Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Redskins Forum Mock: St. Louis is on the Clock
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Washington Redskins
View previous topic :: View next topic  

The St. Louis Rams select?
Sammy Watkins
81%
 81%  [ 9 ]
Greg Robinson
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Justin Gilbert
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Jake Matthews
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Johnny Manziel
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Ha'Sean Clinton-Dix
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Khalil Mack
18%
 18%  [ 2 ]
Anthony Barr
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Mike Evans
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Aaron Donald
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Total Votes : 11

Author Message
mike23md


Joined: 21 Jan 2007
Posts: 7717
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2014 9:08 am    Post subject: Redskins Forum Mock: St. Louis is on the Clock Reply with quote

1. Houston Texans - Jadeveon Clowney, DE, South Carolina

St. Louis is on the clock with the Washington Redskins pick.

St. Louis has a few areas they could address like OT, WR, CB, S and DT.

That being said, who does Jeff Fisher and staff pick here.

You decide.
_________________


2015 NFL MOCK DRAFT
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PARROTHEAD


Joined: 08 Mar 2009
Posts: 4391
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2014 10:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I went Sammy. Cause they have another pick in the first.. Sammy is the type gift they were hoping for when trading RG I believe.
_________________


Trinidad: Where you can play dodgeball, jump off a diving board, and call a team the Redskins without the Communist Left sayin otherwise.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PSID412


Joined: 28 Feb 2010
Posts: 1382
Location: Bristol England
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2014 11:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The talk is if they don't trade down they will take Mack so that who I picked.
_________________

^ Awesome sig by Mike23md
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
MKnight82


Joined: 04 Mar 2009
Posts: 6641
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2014 11:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

PSID412 wrote:
The talk is if they don't trade down they will take Mack so that who I picked.
I did the same. Makes a lot of sense for their needs.
_________________


Redskins FFMD War Room
http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=541707
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SeanTayorsaPIMP


Joined: 14 Oct 2006
Posts: 3568
Location: Boston, Ma
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2014 12:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Watkins on turf Shocked nuff said.
_________________



mike23md on the sig!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 62201
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2014 1:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sammy Sammy Sammy!

Bradford needs a #1 WR like I need a billion dollars! Laughing
_________________
RIP SSFmike23md
Quote:
Preseason 10; Final Cuts 33; Reg Season 41
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 62201
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2014 1:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MKnight82 wrote:
PSID412 wrote:
The talk is if they don't trade down they will take Mack so that who I picked.
I did the same. Makes a lot of sense for their needs.
Isn't Mack a pass rusher? OLB/De?

I don't see the need there. They two pro bowl caliber pass rushers.

Now, if they're thinking of having Mack play SLB, good luck with that. We tried that experiment with Orakpo in 2009 and it didn't go so well trying to make a defensive end a SLB/SAM.

If they want a SLB/SAM they'd be better off trading down and taking CJ Mosely. He'd have to put on 5-10 lbs, but that's doable. They're going to need an OLB that can cover in their 4-3 scheme, and that's not Mack.
_________________
RIP SSFmike23md
Quote:
Preseason 10; Final Cuts 33; Reg Season 41
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
mike23md


Joined: 21 Jan 2007
Posts: 7717
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2014 3:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Their biggest need is a true #1 WR and the fact that Watkins is being talked about at #2 means they need Watkins. This will allow more single coverage on Austin which could be like DeSean in Philly.
_________________


2015 NFL MOCK DRAFT
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MKnight82


Joined: 04 Mar 2009
Posts: 6641
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2014 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

turtle28 wrote:
MKnight82 wrote:
PSID412 wrote:
The talk is if they don't trade down they will take Mack so that who I picked.
I did the same. Makes a lot of sense for their needs.
Isn't Mack a pass rusher? OLB/De?

I don't see the need there. They two pro bowl caliber pass rushers.

Now, if they're thinking of having Mack play SLB, good luck with that. We tried that experiment with Orakpo in 2009 and it didn't go so well trying to make a defensive end a SLB/SAM.

If they want a SLB/SAM they'd be better off trading down and taking CJ Mosely. He'd have to put on 5-10 lbs, but that's doable. They're going to need an OLB that can cover in their 4-3 scheme, and that's not Mack.
Yes, Mack is an OLB who can rush the passer, buts he's more athletic than Brian Orakpo. He played OLB in college and would be a good fit at OLB in any system, just like Von Miller was. The Cincinnati Bengals use large OLBs in their 4-3 scheme in the same way. You can never have too many pass rushers. That would given them Long, Brockers, Langford, Quinn, Ogletree, Laurinitis, & Mack. They would have the best front 7 in football.

