Fant to IR

[jamesr]

On 9/27/2022 at 11:07 PM, JoeNamathsFurCoat said:

Let’s see the mobility and the “Mormon Mahomes” stuff 

Now’s your time to shine, Zachary

Mobility is fine IF it buys you time to find a guy downfield or at worst throw the ball away (safely).

If it becomes a game of "catch me if you can" where it's either throw the ball away (while getting flattened) or a sack / intentional grounding penalty ... I saw enough of that last year.

[TheClashFan]

11 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Except that’d only happen with your benefit of hindsight. More likely is if they’d invested pick 69 (let alone much earlier) in a tackle then he probably wasn’t also taking Mitchell in the very next round. Maybe then Mitchell isn’t even on the board for us to take anymore; instead taken by one of the teams that did draft an OT in round 3.

And further rationalization is the additional hindsight that they’d lose 3 starting tackles before October.

The other reality is no coach really wants to start two rookie tackles anyway, so this upcoming game would be the only one with both rookie tackles would be starting together. Most likely is Mitchell would be on the bench almost the entire time in ’22, seen only as depth for the rest of this season & more; then to be buried further after they reinvest a higher pick in a tackle in ‘23.

So take the gift and be happy with a starting 4th round rookie tackle, not wondering what if he and the coaches knew then what they only know now. Accept main reason Mitchell was both drafted here and panning out as a rookie starter is because he didn’t take another tackle earlier.

He moved up to take an edge rusher in the late 20s who’d have shocked no one to go inside the top 10. JJII may not eventually pan out as hoped but it was hardly an unreasonable gamble to move up for one considered a premium prospect at a premium position, when two expensive rostered edge rushers are both entering their non-guaranteed contract years.

BS, dude.  Go back and read my posts prior to the draft.  I and many others were very concerned about the OT situation and wanted an OT early (some argued for the 1s round, I was for the 2nd).

This weak "hindsight" stuff is for guys like you who were dead wrong about the OL being just fine going into the draft and training camp.

[Sperm Edwards]

58 minutes ago, TheClashFan said:

BS, dude.  Go back and read my posts prior to the draft.  I and many others were very concerned about the OT situation and wanted an OT early (some argued for the 1s round, I was for the 2nd).

This weak "hindsight" stuff is for guys like you who were dead wrong about the OL being just fine going into the draft and training camp.

It's hindsight & more to assume the draft lays out just as it would, with Mitchell lasting to us in both scenarios, by assuming 3 starting tackles would get injured before week 3 is up.

Even knowing that, with the benefit of hindsight, I still don't wish we took a tackle at #4 overall.