dave mcbride

Again, disregard the school. Look at the player. Which UCLA QB was good before Aikman? Which Michigan QB before Brady? And which ND QB has been any good since Theismann/Montana? Which BYU qb since Steve Young? The school is basically meaningless. I mean, LSU went nearly 50 years before producing a good NFL QB again (the last one being Bert Jones).

I could be wrong. I also suspect that they weren't particularly thrilled with Star last season. But I'm guessing here. I just don't think they want guys who think there's a bigger world out there than football and the team culture that goes with it.

I totally disagree. He is in my opinion the best route runner as a RB since Marshall Faulk. He actually showed those skills in the first bills game this past season but was yanked into a hamstring injury by AJ Klein (which saved a TD). He is the best wheel route runner I've seen since Thurman. But as I said, dumb as a box of rocks. Also, you appear to be fixated on ypc. Focus on ypt. There was hardly a huge drop in his final year there, and 6.2 probably led all RBs (although I'd need to look it up).

I don't believe in schools being indicative of QBs. When I was growing up, it was a truism that all Michigan QBs sucked in the pros -- until it wasn't true. A number of years ago, I went through every big time program on this board for the past 40 or so years, and Cal and Stanford were the top producers of big time qbs -- and they only issued 2-3. Alabama, of course, produced Stabler and Namath, and who's to say they won't do it again? Who was the last Wyoming QB who was any good? TCU? Ole Miss? Arizona? Wisconsin? Clemson? Texas A & M? NC State? The list goes on and on. Point is, don't get fooled into reading anything into where the player went. Judge the player.

Bell has always been about the elite receiving skills. And don't just look at the ypc - look at the yards per target. If he's getting 8-10 yards per catch and catching it an 80 percent rate, that's as good as a WR getting a 12 ypc average at a 65 percent rate. He had 8.1 yards per target in his awesome second season, and pretty much always above 6 -- which is valuable for a high target (80 receptions) guy. Bell is an odd bird in any case -- he was set up to have multiple great seasons Pitt but is as dumb as a box of rocks. Problem of the profession.

Just my opinion, but I think Fields would probably bomb in SF. For an immediate winner, I'd take Mac Jones any day of the week, at least in the context of the SF scheme. That's not to say he'll be better five years down the road, but as you say Shanahan needs to have a winning season.

At the end of the day, my sense is that McDermott wants no part of people who opted out. Maybe I'm reading too much into his "cultural mindset" (broadly conceived, if you know what I mean), but that's my sense. I could well be wrong.

I don't profess to know anything, but I don't see SF taking Fields at all. Maybe Lance, but not Fields. I think it's either Jones or Lance, with my money on Jones. But I could be wrong. Regardless, I don't see Fields in SF at all. We'll see.

I think mid-second rounder for a bell cow RB is fair. I mean, Bell and Shady were mid-second rounders who earned their slot. Derrick Henry too. None have won SBs except for Shady, who now has two rings for different teams :). They are high WAR players for the RB position, and the reason they don't have rings isn't because their teams spent picks that were too high on them.

I'd love that, but I doubt he'll be there at 30.

He was the DC for the Giants when their dominating Ds won two SBs. He has 8 rings, and his coordination is why the Giants beat a far better Bills team in 1991. He really doesn't care at this point - his legacy is complete. The Pats, if they take him.

I like him as the #42 overall pick.

Yolo: Their offense is built for Newton, and they have the heir apparent in Fields. I've been predicting this for a month now. Don't hate what you can't control!

I haven't read this because I'm out of free articles (SI is now paywalled), but if it you haven't used up your free articles yet, have at it: https://www.si.com/nfl/2021/04/28/gameplan-nfl-draft-coaches-scouting-reports-2021-quarterbacks

I totally disagree. He has nothing left to prove and Fields is Newton Mach II but with a non-injured arm. Why do it the Brady way again? He has already cemented his position as the greatest coach in NFL history. He's just about 70. He's gonna live a little and try something different.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/04/28/report-patriots-talked-to-falcons-about-trading-up-to-no-4-likely-to-draft-justin-fields/

I can't see any team giving up even a seventh for Singletary. He's not bad and deserves to be in the league, but he's replacement-level and you can get an equivalent in the fifth/sixth round for which you'll have two more years of control. With Singletary, you're trading 4 years of control for 2 years. That would make sense if he was more of a game changer than he is, but he isn't.

I don't understand Denver not targeting a QB. Bridgewater isn't good, and it's pretty clear that Lock isn't very good either.

I love McCaffrey's game, but they also went 5-11 in his superstar season. Of course, they had a terrible defense and no quarterback, so there were genuine mitigating circumstances.

Jerry Butler too. And Perry Tuttle is in the Winnipeg Blue Bombers team hall of fame.

Yup. How easily people forget.

Enjoy it while it lasts!

Agreed on all fronts. How would you feel about drafting Vera-Tucker if he were to somehow fall to 30 (which I don't think will happen)?

Agreed. Kuechly, another generational talent as a cover guy, is his model MLB.

He's coming back, which is good news. https://sports.yahoo.com/clemson-wr-justyn-ross-returning-in-2021-after-missing-2020-season-with-neck-injury-132446553.html