Haunted by Missing Ramsey....

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

On May 20, 2016 at 9:08 PM, Danny D said:

Do you think we got lucky in the order?  ....Our F.O. wanted Ramsey in the worst way, settled for Stanley and now Ramsey comes up with a bad transmission.  But was it really luck, or was something else illustrated in the scenario?

I've changed my view upon Drafted and Non Drafted players that develop injuries.  The F.O. still owns those players.  You factor soundness, character and position when you draft and all developments, any contingencies are owned by your F.O.

Our F.O. wanted this guy in the worst way and we were only saved by their stinginess and lack of trust in their own analysis. It doesn't leave one with a positive feeling in any manner.

 

So, you're insinuating that Ramsey would have been a bad pick? Weren't you destroying the FO for not jumping up to get him regardless of the cost? And now, bc of a minor meniscus injury, you're also knocking them for having wanted him and not seeing this issue ahead of time?

This current meniscus injury has nothing to do with his prior micro fracture surgery. He played 4 full years of football in between with no issues. The fact that its the same knee is just coincidence. And he's expected back on the field for training camp - a couple weeks. If a guy had a pulled hamstring, would you feel the same way?

This line of thinking is a joke. You knock the FO on both sides and win both ways. You act like the all knowing, all seeing evaluator and claim to know better than the FO in that they should've done whatever to jump up for Ramsey instead of "settling" for Stanley.... and now that Ramsey has a minor injury, youre saying - well Stanley may have been the right choice, but LOOK THEY WANTED RAMSEY - SEE! IDIOTS.... It's only bc theyre cheap and lack confidence that they didn't make this huge error (but ignore that I was clamoring for them to make that huge error just 2 days ago and berated them for it.... even called for their firing).

 

Edited May 21, 2016 by Moderator 3
Attack removed

[Daft Classic]

I am never for a player getting hurt, and I always hope for the best for players, especially those just getting their careers started. 

That said, Karma's tough, isn't it?

 

 

[JoeyFlex5]

4 hours ago, BmoreBird22 said:

 

All I'm saying is most people hate on his coverage because he can't split out wide and cover a halfback as fast as Duke Johnson across the entire field. 

I have no lack of faith in his zone coverage, which is very solid. He's hyper aware and flows very well.

Not saying he's Luke Kuechly (who was a beast in college), but Mosley isn't nearly as bad as some make him out to be based on a few plays.

I don't think his coverage is that bad, he was a playmaker in coverage as a rookie though he had some inconsistencies, I'd still be comfortable with him zone dropping 7 days a week with a good supporting cast, and last season everyone was so bad in coverage that it made everyone else look worse, add in the lack of pass rush and you got a vicious cycle. 

 

However I tend to believe that a traditional LB with a mixed role including occasional man, shallow zone dropping, and occasional blitzing, is a lot different than a true Tampa 2 MLB. I think the prerequisite for that role is great coverage, and Mosley is solid in coverage but I think he's far from great there. We diminish his value with a Tampa 2 and need to keep him in a mixed role. It's like a LT who is an elite run blocker but average in pass pro, one thing is a nice bonus and the other thing is an absolute requirement and it doesn't matter how good you are at those other things if you can't do the primary job at a high level. 

[Sami84]

Ramsey is a corner prospect that has little football IQ and is just an athletic freak like michael huff was in college.In his defence he's a bit nastier than huff but thats not saying much is it. This guy is without doubt overrated while ronnie stanley is underrated.His best position will be at C SS . He is no FS.

 

Don't get me wrong, ramsey will have an nfl career, but he wont be this perenniel pro bowler that everyone seems to think he will be. He has little awareness and bad ball skills. Slightly better version of michael huff..solid Duwan landry quality like career.

Edited May 21, 2016 by Sami84

[BmoreBird22]

30 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

I don't think his coverage is that bad, he was a playmaker in coverage as a rookie though he had some inconsistencies, I'd still be comfortable with him zone dropping 7 days a week with a good supporting cast, and last season everyone was so bad in coverage that it made everyone else look worse, add in the lack of pass rush and you got a vicious cycle. 

