how would you guys feel about grabbing BOTH of these guys. The Giants would probably have the best interior OL in the NFL and the running game would take off.
They could probably even trade down a spot or 2 and grab an extra 2nd rounder to use on an RB like Jones, Guice, or Michel.
Then, add an OT in round 2 as well. From rounds 3-6, they can go strictly defense and find guys to fit Bettcher's scheme. There is some quality LB's and EDGE guys who will be there in rounds 3 and 4. (Nwosu, Turay, Lorenzo Carter, Darius Leonard, Shaun Dion-Hamilton, Jerome Baker come to mind)
I'm still on the Barkley hype train, but this is not a bad second option if the reports that the Giants are considering not drafting a QB have any merit.
If we can trade down and get him with picks it would be joyous
but we will probably go QB
It's not to say we MUST pick a QB at #2, certainly not unless one carries the grade. But, we need a longer term perspective with this draft pick.
It's not to say we MUST pick a QB at #2, certainly not unless one carries the grade. But, we need a longer term perspective with this draft pick.
Yea I agree that QB should be priority 1, but if the Giants guy goes #1 and they don't love the options at QB left on the board, then they should not feel like they HAVE to take a QB.
Nelson is outstanding. I know highlight tapes don't tell the whole story, but I've never seen an OL with a 14 minute highlight tape from one season. And every single highlight is him either pancaking someone, or driving a guy 10 yards, or literally taking another player off the field while pulling and driving that guy out of bounds.
Positional value matters and we need offensive tackles and a long-term solution at QB.
Sign Norwell, Fleming and tender RFA Jones.
Draft, Nelson round 2, Crosby round 2 and Cole round 4.
Add Flowers, Wheeler, Bisnowaty to the mix and field the best 5 players.
This would be my hope. I think a slight trade down with Cleveland to pick 4 could next the 2 early 2nd round picks and maybe the 4th rounder as well. Could be a roster changing move.
Jones, who was solid last year and would benefit greatly from having 2 all-pro types flanking him. They could even sign a vet to a bargain deal, such as John Sullivan.
It's not likely to be perfect, that's the problem.
If NYG covets one at #2, they will pick him. They'd be unwise to pass up that opportunity, pick an OG, and hope for better luck down the road. Fans need to suck it up that the team could suck again next year, and Eli could be gone in a year.
I always wish we had multiple #1 picks.
I want the QB and I want to build younger.
How about
Fulton
Jennings
Hubbard
Now you've got potentially two tackles or at worst one tackle and with Fulton you get a solid guard and at worst Hubbard can be a solid guard but a probable tackle. You can always find guards in the future int he draft. But now you've locked up tackles for several years.
Being so top heavy at guard without good tackles our QB's will get crushed.
James Daniels, Iowa
What is
I always wish we had multiple #1 picks.
What is "FB" RB?
It's gonna be an exciting countdown to that number 2 pick
2. Nelson #1 draft pick to play LG
3. Either Ragnow or Bozeman #2 draft pick to play Center
Prospective starting line-up as follows:
Solder (LT), Nelson (LG), Ragnow (C), Fluker (RG), Flowers (RT)
All-of-a-Sudden we have a top five O-line = Serious Championship Contender
The Browns will either pick Barkley (if they have any sense) or Darnold (if they have no sense), so Nelson should fall in our laps.
Eli is still around, so the need isn't immediate. You also just spent a 3rd round pick on a kid who some people feel can play and a new HC with a reputation for nurturing QBs.
Something like trading down with Denver (for example) and picking up their 1st next year in the process is how something like the OL rebuild suggested by the OP is very realistic, while at the same time planning for the future.
It's not really one or the other.
2. Nelson #1 draft pick to play LG
3. Either Ragnow or Bozeman #2 draft pick to play Center
Prospective starting line-up as follows:
Solder (LT), Nelson (LG), Ragnow (C), Fluker (RG), Flowers (RT)
All-of-a-Sudden we have a top five O-line = Serious Championship Contender
The Browns will either pick Barkley (if they have any sense) or Darnold (if they have no sense), so Nelson should fall in our laps.
But it presumes Eli can still be a playoff quality QB
or that Webb will surprise and be that QB.
The approach to go for potential All Pro players
as opposed to QB usually leaves teams & fans frustrated.
Everything starts with QB with you intention is the SB.
Me, I'd draft QB at #2. And I'd keep drafting QB's
until I have one that will bring us the SB.
In the playoffs, it's usually the QB's Show. Great defensive
teams like Buddy Ryan's Eagles couldn't beat the best
ones. Remember the playoff game with SF where Montana
was either being dumped on his ass by that great line
until he held on long enough to get those TD's and win.
You can still win without trading down. Saying goodbye to Eli and Brandon Marshall - you can get free agents that I mentioned and you could go after quality linebackers - Fro example if you wanted to win so bad Avery Wiliamson and Tahir Whitehead would be two super pickups. Along with the offensive lienmenneman i suggested
you win with defense and you have ODB. Then each progressive year the QB you took at 2 becomes a much a larger impact. ANd you have a young OLine to grow with him.
Not taking the QB at 2 is a short-sighted move.
Quote:
1. Nate Solder free agent to play LT
2. Nelson #1 draft pick to play LG
3. Either Ragnow or Bozeman #2 draft pick to play Center
Prospective starting line-up as follows:
Solder (LT), Nelson (LG), Ragnow (C), Fluker (RG), Flowers (RT)
All-of-a-Sudden we have a top five O-line = Serious Championship Contender
The Browns will either pick Barkley (if they have any sense) or Darnold (if they have no sense), so Nelson should fall in our laps.
