Joe Staley at #22?

[MichaelWinicki]

he added 80lbs. between his Sophomore and Senior seasons, he's 6'6", he has alot of room to grow

we need a replacement for Flo, just like we need a replacement for Glenn and TO, just like we need a replacement for at least Aaron Glenn too, I'm not trying to push Staley down anyone's throat, I'm just sayin...

Guys that can "move" like Staley and Al Johnson are just built differently than your more typical offensive lineman.

Just because he added 80lbs doesn't mean he can add more. Hell Al Johnson maxed out at 300lbs himself and he's 6'5". I mean these guys aren't "sponges".

 

[Rockytop6]

I would like for the Boys to trade down 5 or 6 spots and take Staley if he is still there. I think he will develop into an elite LT and they don't grow on trees.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

he added 80lbs. between his Sophomore and Senior seasons, he's 6'6", he has alot of room to grow

we need a replacement for Flo, just like we need a replacement for Glenn and TO, just like we need a replacement for at least Aaron Glenn too, I'm not trying to push Staley down anyone's throat, I'm just sayin...

And who says McQ isn't a suitable replacement for Adams?

And who says we won't resign Adams?

You draft an undersized offensive tackle like Staley and you're basically going to have to make him inactive for every game because he won't have the strength/knowledge to even be the third tackle on the this club. Even though McQ was a 7th round pick he's a 7th rounder with some seasoning now and he'll be the 3rd tackle.

As a side note, most of the folks on this board couldn't wait to label Carpenter a "bust" because he spent a few weeks inactive... just see what would happen if we choose Staley and he was inactive for most of the season-- trust me it wouldn't be pretty here or in the media where shots at Carpenter were taken liberally.

An offensive tackle chosen with the 22nd pick is not a smart move in my opinion.

And another thing, taking the 3rd tackle as our top pick in a very weak class of top-end tackles doesn't warm the cockles of my heart either. I'd rather be looking at a position of strength in this draft (first round wise) like WR or CB rather than an acknowledged weak position like OT.

 

[dbair1967]

And who says McQ isn't a suitable replacement for Adams?

And who says we won't resign Adams?

You draft an undersized offensive tackle like Staley and you're basically going to have to make him inactive for every game because he won't have the strength/knowledge to even be the third tackle on the this club. Even though McQ was a 7th round pick he's a 7th rounder with some seasoning now and he'll be the 3rd tackle.

As a side note, most of the folks on this board couldn't wait to label Carpenter a "bust" because he spent a few weeks inactive... just see what would happen if we choose Staley and he was inactive for most of the season-- trust me it wouldn't be pretty here or in the media where shots at Carpenter were taken liberally.

An offensive tackle chosen with the 22nd pick is not a smart move in my opinion.

And another thing, taking the 3rd tackle as our top pick in a very weak class of top-end tackles doesn't warm the cockles of my heart either. I'd rather be looking at a position of strength in this draft (first round wise) like WR or CB rather than an acknowledged weak position like OT.

this is the kind of player you choose in the 2nd rd

he isnt going to start this yr, and might not be a starter next yr either

David

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Guys that can "move" like Staley and Al Johnson are just built differently than your more typical offensive lineman.

Just because he added 80lbs doesn't mean he can add more. Hell Al Johnson maxed out at 300lbs himself and he's 6'5". I mean these guys aren't "sponges".

doesn't mean he can't add more either

 

[MichaelWinicki]

doesn't mean he can't add more either

If I'm taking a developmental OT... I ain't doing it in the first round.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

And another thing, taking the 3rd tackle as our top pick in a very weak class of top-end tackles doesn't warm the cockles of my heart either. I'd rather be looking at a position of strength in this draft (first round wise) like WR or CB rather than an acknowledged weak position like OT.

I just want the BPA at 22, again, either Staley, Spencer or Meachem

 

[iceberg]

And who says McQ isn't a suitable replacement for Adams?

And who says we won't resign Adams?

You draft an undersized offensive tackle like Staley and you're basically going to have to make him inactive for every game because he won't have the strength/knowledge to even be the third tackle on the this club. Even though McQ was a 7th round pick he's a 7th rounder with some seasoning now and he'll be the 3rd tackle.

As a side note, most of the folks on this board couldn't wait to label Carpenter a "bust" because he spent a few weeks inactive... just see what would happen if we choose Staley and he was inactive for most of the season-- trust me it wouldn't be pretty here or in the media where shots at Carpenter were taken liberally.

