I watch all the games. Closely. Heath takes bad angles. He is a terrible tackler. Always coming in high. He also showed a lack of desire to tackle this year. Often out of position. Bad instincts. A decent athlete but not a starting S. His rodeo ride tackles this past season were embarrassing.
As for Hill. I like the pick. If they did target him, move down. He could have been had later.
Do you think the coaching staff might watch the games and specifically questionable players a little closer. I am not arguing your evaluation of him because I have not focused on him but if he's as bad as some feel he is, how does he keep that job? These [players get graded out after every game and the film doesn't lie.
What I don't get is if he's that bad, why does Richard put up with him when his name is on that secondary? Wouldn't he be pushing for them to move up and get him a new and better S instead of waiting to take a DT at 58?
I have the tendency to lean in the coach's direction on players and I do believe they all have input along with the scouts in these picks. There's no assurance that if they'd taken a S at 58 that he would have beaten Heath out.
The other thing I do, Wj, and this is not aimed at you at all, is discount these opinions that are over the top either direction on these players. They aren't saints or sinners to me.
As far as waiting for Hill, in any draft there is no assurance your guy will be there. If you targeted him and want him, especially if 5 of the 7 targets are gone, you take him. I am sure they went 7 deep because they knew some would be gone but they probably felt they would not be down to 2.
