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

Predict the 53 Roster and Practice Squad-Post Draft
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> San Francisco 49ers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
wilmtalk


Joined: 16 Aug 2009
Posts: 182
Location: nor cal
PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2013 11:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

niner4ever wrote:
.
Practice Squad players
DL: Tony Jerrod-Eddie
OLB: Cam Johnson/Darius Fleeming
WR: Ricardo Lockette
DL: Lawrence Okoye
OL: Luke Marquardt
CB: Marcus Cooper
OL: Al Netter
QB: Nate Montana

PUP/IR
Lattimore

I. Nate Montana due to his fathers history.



That is the silliest thing I have ever seen posted. Nate got an invite to camp and that's about all his fathers history will get him. He is not that good, even by college standards, and the invite was enough charity. This year more than any that I can remember the cuts will be hard to make and there just isn't enough space available even on the practice squad for the quality players left. Harbaugh is not going to waste a space for Joe's kid. That would be disrespectful all around.

Harbaugh also mentioned that he would like to keep a third QB active for games but this QB would also have to play mulitple positions. That would seem to point to either Danials or Gray. they may carry a fouth QB on the practice squad and that one could even be either Colt or Tolzein.I also don't understand why Jenkins would be a lock over Lockette. Lockette is faster and bigger and one of the knocks on Jenkins was his slight frame If he builds himself up that might inturn affect his speed.. Harbaugh is not going to keep a lesser player just to save face for a bad #1 pick if he doesn't show measurable improvement this year I think they don't think twice about dumping him on the practice squad or cutting him. They just have too many other options to wait on him much longer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
49ers Finest


Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 8727
Location: San Jose
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 3:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Interesting point. Idk if everybody know but tramine Brock's tender is fully guaranteed this year
_________________
***WE RUN THE WEST!***
SB AT HOME!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

new sig... sorry alex
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kikuchiyo


Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 2109
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 4:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

49ers Finest wrote:
Interesting point. Idk if everybody know but tramine Brock's tender is fully guaranteed this year


He was also one of our best ST players last year. I know a lot of people expect him to be cut, but I think he lasts at least one more year.
_________________

A Big Thanks To PatsDynasty21
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oldman9er


Joined: 24 Oct 2006
Posts: 39793
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 8:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

49ers Finest wrote:
Interesting point. Idk if everybody know but tramine Brock's tender is fully guaranteed this year


I believe this to be inaccurate. RFA tenders in general are not guaranteed... some can be guaranteed once they are still on the roster after week 1 begins.. but not prior. Where did you hear/read that?
_________________

___
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oldman9er


Joined: 24 Oct 2006
Posts: 39793
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 8:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

^ been reading some conflicting stuff on whether guaranteed or not, now... Think
_________________

___
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
49ers Finest


Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 8727
Location: San Jose
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 6:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oldman9er wrote:
^ been reading some conflicting stuff on whether guaranteed or not, now... Think


Oh maybe... Idk. I'm not sure
I remember reading matt maicco (sp) saying that I think
I'll look into it too
_________________
***WE RUN THE WEST!***
SB AT HOME!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

new sig... sorry alex
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
adamq


Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 7803
Location: Missouri
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 7:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.csnbayarea.com/blog/matt-maiocco/early-odds-49ers-53-man-roster

Quote:
"We present the opportunity," 49ers general manager Trent Baalke told CSNBayArea.com in March at the NFL owners meetings. "We never put a ceiling on any player, whether it's a draft pick or a free agent, college free agent. We never put a ceiling on what they can be within our system.

"We look at it like, 'We're bringing you in to compete.' You will earn that role on this team through competition. That's with every player."



meanwhile, in Cowgirl land...

http://cowboysblog.dallasnews.com/2013/05/jerry-jones-i-dont-think-that-we-do-have-a-country-club-atmosphere-around-here.html/


Quote:
“I don’t think that we do have a country club atmosphere around here,” Jones said. “There’s too much competition. These players recognize how fortunate they are to be in the NFL, to have these opportunities. We’ve got as good or better leadership than my experience in 24 years with the Cowboys has seen.


