Son of a Beach 2017 (+Top-8 Predictions)

[davos]

Just now, Pejorative Miscreant said:

If we draft Jerry Sprinkle he will be nicknamed "The Weatherman"

Good ole' Larry.  Is he still kicking it in the QC?  

[Pejorative Miscreant]

Just now, davos said:

Good ole' Larry.  Is he still kicking it in the QC?  

Had an accident and got banged up pretty bad but he is back at it. 

[WOW!!]

Yeah the best part of that draft was the women..

Thank goodness you had them there to distract for how suckass that draft was..

[davos]

Just now, WOW!! said:

Yeah the best part of that draft was the women..

Thank goodness you had them there to distract for how suckass that draft was..

I know right?!

[Moorgan]

20 minutes ago, Lasus83. said:

+1

Not a huge fan or opponent of the mock... but future mocks should be required to include such photos

Sent using the amazing CarolinaHuddle mobile app
 

I agree. I like it when I can see the player when the pick is identified.

 

 

 

 

wait...what we're we talking about?

[WOW!!]

Honestly i would have rather you drafted the women instead of the crappy picks you made..

[davos]

Just now, WOW!! said:

Honestly i would have rather you drafted the women instead of the crappy picks you made..

Ha! Stirring as always

I was seriously considering 1-Barnett NOT HOWARD 2-Barnett 2-Barnett 3-Barnett 4-Barnett 5-Barnett  6-Barnett

[uscgamecocks]

49 minutes ago, FuFuLamePoo said:

I'd rage if we take a CB 8th overall.  Especially the CB that isn't even the best in the draft

I'm 100% fine with adding an elite CB.  I don't have a strong opinion on Lattimore vs. Conley but I've read that usage patterns suggest OSU viewed Conley as their CB1.

But if we draft defense in the first the next two picks almost necessarily have to be offense and preferably skill positions.

In my opinion we have so little speed and athleticism on offense that it will put on a ceiling on how far this team can go if it is not addressed early on draft night.

[FuFuLamePoo]

3 hours ago, uscgamecocks said:

I'm 100% fine with adding an elite CB.  I don't have a strong opinion on Lattimore vs. Conley but I've read that usage patterns suggest OSU viewed Conley as their CB1.

But if we draft defense in the first the next two picks almost necessarily have to be offense and preferably skill positions.

In my opinion we have so little speed and athleticism on offense that it will put on a ceiling on how far this team can go if it is not addressed early on draft night.

If a guy like Thomas/Adams/Hooker falls I get going defense.  I can understand why our FO would at least view them as "elite" prospects that can be perennial pro bowlers.  Especially with Adams and Hooker.  I'm iffy on Thomas and how he would fit here, but I could understand being enticed with him.  Any other defensive pick, I'll probably be a little disappointed.  Jonathan Allen is the realistic pick that would make me rage.  I think he's a good player, but can't play on the outside.  I could live with Lattimore as well.  Other than that, we need to go on offense.  We have a chance to add a true play maker on the side of the ball where we sorely need it.  I feel fine about our CB's going into next year, I was just planning on finding a cheap guy to add for depth and be ready to roll there.  I just don't see how Conley makes us much better next year.  We need to make moves to win now.

[grimesgoat]

14 hours ago, davos said:

In Summary:

Conley CB | Watt DE | Dawkins RT | Samuel WR | Maye S | Hill RB | Sprinkle TE  

 

I like this draft and appreciate the time put into it.  Really covers our needs.  Also like the babes.

Couple of issues though - the trade back is not realistic.  If we got a 2nd from AZ just to move back 5 spots, I feel like we would be jailed for rape.  Also, I'd be a little surprised if we drafted someone in the first that we did not meet with privately.

I'd substitute McCaffrey for Conley and Corn Elder for Hill.  AZ may give us 77 and 119 (instead of 45) for the move up, and so we may still be able to get Dawkins at 77, but if not, sub in Elflein or Ojunjobi into that slot.

[davos]

4 hours ago, grimesgoat said:

I like this draft and appreciate the time put into it.  Really covers our needs.  Also like the babes.

Couple of issues though - the trade back is not realistic.  If we got a 2nd from AZ just to move back 5 spots, I feel like we would be jailed for rape.  Also, I'd be a little surprised if we drafted someone in the first that we did not meet with privately.

I'd substitute McCaffrey for Conley and Corn Elder for Hill.  AZ may give us 77 and 119 (instead of 45) for the move up, and so we may still be able to get Dawkins at 77, but if not, sub in Elflein or Ojunjobi into that slot.

Heck, I'd be cool with a double dip at RB. This scenario sees how a CB could go high but don't see an absolute need to draft one. Like DT last year. DG cautioned us so had to give this a shot.

Was close to scrapping Conley/Dawkins for Howard but wanted something a tad crazy.

[grimesgoat]

7 minutes ago, davos said:

Heck, I'd be cool with a double dip at RB. This scenario sees how a CB could go high but don't see an absolute need to draft one. Like DT last year. DG cautioned us so had to give this a shot.

Was close to scrapping Conley/Dawkins for Howard but wanted something a tad crazy.

I don't think grabbing a corner is that crazy, although I'd be a little surprised if its at 8.  At some point this year, one or more of Bradberry, Worley, or Munnerlyn will tweak something and miss a few games, and it will be nice to throw someone in that's not an UDFA.  This is an important draft to build the bench because there will be some serious opportunities (i.e. holes) in the next few years.  Gotta get some guys that will be ready for that.

[Chief Keek]

Pie for the pictures but that's about as best I can do for you.

[davos]

In light of recent sh*t, I have made a revision lol