Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 46

Thread: Does signing Foote mean no LB in Round 1

  1. #11
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,907

    Re: Does signing Foote mean no LB in Round 1

    Quote Originally Posted by Oviedo
    Quote Originally Posted by papillon
    It's my opinion that the Steelers FA signings are simply adding depth to as many positions as possible to allow them to take the BPA based on their draft board and that includes Spiller should he fall. As much as I'd hate to see it, it wouldn't surprise me if they took him if he fell. It would almost be impossible to pass on him should he fall that far.

    Regardless, the Steelers have put themselves in a position to take BPA and that's how they like to operate.

    Pappy
    Spiller!!! Yea baby!!! You are starting to look and see and the same time. Too many on this board look but don't see and listen but don't hear.

    IMO we are putting together a roster that gives us the freedom to go up and get him.
    Other than CB, RB is absolutely a position of need and it's nice to see it's finally starting to get some attention here. I'm sold on Spiller in the 1st.

  2. #12
    Legend
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    13,731

    Re: Does signing Foote mean no LB in Round 1

    Quote Originally Posted by SteelBucks
    Quote Originally Posted by Oviedo
    Quote Originally Posted by papillon
    It's my opinion that the Steelers FA signings are simply adding depth to as many positions as possible to allow them to take the BPA based on their draft board and that includes Spiller should he fall. As much as I'd hate to see it, it wouldn't surprise me if they took him if he fell. It would almost be impossible to pass on him should he fall that far.

    Regardless, the Steelers have put themselves in a position to take BPA and that's how they like to operate.

    Pappy
    Spiller!!! Yea baby!!! You are starting to look and see and the same time. Too many on this board look but don't see and listen but don't hear.

    IMO we are putting together a roster that gives us the freedom to go up and get him.
    Other than CB, RB is absolutely a position of need and it's nice to see it's finally starting to get some attention here. I'm sold on Spiller in the 1st.
    RB IMO is actually a position of greater need than CB. We drafted two CBs last year, but we have nothing close to a #2 RB on this roster. Remember Mendy's rookie season was a wash with an injury. He was healthy last year but he runs hard and the chances he gets injured are high. We need a capable #2 unless we are going to pass the ball 50x per game because there is no other RB on this roster that could carry the load for 4-5 games if required.
    Playing Fantasy Football does not qualify you to be the in the front office or on the coaching staff of the Pittsburgh Steelers. They are professionals and you are not!

  3. #13
    Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,491

    Re: Does signing Foote mean no LB in Round 1

    I wouldn't have a problem with Spiller. But if guys like Mcclain, Haden, T Williams, & Spoon are on the board, how do you pass? I would be fine with taking BPA when you can't fill a need because players graded where you pick are gone and you can't trade out. If Spoon, Haden, Williams, Spiller & Mcclain are all on the board at #18....I would rate them like this:


    1. Haden - How can you pass? Who cares about the 40 time at the combine. Fluid in position drills and on film.
    2. Trent Williams - Can play anywhere. He's the Steelers new C.
    3. Spoon - I like him better than McClain since the Senior Bowl. My pick in the mock because I feel Haden & Williams will be gone.
    4. Spiller - At this spot with Haden, Williams, & Spoon off the board...I would take him over McClain.
    5. Trade back and target Pouncey.
    6. BPA-McClain



  4. #14
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, United States
    Posts
    1,387

    Re: Does signing Foote mean no LB in Round 1

    I still think there is no way we draft a RB in the first round, let alone trade up to get one (Spiller). If Spiller is on the board at #18, I guess there is s possibility we take him. It certainly is not in the Steelers makeup to move a any more than a few spots to get a guy, so I don't see that happening. Too costly to give up our first, second and third at least to move up high enough to get Berry. I can't realistically see us trading any player of significance either, especially Homes or Wallace. That would cripple us at the WR spot.

    I still have a feeling it is going to be a "safe" pick to bolster the OL, Williams or Iupati more than likely.

  5. #15
    Legend RuthlessBurgher's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Where the Rubber Meets the Road (in NEPA)
    Posts
    21,912

    Re: Does signing Foote mean no LB in Round 1

    Quote Originally Posted by Oviedo
    Quote Originally Posted by papillon
    It's my opinion that the Steelers FA signings are simply adding depth to as many positions as possible to allow them to take the BPA based on their draft board and that includes Spiller should he fall. As much as I'd hate to see it, it wouldn't surprise me if they took him if he fell. It would almost be impossible to pass on him should he fall that far.

