glazeduck

That's great. He's a 5th year college player who -- IN A LOWER DIVISION -- never averaged more than 3 1/2 recs a game in any of his seasons. The Sr. Bowl is a handful of games where he was one of the oldest players there. His 5 year career in college, again, in a lower division, shouldn't be ignored...

There's a lot to like, physically. It's fair to wonder though, why he didn't absolutely dominate in lower division CFB. That's what's keeping me from getting fully onboard. NFL draft history is littered with tons of height/weight/speed freaks who couldn't play WR. At 25 he'd be a pass for me. Moving down (or up from our 2) and he'd be more interesting...

Yep, best player still on my board...

Getting this thread back on track after yesterday's madness... Call this an anti-sleeper, if you like, but Jalen Wydermyer is absolutely worth a late round dart throw. There's plenty to be concerned about with this kid, and it's probably not unfair to say he's likely to be nothing in the pros, but clearly there is (or was) something there. Maybe he needs to grow up? Maybe he was hiding an injury? Maybe he doesn't actually love the game, or to the point that the above link makes, maybe he's just not in peak physical shape and/or didn't refine his testing techniques. Any/all of those could be true, but if you can untap his potential, he could be an absolute bargain with a 6th or 7th round pick.

For probably the 10th time, you're clearly very convinced with all of this, why not put some money behind it? Or at the very least, please stop talking to everyone else like we're the ones who look crazy, when you're coming here with the NFL Draft version of screaming "lizard people control the world". Like Gunner said, we're as convinced that you're wrong as you're convinced that you're right.

With the 49th pick in the 2022 NFL Draft, the Green Bay Packers select Trey McBride, TE, Colorado State. OT or DL could be considerations here, but we'll instead opt for the best player at TE, adding another weapon in both the run game and the passing game for A-Arodg. The Bucs (Sherlock Holmes) are now on the clock...

@FFadpecr I'll give you props for having a solid opinion on this. I'm a big believer in needing to have confidence in your draft opinions. I've been very outspoken over the years here on Tebow, DK, Zach Moss, Ed Oliver and others, so props to you for your conviction. That said, the fact that you're unwilling to even acknowledge my bet offers leads me to believe you're either doing an elaborate troll job here, or, more likely, not as convinced as you're projecting (using a random intern suggesting they take him in the 2nd isn't helping your case either).

From a random intern, no less.

Cherrypicking is fun isn't it? Tyler Locket = tiny at any position Russell Wilson = tiny qb Bruce Irvin = tiny DE Britt = tiny OL

This is getting ridiculous. So Pete, who somehow has always secretly hated Russell Wilson because of his size, put the Super Bowl in that man's hands -- INSTEAD OF ONE OF THE BEST GOAL LINE BACKS OF ALL TIME -- because... why exactly? You've made your point, I've made mine. Let's have one of us make some money off of it since you're somehow so sure. I think you're beyond hot-takey at this point, but we'll find out in a few weeks.

We just going to pretend like Russell Wilson and Tyler Lockett never played for the Seahawks? Your points are all over the place with this. The Seahawks didn't draft MOST of the players you're referencing. Carlos Dunlap was traded for because they needed pass rushing (and is, at best, perhaps an above-averagely sized DE), Drew Lock was traded for because they need a warm body at QB not because of his size (also kinda defeats your "Carson Strong will beat him out" point if you're also using him as an example of a Pete Carroll type player); Chris Carson and Penny's most significant FLAWS are their size (Carson's because he's such a big target and Penny's size is because he's always in terrible shape); Gabe Jackson and Lewis have been... maybe passable for the Seahawks? So again, not like going with the big guys is really working out super well there. EDIT: I'll also add that many in Seattle are urging Pete to retire because he's refused to evolve his football philosophies, so I have a VERY hard time believing that they're going to let him screw up that pick from trading their franchise QB with another player that fits that old school mold... So like I said, put your money where your mouth is if you're so certain. Maybe the Hawks trade down later to take Strong, I don't think your logic is completely inconceivable, but the absolutely will not be taking him at 9.

I'm more than a little familiar with Pete Carroll. As am I with this draft class. Care to put some money on this since you're so certain?

Completely fair. I trust our staff though, they've hit enough home runs with guys like him that it's a pick I'd be excited about. I like Woolen but I also DO NOT like, well, just about every other player on that board, at the value, so there's some of that coming into play too... Entirely unrelated to my rantings and ravings about Tariq Woolen -- There's 11 or so votes that I think are just completely wasted. That's fun too...

