The 2026 Draft Thread - 1st Round - 7th overall

KDawg said:
McShay on latest pod:

With Washington there was some mention that they would go Tyson. But no. They, real early, said they are a Tate team.

Looking into Blough he wants a big, physical receiver and Tate fits.

“I want to give you the honest to God truth… the last conversation I had was very authoritative. And that was this pick will be defense. Quinn has got it… uhm… what’s the word… it is… priority is too light a word. It’s a demand. It’s a mandate that we get that defense fixed. It will be Downs if the board falls the way it is. If Styles is off the board it’s Downs.”

He then went on to take Tate because he thinks that is what they should do. “Can’t let my franchise QB be in a situation where he doesn’t have the tools he needs to be successful. I wouldn’t blink.”

And then he changed back and said he’s going to take Downs because he thinks that will be what they actually do.
Click to expand...
I'm good w any of those 3.

Tate makes a ton of sense, the FO and coaches are on a hot(tish) seat to win now
 
At this point, I think zero chance Love lands at 7, I already hate the Giants as is. So to see him in NY would drive me nuts. Giants already hyped by national media like they are SB contenders -- if they get Love, too? It will be the most obnoxious organization even more insufferable.

So rooting to see Love off the board at 3 or 4.

Judging by recent intel, Giants are higher on Downs than Styles. And would take Love in a heartbeat if he falls to them.

 
skinsinparadise said:
You think he's elite or close enough otherwise?
Click to expand...
I'm going only off what I've heard people say about him, but I have heard repeatedly that if there weren't injury concerns he'd be the first receiver off the board. I haven't watched any tape, but I've heard that over and over again that he's super talented but always hurt.
 
burgold said:
I'm going only off what I've heard people say about him, but I have heard repeatedly that if there weren't injury concerns he'd be the first receiver off the board. I haven't watched any tape, but I've heard that over and over again that he's super talented but always hurt.
Click to expand...

That's more of a draft media thing. Still not all agree on it with the draft media either. With scouts, at least the ones McGinn interviewed they ranked him as the third best WR in this class.

I think McShay nailed it when he said Tyson's agent is awesome at promoting his client.
 
burgold said:
I'm going only off what I've heard people say about him, but I have heard repeatedly that if there weren't injury concerns he'd be the first receiver off the board. I haven't watched any tape, but I've heard that over and over again that he's super talented but always hurt.
Click to expand...

Some think so. Not everyone agrees with that point. Definitetly not a consensus on that. I get those who like Tyson over Tate or vice versa, purely as players. I think they both have limitations but both should be good to very good if healthy IMO -- Tyson less likely to be good to very good because of his makeup and injury history.
 
Again, I’m not sure if anyone has paid attention to Steve Smith but he is, quite possibly, the best receiver evaluator out there.

What he said absolutely aligns with what I said, plus he noticed some other things that I hadn’t.

If Steve Smith is saying Carnell Tate is the best prospect in this class I’m not arguing with him.

Tyson could be, but he takes a ton of contact, runs awkwardly on his legs and already has a vast history of leg injuries. He’s not as good of a blocker, has worse hands.

I don’t get why this is even a question. If it’s not Love, it needs to be Tate.
 
KDawg said:
Again, I’m not sure if anyone has paid attention to Steve Smith but he is, quite possibly, the best receiver evaluator out there.

What he said absolutely aligns with what I said, plus he noticed some other things that I hadn’t.

If Steve Smith is saying Carnell Tate is the best prospect in this class I’m not arguing with him.

Tyson could be, but he takes a ton of contact, runs on his legs and already has a vast history of leg injuries. He’s not as good of a blocker, has worse hands.

I don’t get why this is even a question. If it’s not Love, it needs to be Tate.
Click to expand...

Tate versus Tyson.

A. Tate with the better hands
B. Tate the better contested catch player -- his score is almost double Tyson's score
C. Tate the better big play guy -- deep threat
D. Tate the better blocker
E. Tate with the better catch radius
F. Tate isn't much of a YAC guy but guess what his YAC number is still higher than Tyson
G. Tate almost one year younger. Tate also known for his maturity -- Tyson not so much

Tyson is twichier, and seperates better in short space.

The idea that some (not all) in the draft media acting like Tyson is slam dunk better, you got me how that is some definitive take. They are different flavors. IMHO Tate is the better player. But I can see how some see it as close or prefer one or the other. But the intangibles and injuries make it a no brainer. But lol I thought it was hilarious when McShay touted Tyson's agent implying he's a propaganda machine and great at his job. The scouts who McGinn interviewed actually preferred Lemon over Tyson let alone Tate who they graded as the #1 guy.
 
Kalu44 said:
Isn’t there a good chance the Browns draft Tate at #6?
Click to expand...

washington football said:
If they cant trade out. Cowboys may move up.
Click to expand...

The Browns could literally do anything at 6. They are a major wild card. Many seem to think OL.

If they take Tate, and if we can’t move back slightly, then yes - take the D player. It makes sense and we aren’t purposefully neglecting our quarterback and OC in the draft.
 
Last edited:
KDawg said:
The Browns could literally do anything at 6. They are a major wild card. Many seem to think OL.

If they take Tate, and if we can’t move back slightly, then yes - take the D player. It makes sense and we are purposefully neglecting our quarterback and OC in the draft.
Click to expand...
I don’t think there is non-D player you can take at #7 (in that scenario, also assuming Love is gone), so no real choice but to neglect QB/OC. I wouldn’t call it purposeful, if the chips fall that way. They could still draft best available WR in round 3, or perhaps move up late round 2 to get one.
 
Kalu44 said:
I don’t think there is non-D player you can take at #7 (in that scenario, also assuming Love is gone), so no real choice but to neglect QB/OC. I wouldn’t call it purposeful, if the chips fall that way. They could still draft best available WR in round 3, or perhaps move up late round 2 to get one.
Click to expand...
That is supposed to say “aren’t”.
 
Using a podcast once from Hoffman where he said he built relationships with scouts from being around the building and had a sense of who they liked that way, I'd bet those are likely the sources for Keim. Are scouts out of the loop with what Peters does? Maybe. But I doubt it. But its possible scouts recommend one thing, and Peters does another.

Wonder if Schrager's source for Peters is Kliff -- Schrager is close with Kliff and even with Kliff gone I can see him speculating what he thinks Peters is thinking.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 4, Members: 0, Guests: 4)

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top