    Regardless, the Steelers have put themselves in a position to take BPA and that's how they like to operate.

    Pappy
    Spiller!!! Yea baby!!! You are starting to look and see and the same time. Too many on this board look but don't see and listen but don't hear.

    IMO we are putting together a roster that gives us the freedom to go up and get him.
    Early in the process, when we had gaping holes at NT and FS, plus weaknesses at CB, LB, and OL, I hated your suggestion of Spiller. Made my skin crawl just thinking about it. Now that we have re-signed Hampton and Clark to start, and filled in with depth players like Foote, Randle El, Allen, Battle, and Scott, I don't loathe the idea anymore. I'm not saying I love it by any means. I'm lukewarm about it at this point. I'd still rather a CB, LB, or OL more, but you you have to admit RB is a position that needs an infusion of depth. I think there are multiple options at RB that would satisfy that need which could be had in round 3 or 4 instead of round 1, but I wouldn't destroy my flatscreen with my remote if we drafted Spiller at #18 (I better get some extra insurance on my T.V., though, just in case we trade up for him as you suggest, because that would make my remote fly).

    My favorite trade up scenario would be to give up our 2nd rounder if Eric Berry falls to the latter portion of the top 10. I would even consider giving up a 3rd rounder to move up a few spots to get Haden (and, yes, I know you don't like him).

  6. #16

    Re: Does signing Foote mean no LB in Round 1

    Yup I think LB is out.....my new mock reflects.....I think CB is now the position to go for.
    2015 Draft

    1) P.J. Williams-CB-Florida St.
    2) Jordan Phillips-DT-Oklahoma
    3) Geneo Grissom-OLB-Oklahoma
    4) Jeff Heuerman-TE-OSU
    5)
    Clint Trickett-QB-WVU
    6) Justin Coleman-CB-Tenn
    7) Spencer Roth-P-Baylor













  7. #17

    Re: Does signing Foote mean no LB in Round 1

    Quote Originally Posted by Oviedo
    Quote Originally Posted by papillon
    It's my opinion that the Steelers FA signings are simply adding depth to as many positions as possible to allow them to take the BPA based on their draft board and that includes Spiller should he fall. As much as I'd hate to see it, it wouldn't surprise me if they took him if he fell. It would almost be impossible to pass on him should he fall that far.

    Regardless, the Steelers have put themselves in a position to take BPA and that's how they like to operate.

    Pappy
    Spiller!!! Yea baby!!! You are starting to look and see and the same time. Too many on this board look but don't see and listen but don't hear.

    IMO we are putting together a roster that gives us the freedom to go up and get him.


    You be on that crack pipe.

  8. #18

    Re: Does signing Foote mean no LB in Round 1

    Guys we will draft a RB in the first 5 rounds but I don't see it being a scat back. It will be a power runner to help in the RZ and to sustain leads late in games. The only way I see us grabbing Spiller is if we also draft a power back. And even then...I can't see it happening.

  9. #19
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, United States
    Posts
    1,387

    Re: Does signing Foote mean no LB in Round 1

    Quote Originally Posted by steelerkeylargo
    Yup I think LB is out.....my new mock reflects.....I think CB is now the position to go for.
    If Spoon and/or McClain are sitting at #18, they may still take them. LB is still a big need, regardless of Foote's signing. I still think there may be another shoe to drop there.

  10. #20
    Legend
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    13,731

    Re: Does signing Foote mean no LB in Round 1

    Quote Originally Posted by Shawn
    Guys we will draft a RB in the first 5 rounds but I don't see it being a scat back. It will be a power runner to help in the RZ and to sustain leads late in games. The only way I see us grabbing Spiller is if we also draft a power back. And even then...I can't see it happening.
    But it has been proven over the past couple of years that you are usually wrong and I am usually right. Therefore I wonder what Number CJ will get
    Playing Fantasy Football does not qualify you to be the in the front office or on the coaching staff of the Pittsburgh Steelers. They are professionals and you are not!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •