• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

Steelers select Dri Archer in Round 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Idioteque said:
If he really did project to be Sproles or DeSean Jackson I'd agree with everyone in here who told us what an interesting dimension we've added to the offense, and I'd be plenty excited about it.
Click to expand...
You nailed it, that's exactly the projection many of us see for Archer. More importantly, that's exactly the projection the Steelers saw in him, hence the move to grab him in the 3rd.

btw - this friggin' thread is waaaay too long, totally annoyed by how long this thread is...
 
insaniti said:
Or don't assume people are complaining about the length of a thread just because they post the number of pages to make a point. Especially when it was abundantly clear that I wasn't complaining, but hey what do I know, I only typed the post out myself.
Click to expand...

Ok. I'll take your word for it. My apologies.
 
USDA#1 said:
not sure...it's grocery shoppin' night.
Click to expand...
I know where you'll be eating this weekend, you sneaky little devil...

l.jpg
 
CorpusDsteelers said:
TMC I like what you posted about Adams not being a LT and agreed with you. I laughed at hood jumping out of pools and only hoped Rainey could contribute. Archer is no Rainey you look foolish to think they are the same player.
Click to expand...

So why bring up the James Harrison ****? Are you now stating that players need time IF you like them and they do not need time if you do not like them? Is that it? So, you can disagree with Adams being a LT, even though coaches made that reference (even put him there) but you push all-in on their Rainey assessment. You hate the Hood pick, laughed at it (even though it was Jaron Gilbert that jumped out the pool, not Hood). Yet, they are dead on with the CB evaluation.

I get it. You flip-flop your arguments to suit your position on the player. I like this guy, he is the next James Harrison. I do not like this guy, he is the next Ziggy Hood. Brilliant.

flip+flops.jpg
 
Bigappleyinzer said:
Thursday night is grocery shopping night?


There are no bars or happy hours down in Ft. Liquordale?
Click to expand...
it's down to one chicken thigh, some freezer burned fish sticks, and some leftovers.

and no beer.

it's grocery shoppin' night, lol.
 
Bigappleyinzer said:
There are no bars or happy hours down in Ft. Liquordale?
Click to expand...
Oh, there are bars, and one particular pub is USDA's favorite...

Archer-Sign1.jpg



ps - the length of this thread is killing me, wish there was a way to make it shorter...
 
Essentially, no matter how well Archer does, TMC and Vader are going to minimize aspects of his game. At this point, it's about saving face for acting like they know better than Steeler Scouts, coaches, and management.
 
Badcat said:
Essentially, no matter how well Archer does, TMC and Vader are going to minimize aspects of his game. At this point, it's about saving face for acting like they know better than Steeler Scouts, coaches, and management.
Click to expand...

And if he ***** the bed is everyone else going to beg for forgiveness? (btw, I've seen several times where TMC has admitted to being wrong about a player eval.)
 
insaniti said:
(btw, I've seen several times where TMC has admitted to being wrong about a player eval.)
Click to expand...
Surely TMC is already preparing his mea culpa regarding Archer as well.
 
Idioteque said:
I get that, and it's a fair point, but some of us didn't want to take Archer at all, regardless of round. I think of him as a 5th-6th guy. So for me, the difference between the 3rd and the 4th isn't the issue so much as they player himself. If Bryant was necessary, I would have preferred Bryant in the 3rd and a more useful prospect (CB/OLB/WR) in the 4th, and let someone else work their ***** off to make Archer a contributor. *** Let me add the necessary disclaimer that I am not a professional GM, nor do I claim to have any clairvoyant knowledge of the future. But we all have our own ideas. ***

If Archer looked like a better prospect, I'd be fine with it. If he really did project to be Sproles or DeSean Jackson I'd agree with everyone in here who told us what an interesting dimension we've added to the offense, and I'd be plenty excited about it.
Click to expand...