Laughing
_________________

-kiltman

Uncle Buck wrote:
I'd rather have Tebow than any other QB in the NFL besides Rodgers, and I may even take him over Rodgers due to the difference in age.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
niner4ever


Joined: 22 Sep 2008
Posts: 145
Location: napa
PostPosted: Mon May 06, 2013 7:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wilmtalk wrote:
niner4ever wrote:
.
Practice Squad players
DL: Tony Jerrod-Eddie
OLB: Cam Johnson/Darius Fleeming
WR: Ricardo Lockette
DL: Lawrence Okoye
OL: Luke Marquardt
CB: Marcus Cooper
OL: Al Netter
QB: Nate Montana

PUP/IR
Lattimore

I. Nate Montana due to his fathers history.



That is the silliest thing I have ever seen posted. Nate got an invite to camp and that's about all his fathers history will get him. He is not that good, even by college standards, and the invite was enough charity. This year more than any that I can remember the cuts will be hard to make and there just isn't enough space available even on the practice squad for the quality players left. Harbaugh is not going to waste a space for Joe's kid. That would be disrespectful all around.

Harbaugh also mentioned that he would like to keep a third QB active for games but this QB would also have to play mulitple positions. That would seem to point to either Danials or Gray. they may carry a fouth QB on the practice squad and that one could even be either Colt or Tolzein.I also don't understand why Jenkins would be a lock over Lockette. Lockette is faster and bigger and one of the knocks on Jenkins was his slight frame If he builds himself up that might inturn affect his speed.. Harbaugh is not going to keep a lesser player just to save face for a bad #1 pick if he doesn't show measurable improvement this year I think they don't think twice about dumping him on the practice squad or cutting him. They just have too many other options to wait on him much longer.


It was kind of a joke for Montana. I don't actually think he will make PS. Tolzien and McCoy are ineligible for the practice squad as they both have spent at least one full season on the 53 roster also McCoy has been Active for more than 9 games, which is the minimum. Jenkins will make the team because of being picked in the first round, also not eligible for PS due to being on 53 for a full season. If Lockette makes it he will probably replace Williams or Manningham probably not Jenkins. Either way we can debate it during the season.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 13744
PostPosted: Tue May 07, 2013 8:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

wilmtalk wrote:

Harbaugh also mentioned that he would like to keep a third QB active for games but this QB would also have to play mulitple positions.


Why would a third QB have to play multiple positions? And what real NFL QB does play multiple positions? Seems to me that either you're and NFL QB, or you're not. An if you're not an NFL QB are you good enough as a RB to beat out James or Hunter, as a WR are you good enough to beat out any of the hoard of WRs we have. Sure versatility is nice, but so is being an NFL quaity QB. The value of having a third guy who can actually paly QB, or who you can later trade to someone for a decent pick far outweighs the value of a bad QB who also play WR or RB badly. I hope and expect we'll be keeping whichever QB has the most potential to be a decent NFL QB.

wilmtalk wrote:
why Jenkins would be a lock over Lockette. Lockette is faster and bigger and one of the knocks on Jenkins was his slight frame If he builds himself up that might inturn affect his speed.. Harbaugh is not going to keep a lesser player just to save face for a bad #1 pick.


Certainly Harbaugh will keep the better guy, or at least the guy with the most potential. But asking "why" we would keep Jenkins instead of Lockette because of their speed or size is like completely ignoring their skills as a WR. Jenkins was a great college receiver; Lockette was not. Jenkins was rated as a second round pick by everybody (even though we saw him as a first rounder); Lockette was not seen as being draftable. Sue Jenkins didn't show much last year, but there's no reason to give up on him so quickly. At this point it is completely reasonable to believe that Jenkins still has far more potential than Lockette.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LANiner


Joined: 15 Feb 2009
Posts: 536
Location: Los Angeles
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2013 12:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

adamq wrote:
http://www.csnbayarea.com/blog/matt-maiocco/early-odds-49ers-53-man-roster

Quote:
"We present the opportunity," 49ers general manager Trent Baalke told CSNBayArea.com in March at the NFL owners meetings. "We never put a ceiling on any player, whether it's a draft pick or a free agent, college free agent. We never put a ceiling on what they can be within our system.

