Draft responses

Filed under: , , , by: Stankoniforous 0ne

Werdsworth chimed in on some draft bits and pieces. He specifically asked for some response so here Stank-0 goes. Werds said,

"The question becomes was the Giants' offense a function of Plax drawing double coverage or Eli slowly progressing into a future franchise QB? You know how I feel about that."

Indeed, we do. An NFL offense is an amazingly complex organism, to reduce it down to simple cause and effect is disingenuous. Sure Plax was very helpful, but that isn't the sole reason. The GMen looked eerily similar to the 2001 Patriots in winning that ring. They relied on their defense to get them there. Good enough, Werds? Let's move to the next part.

Werds said,

"So what should the Lions do with the #1 pick?"

Werds, you sure don't make it easy for a playa. The problem is that you only have one pick and a myriad of problems to address. It would make the most logical sense to deal the pick and get a grip of picks to start the long process of puttin the Lions back together again. Now does Stank-0 think the Lions will do this, of course not. It would be highly unorthodox to deal the 1st pick.

Werds, said,

Should the Skins draft another QB to make it three now?

This question answers itself. HELL NAW! Stank-0 wrote about Campbell last season. Stank-0 was sold then and he's sold now. Campbell has a QB coach-turned-head coach and he has helped Campbell's progression. If and Stank-0 says that very judiciously, Campbell is not the franchise QB for the Redskins then give Brennan a chance before you go lookin for another QB.

Powered by ScribeFire.


Related Posts with Thumbnails