 

However I tend to believe that a traditional LB with a mixed role including occasional man, shallow zone dropping, and occasional blitzing, is a lot different than a true Tampa 2 MLB. I think the prerequisite for that role is great coverage, and Mosley is solid in coverage but I think he's far from great there. We diminish his value with a Tampa 2 and need to keep him in a mixed role. It's like a LT who is an elite run blocker but average in pass pro, one thing is a nice bonus and the other thing is an absolute requirement and it doesn't matter how good you are at those other things if you can't do the primary job at a high level. 

I like using Mosley on blitzes quite a bit. He's probably up there as one of the best blitzing inside linebackers in the league.

However, I don't like that example, especially since defenses have evolved to the point that Miller is rushing 60% of the time from the right side, but I digress.

Mosley doesn't have to be sitting in zones on every single third down. It's probably not going to be that vastly different than now, except Mosley is playing far more man. The Tampa 2 still does use it's linebackers to blitz the A gap. 

Furthermore, I really have a TON of faith that Weddle can fulfill that rover role at a very high level and help pick up any slack.

[ellicottraven]

On 5/20/2016 at 6:13 PM, JoeyFlex5 said:

The jags were trading back if we took Ramsey and I think it was Miami that was willing to offer a nice haul to move up for zeke. Dallas knew this and they had a slim chance of getting zeke if they traded back at all

Where did you hear this? Can you post a link to this story?

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Sami84 said:

Ramsey is a corner prospect that has little football IQ and is just an athletic freak like michael huff was in college.In his defence he's a bit nastier than huff but thats not saying much is it. This guy is without doubt overrated while ronnie stanley is underrated.His best position will be at C SS . He is no FS.

 

Don't get me wrong, ramsey will have an nfl career, but he wont be this perenniel pro bowler that everyone seems to think he will be. He has little awareness and bad ball skills. Slightly better version of michael huff..solid Duwan landry quality like career.

I don't believe he's much of a corner prospect. Strong Safety is where he may find a niche. ( We still haven't replaced Pollard.)

I've been trying to determine what drill he was injured in with the suspicion it was a cornerback quick reaction drill, a skill he did not possess in spades.

Having watched all his film I'm aghast we almost traded up for him.  The same sick Matt Elam feeling. The man is a safety and we have a roster full of them.  At this juncture we don't need Newsome and DeCosta trying to draft anymore safeties since they have clearly demonstrated they no longer have a feel for the position.

The "Baltimore Settlers" settled for Stanley and their faithful let out a sigh of relief when the Settlers number 1 on the board choice eluded their shrewd plans and then went down with an injury.  I don't view it the same way and find it difficult to comprehend how the Faithful can't discern the tortuous path being tread by the Settlers. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 22, 2016 by Danny D

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

2 hours ago, Danny D said:

I don't believe he's much of a corner prospect. Strong Safety is where he may find a niche. ( We still haven't replaced Pollard.)

I've been trying to determine what drill he was injured in with the suspicion it was a cornerback quick reaction drill, a skill he did not possess in spades.

Having watched all his film I'm aghast we almost traded up for him.  The same sick Matt Elam feeling. The man is a safety and we have a roster full of them.  At this juncture we don't need Newsome and DeCosta trying to draft anymore safeties since they have clearly demonstrated they no longer have a feel for the position.

The "Baltimore Settlers" settled for Stanley and their faithful let out a sigh of relief when the Settlers number 1 on the board choice eluded their shrewd plans and then went down with an injury.  I don't view it the same way and find it difficult to comprehend how the Faithful can't discern the tortuous path being tread by the Settlers. 

So, as I understand it, the FO should be fired for passing on Tunsil and "settling" for Stanley.

Another poster who shared this opinion, you claimed to be the best poster on the boards. Support of both your reasoning was to point to all the "experts" who throughout the draft process pointed to Tunsil being the better prospect, and how could the Ravens take Stanley when all these evaluators clearly said Tunsil was better.

Yet, those same evaluators all agreed that Ramsey was the best corner prospect to come out in a LONG time, and many had him as the #1 guy on their boards... But, according to you now - they must all be idiots bc he's nothing more than a Matt Elam, a failed SS prospect who made find a niche as a journeyman type of pro.

So... in essence their evaluations of Tunsil are gold, and are proof that our FO is a bunch of failures who should be fired.... AND their evaluations Ramsey are absolutely terrible since they see a generational talent and you see a complete bust...

 

Seems to me like you flip flop and only stick to what supports your agenda. See the FO likes Stanley - hes trash... and look the media scouts agree with me! Oh, the FO likes Ramsey, and the media scouts do too? Shhh, don't mention that bc that blows holes in my Stanley argument.

Unless of course you're willing to admit that the only basis you have for thinking the FO's evaluation of prospects is terrible is that your evaluations don't match.... in which case you're arguing that you are a better talent evaluator than guys who are paid millions to do it and are pretty much unanimously touted as among the best. And, if that's the case I have to wonder what you're doing on these boards?

Why hasn't anyone offered to hire you or at the very least offered to pay you to report your opinions?

It's literally no different than a check out clerk at a grocery store saying they can do a better than a surgeon, and their proof being - well because I said so. Or, a guy who played high school baseball, and then went to college and got a business degree (without a scholarship offer to play on the team) saying in their 30's that man, the O's should cut Adam Jones bc I can hit better than him.... "That's not stupid, in high school I hit .400 and he's only hitting .382!"

 

You can dislike a move or disagree with a pick based on your opinion alone - that's perfectly fine. We all do it. But to then elevate to the level of saying our FO should lose their jobs, with the only justification being that you didn't agree with a couple draft picks, while also claiming that anyone who happens to disagree with you and your opinion is an idiot or blind loyalist (I mean how stupid to trust professionals widely considered among the best in the world at what they do, over... well some guy with no qualifications) is where you lose all credibility and become nothing more than a troll.

Saying, man I really disagree with that pick or this decision, but I guess we'll have to see how it pans out. That's totally fine and completely respectable. Saying, I disagree and therefore the pick or decision is definitely wrong, point blank end of story, they need to be fired... is well, stupid. And, pointing out some poor picks in the past and saying, see I told you so, I knew it was wrong back then, with absolutely no evidence that you did in fact know I then... that's easy bc theres no accountability. Plus, its easy to point out some mistakes in hindsight while completely ignoring all the successes, and that even with the mistakes the team has been among the elite of the league for now 2 decades.

We're idiots and loyalists if we accept a 5-11 season while ravaged with injuries.... even though the reality is that every team goes through those, and 90% go through far more of them and good portion deal with that reality every season.

 

If you want to root for a team that reacts aggressively to every poor decision and wont accept a 5-11 season to see if the long term plan works out - then go root for the Browns. They employ the exact type of philosophy you call for. Oh wait, that doesn't work with your fantasy? That's the reality.

Edited May 22, 2016 by BOLDnPurPnBlacK

[Sami84]

1 hour ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

So, as I understand it, the FO should be fired for passing on Tunsil and "settling" for Stanley.

Another poster who shared this opinion, you claimed to be the best poster on the boards. Support of both your reasoning was to point to all the "experts" who throughout the draft process pointed to Tunsil being the better prospect, and how could the Ravens take Stanley when all these evaluators clearly said Tunsil was better.

Yet, those same evaluators all agreed that Ramsey was the best corner prospect to come out in a LONG time, and many had him as the #1 guy on their boards... But, according to you now - they must all be idiots bc he's nothing more than a Matt Elam, a failed SS prospect who made find a niche as a journeyman type of pro.

So... in essence their evaluations of Tunsil are gold, and are proof that our FO is a bunch of failures who should be fired.... AND their evaluations Ramsey are absolutely terrible since they see a generational talent and you see a complete bust...

 

Seems to me like you flip flop and only stick to what supports your agenda. See the FO likes Stanley - hes trash... and look the media scouts agree with me! Oh, the FO likes Ramsey, and the media scouts do too? Shhh, don't mention that bc that blows holes in my Stanley argument.

Unless of course you're willing to admit that the only basis you have for thinking the FO's evaluation of prospects is terrible is that your evaluations don't match.... in which case you're arguing that you are a better talent evaluator than guys who are paid millions to do it and are pretty much unanimously touted as among the best. And, if that's the case I have to wonder what you're doing on these boards?

Why hasn't anyone offered to hire you or at the very least offered to pay you to report your opinions?

It's literally no different than a check out clerk at a grocery store saying they can do a better than a surgeon, and their proof being - well because I said so. Or, a guy who played high school baseball, and then went to college and got a business degree (without a scholarship offer to play on the team) saying in their 30's that man, the O's should cut Adam Jones bc I can hit better than him.... "That's not stupid, in high school I hit .400 and he's only hitting .382!"

