Is there any chance we take this guy? From the sounds of it he seems like the surest thing in the draft--an immediate pro bowl level MLB, 10 year fixture type. Kind of reminds me of the Brady Quinn draft when everyone was screaming for us to take Quinn (I will admit I was one of them) and were pissed when we took Ginn, but the best player we could've had was Pat Willis (in hindsight some are saying that's who they really wanted all along). I know that MLB is not a "glamour" position but given our needs/playing more 4-3, would he make sense, if, say, Tannehill was off the board we were really looking at players like Q Coples?

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

If Tannehill is gone and we stay at 8 I could definitely live with selecting Keuchly.

He doesn't fill a major/immediate need per se but he's a terrific football player.

plus I hear he really likes turtles...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/05/2012 07:03AM by THE Truth.

No way, check out youTube clips. This guy is rated as high as he is because this is a weak draft for MLB's. An immediate pro bowler? Who makes up this stuff. He might be a bit above average but I do not think he is a stud.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If Tannehill is gone and we stay at 8 I could
> definitely live with selecting Keuchly.
>
> He doesn't fill a major/immediate need per se but
> he's a terrific football player.
>
> plus I hear he really likes turtles...

**************************************************************

I highly doubt Miami would grab Keuchly with the 8th pick. MLB is not a need.

I know some on here disagree, but I don't see how MLB/ILB is not a need for this team. We've got Koa Misi who is useless at any LB spot, Dansby who is not really a MLB, and Burnett who is no great shakes either (assuming he can play ML. We could use a dominating MLB for sure.

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I know some on here disagree, but I don't see how
> MLB/ILB is not a need for this team. We've got Koa
> Misi who is useless at any LB spot, Dansby who is
> not really a MLB, and Burnett who is no great
> shakes either (assuming he can play ML. We could
> use a dominating MLB for sure.


I think its because both Dansby and Burnett are viewed as more int he 4-3 MLB mold than 4-3 OLB mold at this point in their careers.

If we do migrate to a 4-3 both of them will get a shot at that spot. The other will move outside until we bring in smaller/faster OLB's.

I don't think its a need for us but I could see it being a need in a year or two which is why I'd have no issues with addressing it now if Tannehill is gone.

If we are going to follow the Giants lead and go to a 4-3 that can morph onto a 3-4 when needed then we need to bring in the parts.

In a 4-3 we need another DE like Wake who is 260lbs + and a dynamic pass rusher. That allows us to go with Wake and a Rookie/FA at DE and Odrick and Starks at DT in passing situations.

On top of that we need to revamp the entire LB corps. Dansby and Burnett are bigger and slower at this point in their careers than playing the OLB spot in a 4-3 requires.

I think one of them gets moved inside. Wouldn't surprise me if one or both of them are gone after this season.

Misi isn't fast enough to play out side in a 4-3. He'll get a shot inside but we are going to need at least two smaller more athletic OLB's with coverage skills and a MLB who is a tackling machine in the not too distant future.

Keuchly isn't a need on this team with this roster for this year.

But that doesn't mean he wouldn't be a great fit in our scheme or on our roster TWO years from now.

I am in complete agreement with Berk. In fact, I was going to start the very same thread. I bet that, outside of the quarterbacks, when we look back at this draft, we will find that Kuechly was the best and most consistent player. He has been highly productive and proved to be quite the athlete at the combine. I believe that he would address a need too. I am also in agreement with Berk about turtles. By the way, I think zombies are awesome as well.

I think that Kuechly was the best player when the U played Boston college last year by far on the entire field, and tthat included former U players. That being said I don't know if we will take him or not, as we need offensive help more than a MLB in my opinion.

How can so many people say MLB is not a point of need. Is everyone forgetting that we don't have a true MLB on our roster, and we're planning to go to a 4-3 this year?

The best teams always picked a franchise QB high, then every pick/draft after they always select the BPA, despite the need.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

Aqua&Orange Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The best teams always picked a franchise QB high,
> then every pick/draft after they always select the
> BPA, despite the need.

Except, of course, for N.E. and N.O.

Not to mention the fact the SF was ready to dump their highly picked franchise QB for a FA, and Denver did.

What do yOu mean except for NE and NO?

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

Kuechly reminds me of Zach Thomas.He or Nick Perry might go to Seattle

I am very skeptical about us actually switching to a 4-3. They have talked about a hybrid. You could say we have been in a hybrid the last 2 years. Early in 2010, we tried using Wake as a stand-up rusher. But, he settled in to lining up with his hand on the ground because he was more comfortable that way. The last 2 years, we have been in 3-man fronts less than half the time. In passing situations, Wake drops down to DE, and we are in a 4-man front. On running downs, he stands up, and we are in a 3-4. That could be all they mean by a hybrid.

The signing of Paul Soliai is also an indicator that things really aren't changing much. In a 4-3, you want more athletic DTs, guys who can cover more than one gap and help rush the passer. If we were truly going to a 4-3, with guys like Starks, Merling, McDaniel, and Odrick already on the roster, committing significant money to Soliai would be an odd move. There are 4-3 systems that do use one of the DTs as more of a NT, but it would still be odd to give a guy like Soliai that kind of money for that role when he is more of a pure run stuffer.

I still anticipate us being in a 3-4 in most early downs.

I would take this kid in a heartbeat if Tannehill is gone or if our staff thinks he's not the answer.

Aqua&Orange Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What do yOu mean except for NE and NO?

N.E.'s QB was drafted in the 6th round. They haven't drafted a QB high since. N.O.'s QB was a FA signing. I'm not aware that they drafted a QB high recently either.

I hope we Trade down 10-15 spots. We have some Holes to fill. With whats left I'm good with Moore.

montequi Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Aqua&Orange Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > What do yOu mean except for NE and NO?
>
> N.E.'s QB was drafted in the 6th round. They
> haven't drafted a QB high since. N.O.'s QB was a
> FA signing. I'm not aware that they drafted a QB
> high recently either.


&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Well, those 2 teams are very lucky and unusual scenarios.

The QB that Tom Brady took over for (Drew Bledsoe) was the #1 pick. If not for Bledsoe's injury, Brady may not be who he is today.

As far as Brees, has a franchise QB in his prime ever been a FA in the history of this league?

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

Aqua&Orange Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> montequi Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Aqua&Orange Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > What do yOu mean except for NE and NO?
> >
> > N.E.'s QB was drafted in the 6th round. They
> > haven't drafted a QB high since. N.O.'s QB was
> a
> > FA signing. I'm not aware that they drafted a
> QB
> > high recently either.
>
>
> &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
> Well, those 2 teams are very lucky and unusual
> scenarios.
>
> The QB that Tom Brady took over for (Drew Bledsoe)
> was the #1 pick. If not for Bledsoe's injury,
> Brady may not be who he is today.
>
> As far as Brees, has a franchise QB in his prime
> ever been a FA in the history of this league?

You mean besides Brees? I suppose we'll find out with Peyton Manning this coming season year. If Manning comes back 100%, then he may STILL be in his prime.

Still, plenty of FA QBs have gone into situations and excelled. What about Kurt Warner with Arizona? Rich Gannon with Oakland? In these cases, even though these guys were on in years, I still think you can consider them franchise QBs...and both of the PLAYED like they were in their prime with those teams!!

Aqua&Orange Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> montequi Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Aqua&Orange Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > What do yOu mean except for NE and NO?
> >
> > N.E.'s QB was drafted in the 6th round. They
> > haven't drafted a QB high since. N.O.'s QB was
> a
> > FA signing. I'm not aware that they drafted a
> QB
> > high recently either.
>
>
> &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
> Well, those 2 teams are very lucky and unusual
> scenarios.
>
> The QB that Tom Brady took over for (Drew Bledsoe)
> was the #1 pick. If not for Bledsoe's injury,
> Brady may not be who he is today.
>
> As far as Brees, has a franchise QB in his prime
> ever been a FA in the history of this league?

Mike Vick?

Ehhh....Mike Vick? He wasnt really a FA, in terms of FA's that we normally think of.

He was coming off a 2 or 3 (whatever it was) prison term. That is a little different. LOL.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"