But it presumes Eli can still be a playoff quality QB
or that Webb will surprise and be that QB.
The approach to go for potential All Pro players
as opposed to QB usually leaves teams & fans frustrated.
Everything starts with QB with you intention is the SB.
Me, I'd draft QB at #2. And I'd keep drafting QB's
until I have one that will bring us the SB.
In the playoffs, it's usually the QB's Show. Great defensive
teams like Buddy Ryan's Eagles couldn't beat the best
ones. Remember the playoff game with SF where Montana
was either being dumped on his ass by that great line
until he held on long enough to get those TD's and win.
I want the QB. ANd in regards to Montana, I do know The Giants record vs him in the playoffs was 3-2 Giants and two games he was knocked out.
2. Nelson #1 draft pick to play LG
3. Either Ragnow or Bozeman #2 draft pick to play Center
Prospective starting line-up as follows:
Solder (LT), Nelson (LG), Ragnow (C), Fluker (RG), Flowers (RT)
All-of-a-Sudden we have a top five O-line = Serious Championship Contender
The Browns will either pick Barkley (if they have any sense) or Darnold (if they have no sense), so Nelson should fall in our laps.
+1
It's exactly the pick you make.
You can still win without trading down. Saying goodbye to Eli and Brandon Marshall - you can get free agents that I mentioned and you could go after quality linebackers - Fro example if you wanted to win so bad Avery Wiliamson and Tahir Whitehead would be two super pickups. Along with the offensive lienmenneman i suggested
you win with defense and you have ODB. Then each progressive year the QB you took at 2 becomes a much a larger impact. ANd you have a young OLine to grow with him.
Not taking the QB at 2 is a short-sighted move.
I certainly understand the sentiment, but you can equally look at it from the other point of view. If you take a QB at 2, you must be convinced that he is the guy. (and if he is it is a no-brainer).
But if you are not convinced, then explore other options.
This is Robert Gallery all over again. BBI was infatuated with that guy and how he was a “blue chip” LT that would be lock down the blind side for 10 years. Can’t-miss sure thing. Uh huh.
TG for Ernie Accorsi.
This is Robert Gallery all over again. BBI was infatuated with that guy and how he was a “blue chip” LT that would be lock down the blind side for 10 years. Can’t-miss sure thing. Uh huh.
TG for Ernie Accorsi.
Nelson is not Gallery. He just isn't. However, would I pick Nelson at #2? No. I want a QB.
And for those who think Fluker is so great, guess again. His pass blocking is not good.
Quote:
Especially a guard. Just not a pick you make at that point.
It's exactly the pick you make.
You are tiresome. Go away.
It's exactly the pick you make.
You are tiresome. Go away.
Only a fool would take a guard with the 2nd pick in the draft. Top notch left tackle prospect, OK but not over a possible franchise QB.
Draft picks can blow up in your face, no matter what position you pick .
The ones people remember best (and they don't let you forget their failures) are the #1 over-all QBs that have flopped (because it's the most glamorous position)
Terry Baker, David Carr, David Klingler, Tim Couch, Ryan Leaf (2nd overall), Ja Marcus Russell
Draft picks can blow up in your face, no matter what position you pick .
The ones people remember best (and they don't let you forget their failures) are the #1 over-all QBs that have flopped (because it's the most glamorous position)
Terry Baker, David Carr, David Klingler, Tim Couch, Ryan Leaf (2nd overall), Ja Marcus Russell
And the QBs that have hit, have been integral to their team's success pretty much for their entire career.
Show me the LG who single-handedly made his team a contender for the length of his career. Now, to add a dimension to the argument, look at the best guards in recent NFL history (for argument's sake, let's say within the cap era), and tell me how high or low they were drafted. How many were top 5? How many were top 10? How many were even first round?
No one is saying that Nelson, in a vacuum, is a bad player. But is he marginally better than Smith, Wynn, Hernandez (all prominent OG prospects who figure to be available at #34) by such a such an amount that you'd be willing to sacrifice the highest draft pick the Giants have had since they picked Lawrence Taylor? I'd argue that Nelson may not be better than Smith (and maybe even Wynn) at all, let alone by a sufficient margin that I'd be willing to give up the chance at a potential franchise QB or a playmaker at a premium position.
Here's the other reason why teams are (and should be) reluctant to use a top 10 pick on an OG: the 5th-year option for top 10 picks is equal to the transition tag salary (average of the top 10 salaries at that position in the NFL) - and keep in mind that the NFL considers all OL together for these calculations.
Which means that if you draft Nelson in the top 10, you effectively give away your 5th-year option in the process, because you would have to pay him the average of, essentially, the top 10 OLT salaries in order for you to use the option.
For example, if Washington elects to use the 5th year option on Scherff, it will cost them ~$14MM (and it's fully guaranteed for injury at the start of the league year). It will more than double his cap number YOY. In fact, it almost triples if they use the option. It will make Scherff the most expensive OG in the league in his option year!
Conversely, a QB, while the most expensive top 10 5th-year option, still remains a reasonable scenario because that number is within range of what a starting QB tends to get paid. And a RB would barely see his cap number increased at all compared to the AAV of the #2 pick contract.