I understand the opinion that people aren't happy because Archer isn't going to be a 300 carry back, or a 100 catch receiver. I get that. I have been saying from the begining that is not the plan for Archer. But he WILL touch the football and that is something no other pick would surely do. Even Bryant who they took the round later might not even make the 53 man because his function is either WR or practice squad. He isn't a return guy, he isn't a special teams gunner, he has no other value than WR. I understand some would rather have RD1 Shazier, RD2 Tuitt, RD3 Bryant, RD4 Desir, RD5 Seastrunk, RD5 Johnson, RD6 Zumwalt, RD7 Blanchflower. And I can see the value in the middle rounds. Bryant could be the next Colston, or the next Limas Sweed. Desir could be the next Keenan Lewis, or the next Hawthorne. Seastrunk could be the next Blount, but he has Bell and Blount in from of him. I guess what I am saying is I understand what people are saying but even though Archer will likely not be Shady McCoy his floor is still much higher than most of the guys drafted after him because he has several avenues where he will be able to contribute.


I think they did an excellent job there. I was worried they'd reach for need (Dennard) or have their own ideas about some late-first, early-second type of guy and reach for him (Benjamin or Lee). Shazier was the right pick at 15, and while I'm not quite as high on Tuitt as some are, he brought excellent value and real potential to turn a big weakness into a big strength. To me, the BPA v. need debate isn't as simple as it seems. You don't just (a) take the position you look weakest at in May, nor do you (b) take the highest-rated player on your board regardless of position. I think you identify and rank your key needs, then take the highest-rated and best-fitting player available.
Click to expand...
That's a fine opinion. I get that 100%. I personally would always take BPA first round unless you have a 25 year old Pro Bowl QB locked up I draft BPA. Round 2-3 I take BPA then tie breaker going to the need position. example if you have two guys ranked 5.7 but one position you have an older guy or a guy with a contract coming up and the other you are young and have a few more years under contract I go with the bigger need. That's my tie breaker and that is all. I don't take the 5.6 guy because of need I take the guy on my board. Round 4-7 I fill up my roster with a BPA/need. By that time you will have a lot of guys neck and neck on your board so filling up the empty roster holes you have. That is just how I would do it if it was my team but I am sure some teams go by need first highest at that position and other totally draft down their board regardless of position.
They did a great job of that. This was not a good safety class at all, and I think they locked up a young contributor in Mitchell. Like all drafts, this one only had X number of pure NTs, and we added Cam Thomas. I just think there are key needs we ignored. Our pass rush still looks horrid, and our CB depth chart is worrisome to me. The main beef I have with the Archer pick is that it took away a chance to fill one of those much more important roles.
Click to expand...
Pass rush is a spendy position in FA. They took a guy who can blitz up the middle and a 34 DE who was a pass rush nightmare in college. I think when guys like Everson Griffen get 42.5 million you don't have a lot of options to increase the pass rush in free agency. They decided to keep Worilds and they ended up drafting guys early. If they took Archer in the first I'd be pissed too because I feel you need a starter every year in round one. Round two I would say you have a 1/3 shot at a starter but round 3 it's literally 12% and probably not a year one starter. I can live with taking a guy who in his first year will contribute in the third round. But maybe you feel they easily would have grabbed the next Keenan Allen or Jordan Reed (the only two guys I can think of who started from the third last year).
 
Anyone who says we should have drafted Bryant in the 3rd is an idiot. We got him in the 4th, so why over reach for him?
 
Does it count that big dan was a third/fourth (we got in the 6)and the Wr was a 2/3 rounder (we got in the 4) archer was a 5/6 (we got in the 3rd) seems to even out. Esp if our 2nd was supposed to go in the 1st.
 
y'all arent real fans.
we're s'posed to pick first rounders in every round.

good god. go download open office and learn how to make a spreadsheet.
 
FordFairLane said:
I understand the opinion that people aren't happy because Archer isn't going to be a 300 carry back, or a 100 catch receiver. I get that. I have been saying from the begining that is not the plan for Archer. But he WILL touch the football and that is something no other pick would surely do. Even Bryant who they took the round later might not even make the 53 man because his function is either WR or practice squad. He isn't a return guy, he isn't a special teams gunner, he has no other value than WR. I understand some would rather have RD1 Shazier, RD2 Tuitt, RD3 Bryant, RD4 Desir, RD5 Seastrunk, RD5 Johnson, RD6 Zumwalt, RD7 Blanchflower. And I can see the value in the middle rounds. Bryant could be the next Colston, or the next Limas Sweed. Desir could be the next Keenan Lewis, or the next Hawthorne. Seastrunk could be the next Blount, but he has Bell and Blount in from of him. I guess what I am saying is I understand what people are saying but even though Archer will likely not be Shady McCoy his floor is still much higher than most of the guys drafted after him because he has several avenues where he will be able to contribute.
Click to expand...

