1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

FOX Sports Releases Mock 2009 NFL Draft

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by KevinmH9, Jan 7, 2009.

  1. KevinmH9

    KevinmH9 Active Member


    Have at it.
  2. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    Good list but disagree on Eagles taking Phil Loadholt at 28
  3. pallister

    pallister Guest

    Well, the Bears definitely need a DE that can rush the passer, but the last time I heard Michael Johnson's name mentioned, it was in reference to how he hadn't played hard throughout the season. If the Bears get this guy, he better not be another Michael Haynes.

    I don't like Stafford's chances to be a good NFL QB, so No. 4 seems like a reach.

    I think it's silly for perenially bad teams to take WRs so high. You don't build winning teams around receivers. The Bengals should not take Crabtree at 7.

    Maclin to the Jaguars would be perfect, IMO. Teaming him and MJD would instantly transform one of the dullest offense in the NFL. Granted, that kind of goes against my WR theory above, but Maclin is also a great return guy, and the Jaguars are not nearly as moribund a franchise as the Bengals.

    Harvin could do many of the same things for the Titans, assuming he can stay on the field.
  4. KevinmH9

    KevinmH9 Active Member

    There isn't much to like about the Lions, but I like the prediction of the Lions trading away some of their picks to get Laurinaitis from OSU at #20. The combination of Bradford and Laurinaitis really is a good start to a team that just needs a complete makeover.
  5. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    They are right about the Steelers having a desperate need on the OL, but they are usually too stubborn to reach.
  6. Angola!

    Angola! Guest

    I'd rather the Seahawks took a lineman than a quarterback, but who knows.
  7. RossLT

    RossLT Guest

    Gotta disagree with the Seahawks pick, they have to take a receiver.
  8. pallister

    pallister Guest

    At No. 4? Well, that would be a great pick for the Cardinals, 49ers and Rams.
  9. Angola!

    Angola! Guest

    Are you referring to the wide receiver or OL suggestion?

    I think they are fine at WR, if their guys can stay healthy.
  10. RossLT

    RossLT Guest

    Why not? Crabtree is worth it.
  11. pallister

    pallister Guest

    History says he's not. For a team like the Seahwaks, there are a lot more critical positions to fill. I don't like Stafford, but QB is better than receiver. If Hasselbeck is still hurting next year, a good WR won't make much difference. If I were the Seahawks, I'd try to shore up the running game (which would be best for whomever is QBing the team next year) with one of the top tackles, or maybe trade down and grab a RB.
  12. RossLT

    RossLT Guest

    Grab a RB and admit that the signing of Jones was a failure? I don't see them doing that. The OL would be a great pick, it is not a coincidence that the Seattle running game went south after the loss of Hutchinson. I just wonder if they are going to try Seneca out at QB for more than maybe 3 or 4 games.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page