I'm not as high on Sammy Watkins as you guys are. He's very athletic but he has a lot of question marks IMO. He didn't have a good Junior year, and I think taking him in the top 3 is too risky. I'd rather have Mack.
_________________


Redskins FFMD War Room
http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=541707
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 62201
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2014 5:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MKnight82 wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
MKnight82 wrote:
PSID412 wrote:
The talk is if they don't trade down they will take Mack so that who I picked.
I did the same. Makes a lot of sense for their needs.
Isn't Mack a pass rusher? OLB/De?

I don't see the need there. They two pro bowl caliber pass rushers.

Now, if they're thinking of having Mack play SLB, good luck with that. We tried that experiment with Orakpo in 2009 and it didn't go so well trying to make a defensive end a SLB/SAM.

If they want a SLB/SAM they'd be better off trading down and taking CJ Mosely. He'd have to put on 5-10 lbs, but that's doable. They're going to need an OLB that can cover in their 4-3 scheme, and that's not Mack.
Yes, Mack is an OLB who can rush the passer, buts he's more athletic than Brian Orakpo. He played OLB in college and would be a good fit at OLB in any system, just like Von Miller was. The Cincinnati Bengals use large OLBs in their 4-3 scheme in the same way. You can never have too many pass rushers. That would given them Long, Brockers, Langford, Quinn, Ogletree, Laurinitis, & Mack. They would have the best front 7 in football.

I'm not as high on Sammy Watkins as you guys are. He's very athletic but he has a lot of question marks IMO. He didn't have a good Junior year, and I think taking him in the top 3 is too risky. I'd rather have Mack.
Watkins had a down Junior Year? What are your standards? He has to catch 120+ receptions and go for 2000 yards and 20 tds?

In 2012, as a sophomore, Watkins had 57 receptions for 708 yards and three touchdowns. (If I remember correctly, Watkins battled through injuries in his sophomore year)

Last year in his junior year, Watkins had 101 receptions for 1,464 yards and 12 touchdowns. He went on to be MVP of the 2014 Orange Bowl when he set an Orange Bowl record with 16 receptions for 227 yards. He also set the school record for career receptions in the game finishing with 240.
_________________
RIP SSFmike23md
Quote:
Preseason 10; Final Cuts 33; Reg Season 41
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
MKnight82


Joined: 04 Mar 2009
Posts: 6641
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2014 6:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

turtle28 wrote:
MKnight82 wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
MKnight82 wrote:
PSID412 wrote:
The talk is if they don't trade down they will take Mack so that who I picked.
I did the same. Makes a lot of sense for their needs.
Isn't Mack a pass rusher? OLB/De?

I don't see the need there. They two pro bowl caliber pass rushers.

Now, if they're thinking of having Mack play SLB, good luck with that. We tried that experiment with Orakpo in 2009 and it didn't go so well trying to make a defensive end a SLB/SAM.

If they want a SLB/SAM they'd be better off trading down and taking CJ Mosely. He'd have to put on 5-10 lbs, but that's doable. They're going to need an OLB that can cover in their 4-3 scheme, and that's not Mack.
Yes, Mack is an OLB who can rush the passer, buts he's more athletic than Brian Orakpo. He played OLB in college and would be a good fit at OLB in any system, just like Von Miller was. The Cincinnati Bengals use large OLBs in their 4-3 scheme in the same way. You can never have too many pass rushers. That would given them Long, Brockers, Langford, Quinn, Ogletree, Laurinitis, & Mack. They would have the best front 7 in football.

I'm not as high on Sammy Watkins as you guys are. He's very athletic but he has a lot of question marks IMO. He didn't have a good Junior year, and I think taking him in the top 3 is too risky. I'd rather have Mack.
Watkins had a down Junior Year? What are your standards? He has to catch 120+ receptions and go for 2000 yards and 20 tds?

In 2012, as a sophomore, Watkins had 57 receptions for 708 yards and three touchdowns. (If I remember correctly, Watkins battled through injuries in his sophomore year)

Last year in his junior year, Watkins had 101 receptions for 1,464 yards and 12 touchdowns. He went on to be MVP of the 2014 Orange Bowl when he set an Orange Bowl record with 16 receptions for 227 yards. He also set the school record for career receptions in the game finishing with 240.
I meant his sophomore year.
_________________


Redskins FFMD War Room
http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=541707
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 62201
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2014 6:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MKnight82 wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
MKnight82 wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
MKnight82 wrote:
PSID412 wrote:
The talk is if they don't trade down they will take Mack so that who I picked.
I did the same. Makes a lot of sense for their needs.
Isn't Mack a pass rusher? OLB/De?