 

You can dislike a move or disagree with a pick based on your opinion alone - that's perfectly fine. We all do it. But to then elevate to the level of saying our FO should lose their jobs, with the only justification being that you didn't agree with a couple draft picks, while also claiming that anyone who happens to disagree with you and your opinion is an idiot or blind loyalist (I mean how stupid to trust professionals widely considered among the best in the world at what they do, over... well some guy with no qualifications) is where you lose all credibility and become nothing more than a troll.

Saying, man I really disagree with that pick or this decision, but I guess we'll have to see how it pans out. That's totally fine and completely respectable. Saying, I disagree and therefore the pick or decision is definitely wrong, point blank end of story, they need to be fired... is well, stupid. And, pointing out some poor picks in the past and saying, see I told you so, I knew it was wrong back then, with absolutely no evidence that you did in fact know I then... that's easy bc theres no accountability. Plus, its easy to point out some mistakes in hindsight while completely ignoring all the successes, and that even with the mistakes the team has been among the elite of the league for now 2 decades.

We're idiots and loyalists if we accept a 5-11 season while ravaged with injuries.... even though the reality is that every team goes through those, and 90% go through far more of them and good portion deal with that reality every season.

 

If you want to root for a team that reacts aggressively to every poor decision and wont accept a 5-11 season to see if the long term plan works out - then go root for the Browns. They employ the exact type of philosophy you call for. Oh wait, that doesn't work with your fantasy? That's the reality.

10

Ronnie Stanley was ranked higher on my board than ramsey. Much like Da'Brickashaw Ferguson was ahead michael Huff in 2006.

 

[Winchester]

4 hours ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

So, as I understand it, the FO should be fired for passing on Tunsil and "settling" for Stanley.

Another poster who shared this opinion, you claimed to be the best poster on the boards. Support of both your reasoning was to point to all the "experts" who throughout the draft process pointed to Tunsil being the better prospect, and how could the Ravens take Stanley when all these evaluators clearly said Tunsil was better.

Yet, those same evaluators all agreed that Ramsey was the best corner prospect to come out in a LONG time, and many had him as the #1 guy on their boards... But, according to you now - they must all be idiots bc he's nothing more than a Matt Elam, a failed SS prospect who made find a niche as a journeyman type of pro.

So... in essence their evaluations of Tunsil are gold, and are proof that our FO is a bunch of failures who should be fired.... AND their evaluations Ramsey are absolutely terrible since they see a generational talent and you see a complete bust...

 

Seems to me like you flip flop and only stick to what supports your agenda. See the FO likes Stanley - hes trash... and look the media scouts agree with me! Oh, the FO likes Ramsey, and the media scouts do too? Shhh, don't mention that bc that blows holes in my Stanley argument.

Unless of course you're willing to admit that the only basis you have for thinking the FO's evaluation of prospects is terrible is that your evaluations don't match.... in which case you're arguing that you are a better talent evaluator than guys who are paid millions to do it and are pretty much unanimously touted as among the best. And, if that's the case I have to wonder what you're doing on these boards?

Why hasn't anyone offered to hire you or at the very least offered to pay you to report your opinions?

It's literally no different than a check out clerk at a grocery store saying they can do a better than a surgeon, and their proof being - well because I said so. Or, a guy who played high school baseball, and then went to college and got a business degree (without a scholarship offer to play on the team) saying in their 30's that man, the O's should cut Adam Jones bc I can hit better than him.... "That's not stupid, in high school I hit .400 and he's only hitting .382!"

 

You can dislike a move or disagree with a pick based on your opinion alone - that's perfectly fine. We all do it. But to then elevate to the level of saying our FO should lose their jobs, with the only justification being that you didn't agree with a couple draft picks, while also claiming that anyone who happens to disagree with you and your opinion is an idiot or blind loyalist (I mean how stupid to trust professionals widely considered among the best in the world at what they do, over... well some guy with no qualifications) is where you lose all credibility and become nothing more than a troll.

Saying, man I really disagree with that pick or this decision, but I guess we'll have to see how it pans out. That's totally fine and completely respectable. Saying, I disagree and therefore the pick or decision is definitely wrong, point blank end of story, they need to be fired... is well, stupid. And, pointing out some poor picks in the past and saying, see I told you so, I knew it was wrong back then, with absolutely no evidence that you did in fact know I then... that's easy bc theres no accountability. Plus, its easy to point out some mistakes in hindsight while completely ignoring all the successes, and that even with the mistakes the team has been among the elite of the league for now 2 decades.

