Hurst Impressing

[MedellinHeel]

I am still positive / hopeful DG will patch this up come reg season. However, I would be lying my ass off if I told you I was not highly concerned with the fact we have yet to pick up an OT in FA and didn't get a single OT in the draft. 

 

 

[Carolina Cajun]

At this point a few years ago we thought we had our next shut down corner in Josh Norman too.  It's far to early to know whether any of these rookies will be really good or really bad.

[top dawg]

you read my post right

 

i mean, you did right

 

 

That is assuming that someone is kicking a chair over Hurst. I don't actually believe that's what's happening here.

[TheRed]

That is assuming that someone is kicking a chair over Hurst. I don't actually believe that's what's happening here.

 

Isn't this like the third or fourth thread about the guy since the draft? I'd certainly say there are some sour grapes about it...

[Mr. Scot]

Yeah, right! No one is pushing anything.  Appears to me like guys are just being too damned sensitive to admit that their precious G-man is not perfect. 

 

Like I've always said, I support G-man, but not to the point where I am not going to question any moves that I don't agree with. 

 

Furthermore, I have already explained why people would bring Hurst up, and it makes sense, even if you don't agree with it.

 

No one has said he's perfect.

 

I'm just not convinced that passing on James Hurst is the horrible, glaring mistake that you guys are suggesting, especially given that 31 other GMs also felt he wasn't worth spending a draft pick on either.

 

If it turns out Gettleman blew it on this one, he'll have plenty of company.

 

If Hurst turns out to be no more than average/backup material though, passing on him will be no great loss.

 

[MedellinHeel]

No one has said he's perfect.

 

I'm just not convinced that passing on James Hurst is the horrible, glaring mistake that you guys are suggesting, especially given that 31 other GMs also felt he wasn't worth spending a draft pick on either.

 

If it turns out Gettleman blew it on this one, he'll have plenty of company.

 

If Hurst turns out to be no more than average/backup material though, passing on him will be no great loss.

 

 

I dont think anyone is pointing to just Hurst. I think many ppl are just simply concerned with the lack of attention / upgrade to our OT group this offseason. Hurst just happens to be a intriguing prospect in our back yard. 

 

DG could come out of all this looking like a genius. Time will tell. 

[TheRed]

I dont think anyone is pointing to just Hurst. I think many ppl are just simply concerned with the lack of attention / upgrade to our OT group this offseason. Hurst just happens to be a intriguing prospect in our back yard. 

 

DG could come out of all this looking like a genius. Time will tell. 

 

So drafting an injured OT just to say you drafted one makes you look like a genius? Okay...

[TheRumGone]

blah blah blah blah

 

get the fug over it

[MedellinHeel]

 

So drafting an injured OT just to say you drafted one makes you look like a genius? Okay...

 

 

Huh? 

 

If DG can completely ignore OT in the draft and FA (up until now) and somehow get the OL playing decent come game day then he will be a genius at least in my eyes assuming KB and Ealy are hits. 

 

Although, I would prefer our OL be a bit more than "decent". 

[top dawg]

If we could bet, I would tell some of you to put your money where your mouth is.

[Mr. Scot]

I dont think anyone is pointing to just Hurst. I think many ppl are just simply concerned with the lack of attention / upgrade to our OT group this offseason. Hurst just happens to be a intriguing prospect in our back yard. 

 

DG could come out of all this looking like a genius. Time will tell. 

 

Gettleman apparently didn't think any of the guys available in the later rounds were more of an 'upgrade' than the guys he took at other spots, which is consistent with a BPA philosophy.

 

And let's be real: The odds of a 4th to 7th rounder coming in and being a quality starter at LT would be extremely slim.

 

[TheRed]

Huh? 

 

If DG can completely ignore OT in the draft and FA (up until now) and somehow get the OL playing decent come game day then he will be a genius at least in my eyes assuming KB and Ealy are hits. 

 

Although, I would prefer our OL be a bit more than "decent". 

 

Maybe it's just me, but I would rather not have seen Gettleman look desperate and reach for need and draft a couple of scrub OT's just because. Seems pretty clear that he felt he could find similar if not better players on the roster or later on when cuts begin after training camp.

[MedellinHeel]

Gettleman apparently didn't think any of the guys available in the later rounds were more of an 'upgrade' than the guys he took at other spots, which is consistent with a BPA philosophy.

 

And let's be real: The odds of a 4th to 7th rounder coming in and being a quality starter at LT would be extremely slim.

 

 

Every GM misses on late round and UDFA gems every year so not sure your point. 

 

To that I would say step your scouting game up. 

 

Obviously we don't know if any of those gems are LT's yet, but the point still remains. 

[MedellinHeel]

Maybe it's just me, but I would rather not have seen Gettleman look desperate and reach for need and draft a couple of scrub OT's just because. Seems pretty clear that he felt he could find similar if not better players on the roster or later on when cuts begin after training camp.

 

GM's are wrong every year in regards to evaluations. 

 

If DG can find better options then great. If not, he deserves some criticism. 

 

I will be the first one to eat some crow. Although, I am still optimistic about him patching this up, albeit even if I am still annoyed with how the draft and FA are playing out.