I don't see the need there. They two pro bowl caliber pass rushers.

Now, if they're thinking of having Mack play SLB, good luck with that. We tried that experiment with Orakpo in 2009 and it didn't go so well trying to make a defensive end a SLB/SAM.

If they want a SLB/SAM they'd be better off trading down and taking CJ Mosely. He'd have to put on 5-10 lbs, but that's doable. They're going to need an OLB that can cover in their 4-3 scheme, and that's not Mack.
Yes, Mack is an OLB who can rush the passer, buts he's more athletic than Brian Orakpo. He played OLB in college and would be a good fit at OLB in any system, just like Von Miller was. The Cincinnati Bengals use large OLBs in their 4-3 scheme in the same way. You can never have too many pass rushers. That would given them Long, Brockers, Langford, Quinn, Ogletree, Laurinitis, & Mack. They would have the best front 7 in football.

I'm not as high on Sammy Watkins as you guys are. He's very athletic but he has a lot of question marks IMO. He didn't have a good Junior year, and I think taking him in the top 3 is too risky. I'd rather have Mack.
Watkins had a down Junior Year? What are your standards? He has to catch 120+ receptions and go for 2000 yards and 20 tds?

In 2012, as a sophomore, Watkins had 57 receptions for 708 yards and three touchdowns. (If I remember correctly, Watkins battled through injuries in his sophomore year)

Last year in his junior year, Watkins had 101 receptions for 1,464 yards and 12 touchdowns. He went on to be MVP of the 2014 Orange Bowl when he set an Orange Bowl record with 16 receptions for 227 yards. He also set the school record for career receptions in the game finishing with 240.
I meant his sophomore year.
I thought he battled through an ankle injury in his sophomore year if I remember correctly. I'll try to find out.

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2012/12/31/3823438/sammy-watkins-injury-clemson-lsu

Quote:
Watkins hobbled off the field with an apparent leg injury. Watkins was pummeled by imposing LSU defensive end Barkevious Mingo in the backfield after taking a handoff, then had to be helped to the sideline and carted off the field with a towel over his head.

It was later announced he has an injured right ankle. X-rays were negative, but he's out for the game.

Watkins has missed time due to both suspension and injury this year. Despite missing three full games, he still finished the year with 808 yards from scrimmage.

_________________
RIP SSFmike23md
Quote:
Preseason 10; Final Cuts 33; Reg Season 41
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Brian23


Joined: 08 Feb 2010
Posts: 6653
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2014 10:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is either Watkins or a WR. If the Rams are set on Bradford as their franchise, they need to get him weapons as he's -never- had a quality outside WR. Watkins fits that bill.

If not him, its one of the QB's. That's if they have to pick here though.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 62201
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2014 10:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MKnight82 wrote:
Yes, Mack is an OLB who can rush the passer, buts he's more athletic than Brian Orakpo. He played OLB in college and would be a good fit at OLB in any system, just like Von Miller was. The Cincinnati Bengals use large OLBs in their 4-3 scheme in the same way. You can never have too many pass rushers. That would given them Long, Brockers, Langford, Quinn, Ogletree, Laurinitis, & Mack. They would have the best front 7 in football.


http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/players/1754653/khalil-mack

In reading about and watching Mack, I'm sorry, but my suspicions are confirmed about him translating to a 4-3 SLB, as they were about Orakpo in 08.

He's been a pass rusher all 4 years at Buffalo, most of the time with his hand in the dirt. He struggled to drop in coverage, and struggles with his hips, fluidness in coverage, he also had problems with missed tackles.

People like him for his pass rushing skills - nothing else.

Moving him to a 4-3 SLB would be a mistake IMO, and a waste of his pass rushing talent. He needs to be in a 3-4 as an OLB, or a 4-3 RDE.
_________________
RIP SSFmike23md
Quote:
Preseason 10; Final Cuts 33; Reg Season 41
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Woz


Moderator
Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 19370
Location: in a land where the furniture folds to a much smaller size
PostPosted: Fri Apr 11, 2014 10:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The correct answer was either Greg Robinson or Jake Matthews.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Washington Redskins All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
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 vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group