone for special teams, but i guess that maybe if you're as good as we are you can do that?"
SInce this isnt really hard to decipher but you got tripped up on it anyway let me break it down. First, notice the question mark. What that indicates is that there is uncertainy in the sentence. Next, notice how i started with .. its crazy to think.. which indicates something ..crazy... to... think... All that probably means that it would be crazy to suspect the chargers would draft a special teams guy... but since the guy doesnt fill any real purpose... is that wrong?

No sir, i am not cocky. You over reacted, misunderstood, and basically tried to make me look foolish by listing what you didnt say and then said i acknowledged i was 'wrong'.... when i never did..

It being "crazy to think" that the Chargers would draft a ST player, and then doing it, isn't what I objected to, and has no relevance to my objection anyway. And a question mark after saying, "if you're as good as we are" doesn't make it sound any less cocky. But fine, I get that your a cocky fan in that case and its fine, I'll let it go. And in terms of overreacting, all I did was say you were being cocky, and you might wanna wait for the season to actaully start for that.

DChess
07-19-2007, 12:50 AM
dont ask us, ask calvin johnson

Sniper
07-19-2007, 01:27 AM
dont ask us, ask calvin johnson

Or ask Calvin Johnson who his QB was ;)

Average OT LB
07-19-2007, 02:31 AM
I didn't debate for a second Nannee would probably be used as a special teamer so just about all of this is irrelevant, and just used to make your post longer. I already said glaring was an overstatement, so I don't think your going to get much of an argument out of me there either.



It being "crazy to think" that the Chargers would draft a ST player, and then doing it, isn't what I objected to, and has no relevance to my objection anyway. And a question mark after saying, "if you're as good as we are" doesn't make it sound any less cocky. But fine, I get that your a cocky fan in that case and its fine, I'll let it go. And in terms of overreacting, all I did was say you were being cocky, and you might wanna wait for the season to actaully start for that.

Whhhattt?? Did i not just hold your hand and walk you threw that? how can i be cocky when i've fought you over the quality of like each player. Please explain to me how the hell im cocky, if all i said was that we have a stacked rsoter. Is that not true? Oh i get it, i said that we were gonna go undefeated and win the super bowl. Oh, i didnt even talk about winning? that must mean... yes... its coming to me... im not cocky! I was stating a fact. An undeniable fact. A fact which you eluded to in your first paragraph. So please point to where i was cocky.

As for breaking up the sentence, i think it makes for a better case coming from your perspective if all i said was, "if you're as good as we are". Thats slander.

Xenos
07-19-2007, 04:13 AM
I don't think he doesn't get the concept of depth. But why, when we need depth on both our offensive and defensive lines among other positions, would we draft a TE, where we already have Gates and Manu. Depth could have been found later, since the position, although significant in our offense, is not as important as some of the other line positions that have little depth.

It's not like he's criticizing drafting a superstar at a position we need. It was a questionable pick, so I don't think its that he doesn't understand how to read a roster or depth chart. Personally I'm not huge on the pick either. I know he's playing well and I'm glad we have the depth, but there are other positions that needed more serious consideration to depth.

I don't understand what you mean. TE was really one of the few places that needed depth. What other positions needed depth? The DL? The only thing I could think of is someone to groom to replace for Jamal, but seeing as how there weren't that many good DTs available in this draft, I suppose it's better to stick with Bingham and McKinney(who I hope can become the heir apparent to Jamal). We are pretty much set at ILB.

JK17
07-19-2007, 10:39 AM
I don't understand what you mean. TE was really one of the few places that needed depth. What other positions needed depth? The DL? The only thing I could think of is someone to groom to replace for Jamal, but seeing as how there weren't that many good DTs available in this draft, I suppose it's better to stick with Bingham and McKinney(who I hope can become the heir apparent to Jamal). We are pretty much set at ILB.

Yes, TE, was a position we needed depth in, and I didn't say there were a lot we did need it in, but if you look at our O-Line, we have Mcruzowzki backing up both guard slots right now, and Oben getting much older. On the D-Line there's bingham and Cesaire who are pretty good players, but I wouldn't get your hopes up on McKinney. ILB was good after we addressed it in the draft, so its mainly just the O-Line, and somewhat the D-Line, I would have liked to be added to.

I know I said I wasn't thrilled with the pick earlier, but I didn't mean I hated it. It did fill one of the few position we needed depth in, and I don't remember who exactly would have been available for the other positions I would have rather had either, I just know I wasn't expecting TE to come off the board, at least in the fourth, for us, though now that I look back at it a little more, I'm not as suprised as I was on draft day.

USAF Chief
07-19-2007, 03:31 PM
I think Oliver was not top 10 material next year, but given the situation of what he can become vs. what was spent to acquire him, SD made a good decision that I think they will likely not regret.

I don't think the true value of this pick will manifest this year, but perhaps the year after when the young corners can step up and make a BIG impact for their team (Cromartie and Oliver is a great young duo) and as a KC fan I don't look forward to playing that duo.

Out.

Xenos
07-20-2007, 12:52 AM
Yes, TE, was a position we needed depth in, and I didn't say there were a lot we did need it in, but if you look at our O-Line, we have Mcruzowzki backing up both guard slots right now, and Oben getting much older. On the D-Line there's bingham and Cesaire who are pretty good players, but I wouldn't get your hopes up on McKinney. ILB was good after we addressed it in the draft, so its mainly just the O-Line, and somewhat the D-Line, I would have liked to be added to.

I know I said I wasn't thrilled with the pick earlier, but I didn't mean I hated it. It did fill one of the few position we needed depth in, and I don't remember who exactly would have been available for the other positions I would have rather had either, I just know I wasn't expecting TE to come off the board, at least in the fourth, for us, though now that I look back at it a little more, I'm not as suprised as I was on draft day.

On the oline, we have Mcruzowzski at guard, Olivea who can slide into the guard position (which I think is his idea position), Withrow who can play center and guard. As for the tackle position, we have Lerkerkerker who can play both right and left tackle. I think he should be our future right tackle, but that's just my opinion. Then we have the draft picks from last year who spent time in NFL Europe like Jerome Clary (tackle). Also there's that tackle Leonard Pope who I hear did well in NFL Europe, and possible backup replacement for Oben in the future. My ideal situation would be to have at least 5 backups for the individual starters, but that's not gonna happen because of the 53 man roster restraint.

On the Dline, we also have Derek Robinson who played very well in Igor's place last season. So we our three starters in Igor, Louis, and Jamal; and then their backups in Robinson, Cesaire, Bingham, and Brandon. Once again, 53 man roster limits adding more. We will draft Jamal's replacement next year no doubt.

bergo23
07-22-2007, 02:15 PM
I think AJ will go beef next year, especially having sewed up Oliver....who fills a need after DFlo leaves (hopefully not for KC!!!)

We can definately use a future RT to move Olivea inside, and a DT to groom behind Jamal.