We're idiots and loyalists if we accept a 5-11 season while ravaged with injuries.... even though the reality is that every team goes through those, and 90% go through far more of them and good portion deal with that reality every season.

 

If you want to root for a team that reacts aggressively to every poor decision and wont accept a 5-11 season to see if the long term plan works out - then go root for the Browns. They employ the exact type of philosophy you call for. Oh wait, that doesn't work with your fantasy? That's the reality.

Fact, 99% of scouts gms were players,family members of coaches,players,owners gms, plain knew somebody. These guys are merely watching athletes play. It is not precision ligament surgery. Just like many jobs a person more natural can be better than somebody doing it for years. Racing,computers,chess,carpentry,day trading, acting, modeling,music writing,art are a a mere couple categories that all have newcomers that come along and are better than people doing it for years with pay. Nfl has never posted openings people working for the nfl are there by divine right.

[Guest]

5 hours ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

So, as I understand it, the FO should be fired for passing on Tunsil and "settling" for Stanley.

 

That discussion needs to begin now.

Our Front Office has been a train wreck since 2013. They made a ton of bad decisions that year, ostensibly in a "rebuild" post championship.  Since then, the mistakes far outweigh the successes. Kubiak was a big success, but transitory.

Newsome is 60 and deserves a statue outside of M&T Bank with his name in the Ring of Honor but he is closer to the end of the line than the beginning, closer still due to playing 13 years in the NFL. 

It was not just the Tunsil mistake, there is a litany now, a long rap sheet of missteps. It is time to rebuild and though they deserve credit for the past Newsome and DeCosta are not a part of our future. Not if we want to be a playoff team and beat teams like the Patriots and Seahawks.

There is a story out there called "The Emperor's New Clothes". It is about a powerful man held in high regard. Such regard that the masses refuse to see him compromised.  Finally, someone calls him on the ruse.  It is a must read for the Faithful here unfamiliar with the story.

Edited May 22, 2016 by Danny D

[jazz1988]

On 5/20/2016 at 9:08 PM, Danny D said:

Do you think we got lucky in the order?  ....Our F.O. wanted Ramsey in the worst way, settled for Stanley and now Ramsey comes up with a bad transmission.  But was it really luck, or was something else illustrated in the scenario?

I've changed my view upon Drafted and Non Drafted players that develop injuries.  The F.O. still owns those players.  You factor soundness, character and position when you draft and all developments, any contingencies are owned by your F.O.

Our F.O. wanted this guy in the worst way and we were only saved by their stinginess and lack of trust in their own analysis. It doesn't leave one with a positive feeling in any manner.

 

I don't think The Ravens were being stringy  or showed lack of trust in their own  draft board by not commiting to give up their first and third round pick to The Cowboys in order to draft Ramsey. Ravens knew this draft was not only suppose to be about drafting instant coffee but solid depth as well. 

Why would they give up their first and third round pick just to move up two spots ? 

 

[Ravensfan23]

5 hours ago, Winchester said:

Fact, 99% of scouts gms were players,family members of coaches,players,owners gms, plain knew somebody. These guys are merely watching athletes play. It is not precision ligament surgery. Just like many jobs a person more natural can be better than somebody doing it for years. Racing,computers,chess,carpentry,day trading, acting, modeling,music writing,art are a a mere couple categories that all have newcomers that come along and are better than people doing it for years with pay. Nfl has never posted openings people working for the nfl are there by divine right.

This is the issue right here. I don't doubt that fans who really love the game and have some playing experience and have been watching talent play for years can hit on a few players in the draft a year. However to diminish what they guys do to just "watching athletes play" to make it seem like any average Joe can do is not only disrespectful imo but also pretty foolish. These guys spend over 200 days and nights away from their families in the course of a  365 day year. They spend countless hours building relationships at many schools in the areas they are designated to. They watch practices, do investigative work into backgrounds and off field habits, they have to watch live games in poor conditions, spend countless hours watching tape among other things. They don't just sit in front of their computers watching youtube clip while at work or sitting at home. Also it's not just about who the better player is, they have to scout for team and scheme fit. 