The pick doesn't bother me as much as the player. I like that they ignored Mel effing Kiper, said "**** the depth chart (to an extent)" and had the balls to go after their guy. Teams don't get better by taking safe, sanitized prospects at every turn, making sure they fill an immediate need. They improve by adding talent. So, by all means, go get your guy. If I liked Archer more as a player - let's say he were NFL-sized and didn't have a mile-long injury and fumbling history - and the team saw enough in the guy to prioritize him, then I'd be all for it. I remember 2001 vividly - we ignored two blue-chip CBs in Clements and Smoot and "reached" for a stumpy NT. Obviously, it was the right move. I loved the trade-up for Stonio. I loved taking DeCastro and Heyward. Go get your guy.

I just don't like the player. It's not that I think an 8-10 touch scatback isn't worth the pick. It's that I don't think Archer will be able to be that. If you offered me a guaranteed (better) McCluster there, I might do it, but at this point I don't see that in Archer.

Pass rush is a spendy position in FA. They took a guy who can blitz up the middle and a 34 DE who was a pass rush nightmare in college. I think when guys like Everson Griffen get 42.5 million you don't have a lot of options to increase the pass rush in free agency. They decided to keep Worilds and they ended up drafting guys early. If they took Archer in the first I'd be pissed too because I feel you need a starter every year in round one. Round two I would say you have a 1/3 shot at a starter but round 3 it's literally 12% and probably not a year one starter. I can live with taking a guy who in his first year will contribute in the third round. But maybe you feel they easily would have grabbed the next Keenan Allen or Jordan Reed (the only two guys I can think of who started from the third last year).
Click to expand...

Absolutely, spending on pass rushers in FA is a nightmare, unless you're the Jags with $50M to burn. I wanted to stock up in the draft. Lots of mid-round talent off the edge. I like the majority of our draft - not an Archer fan and I knew very little of Shaq, though I like what I've seen - but man I wish we had spent a pick on a promising pass rusher.
 
Last edited:
insaniti said:
And if he ***** the bed is everyone else going to beg for forgiveness? (btw, I've seen several times where TMC has admitted to being wrong about a player eval.)
Click to expand...

Not long ago, TMC and I went ten rounds on Trent Richardson. When Richardson **** the bed horribly, he admitted that he may have been wrong on the guy. Soon after that, we went at it again over Eugene Monroe. He set me straight on Monroe and the fallacy of relying on blocking metrics.

Anyone who throws around this "You just wanna look right!" crap is just reaching. I rarely, if ever, see that on this board.
 
Last edited:
Idioteque said:
Not long ago, TMC and I went ten rounds on Trent Richardson. When Richardson **** the bed horribly, he admitted that he may have been wrong on the guy. Soon after that, we went at it again over Eugene Monroe. He set me straight on Monroe and the fallacy of relying on blocking metrics.

Anyone who throws around this "Psssh, y'all ain't real fans, you just wanna look right!" crap are just reaching. I rarely, if ever, see that on this board.
Click to expand...

Timmons, gets drafted to play OLB, moves inside, when he starts to look good inside, people were still saying "Well, he's a bust, because he's not playing the position we drafted him to play".

If that's not reaching to be right, I don't know what is.

Joe
 
Oh, and for the record, I really thought Richardson was going to do much better in Indy, he's so far sucked ***.

Joe
 
Tibs said:
Dri Archer will kick your *****!

Yup, that's exactly what's gonna happen. So I suggest everyone get back on track and begin listing the ways Archer is gonna put this offense on his back & get this team into the playoffs.
Click to expand...

All he needs is a chair to stand on so he can reach them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top