Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Three young perennial pro bowlers on defense?


Jeremy Igo

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, hepcat said:

Now just think how much better the defense will be without Tre Boston 

I'm going to go out here on a limb and defend Tre. He's been playing well and he's been around the ball on every play throughout the year and has been at his best when he's been positioned and played aggressively by the scheme. The guy has given veteran leadership back there and has shown a willingness to not only be part of the pass defense but an active participant in the run defense and has been a better tackler this season than most of his career.

The guy catches a lot of hate on here, but sh!t the guy has been playing hard and making an impact. Really, evaluate the man for what he's doing on the field rather than making some unfounded hot take based on an easy to spot player. The guy is playing safety, not corner, and he's been pretty good at roving the field and making plays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Khyber53 said:

I'm going to go out here on a limb and defend Tre. He's been playing well and he's been around the ball on every play throughout the year and has been at his best when he's been positioned and played aggressively by the scheme.

Guy plays hard and generally is above average. Sure, he's whiffed on a couple of tackles and people here act like he misses every tackle. It's easy to pick on one glaring mistake and ignore the general body of work. For whatever reason, some guys just become punching bags for this forum without a lot of rationale. Probably related to general frustration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • When we drafted Luke, we already had Cam, Smith, Olsen, Stewart, Deangleo, Gross, Kalil, CJ, Hardy, Beason, TD, Gamble (and maybe more I'm forgetting), we had a lot of great pieces in place. Going pure BPA for a player with Luke's potential when the LB you already have is different when you already have all those pieces in place.  Our OL right now is probably in a better shape than that team and our RBs and TE have potential compared to proven vets back then, but after that, the 2012 roster was in a far better shape than we are right now. We need a #1 WR, DEs, LBs, DBs, C, and depending who you ask a QB.  Going BPA at pick #5 when that player is a DT and your current best player on either side of the ball is a DT, seems irresponsible. If he's the only player they like that high left, then you trade back and go with position of more need at a slot that makes sense for the player while adding other picks.  If you trade back and he falls because other teams don't need/want a DT, then you consider him at that point because of the value.    
    • This sounds like the same back and forth when we drafted a LB when we already had a LB or as mentioned prior back to back DLs. I want the BPA, if it is another DT so be it. (No not a kicker/punter for those people that think they are funny))
    • I’m hoping SMU messes it all up and wins out. Imagine the SEC & BI0 would crap themselves trying to “fix” the problem.
×
×
  • Create New...