Most importantly these guys do this for a living, which means if they aren't right, they don't just get to try again next year. In most cases they are fired and their families suffer for it. If we fail on a evaluation of a college player, we just say we missed it and there's no big deal. Not to mention most of their work goes unnoticed because they have to convince the GM and other decision makers that the guy they've been scouting and believe is good enough to be drafted. In most cases those guys don't even make it too the draft board. As fans we'll look at a predetermined list of draft eligible prospect and then dive into youtube clips or bowl games of these players. There are freshman being scouted in Spring practice right now who scouts are trying to get a jump on for the draft 3-4 years from now and i'm willing to bet not a single person here is doing work on those players. 

Here's a decent article on the life of a scout. 

Wanna be an NFL Scout?

 I'm not a scout nor do I personally know of any. However I can relate to men and women putting their families at risk while pursuing a career or business that has the potential to change their families financially for the better, but if it doesn't work could ruin everything. To diminish what these men do to just "watching athletes play" is very disrespectful imo.  

[BmoreBird22]

8 hours ago, Winchester said:

Fact, 99% of scouts gms were players,family members of coaches,players,owners gms, plain knew somebody. These guys are merely watching athletes play. It is not precision ligament surgery. Just like many jobs a person more natural can be better than somebody doing it for years. Racing,computers,chess,carpentry,day trading, acting, modeling,music writing,art are a a mere couple categories that all have newcomers that come along and are better than people doing it for years with pay. Nfl has never posted openings people working for the nfl are there by divine right.

Do you actually have a way to back any of this up?

Matt Miller actually did an article on this and he got his work by being an athletic trainer or something with the football team in undergraduate and volunteering to help with the graduate assistant program. He just gradually worked up from there with recruiting younger player, and from I'm reading from many of the Ravens scout bios, that's how they started.

Challenge: Go through every single scout the Ravens have and let me know who they knew prior to becoming an NFL scout. If that 99% is true, this should be easy.

[Militant X 1]

Just keep watching...time will tell....

[Sami84]

Ramsey is just a realy athletic guy with great measurables. As a football player he's limited. He'll be fooled often at the highest level by the smarter TE"s and WR's

[Sami84]

its a real shame our FO and scouting department honestly know less than I do when it comes to evaluating players. I'll bet if this were the 2006 draft and we didnt have ed reed on our roster and had a top 7 pick they would have picked michael huff.

[Sami84]

oh and btw..before people say anything about drafting reed, he was ozzies 7th choice..the 3 guys he was targeting  were out of the league within 4 years/

Edited May 25, 2016 by Sami84

[Sami84]

 

honestly, I think i do. They were desperate to move up for another athlete rather than football player. Jalen ramsey is not special. Whoever started the hype machine did a good job. His instincts are terrible.

[jimmypowder]

I see Ramsey already getting surgery and MAY be ready for training camp. Hmm. 

[Sami84]

As a football player I see nothing of a high calibre level in ramsey. He was part of great defence for many years FSU and frankly anyone who has a real eye for football IQ can see ramsey has a pea between his skull He's not great and i wish scouts were not so obsessed with combine numbers

Edited May 25, 2016 by Sami84

[Sami84]

btw I love Victor Ochi more and more. The more i watch him, the more impressed I am. Can't wait to see him in pre season. I think he'll lead the league in pre season sacks.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

On 5/22/2016 at 3:03 AM, Sami84 said:

Ronnie Stanley was ranked higher on my board than ramsey. Much like Da'Brickashaw Ferguson was ahead michael Huff in 2006.

 

I can dig that. I like the Stanley pick - he's a beast as a pass blocker... not great run blocking ,especially a zone scheme bc from what ive seen if his man isnt right on the line and he has to pull or block someone in space, he fails to latch on too often for my liking. But as our LT, pass blocking is going to be far more important and if theres a line coach to help him in the run game its Castillo.

Ramsey I like, but I dont see the next Deion like some do.

Huff I thought was a better slot corner than a safety. His tackling proved to be terrible in open space.

And if we get Ferguson from Stanley, I'll take that all day.

I have no problem with thinking Stanley is better than Ramsey or Tunsil is better than Stanley. But saying the FO should be fired bc of differing opinions is a little ridiculous.

[Grapple Raven]

Since football season is starting, and Ramsey is with another team, this thread has run its course. Time to move on!