Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 11:15 pm Posts: 25452 Location: Under my wing like Sanford & Son Gender: Male
I see nothing wrong with it. If I'm not mistaken Seattle's current front office includes some of the Packers guys who had a hand in drafting Rodgers while they still had Favre and they've been in the news as looking at drafting a developmental guy.
_________________ Now that god no longer exists, the desire for another world still remains.
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:28 am Posts: 28541 Location: PORTLAND, ME
Orpheus wrote:
I see nothing wrong with it. If I'm not mistaken Seattle's current front office includes some of the Packers guys who had a hand in drafting Rodgers while they still had Favre and they've been in the news as looking at drafting a developmental guy.
taking a qb to develop is one thing, sure... but not in the 2nd round. they took rodgers when favre was getting near the end, not when they'd just invested in him being their #1 for a significant period of time (like Flynn).
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:03 pm Posts: 26481 Location: virginia Gender: Male
yeah, not sure if he will check in or not, he is on his honeymoon. Brandee might meet up with them later this evening, and if so i can try to find out if he wants to make a pick, but i doubt he is too worried about it.
_________________ what is that a titleist..............Hole in one
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:53 pm Posts: 20537 Location: The City Of Trees
Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:
yeah, not sure if he will check in or not, he is on his honeymoon. Brandee might meet up with them later this evening, and if so i can try to find out if he wants to make a pick, but i doubt he is too worried about it.
No kidding. Why don't you go ahead and make this pick, then.
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:53 pm Posts: 20537 Location: The City Of Trees
EllisEamos wrote:
Orpheus wrote:
I see nothing wrong with it. If I'm not mistaken Seattle's current front office includes some of the Packers guys who had a hand in drafting Rodgers while they still had Favre and they've been in the news as looking at drafting a developmental guy.
taking a qb to develop is one thing, sure... but not in the 2nd round. they took rodgers when favre was getting near the end, not when they'd just invested in him being their #1 for a significant period of time (like Flynn).
For what it's worth, Peter King seems to think that it's a lock that the Seahawks will take Tannehill if he's available at #12. I wouldn't agree with making that Tannehill move, though--give Flynn a fair chance, I think he'll be good.
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:28 am Posts: 28541 Location: PORTLAND, ME
Green Habit wrote:
EllisEamos wrote:
Orpheus wrote:
I see nothing wrong with it. If I'm not mistaken Seattle's current front office includes some of the Packers guys who had a hand in drafting Rodgers while they still had Favre and they've been in the news as looking at drafting a developmental guy.
taking a qb to develop is one thing, sure... but not in the 2nd round. they took rodgers when favre was getting near the end, not when they'd just invested in him being their #1 for a significant period of time (like Flynn).
For what it's worth, Peter King seems to think that it's a lock that the Seahawks will take Tannehill if he's available at #12. I wouldn't agree with making that Tannehill move, though--give Flynn a fair chance, I think he'll be good.
PK is working hard for tannehill and whoever's going to trade up to get him.
Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:
What do the jets need, ive looked at 6 or 7 mocks and they are all different, rb, lb, wr, safety, not sure what to pick for them
they already landed a LB, so one of the other positions would work.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:03 pm Posts: 26481 Location: virginia Gender: Male
EllisEamos wrote:
Green Habit wrote:
Is it time to just open this up so we can get through the 2nd round? I still want to make the Broncos' pick before it's too late.
its mostly going to be me and you (i too would still like to pick for the Pats later this round).
doesnt look like too many other people are paying attention, id say if it takes more then 4 or 5 hours, or if someone has on and didnt make their pick, then we just decide for them
_________________ what is that a titleist..............Hole in one
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:28 am Posts: 28541 Location: PORTLAND, ME
Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:
EllisEamos wrote:
Green Habit wrote:
Is it time to just open this up so we can get through the 2nd round? I still want to make the Broncos' pick before it's too late.
its mostly going to be me and you (i too would still like to pick for the Pats later this round).
doesnt look like too many other people are paying attention, id say if it takes more then 4 or 5 hours, or if someone has on and didnt make their pick, then we just decide for them
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum