Jackson to the Boys

[Southpaw]

Are you listening, Bill Parcells? "I don't care where I play, but my dad really wants me to play for the Cowboys," said Oregon State running back Steve Jackson. "He's a big Dallas fan." Jackson may be the top runner in the draft and the Patriots are considering stockpiling their four picks in the first two rounds — Nos. 22, 32, 50 and 64 — in order to move up to get him.

Ben Maller's Rumors

Man, oh man. If the Cards could pull off that deal, that would be sweet. 4 picks for the #3 in the draft, plus their own at 33. They could load up at a bunch of positions cheaply. Worst case in that deal, they could flip those 2 #1s from Pats for a top 15 and get a chipper, like Wilfork or Vernon Carey. MAKE IT SO.

 

[BACH]

Originally posted by wallyburger
Jackson may be the top runner in the draft and the Patriots are considering stockpiling their four picks in the first two rounds — Nos. 22, 32, 50 and 64 — in order to move up to get him.

Ben Maller's Rumors

Man, oh man. If the Cards could pull off that deal, that would be sweet. 4 picks for the #3 in the draft, plus their own at 33. They could load up at a bunch of positions cheaply. Worst case in that deal, they could flip those 2 #1s from Pats for a top 15 and get a chipper, like Wilfork or Vernon Carey. MAKE IT SO.

That doesn't make any sense.

Why would the Patriots trade up to #3 to take a player that not going to draw any attention until #11??

 

[Southpaw]

Re: Re: Jackson to the Boys

Originally posted by BACH
That doesn't make any sense.

Why would the Patriots trade up to #3 to take a player that not going to draw any attention until #11??

Because they are stupid ???? I am looking at it from The Cards viewpoint, not the Pats and it's just a pipedream.

 

[JeffGollin]

They could load up at a bunch of positions cheaply.
Logically, with "cheap" players.

Granted, each draft is different (and maybe the talent pool is deeper this year) but I'm still bitchy over passing up Suggs in order to grab Johnson and Pace.

One of the defining characteristics of our team last year was that, when we needed a big play - to prevent a TD, squash a scoring drive or stop a 3rd or 4th down on defense - or to pick up a crucial 1st down at crunch time - or get us back in the game on offense (the Vike game being the exception rather than the rule) we'd invariably reach into the well and come up dry.

The Cardinals do not need "a bunch of positions" to load up on. We've already rebuilt the belly of the team with a bunch of overachievers. What we need now are playmakers. And when you give up a #3 to load up on late first round and 2nd & 3rd round picks, the chances of landing a true difference-maker becomes less and less.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

5 picks in the first two rounds does sound intriguing. It's a very difficult decision to make and could be a home run if Graves/Green pick well, just like when the Cowboys stockpiled a bunch of picks for Herschel Walker that turned them around. Then again, an impact player at #3 sounds good too.

 

[CaptTurbo]

Originally posted by JeffGollin
They could load up at a bunch of positions cheaply.
Logically, with "cheap" players.

Granted, each draft is different (and maybe the talent pool is deeper this year) but I'm still bitchy over passing up Suggs in order to grab Johnson and Pace.

Not me. If Suggs was on the cards he would have played every down and gotten killed. He's fine if you have a top 10 defense and just use him on 3rd down as a LB. He would have been a DE on every play with the cards and probably never finished the season healthy.

 

[Southpaw]

Originally posted by JeffGollin
They could load up at a bunch of positions cheaply.
Logically, with "cheap" players.

Granted, each draft is different (and maybe the talent pool is deeper this year) but I'm still bitchy over passing up Suggs in order to grab Johnson and Pace.

The Cardinals do not need "a bunch of positions" to load up on. We've already rebuilt the belly of the team with a bunch of overachievers. What we need now are playmakers. And when you give up a #3 to load up on late first round and 2nd & 3rd round picks, the chances of landing a true difference-maker becomes less and less.

I understand your passion for Suggs on the Ravens. I really don't think he would have been a difference maker on the Cards. A team with 5 picks in the top 60 has leverage up the ying yang.

 

[vikesfan]

Suggs would have had at least 10 sacks for the Cards maybe more. He would have been considered for ROY and he would not have been hurt.

I have debunked the myths about Suggs on the Cards in several threads. He would have been 1 on 1 with o lineman a number of times every game and he would have beaten them enough times to get 10 sacks and probably more.

It's okay to admit you made a huge mistake. The Cards drafts in general have been one huge mistake after another and Suggs is no exception.

 

[SECTION 11]

Originally posted by vikesfan
Suggs would have had at least 10 sacks for the Cards maybe more. He would have been considered for ROY and he would not have been hurt.

Whew! Thanks for clearing that up for us.

 

[Pariah]

Originally posted by vikesfan

It's okay to admit you made a huge mistake. The Cards drafts in general have been one huge mistake after another and Suggs is no exception.

You know, Vikesfan, on some threads you sound like an okay guy and fairly knowledgable. On others (like this one) you sound like a troll.

I don't think anyone here turns a blind eye to the Cardinals mistakes. Drafting talent is the least of their problems, IMO. The biggest problem is developing talent and keeping talent.

 

[CaptTurbo]

Originally posted by vikesfan
I have debunked the myths about Suggs on the Cards in several threads. He would have been 1 on 1 with o lineman a number of times every game and he would have beaten them enough times to get 10 sacks and probably more.

And? You really think quite highly of your own opinion.

imo he wouldnt have had 1 sack. Probably injured by week 4.

 

[JeffGollin]

Suggs isn't the point

I mentioned Suggs, because he's the most famous guy we passed on. I could just as easily have used Trufant or Kevin Williams as an example.

The point is - there are only so many dominating players in the draft (from the standpoint of size, speed or specific skills like sacking the QB). And depending on the depth of talent in a given year, you're not likely to get one of those guys after the 15th - 20th spots in the first round (unless you're very good or very lucky at evaluating talent).

When you trade out of #3 in order to load up on guys after, say, #28, you may get a lot of guys like KVB, Levar or Raynoch, (or for that matter, Rutledge or Stone), but you're not likely to get a Woodson, a Moss, an Elway, a Peppers or a Thomlinson.

Our team has very few Elway or Woodson types. We need 2 or 3 on each side of the ball. This is less likely to happen when we trade out of the top half of the draft in order to load up on quantity.

 

[Southpaw]

Originally posted by vikesfan
Suggs would have had at least 10 sacks for the Cards maybe more. He would have been considered for ROY and he would not have been hurt.

I have debunked the myths about Suggs on the Cards in several threads. He would have been 1 on 1 with o lineman a number of times every game and he would have beaten them enough times to get 10 sacks and probably more.

It's okay to admit you made a huge mistake. The Cards drafts in general have been one huge mistake after another and Suggs is no exception.

I don't know what I was thinking about. I must be crazy.

P.S. ATTEMPTED to debunk.

 

[cardsunsfan]

Vikesfan, even though many of us are Cards Fans, I think some of us (not necessarily me) might actually know more about football than you! So telling us what would of happened and a lot of us are just plain wrong and you've told us why just sounds silly to a lot of people on this board....

 

[schel]

I understand it's a fair assumption to think that Suggs wouldn't have done as well here because of the lack of talent compared to the Ravens... but only 1 sack? Come on, he has talent, at least give him that. Umm... I'd go on, but this topic wasn't meant to be another Suggs thread

 

[azdad1978]

Originally posted by vikesfan
Suggs would have had at least 10 sacks for the Cards maybe more. He would have been considered for ROY and he would not have been hurt.

I have debunked the myths about Suggs on the Cards in several threads. He would have been 1 on 1 with o lineman a number of times every game and he would have beaten them enough times to get 10 sacks and probably more.

It's okay to admit you made a huge mistake. The Cards drafts in general have been one huge mistake after another and Suggs is no exception.

Dude for someone who doesn't follow the Cards, you kept on giving us insight that doesn't have any revelence on anything. OK I'll bite how would Suggs get a lot of one on one on defense? I don't see it all since we don't have any passrusher on this defense to be double team all the time. Maybe if we have a 12 sack guy on the Defense yeah that means he will see one on one blocking but dude I wouldn't be saying a lot of stuff esp if you don't follow this team like we do.

 

[vikesfan]

Suggs produced in college. Suggs produced in the NFL. But he wouldn't produce in ARI? What a cop out. ARI is not in the NFL?

Why is saying he would get a few sacks and be injured more realistic then saying he would get 10 sacks.

He would have played more in ARI and he would probably would have gotten more sacks I was lowballing at 10.

I am not saying he would be 1 on 1 all the time. There are schemes teams run to free up guys and get them 1 on 1. That plus offenses run schemes that sometimes leave a good DE 1 on 1. Plus he would have gotten a few sacks when doubled.

I already debunked the OLB theory. Colvin OLB in 4-3 10 sacks every year - if he plays OLB. But in Baltimore he played RDE just like he would have done in ARI. He was not really an OLB in BAL anyway. Either way he can still get his 10 sacks. The guy Suggs replaced in BAL did not have 12 sacks. If someone else played in place of Suggs in BAL say Pace he would not have had 12 sacks. Otherwise why draft Suggs just trade down and draft Pace. Because talent matters. Suggs is a super talented producer and he would have produced on any, team. Lots of bad teams have all, pro type players on them.
Playing on great team again it doesn't matter did Boldin have any more help on offense then Suggs would have had on defense - uh no. Boldin produced and Suggs would have produced.

Not drafting Suggs was a huge mistake - those who do not learn from history are destined to repeat it. A mistake both the Cards and Vikes made.

 

[Pariah]

Originally posted by vikesfan
Not drafting Suggs was a huge mistake - those who do not learn from history are destined to repeat it.

Wisdom handed down from the mountain, Mount Vikesfan.

:notworthy

:roll:

 

[Southpaw]

Repeat after me.