An offensive tackle chosen with the 22nd pick is not a smart move in my opinion.

And another thing, taking the 3rd tackle as our top pick in a very weak class of top-end tackles doesn't warm the cockles of my heart either. I'd rather be looking at a position of strength in this draft (first round wise) like WR or CB rather than an acknowledged weak position like OT.

no one says that. but it's more likely to succeed w/a 1st round talent (staley) than someone who's brother was on the draft board but he wasn't, so we took the klingon stepchild anyway.

what about that thomas dude being drafted in many circles at 2-5. wow - the world of stupidity just spun over in it's grave cause it's gonna happen despite the clear cut draft guide you show me.

flo has never been a superstar but next year he's gonna get paid like one. let someone else have him and let's have a year of staley to judge and work upon than all of a sudden plugging bodies into a sudden hole. many said if we drafted a OL in the 2nd who cares, they'd sit. but hey, that two TE offense is more important than the line.

the "knowed up fans" ate that excuse up faster than the "best chance to win" mantra.

nothing against fasano - we got him i hope he pans out. but we didn't do what we thought we'd do for an offensive philosophy and we don't have any young "good" depth to look forward to.

WHEN are we gonna bite the bullet and "pay off this debt" and take a chance we can eventually draft a good OL prospect?

take staley and let's go.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

If I'm taking a developmental OT... I ain't doing it in the first round.

Staley was a 3-year starter for a Div1A team, I don't know why everyone is calling him a developmental player, yes he's raw, and that's because he was a TE before switching to OT, but any rookie is raw, it's not like it's McQuistan only playing 2 years of college football for a 1-AA school

 

[iceberg]

I just want the BPA at 22, again, either Staley, Spencer or Meachem

i can't argue W/R either for the same reasons. if you see one a year or two away from going, THEN it's tim to look for a replacement. not when they walk out the door and we take whatever is available.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

btw, Joe Thomas weighs only 5lbs more and is just as strong, guess noone should take him in the 1st either

and D'Brickshaw Ferguson weighs 8lbs more, oh how in the world is Staley going to add that many lbs?!!

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Staley was a 3-year starter for a Div1A team, I don't know why everyone is calling him a developmental player? yes he's raw, but any rookie is raw, it's not like it's McQuistan only playing 2 years of college football for a 1-AA school

No question that McQ was and is still "raw". BUT he has the advantage of being in the NFL for one full season-- maybe you can't understand what a huge advantage that is.

And like I said Bob you draft Staley who definitely needs to add weight/strength who dresses on Sunday? Staley or McQ?

I say McQ at this point.

So then you are forced to keep Staley inactive for much of the season-- how is that going to go down? Hmm?

Take a guy like a WR or a CB or even a "tweener" at this point and I can see any 1st rounder at any of those positions dressing on Sunday but not an offensive tackle.

 

[iceberg]

btw, Joe Thomas weighs only 5lbs more and is just as strong, guess noone should take him in the 1st either

pointed that one out a few posts ago. there is no "hard and fast rule" - if 3-4 players are there and can all address a need, go with your biggest need or best player - either call.

staley
meachem
nelson
jarrett

if those 4 are there, i could see jarrett or meachem over staley but likely not safety at this point.

so bigger need/payoff. solidifying that line would be a good idea with the 1/2nd best talent on the board than the 6/7th best WRs, wouldn't you think?

but i would be ok with either, prefer staley.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

No question that McQ was and is still "raw". BUT he has the advantage of being in the NFL for one full season-- maybe you can't understand what a huge advantage that is.

it's not that huge, as McQ still needs to add more strength and learn the position and the nuances of playing it in the NFL

And like I said Bob you draft Staley who definitely needs to add weight/strength who dresses on Sunday? Staley or McQ?

I say McQ at this point.

I say the potential of McQ and Staley as the bookends at OT is more promising than Flozell and Colombo

So then you are forced to keep Staley inactive for much of the season-- how is that going to go down? Hmm?

it will go down however it does

Take a guy like a WR or a CB or even a "tweener" at this point and I can see any 1st rounder at any of those positions dressing on Sunday but not an offensive tackle.

me too

 

[MichaelWinicki]

btw, Joe Thomas weighs only 5lbs more and is just as strong, guess noone should take him in the 1st either

and D'Brickshaw Ferguson weighs 8lbs more, oh how in the world is Staley going to add that many lbs?!!

#1 is that they've played the OT position far longer than Staley.

#2 Mechanically they are both ahead of Staley... Ferguson by a wide margin.

#3 Thomas, even being the top-rated OT isn't anything to right home about. We're not talking Orlando Pace or even Ferguson level here. And if Thomas is at the level he's at then where is Staley at?

 

[iceberg]

No question that McQ was and is still "raw". BUT he has the advantage of being in the NFL for one full season-- maybe you can't understand what a huge advantage that is.

advantage? that's why i hated fasano last year. we'd have a GOOD (not no name) player w/that year under their belt ready to go in case flo leaves, gets hurt or whatever.

if we take staley, we're ready in case flo goes and then staley has this WONDERFUL year under his belt that you now speak higly of. if you don't take the player to give him that year, when does he get it?

i'll take staley and a year wait LONG BEFORE mcq who was not on very many draft boards AT ALL.

flo goes THEN we draft, rookie time or plug in another FA from nowhere.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

#1 is that they've played the OT position far longer than Staley.

1 year is hardly far longer

#2 Mechanically they are both ahead of Staley... Ferguson by a wide margin.

what would you know about their mechanics? show me a piece where they mastered the OT position, I'm sorry, raw is raw

#3 Thomas, even being the top-rated OT isn't anything to right home about. We're not talking Orlando Pace or even Ferguson level here. And if Thomas is at the level he's at then where is Staley at?

it's not about that, it's about you knocking Staley for being undersized when there are undersized OTs out there who are highly thought of, or unless you have Ferg's, Thomas' and Staley's DNA to prove to me who will, and who won't add weight in the pros

the bottomline is that Staley played extremely well as an OT at CMU, despite learning on the run, and his potential is through the roof

 

[TDH]

And who says McQ isn't a suitable replacement for Adams?

And who says we won't resign Adams?

You draft an undersized offensive tackle like Staley and you're basically going to have to make him inactive for every game because he won't have the strength/knowledge to even be the third tackle on the this club. Even though McQ was a 7th round pick he's a 7th rounder with some seasoning now and he'll be the 3rd tackle.

As a side note, most of the folks on this board couldn't wait to label Carpenter a "bust" because he spent a few weeks inactive... just see what would happen if we choose Staley and he was inactive for most of the season-- trust me it wouldn't be pretty here or in the media where shots at Carpenter were taken liberally.

An offensive tackle chosen with the 22nd pick is not a smart move in my opinion.

And another thing, taking the 3rd tackle as our top pick in a very weak class of top-end tackles doesn't warm the cockles of my heart either. I'd rather be looking at a position of strength in this draft (first round wise) like WR or CB rather than an acknowledged weak position like OT.

A few things -

1.) People on this Board have got to stop looking at our players with rose colored glasses, between McQuistan and Watkins, I would think that these 2 5th and 7th rd picks are the next Ed Reed (yes i know ed's a SS) and Jonathon Ogden or Walter Jones. I wont even go into Watkins, but as far as McQ goes...I mean yeah, he may end up being a serviceable backup, spot starter maybe. But he will never be a probowl caliber LT. I realize every team cant have a probowl caliber LT, but if you think you can maybe get one, you dont not do it b/c some of the coaches/fans (which cracks me up b/c what do any of us fans really know about how McQ practiced???) think that your 7th rd pick the year earlier is exceeding 7th rd talent expectations.

2.) I will never agree with the carpenter pick, and i wont go into it here. However, I do think that we saw some flashes that he may be ok in this league. Nevertheless, what people on this board or in the media say about any of our draft picks (him/staley/etc.) should have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with whether or not we take Staley and have him back up for a year. (assuming staley would be inactive like you said is way off, and your rt, if we dont think he can even be active as Flo's backup, then we shouldnt draft him. All we are saying is that he may not start the first year.

3.) "An offensive tackle chosen with the 22nd pick is not a smart move in my opinion." - Well no offense, but I dont have a whole lot of respect for your football opinion b/c you clearly dont understand how important the LT position is. And cocklng your heart is not my concern, building a team that is strong and talented up front through the draft is...and IMHO, Staley would not be a bad choice. Just my opinion.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

btw, Mark Tuinei was a Dlineman before he entered the pros

improving at a position is all about picking things up quickly, and Staley did that at CMU, he went from a TE, to a very good OT

also, Marcus Spears was a TE in high-school, guess that's the main thing keeping him back in the pros

 

[The30YardSlant]

btw, Mark Tuinei was a Dlineman before he entered the pros

Half the O-Linemen in the league also player D-Line at some point in their football careers