micnificent28

I'm gonna be the controversial guy here. I think evero is a brilliant defensive mind. Worthy of a head coaching gig. He been running defensr since before canales came to town and canales basically give him the keys saying hey it's all yours. That said you can't make a 5 star meal with gas station ingredients.. no derrick Brown no burns and a depleted defense lead to that horrible defense last year. This year you get brown back and some young guys and your middle of the pack.. that can't be because evero doesn't know what he's doing. Give him some weapons where he doesn't have to blitz to simulate pressure and I think he's a top 10 defensive coach. Question the soft coverage and love of zone all you want but a lot of this defenses limitations are already baked into the lack of talent. Roseboom, wallace and cherlius are also not world beaters.. nick scott I'm gonna say it is ass.. doesn't need to start next season period.

This

Personally I like evero. I think he's a great young mind and he's made the most out of what he has. Our leading sack getter has 5 sacks lol. To be in the playoffs with this.. I think at the very least he did his job.

The average defense exceeds the sum of the parts we have given him to work with. Imagine average when your coming off the worst NFL defense and your leading sack getter is a rookie with 5.5 sacks.

I would think just off athletic ability, he's bigger faster and stronger than Scott and undrafted guy and ransom a slower guy. Now could they be more instinctive yes.. but sheer talent and speed to get to spots I wouldn't think so

I get that he is a bust and will never live up to his billing. But he is a guy that had generational measurables and size. He had 100 tackle twice in Arizona.. are you telling me he isnt good enough to play ahead of nick Scott and ransom.. come on bro.

I guess we should have know by his number 27, now I guess we have to ask is he worse than nick Scott and ransom?

I'm not even sure that's all it because he was out of the league before then The last time he played he was in like the AFL or some other league that wasn't the NFL when he was still trying to play so I can only assume he didn't cut it as a backup even when he was trying

I think you have to factor in this is a bad QB class and would you rather have Willis or Moore or Mendoza..

I was thinking about what you said in your post and my whole draft philosophy is kind of the opposite. I believe that every prospect is a gamble and a risk so if you're going to gamble then you gamble on upside and potential. If Bryce Young fails it won't be because he wasn't pro-ready or he isn't accurate or any of those things that you will worry about with Willis. It will be because he lacks the parameters and traits that are needed to do the job what good is it to know what to do if you don't have the arm strength to get it there the speed to capitalize on what you see I'd rather gamble on the guy that already has those assets at the ready available to him then a guy who looks the part but you're not sure he can get it done with the ability that he has. I think you're doing yourself a disservice if you're only looking at wins losses or production and saying hey he won or through 50 touchdowns you can't factor in like some of that production might have come from his teammates or weapons around them you got to look at the whole big picture and in calculating all of that I put a higher value on athletic traits and do you have the things I need you to do to be able to do the job and the rest of it I think is coaching out gamble on the long-term upside versus who I think is pro-ready right now

I can't defend Richardsons failure to this point. And he is still as young as the rookies being taken this past season. I think he still could pan out. XL is another case. I think he looked the part but some of his times and film showed he struggled separating and the fact he never showed up being good before his 5th season. Laad was my obvious choice at that point(tho I was banging the table to trade up and grab Thomas Jr when he fell into the 20s). Ladd didn't lack athleticism and had the route running and mental part to boot. Didn't see a weakness in his game expect he was smaller..

I'm not arguing against any of that. But if a super talent looks bad vs elite competition you also have to factor in the level of talent around him. You can't expect him to beat say Auburn without another draftable player on the roster. It works both ways. Yes he clearly developed over the course of his career but you could say any player not a instant success has the same benefit of time and learning. You would rather get the talent in the building than just say oh well that car needs to much work vs taking a guy that has less ability and less upside. I wanted Richardson over Bryce and Stroud to this day I stand by that, you can't predict being injury prone, if the elite talent fails it won't be because he lacks the talent to play at the NFL level

Agreed. I thought how was better than corral at the time as well and was disappointed when we took Corral. Not sure where Howell is but I hope he's still in the league. But my philosophy drafting any prospect is always bet on elite tools and what can't be taught. I rather fill in the blanks with mental coaching than try to make a guy 5 inches taller or throw 20 yards further or 2 seconds faster.

Willis has an elite arm. And elite athleticism. He is big enough. 6'1 225 isn't small. NFL Network had a round 1 grade on him. The only knock on him really was he came out of liberty level competition.

I did lol.. you were around then? Even still at this point icky is fine I love him but is he that much better or more valuable than say Willis is right now?

Chris trapasso was all over it at the time. He was full on a Malik Willis stan lol

I don't think he was rated higher at all. I remember plenty of guys saying Willis was a first round talent.

He played in Tennessee.. he wasn't ready there. I think we are seeing a comment tread most QBs including Bryce, Caleb williams drake maye Sam darnold guys who have talent but aren't ready year one. I think we give up on talent to early instead of working with the guys who have the tools.

Awful is being out of the league like Corral..

You could say the same for baker and Sam here who have both made the pro bowl since leaving.

That's a fair thought and I agree but at the same time all that you gave up to get Matt corral who's out of the league versus a guy who's now looking to be the number one free agent in the whole offseason looks like a gross oversight and miss evaluation of talent to me

Probably so but I'd argue you'd rather have a talented player who's been through rough times and let him build from that than to still not be sure what you have at the position

To this day I never got what everybody didn't see in Willis and saw more in corral. Yes he had more work to do on fundamentals but he had more physical gifts and given the time we see how that has paid off. After sitting for two three seasons he now looks prime to take over the free agency market. There's a pretty good chance he's better than Bryce as well. There's just so much upside to a guy that's played very little but looks the part so far and we could have had them for a pile of magic beans.

I haven't considered cherelus being better than Wallace but, then again I haven't payed much attention to our linebacker play. I just know they aren't make a lot impact plays. Rozeboom has been better than I expected. Wallace has tools, I think he needs more time seasoning.

I m giving the staff benefit of the doubt hey maybe he is worse than Wallace and rozeboom.. but Wallace is hurt and Cherlus is starting and being spelled by bam Martin scott.. so I'm like is he worse than those 2?