It just doesn't matter.
It just doesn't matter.
It just doesn't matter.


:bang

 

[Russ Smith]

Originally posted by vikesfan


I already debunked the OLB theory. Colvin OLB in 4-3 10 sacks every year - if he plays OLB. But in Baltimore he played RDE just like he would have done in ARI. He was not really an OLB in BAL anyway. Either way he can still get his 10 sacks. The guy Suggs replaced in BAL did not have 12 sacks. If someone else played in place of Suggs in BAL say Pace he would not have had 12 sacks. Otherwise why draft Suggs just trade down and draft Pace. Because talent matters. Suggs is a super talented producer and he would have produced on any, team. Lots of bad teams have all, pro type players on them.
Playing on great team again it doesn't matter did Boldin have any more help on offense then Suggs would have had on defense - uh no. Boldin produced and Suggs would have produced.

Not drafting Suggs was a huge mistake - those who do not learn from history are destined to repeat it. A mistake both the Cards and Vikes made.

Suggs did NOT play RDE, he played LOLB and on pass downs he lined up at LDE in often a 5 man line which is how they got him on the TE so much.

In ARizona he'd have been the RDE lining up against Orlando Pace, Walter Jones and company. He undoubtedly would have had more than the 1 sack Pace got us, but I doubt he gets 12 in the situation Pace was in.

he's better than Pace, he proved that, but remember we got Bryant Johnson too and if he and Pace develop, the trade won't look so bad. Suggs was in a situation where he only played on pass downs, he didn't have to battle 330 pound pro bowl LT's every down and then rush the passer on pass downs as well, situational pass rushing has it's advantages that way.

Great rookie year, great pass rusher, totally different situation impossible to quantify what he would have done here.

 

[azdad1978]

Originally posted by Russ Smith
Suggs did NOT play RDE, he played LOLB and on pass downs he lined up at LDE in often a 5 man line which is how they got him on the TE so much.

In ARizona he'd have been the RDE lining up against Orlando Pace, Walter Jones and company. He undoubtedly would have had more than the 1 sack Pace got us, but I doubt he gets 12 in the situation Pace was in.

he's better than Pace, he proved that, but remember we got Bryant Johnson too and if he and Pace develop, the trade won't look so bad. Suggs was in a situation where he only played on pass downs, he didn't have to battle 330 pound pro bowl LT's every down and then rush the passer on pass downs as well, situational pass rushing has it's advantages that way.

Great rookie year, great pass rusher, totally different situation impossible to quantify what he would have done here.

Boo Yah!!!! same thing i was thinking!!! This is for Vikesfan, Like I said If you don't follow this team don't push your opinions down our throats!!!

 

[DevonCardsFan]

Originally posted by Pariah
You know, Vikesfan, on some threads you sound like an okay guy and fairly knowledgable. On others (like this one) you sound like a troll.

I don't think anyone here turns a blind eye to the Cardinals mistakes. Drafting talent is the least of their problems, IMO. The biggest problem is developing talent and keeping talent.

Your not a troll if you have a diffrence of opinion about football.
a troll is someone who comes here to say F you guys cards suck, F off, I did your mom.

Big diffrence if you post 20 times a day and talk football, I do not consider you a troll

 

[Pariah]

Originally posted by DevonCardsFan
Your not a troll if you have a diffrence of opinion about football.
a troll is someone who comes here to say F you guys cards suck, F off, I did your mom.

Big diffrence if you post 20 times a day and talk football, I do not consider you a troll

His isn't expressed as a difference of opinion on this thread. He's stating it as fact, which it isn't. Not only that, he's calling people out to admit "mistakes" made by the organization.

And saying he sounds like a troll is different from actaully calling him a troll. It's subtle, but it's different. And I stand by what I said--sometimes he sounds like a good guy who I would welcome here, and other times he sounds like a troll.

 

[Northern Card]

Originally posted by vikesfan
Suggs would have had at least 10 sacks for the Cards maybe more. He would have been considered for ROY and he would not have been hurt.

I have debunked the myths about Suggs on the Cards in several threads. He would have been 1 on 1 with o lineman a number of times every game and he would have beaten them enough times to get 10 sacks and probably more.

It's okay to admit you made a huge mistake. The Cards drafts in general have been one huge mistake after another and Suggs is no exception.

You perhaps "debunked" things to your satisfaction... and that and-a- buck-and-a-half will buy you a cup of coffee... Heck! with him as an every play end, teams wouldn't bother risking a pass, as they could run over him everytime...

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by vikesfan It's okay to admit you made a huge mistake. The Cards drafts in general have been one huge mistake after another and Suggs is no exception.

I dont think not getting Suggs is a mistake. But since you bring up huge mistakes, I think the most lopsided trade in the history of organized sports is the 4 players and 5 draft picks the Vikings gave the Cowboys for Hershel Walker. If it wasnt for that trade the Vikes may have won some Super Bowls instead of the Cowboys.

He who lives in glass house should not cast stones, grasshopper.