"We look at it like, 'We're bringing you in to compete.' You will earn that role on this team through competition. That's with every player."



meanwhile, in Cowgirl land...

http://cowboysblog.dallasnews.com/2013/05/jerry-jones-i-dont-think-that-we-do-have-a-country-club-atmosphere-around-here.html/


Quote:
“I don’t think that we do have a country club atmosphere around here,” Jones said. “There’s too much competition. These players recognize how fortunate they are to be in the NFL, to have these opportunities. We’ve got as good or better leadership than my experience in 24 years with the Cowboys has seen.


Laughing


I remember a couple years back when parcel was putting that team together I hated every second of it we were pretty horrid in those days I remember them being built right and hate d parcels drafting skills and there coaching staff our hit and miss fo left more too be desired at the time and our coach was in over his head fast forward to now an I don't regret those dark days we have s great front office since dumping mc clueless he did have some good drafts but that 2008 draft really put a bad taste in my mouth and that 09 draft wasnt all that great either aside from Crabtree.
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
oldman9er


Joined: 24 Oct 2006
Posts: 39793
PostPosted: Thu May 09, 2013 6:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Didn't want to make a new thread, but I found this article and even more so the many comments from Maiocco worth taking a look at...

http://www.csnbayarea.com/blog/matt-maiocco/carradine-lattimore-expected-work-49ers-rookie-camp
_________________

___
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wilmtalk


Joined: 16 Aug 2009
Posts: 182
Location: nor cal
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 11:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

big9erfan wrote:
wilmtalk wrote:

Harbaugh also mentioned that he would like to keep a third QB active for games but this QB would also have to play mulitple positions.


Why would a third QB have to play multiple positions? And what real NFL QB does play multiple positions? Seems to me that either you're and NFL QB, or you're not. An if you're not an NFL QB are you good enough as a RB to beat out James or Hunter, as a WR are you good enough to beat out any of the hoard of WRs we have. Sure versatility is nice, but so is being an NFL quaity QB. The value of having a third guy who can actually paly QB, or who you can later trade to someone for a decent pick far outweighs the value of a bad QB who also play WR or RB badly. I hope and expect we'll be keeping whichever QB has the most potential to be a decent NFL QB.
.


All you have written is generally true. Except in your second sentence if you substitute the word can for does. Just because starting QB' don't play multiple positions does not mean they couldn't if they chose to. Unless you are implying that if someone can play multiple position that means they are incapable of being a starting QB. That would eliminate all the athletes.

I mean generally you don't want your QB to play multiple positions unless of course you need your third QB too in order justify his place on the active roster. A lot of teams only keep two QB on the roster unless the third guy has a huge upside and is their QB of the future. Otherwise the third QB is only there for insurance and other than that is basically is a waste of a roster space. Now usually extra players are kept because of ST and insurance for other positions. Now they due need to be skilled in those positions but it is often a trade off. Where the more versitile player is kept. Now Harbaugh Drafted Danial's and Gray two two QB's who also could and have played other positions. Gray played RB and TE/WR. Danials RB, WR and returner and possibly even as a gunner.

AS the second QB is your backup and the third is usually just insurance or a developmental QB and being that Harbaugh has said that he doesn't want the third guy to just take up space but to be useful while he develops, this would entail the 3 QB being able to play another position. Danial's seems to fit that mold. He could also play RB, but more than likely punt/ kick returner and gunner on ST. He does have the skill set to do so. He along with Gray are excellent athletes and that's why they are in camp. Danial's seems to have a greater upside at QB. I think Harbaugh believes he can coach up Danial's to be an option QB other teams would give up a high draft choice for.

Now it doesn't mean things will play out this way but it appears that in the plans for the team it might imply that either Mc Coy or Tolzian are expendable. Even if that might mean only keeping two QB's on the roster.


Last edited by wilmtalk on Fri May 10, 2013 2:23 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wilmtalk


Joined: 16 Aug 2009
Posts: 182
Location: nor cal
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 1:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big9erfan wrote:


wilmtalk wrote:
why Jenkins would be a lock over Lockette. Lockette is faster and bigger and one of the knocks on Jenkins was his slight frame If he builds himself up that might inturn affect his speed.. Harbaugh is not going to keep a lesser player just to save face for a bad #1 pick.


Certainly Harbaugh will keep the better guy, or at least the guy with the most potential. But asking "why" we would keep Jenkins instead of Lockette because of their speed or size is like completely ignoring their skills as a WR. Jenkins was a great college receiver; Lockette was not. Jenkins was rated as a second round pick by everybody (even though we saw him as a first rounder); Lockette was not seen as being draftable. Sue Jenkins didn't show much last year, but there's no reason to give up on him so quickly. At this point it is completely reasonable to believe that Jenkins still has far more potential than Lockette.


My intitial quiestion was why everyone just assumed that Jenkins is a lock over Lockette. My line of reasoning?. Lets just for now focus on Jenkens. He was drafted to extend the offense with his speed. His speed is his primary value to the team and his biggest hold on a roster spot.His speed is the advantage that he holds over all the other receivers except for Lockette. He can not use that as justification in competition against Lockette.

While being successful in college that has not yet translated to the NFL. He hasn't actually shown anything to justify any position on the depth chart other than the fact he was a first round pick. Now I have heard spin that Jenkins was drafted as a project and only didn't see the field because he was buried behind the depth of a strong wr unite. Early in the season perhaps. But after the injuries to Williams and Manningham they reall needed him to step up but he didn't see the field because they didn't trust him. A first round pick under those conditions should have seen the field.

Now he did come to camp out of shape last year and that must have affected him early but shouldn't have towards the end of the year. What seemed to be his main problem was his lack of strength to avoid getting jammed on the line so he couldn't run his routes. Now he does appear stronger this year but it still remains to be seen if that will fix his problems. Right now he is a question mark.

In comparing Jenkins to Lockette I would disagree about it being reasonable that Jenkins has the greater potential.

Now lets look at Lockette. The reason he wasn't drafted or made a roster was his lack of experience. He was a track guy attempting to transition into football. It's a difficult time consuming process. The main thing with him is that he needs to learn how to run routes. That's why he stuck with the Niner's in order to develop those skills. Harbaugh has often praised him leading me to believe that he has made enough progress to consider him for a roster spot this year.

Now far as to potential. Potential is a measure of an area that has not yet been developed or maxed out. Jenkins has already developed the skills that come from experience, but needs to get stronger. Where as Lockette is already bigger, stronger and faster but needs the mental aspects of the game that come though experience. Lockettes unfulfilled potential lies mostly in the mental aspects of the game, Where as Jenkins they are in the physical. Now the question remaining is which player has the greatest probability of developing and strengthening their remaining area's of need.Can Jenkins ever match Lockette in size strength and speed? Unlikely! Can Lockette lesrn to run routes and pick up the other skills he presently lacks? It's not a given, but it certainly can be said that it is possible for Lockent to match or come close to Jenkins mentally, while it seems unlikely that Jenkens can grow a new body to match Lockette physically. So except for possibly getting stronger ( which might affect his speed ) he is almost maxed out. So it is far more reasonable to assume that since Lockette still has the higher remaining upside then he therefor still has the higher potential. Of course a lot will be answered in training camp.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 13744
PostPosted: Sat May 11, 2013 5:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

wilmtalk wrote:
In comparing Jenkins to Lockette I would disagree about it being reasonable that Jenkins has the greater potential.


Well the staffs from 32 NFL scouting departments disagree strongly with you. It's not like one guy was picked in the 2nd and one in the 3rd. One guy was picked in the first and one guy wasn't picked at all. That's one heck of a difference in perceived potential by the guys who really underestand this sort of thing. That's what we know about their perceived potential. The fact that Jenkins didn't paly much and Lockette is still on the roster are factors to consider, but not nearly enough yet to change the professionals' estimates of their respective potential.

wilmtalk wrote:
. Lockettes unfulfilled potential lies mostly in the mental aspects of the game, ... Can Lockette lesrn to run routes and pick up the other skills he presently lacks?


Only quoted a small part here, but you make it sound like those missing skills that Lockette needs to pickup are mental. I guess you and I have different thoughts about what it takes to be a successful NFL receiver. Firstly, Jenkins showed that he had a long way to go mentally. He looked totally lost out there and didn't seem to have a grasp on the playbook. So I think he has a long way to go "mentally". But the "other skills" you mention like making quick hard cuts, being fluid out there, having good hands, picking up th ball in the air, etc. are not "mental" they are the things that separate good receivers from ones who don't make it. If it was easy to develop those than any big fast guy ccould be a successful NFL receiver which is certainly not the case. The skills Lockettee needs to develop are not at all "mental". What he needs to develop are the skills any good WR has, and not every big fast guy can develop those skills or every big fast guy would be a successful NFL receiver.

wilmtalk wrote:
he (Jenkins) is almost maxed out.


What??? Which NFL rookies come into th league "maxed out"? They all improve. How much is the question


Frankly what the sum total of your point sounds like to me is something like this ... On a scale of 1 to 100 where 100 represents the perfect NFL WR skill set Jenkins came in at (let's just say) 70 and Lockettte came in at (let's just say) 20. So sure there's a lot more room for Lockette to improve. And sure it's also more likely he'll improve by 20 points than that Jenkins will. But if he improves by 20 and Jenkins improves by only 10 that still leaves Jenkins at 80 and Lockette at 40.

I'm not arguing those are the right values, just the point that of course it's true a track guy learing to play WR has a lot more room to iprove that a multi-year starter who caught 90 passes for nearly 1300 yards in his final year. But he'd have to improve a ton to even get close to the skillset that second guy already possesses. Here's an analogy with two other guys that might not be controversial ... Okoye is a physical freak. He has more physical skills than Tank Carradine. In my mind that does not mean in any way that he is more likely to be a better NFL DE than Carradine. Could happen, but if NFL scouts thought it likely Tank would not have gone high in the second while Okoye went undrafted

It is certainly possible Lockette could become a better NFL receiver than Jenkins. It's just that from what we know now I would think that not very likely.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wilmtalk


Joined: 16 Aug 2009
Posts: 182
Location: nor cal
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2013 7:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Will not argue the points you make Big49erfan. They are mostly valid. I probably should have been more descriptive rather than lumping a lot of variable skills under the label of Mental. I only tried to differentiate between the actual known physical attributes and those that are acquired through experience in the game.

Bottom line no one knows for sure how much Lockette has improved since last year. Then again no one knows how much Jenkins has improved since last year either, yet most posters don't seem to want to give Lockette the same benefit of the doubt that they are ready to give Jenkins. Jenkins is as much of an unknown as Lockette.

Jenkins well turn it around this season and become the player that most expected him to be. But-I think that last season a lot of fans confused their perception of Jenkins potential with the reality of what he actually produced. It is not a given that a player's skills and production in college will always translate into the NFL. Given the results of last year his ability to do so is still in question. This is the main reason I think it is presumptuous to make Jenkins a lock for anything given the available talent this year. It is only based on his #30 pick ( which is base on his college resume) and not on what he actually accomplished last year.

I must, however, answer you argument on potential in relation to when someone is picked. The picks aren't always done on a purely potential return basis as we should know. The difference between immediate need and future potential is a major factor. Most teams do not have the luxury to wait for some players to reach their potential but that does not mean that those players lack it. The Niner's are one team that can afford to draft on potential alone. There have also been many early round picks that have busted and late round picks that have become stars, so using that argument as the exclusive and infallible measure of potential is total BS. Your use is purely argumentative and as a rational for your point. It pisses me off to even have to waste the time to respond to it.

Basically we have two unknowns. One however has received praise form the coach and appears on the upswing. Jenkins has only been labeled as improved from last year- What ever that means. Lets just wait until they see the field before we label anyone, especially someone who has not shown anything last year as a lock.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> San Francisco 49ers All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 2 of 5

 
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