I like Strong, he's a target of my in dynasty. That said, I don't think there's any way he goes top 11 in the draft. Possibly late 1 in a trade up (or Lions) scenario, early-to-mid 2 feels much more likely.

Woolen is far from a finished product, no question. But again I think you have to take everything into context... Tre's coming off a major injury (best to buy him time) Dane is...meh (called that one last year) We're good enough to -- at worst -- remain competitive while Woolen develops and Tre recovers, especially with McDuffie also on board (blech) The rest of the board, as you've mentioned does not break out well for us We can't trade down in this bizzaro world (agree with you that a move down in real life, here, would probably be the best setup, especially since I don't think Woolen lasts this long in real life) We're in a world where offenses are using more 3, 4 and 5 wide sets and pass catching TE/RB threats, so more DBs will never be a bad thing We're also in a world with a longer schedule now. Depth is increasingly important, so adding to our most glaring weakness (especially when juxtaposed against this era of offenses) is also not a bad idea Our staff has a track record of: developing DBs getting the most out of raw athletes new to their positions If you're looking at that board and asking who will make the biggest day 1 impact, Tariq Woolen might not be in the top 50 for that answer. But when you factor all of the above in (perhaps foremost being letting Tre progress slowly and completely) and you ask the question, who on the board could make the biggest impact on Super Bowl Sunday... I think there's a strong case that it's Woolen (to say nothing of farther into the future...)

With this board and without being able to trade, it's Walker and no one else is close. To be clear, I'm not advocating for double dipping at CB as a strategy, merely that that's the best course of action in this particular situation.

I was one of the few who was completely okay with taking DK over Oliver, so right there with you (don't get me started on Ford...). I don't like McDuffie, both because he's a Husky (which might as well be a swear word in my house) but also because I think he's pretty tapped out. He might be a low-end CB1 but I think much more likely to be an average CB2 if not maybe an above average slot guy. That's not worth a 1 to me. Either way, take the crazy athlete at the position of need to me.

Agree to disagree. RBs are VERY replaceable, top end athlete CBs aren't. Also adding multiple CBs allows Tre an abundance of time to get right. In our window, we shouldn't be drafting for what the player can do for us day 1, we should be drafting for what they could do for us in the Super Bowl, and to me, Woolen does a lot more in that frame of mind as well... Again though, I wouldn't hate Walker.

This is all VERY moot, because the guy we're debating will be long gone by 57 AND our 1st rd pick was...not a good one. But since you're wanting to debate... The NFL is evolving, looking to get the ball to athletes in space. CB is our most glaring need and our 2nd biggest need has no real viable candidates available. Our staff has repeatedly proven their ability to develop toolsy athletes and Woolen is that in spades. They've also show their ability to move guys around and find fits in different positions (neither Poyer nor Hyde were full time safeties when they came here) -- I'm not saying that we draft Woolen or McDuff to move them to S, but they'd find ways to get them on the field. Perhaps Johnson becomes the S and McDuff stays where he's best in the slot. My whole point is simply that the type of player aligns better to the value and need on the board with Woolen than arguably anyone else. I personally HATED the McDuffie pick too, so might as well right that wrong... Walker is the only other guy available I can see a viable debate for, so agree w/ you there. I just also happen to like a number of RBs deeper into the draft and am also fine with airing it out 60x a game lol

This type of thinking doesn't get you Josh Allen, or Dawson Knox, or Greg Rousseau... or Super Bowl rings.

You say this like we didn't JUST use our 1st and 2nd round picks on the same position last year...

For perspective... Our very own Joe Marino mocked Woolen to us IN THE FIRST ROUND in his newest mock draft. Feels high, which is why I've said before that the ideal scenario is trading down to improve our 2 and ending up with Woolen and George Pickens, BUT... he'd be a steal at 57.

Definitely get and like the thought, but I'd focus more on teams with multiple high 2s or a late 1/high 2 and try to swaps 1s and 2s with them... Jets, Lions and Seahawks all fit that mold. Let them move up to get a "their guy" (Lions, perhaps w/ a QB) and upgrade our 2 so we can get 2 higher level players instead of 1... That'd be my though.

Right conference, wrong school. Give me Zamir White and Kevin Harris all day long.