Welcome to goTitans.com! Log in or sign up to be a part of the best Tennessee Titans fan site available.

Why not take best player available?

Discussion in 'NFL Draft' started by The Playmaker, Apr 15, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. The Playmaker pineapple pizza party

    Brown
    Messages:
    11,119
    Moolah:
    $10,753
    If there was any year to just take the best player this would be it, we may not even have a season next year so I don't understand why we just don't get the most talented. A lot of people are sold on the defensive line but if we don't play then what's the point?

    Now I'm fine with taking Locker or a defensive lineman but let's not dismiss Julio, Green, or someone else just because it's not a position of need.
    #1
    1 people high five this.
  2. Deuce Wayne They're ILLUSIONS, Michael!

    Martin
    Messages:
    24,006
    Moolah:
    $7,255
    In what scenario would Julio be the BPA? Round 2?
    1 people high five this.
  3. Titanic_Sub Starter

    Messages:
    2,400
    Moolah:
    $815
    An Alabama fan wanting Julio Jones? Blah, overrated prospect, in a position we shouldn't even think about touching at #8. Please no.
    • Tip Jar Donor

    Alex1939 Good picture of me from 10 years ago

    Wright
    Messages:
    12,269
    Moolah:
    $8,451
    There's no circumstance where I see Julio Jones as the best prospect at 8.

    Peterson
    Fairley
    Dareus
    Bowers
    Quinn
    Green

    then I'd probably say Gabbert and Newton. I'd rather us not gamble on Newton as the future at the QB position, but I'd rather do that than draft Julio Jones at 8.
  4. The Playmaker pineapple pizza party

    Brown
    Messages:
    11,119
    Moolah:
    $10,753
    Did anyone else see me put just Julio? Stop putting the Bama attachment to my argument to make yours seem better. Of course I would take Green over Julio but no way is Green the 6th best.
  5. The Playmaker pineapple pizza party

    Brown
    Messages:
    11,119
    Moolah:
    $10,753
    Shocker you hate the SEC
    1 people high five this.
  6. Titanup1982 Starter

    Washington
    Messages:
    5,814
    Moolah:
    $12,892
    Julio Jones is a absolute beast.

    If we were drafting for the best player available, I hope Patrick Peterson falls to us, because he is #1 on my board.
  7. Finnebosch Sigh. Titans...

    Hasselbeck
    Messages:
    1,781
    Moolah:
    $3,409
    Mostly because a WR is only going to touch the ball 7-10 times at most. With the tenth pick you need to pick a player that you can build a franchise on and a wideout just isn't a player that you can do that with.

    Even Rice would have been a no one w/o Montana/Young and he was the GOAT of any position. (P.S. And yes he was my #1 BEFORE the NFL countdown)
  8. TorontoTitanFan Starter

    Brown
    Messages:
    4,473
    Moolah:
    $4,015
    I'm not opposed to taking the best player available, but I think the logic in the original post is flawed.

    There is going to be a season, but it might be shortened, there probably won't be any OTAs and there might not be any training camp. Essentially, it's probably going to be a redshirt year for whatever rookie the Titans draft. Whoever it is, he probably won't contribute much.

    If it's a redshirt year, wouldn't it then make more sense to take a developmental player with big potential rather than a player who can contribute right now? It seems like possibly the perfect scenario for it. If the Titans draft a project, no one will be clamoring for him to start from week 1 because everyone will understand that he had no training camp and isn't close to ready. If the pick is a QB, he can be brought along slowly and he won't be ruined by throwing him to the wolves too early.
  9. Deuce Wayne They're ILLUSIONS, Michael!

    Martin
    Messages:
    24,006
    Moolah:
    $7,255
    Uhhh... I'd have no problem with Fairley at 8...

    there goes that.

    What I do hate are overrated receivers that only have great games vs High Schools like Julio Jones.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page