My (biased) thoughts on Martellus Bennett

gbrittain;2055783 said:
Don't you think it is debatable that Bennett was indeed the BPA considering we just traded Fasano a day ago?

To me that pick looks more like a need than BPA.
Click to expand...
Check out Goose's top 100. It was slim pickens at that point. I personally would like to have seen a trade up for Sweed, but since they didn't Bennett was about the best non rb pick left. There was also LB Connor but I guess he didn't fit the scheme and Jaime Dukes said that Connor was getting beat up by the rbs in the senior bowl.
 
HeavyHitta31;2054997 said:
I understand many here are angry over this pick, so I thought I'd share some insight on a Cowboys pick that I actually know personally.

As many of you know, I'm a senior this year at Texas A&M. I actually knew Bennett and hung out with him several times in college, and I'll start off by saying this: He is one of the best people and personalities you'll ever meet. Not only is extremely funny, but he was always the first guy to practice and the last guy to leave. He's a great guy to have in your locker room.

Now, onto his abilities. He is a freakish athlete. He was a second team all-state basketball player in HS if that tells you anything. At 6'7", he can jump out of the building. He is also an excellant blocker, in fact his best highlights in college were of him pancaking DEs and OLBs. The only knock on him is his speed, but he makes up for it with his great hands. Had he been in an offense where he was properly utilized (he played in an option offense at A&M), he would have likely been a first rounder. He also caught about half of his passes split out as a WR.

The guy is a FAR. FAR better player than Fasano, I can assure you.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a Antonio Gates type. That would be good.
 
Bleu Star;2056297 said:
Sounds like a Antonio Gates type. That would be good.
Click to expand...
If he's anywhere near that, hello 2te set again. That would lessen the use of the FB.
 
Martellus Bennett is a heck of a player but I dont have a problem with the fans not wanting him because he is a TE.

We shouldnt have gave away Fasano for what we did. Thats the reason we had to get another TE.

He needs to hit the weight room but dont get me wrong he is a heck of a talent.

Hes just another TE....
 
CATCH17;2056342 said:
Martellus Bennett is a heck of a player but I dont have a problem with the fans not wanting him because he is a TE.

We shouldnt have gave away Fasano for what we did. Thats the reason we had to get another TE.

He needs to hit the weight room but dont get me wrong he is a heck of a talent.

Hes just another TE....
Click to expand...

you think we drafted a TE cause we traded one?

we drafted BPA. period. he just happened to be a TE and in the end likely better than fasano.

if sweed were there we'd have likely taken him. our draft board had (2) rb's and bennett. taking another rb would be rather silly so we BPA it and take a very talented TE.

some people just wanna see the bad so they can feel better.
 
iceberg;2056346 said:
you think we drafted a TE cause we traded one?

we drafted BPA. period. he just happened to be a TE and in the end likely better than fasano.

if sweed were there we'd have likely taken him. our draft board had (2) rb's and bennett. taking another rb would be rather silly so we BPA it and take a very talented TE.

some people just wanna see the bad so they can feel better.
Click to expand...

The Cowboys drafted another TE in the 2nd because they need another 4th round pick. :p:
 
I follow college recruiting pretty closely, especially in Texas. I've always taken an interest in Bennet just because he was the former #1 high school recruit in the state of Texas. I can't even remember how many Aggie games I've watched, and always spend a lot of time focusing on Bennett. I hope that either he was just a victim of the massive Aggie cluster-F under Franchione or Garrett finds a new way to use his talents ... because he has always struck me as the prototypical "looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane" player.
 
Zimmy Lives;2056372 said:
The Cowboys drafted another TE in the 2nd because they need another 4th round pick. :p:
Click to expand...

A HA HA - HA HA!

sigh....
 
speedkilz88;2056293 said:
Check out Goose's top 100. It was slim pickens at that point. I personally would like to have seen a trade up for Sweed, but since they didn't Bennett was about the best non rb pick left. There was also LB Connor but I guess he didn't fit the scheme and Jaime Dukes said that Connor was getting beat up by the rbs in the senior bowl.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Bennett and Dan Connor were the best non-RBs available, I believe, according to Goose's chart. And that list is considered the mecca, so...

The Bennett pick intrigues me more than any other. It's a wildcard pick, but certainly of the best-available-player mold. Had we gone receiver, the guy we drafted wouldn't do us any good given what was available. We'd have drafted a receiver, and walked away thinking we weren't any better at the position than before.
 
I follow college recruiting pretty closely, especially in Texas. I've always taken an interest in Bennet just because he was the former #1 high school recruit in the state of Texas. I can't even remember how many Aggie games I've watched, and always spend a lot of time focusing on Bennett. I hope that either he was just a victim of the massive Aggie cluster-F under Franchione or Garrett finds a new way to use his talents ... because he has always struck me as the prototypical "looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane" player.
 
Hong2221;2055025 said:
I'll trust you, the guy better work on his technique in blocking! I am not mad about the 2nd round pick, I am more bad about the pick at 22. If we wanted a WOW player, we could've picked Jamaal Charles!
Click to expand...

I bleed burnt orange, but Jones is way more versatile than Charles, plus Jones had a much more productive collegiate career than Charles. Charles would of been a good 2nd round pick, but he would of been a major reach at #22.
 
Is Bennett a good route runner? Every highlight I've seen of him at A&M is some lame pass in the flat and he looks rather awkward running.

Anyone have a good highlight package of him?
 
Pottsville Maroons;2056459 said:
here's a link to the article from Vela that called this pick.....2 weeks ago.

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=116110&highlight=vela+bennett

If they plan on using Bennett the way Vela suggests, then this pick makes infinitely more sense. Here's hoping Bennett can be as productive and effective for us as Moose was.
Click to expand...

Vela may have called the pick, but his reasoning still does not resonate. Bennett is not suited for the H-Back position. He seems slow to uncoil (likely due to him being so tall) and all his vids do not show a player with much pop in his blocking (not enough lead in his butt) or the agility to hit moving targets. As a receiver he does have a long frame & big mitts but his YAC ability is literally non-existant.

And the BPA argument is asinine. Not only was Bennett not the highest rated player remaining, but if the Cowboys had a QB rated higher than Felix Jones/Mike Jenkins, does anyone think for one second that a QB is drafted in the first? Of course not. The Cowboys already have a huge investment at the position, just like at TE.
 
BAT;2056553 said:
Vela may have called the pick, but his reasoning still does not resonate. Bennett is not suited for the H-Back position. He seems slow to uncoil (likely due to him being so tall) and all his vids do not show a player with much pop in his blocking (not enough lead in his butt) or the agility to hit moving targets. As a receiver he does have a long frame & big mitts but his YAC ability is literally non-existant.

And the BPA argument is asinine. Not only was Bennett not the highest rated player remaining, but if the Cowboys had a QB rated higher than Felix Jones/Mike Jenkins, does anyone think for one second that a QB is drafted in the first? Of course not. The Cowboys already have a huge investment at the position, just like at TE.
Click to expand...

I think QB is a poor comparison, BAT.

We already have big investments at corner, and are soon to have a big investment (well, likely) in Barber at running back. Yet we chose players at those positions in the first round.

Quarterback is generally always the exception to the best-available rule. It just doesn't make sense, usually, to take a QB that high if you already have one.

But you can use two runners during the course of a game, you can use two tight ends during one game, three or four corners, etc.

Also, how do you reason Bennett was not the best available? Goose's chart had him as, what, the fourth-best there and the best or second-best non-RB available. Certainly in the best-available sphere. Not like Jerry plucked a projected fourth rounder out of his hat.
 
Wasn't Tony Curtis servicable enough for the teams needs?

We could have drafted ANYTHING else, like a position that has a player up for contract negotiations or to fill depth, but for a position that actually needs it? We could have gotten a TE anywhere else!

ughh. I'm sure the guy is a great person and a decent player but we I don't see the need for him at that point in the draft.
 
BouncingCheese;2056567 said:
Wasn't Tony Curtis servicable enough for the teams needs?

We could have drafted ANYTHING else, like a position that has a player up for contract negotiations or to fill depth, but for a position that actually needs it? We could have gotten a TE anywhere else!

ughh. I'm sure the guy is a great person and a decent player but we I don't see the need for him at that point in the draft.
Click to expand...

I'm not picking on you Bouncing Cheese, but this is what I love about the draft.

When you draft for need, you committed the sin of not going the best-available route. When you draft the best available, you took the misguided route of getting a guy that doesn't fill a hole.

The only time there's really a unified liking of a pick is when you take the absolutely, undeniably best player available who just so happens to fill your biggest hole.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

... and 113 more.
Total: 8,125 (members: 213, guests: 7,912)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
464,054
Messages
13,786,155
Members
23,771
Latest member
LandryHat
Back
Top