Lurker

Geez..I wasn't too impressed with that clip. He seemed more like a jumbo package SS than a LB. Not much take on strength (only 19 reps at the combine, 227 pounds at his pro day) and a frame that's maxed out (short arms, small hands). I guess I'll look for a better set of highlights or game film on him...

has him at 15[/url] Charlie Casserly does and Nawrocki has him at 15, the second highest DB on his board. He's not my first pick, but I won't bat an eye if Barron's the way Buddy goes. I want smart, hard-nosed football players that can make a difference on this team and he fits the bill.

Who cares what the previous GMs did? Are they making the pick next Thursday? Buddy's ability to evaluate talent is head and shoulders above Donahoe and Marv/Jauron. If you stay away from a pick because Whitner Lynch, Losman, et al sucked, what sense does that make? If Barron's the guy, it's because THIS administration has done it's homework and thinks he's a difference maker...

He can play both, but he'd play SS here with Bryd at free. His solid run support would help a ton, as well his ability to be physical against TEs, which has been a killer liability here for a long time. If Buddy has him rated higher than Gilmore, I have no problem with the pick.

Barron's a SS...

Thursday can't come soon enough...

Or myopia...

Yes, that's a good philosophy...look at next year's roster (Wilson would be 32 in 2013) and draft his replacement today. The same logic applies at CB (Florence and McGee are both 31, too). The fact that three starters/major contributors in the secondary are 31 shines a pretty bright light on Barron or Gilmore at #10, even with the big hole at LOT and LB depth. Of the two, I'd lean toward Barron as a bigger contributor (almost a mini-LB against the run, strong enough to cover TEs) with a better NFL pedigree and experience. I'd he happy with the pick as long as we got Massie in the second (or signed a stopgap like Mcneil )...

Kendricks is a LB, not an OT. I'd love to have him slip to us at the top of the 3rd, but I suspect he'll go to a team like the Ravens in the 2nd. That's a very good mock, BGBIM. In the immortal words of John Butler, I'd be wiggling and shaking big time if we could pull that one off. The only change I'd make is Mychal Kendricks (fingers crossed) in the 3rd. The more I look at Massie, the more I think he's a Buddy kind of OT, so getting Gilmore in the first seems like a good value tradeoff to an OT at #10.

The pre-draft "common knowledge" is what's hard to take seriously, especially this year when the first round talent seems so thin. What's happening now is that the curtain is being lifted a bit as teams finalize their boards--and a lot of what we thought we knew gets tuned upside down. I'm a big fan of Pro Football Weekly and I was shocked to see that Nawrocki--based on considerable feedback from NFL teams--has guys that were formerly highly rated slipping way down the board. Jonathan Martin, who was almost always thought of as a day one pick, is now considered a low second rounder due to concerns about his strength. OTOH, Rueben Randle is is now viewed as a first round pick. Smoke and mirrors? Maybe. But maybe the January-March plotline was even more so...

Home field advantage? Just give it to him...

It amazes me that people still think Jenkins is on Buddy's board after the comments he made at the draft luncheon...

That comparison is silly. Miller was drafted as a pass rush guy, period. ILBs are valued significantly less than 3-4 rush backers...

Yes, Gilmore would fill a need and he was my darkhorse to Glenn. However, it locks them into taking OT in the second, so the guy they want better be there when they pick (and they better hope no team jumps ahead of them to get that player). It would be a disaster, IMO, if they don't come out of Friday with an immediate contributor to the LOT position (either sharing time with Hairston or outright starting). You can cobble together a WR or CB corps with the spare parts we have--but there aren't many band-aids that can be used to cover up for a lack of NFL-quality OT depth when the inevitabile injury occurrs...

To which Buddy said: At the end of the 45-minute session, Nix returned to the quesiton of getting a difference-maker as it related to an offensive tackle. Said Nix: "I guess I was thinking a big play maker, which a tackle is not. But a difference maker is a guy that makes youre team better and can do things to make you be able to do more, like throwing down the field more. So I think in that light, certainly a left tackle fits that need."

That's why Glenn makes sense to me--he's a bigger (and IMO, better) version of what Hairston was in his draft year. Their playing styles are similar. If Glenn's the day-one starter and gets hurt at some point, inserting Hairston at LOT could be done without missing a beat/changing the gameplan...

Thank goodness Scott never put a flip-the-bird emoticon on here...

My God, I didn't realize that!

Head coach was fired...

So nice to open up another thread on this...

It could just as easily be that Floyd's been taken off their board, despite what all the pundits think, and Doug wasn't comfortable talking about him...

"I'd be really dumb to pick a guy just based on where he's from. ... We go down to the south because that's where the players are'" Looks like he's still fishing in the same hole. "Chris Hairston might not be the prettiest foot athlete [but] he can protect the back side. Sounds like Glenn as well. Buddy seems to like big men in the LOT position, even if they're not dancing bears. "We expect this team to be competitive all year ... It's time for us to take the next step" We want immediate starters/major contributors with picks 1-3, not developmental QBs or guys who need to adjust to an NFL playbook.

Maybe this would help...

Kalil is clearly a top 5 guy, irrespective of competition. I wonder about Keuchly but give him the benefit of the doubt due to his measureables. Martin and Adams look like guys who could slide to the lower half of Round 1 or (in Adams case) be available at 2. Something about Reiff and Floyd bugs me. They seem to be locked in to their 10-15 rankings and almost have a press machine vibe going.

I wonder if Buddy questions the level of competition those guys have faced. We know he's clearly biased toward the SEC, but maybe he's just not that impressed with the Big Ten or ND's 2010 or 2011 strength of schedule...