Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 27 of 27
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    BLOOMINGTON,IL
    Posts
    442
    No

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    College Station, TX
    Posts
    5,745
    Every Defensive lineman is going to face OL that are 30 lbs heavier and 100 lbs stronger. so anyone we draft is going to have to work on mechanics, big time. Why not try with a guy that will actually bowl over the occasional misplaced player on the opposing team because of shear size. so YES I would take him, but with a trade down to pick up another pick, otherwise a S/DB is rated better at 14.
    Slightly better Jay, different day

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    170
    Quote Originally Posted by nomoreshoop View Post
    Every Defensive lineman is going to face OL that are 30 lbs heavier and 100 lbs stronger. so anyone we draft is going to have to work on mechanics, big time. Why not try with a guy that will actually bowl over the occasional misplaced player on the opposing team because of shear size. so YES I would take him, but with a trade down to pick up another pick, otherwise a S/DB is rated better at 14.
    I'm not saying this to be a smart a$$. I don't watch many Minnesota games. But did he bowl over offensive linemen in college that were 30 lbs lighter and 100 lbs weaker? My understanding was the thing he did well was bat balls down at the line of scrimmage... but he didn't really produce to his potential.

    You're making the Kyle Long argument... which Kyle Long's 2013 made palatable. But my understanding was, in the few games Long finally got on the field late in his college career, he was eye-opening. There was reason to believe with fine-tuning he could be as successful at the next level. I'm just not sure if Hageman was hitting those highs in college. And when I say "I'm not sure"... take it at face value... I really don't know and am open to being educated on this by more knowledgeable fans who've watched him more closely.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    16,990
    Quote Originally Posted by toooverbearing View Post
    I'm not saying this to be a smart a$$. I don't watch many Minnesota games. But did he bowl over offensive linemen in college that were 30 lbs lighter and 100 lbs weaker? My understanding was the thing he did well was bat balls down at the line of scrimmage... but he didn't really produce to his potential.

    You're making the Kyle Long argument... which Kyle Long's 2013 made palatable. But my understanding was, in the few games Long finally got on the field late in his college career, he was eye-opening. There was reason to believe with fine-tuning he could be as successful at the next level. I'm just not sure if Hageman was hitting those highs in college. And when I say "I'm not sure"... take it at face value... I really don't know and am open to being educated on this by more knowledgeable fans who've watched him more closely.
    Agreed, Hageman has never lived up to his "hype". I think the draft process has sort of exposed him a little bit and I don't think he's going to be drafted in the 1st round.

    And to piggyback on your point about Long. While Long didn't have the game experience that Hageman has had at Minnesota, when Long did play - he was consistently doing well. Hageman has too many lapses throughout one game let alone an entire college football season to be considered at 14. He has too many issues with leverage, technique, pad level etc. to be drafted that high. If the Bears draft him in the 2nd round - I still don't even know if it's a good investment because I think he's a flawed player that won't pan out in the NFL regardless of wherever he's drafted. But that's just my opinion.
    "Nationalism is power hunger tempered by self-deception." - George Orwell

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    College Station, TX
    Posts
    5,745
    good points. isn't Israel Idonijie also freakish?
    Slightly better Jay, different day

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    6,701
    Quote Originally Posted by BearsFanInMN View Post
    I don't covet him at 14, but I like him a lot. He's got talent and was a productive player on a defense that likely won't have anyone else drafted.

    That said, I have probably seen more Gophers and Sun Devils than any other team (due to marriage and proximity). So comparing him to someone like Sutton who is projected at least a round or two later. Just by watching on field performance Sutton was way more disruptive so I wouldn't be targeting Hageman at 14 like others have said.
    I like your thinking...and hopefully so does Phil. http://t.co/GCWG6flqnd Bears met with Sutton.

    I would much rather grab the best secondary player at 14 and wait on someone like Sutton in the 2nd.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Parts Unknown
    Posts
    4,997
    My initial reaction was: not at 14. I'm squarely in the Aaron Donald camp, but I'm doubtful of Chicago's chance to get him at 14 because I think he'll be long gone at that point. My second choice at 14 - and I'm sure most of you would probably consider it a reach - is Stephon Tuitt. I love the fact that Tuitt would be versatile enough to line up anywhere on the line, just like Houston.

    However, the more I hear about Hageman, the more I like. Quite the bio. His story sounds similar to Michael Oher's. I'd prefer a trade down to get him because I think the consensus is that he'd be available yet in the early 20's, but if Donald is gone and Chicago takes Hageman at 14, I won't complain a bit.
    .
    ....................
    None of you seem to understand. I'm not locked in here with you... you're locked in here with me. ........
    .......................
    .
    ...................
    .......................Best Green Bay quote ever: "We'll never forget you, Brent." .......

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Undisclosed Location
    Posts
    8,513
    I will have to see if Hageman's stock goes up prior to the draft before I commit to him at #14 (I don't like reaching too high for anyone), but I would much prefer Hageman over Donald.

    I've seen too many hot shot smallish tackles not be worth much towards the end of the season. Hageman has the frame to put on more weight which should make him durable for an entire 16-19 game season.


    Sorry boys, but the Vince Wilfork/Tommie Harris draft taught me to look for bigger personnel on the D-line.
    "Jesus is ideal and wonderful, but you Christians -- you are not like him."

    -Gandhi

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    6,701
    Quote Originally Posted by Wounded Bear View Post
    Sorry boys, but the Vince Wilfork/Tommie Harris draft taught me to look for bigger personnel on the D-line.
    That's fine. But why was the bigger player routinely manhandled by guards that won't be playing on Sunday? His personal story aside, Hageman is a project that has bust written all over him.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Undisclosed Location
    Posts
    8,513
    Quote Originally Posted by PC Load Letter View Post
    That's fine. But why was the bigger player routinely manhandled by guards that won't be playing on Sunday?
    He wasn't routinely manhandled by guards. He wouldn't be going in the first couple rounds if he was routinely manhandled by guards.

    I've seen a number of scouting reports on him and I haven't seen one that gives any indication that he was routinely manhandled by guards.
    "Jesus is ideal and wonderful, but you Christians -- you are not like him."

    -Gandhi

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    6,701
    Quote Originally Posted by Wounded Bear View Post
    He wasn't routinely manhandled by guards. He wouldn't be going in the first couple rounds if he was routinely manhandled by guards.

    I've seen a number of scouting reports on him and I haven't seen one that gives any indication that he was routinely manhandled by guards.
    Did you watch the video in my previous post?

    He's projected to go in the first based on his size and measurables and not his production. If his tape came close to matching his size he wouldn't be on the board at 14.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Undisclosed Location
    Posts
    8,513
    Quote Originally Posted by PC Load Letter View Post
    Did you watch the video in my previous post?

    He's projected to go in the first based on his size and measurables and not his production. If his tape came close to matching his size he wouldn't be on the board at 14.
    Undoubtedly raw, I'll agree, but I don't think it's anything that he couldn't be coached up on.

    With a little NFL coaching teaching him to stay lower to get leverage, in my estimation this dude is a stud for years.

    Just my opinion. I could be wrong, but I honestly don't think I am.
    "Jesus is ideal and wonderful, but you Christians -- you are not like him."

    -Gandhi

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  






Fantasy Football Rankings


Part of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties.