Sanders looked like a stud as a sophomore at Arkansas in 2022. He then was banged up a lot in 2023 before transferring to South Carolina.
He's a bigger back without a whole lot of wiggle. Has been kind of indecisive picking his holes, though how mich of that is him (it showed a lot during his junior year at Arkansas too) and how much has been Shane Beamer's inability to recruit offensive line talent is debatable.
I really like Rocket.
There's this kid from Western Kentucky I thought was good....
Grizzled wrote: Thu Jan 02, 2025 9:24 am
It's official. I have a mancrush on Cam Skattebo. A violent runner who gets lots of yards after contact. The kind of guy who will wear down an opposing team. He catches well also, over 500 yards receiving this year. Plus, shades of Sweetness, he threw a 42 yard TD pass yesterday in the Peach Bowl. 3rd rounder?
Cam Skattebo is the only RB in college football to have 1500 rushing yards and 500 receiving yards since Christian McCaffrey in 2017
Allow me to skew younger (Take that LBJ And Audie Murphy!)
I'm a Cam Ward guy but I'm not so sure about him that I would pay NE 3 first rounders to get him. The trade value of that 1.1 will be very interesting to watch
thunderspirit wrote: Thu Jan 02, 2025 10:45 am
Mason Graham would be marvelous, I agree with that.
A healthy Josh Simmons would be worth a top 10 pick in my opinion. The Combine medical checks will be really big for him. If those come out good, I'm in. (This will drive DD to drink, mind you.)
Kelvin Banks Jr might be worth it too, but I'm not certain. He clearly can play, and I think he can stay at tackle in the NFL. The Combine measurements for Banks will matter.
Otherwise yeah, I like Ersery (Minnesota) but that's higher than I'd be happy taking him; I am confident Campbell (LSU) is a guard convert; and while I love Wyatt Milum the player and think he could play tackle i think he's a stud at guard so I'd rather draft him with that in mind.
I left out Simmons because of the injury, but yeah if he’s healthy he’s the best OT prospect IMO. Easily top 12.
Rosenhaus (his agent) says he's "ahead of schedule" and should be cleared for practice by start of NFL training camp.
I think he's fucking good... do you dare take him at #10 if he's there? Put him in at LT and you're set for the next 5 years, God-willing.
"He has created a new wave ... he's created a monster."
Rosenhaus (his agent) says he's "ahead of schedule" and should be cleared for practice by start of NFL training camp.
I think he's fucking good... do you dare take him at #10 if he's there? Put him in at LT and you're set for the next 5 years, God-willing.
Spending high draft pick on an injured player? Straight out of our playbook.
The Bears can no longer afford to do that nor draft guys mainly because of impressive physical attributes. They need to draft guys (especially with the premium picks, rounds 1 and 2 but even through 3 who are ready to play immediately, they don't need to have months of rehab nor be taught basics of their positions.
I left out Simmons because of the injury, but yeah if he’s healthy he’s the best OT prospect IMO. Easily top 12.
Rosenhaus (his agent) says he's "ahead of schedule" and should be cleared for practice by start of NFL training camp.
I think he's fucking good... do you dare take him at #10 if he's there? Put him in at LT and you're set for the next 5 years, God-willing.
So much will depend on exactly what the injury was (you presume ACL but all the reports just say "left knee") and your medical staff's opinion. A lot of guys come back from that sort of injury and do fine, but some don't. (The Bears' track record on the health of their players does not fill me with confidence, either.)
I am generally risk-averse, so while I believe a healthy Simmons is easily the best lineman in this year's draft and a top 10 guy, that "healthy" caveat would push him to late Day 1/(very) early Day 2 for me and I suspect he'll be grabbed by someone with a bigger appetite for rolling the dice than I have.
Rosenhaus (his agent) says he's "ahead of schedule" and should be cleared for practice by start of NFL training camp.
I think he's fucking good... do you dare take him at #10 if he's there? Put him in at LT and you're set for the next 5 years, God-willing.
So much will depend on exactly what the injury was (you presume ACL but all the reports just say "left knee") and your medical staff's opinion. A lot of guys come back from that sort of injury and do fine, but some don't. (The Bears' track record on the health of their players does not fill me with confidence, either.)
I am generally risk-averse, so while I believe a healthy Simmons is easily the best lineman in this year's draft and a top 10 guy, that "healthy" caveat would push him to late Day 1/(very) early Day 2 for me and I suspect he'll be grabbed by someone with a bigger appetite for rolling the dice than I have.
If he slid to #39, I'd sure consider it.
I've only recently started looking into him, but maaaaannnn his tape is fucking nice.
"He has created a new wave ... he's created a monster."
Grizzled wrote: Sat Jan 11, 2025 8:08 am
The Bears can no longer afford to do that nor draft guys mainly because of impressive physical attributes. They need to draft guys (especially with the premium picks, rounds 1 and 2 but even through 3 who are ready to play immediately, they don't need to have months of rehab nor be taught basics of their positions.
Amen.
They also should draft players they actually need. Crazy, right? "Well, he was the number two player on my board!" Doesn't matter if you don't need him.
I will pray to the football gods that Poles changes his ways and sees the light...but I'm afraid what we've seen from him thus far is what we're going to get. And doubly afraid that he's our new Jerry Angelo--smartest guy in the room, every move he makes is golden, etc.
My mother's love was inexplicably linked to kickball.
Grizzled wrote: Sat Jan 11, 2025 8:08 am
The Bears can no longer afford to do that nor draft guys mainly because of impressive physical attributes. They need to draft guys (especially with the premium picks, rounds 1 and 2 but even through 3 who are ready to play immediately, they don't need to have months of rehab nor be taught basics of their positions.
Amen.
They also should draft players they actually need. Crazy, right? "Well, he was the number two player on my board!" Doesn't matter if you don't need him.
I will pray to the football gods that Poles changes his ways and sees the light...but I'm afraid what we've seen from him thus far is what we're going to get. And doubly afraid that he's our new Jerry Angelo--smartest guy in the room, every move he makes is golden, etc.
I always thought Pace was that way but now believe the same about Poles. Hopefully he listens to his scouts, HC, etc. to make decisions on players.
Z Bear wrote: Mon Dec 30, 2024 10:05 am
Raheim "Rocket" Sanders from South Carolina is another Day 3 guy to keep an eye on. Dude makes one cut and hits the hole hard.
He'd be nice in Day 3. Very decisive runner as you said.
10. Chicago Bears: Josh Simmons, OT, Ohio State
Simmons was trending towards being OT1 in this draft class until he suffered a knee injury in mid-October, which required season-ending surgery. His draft stock will be in limbo until the combine, when teams receive medical feedback from their doctors. But if he’s healthy, Simmons is a natural left tackle with a high ceiling.
"He has created a new wave ... he's created a monster."
wab wrote: Wed Jan 15, 2025 9:18 am
Assuming they have a plan for guard and Graham/Carter are off the board, I wouldn't hate it.
Just our history with players that have an injury history makes me terrified of this pick.
Yeah, I get totally get that. Assuming they have a solid FA plan, he wouldn't have to play right away. It's a weird draft in that (if healthy) he's probably a top 5 pick that should be there at 10.
Just our history with players that have an injury history makes me terrified of this pick.
Yeah, I get totally get that. Assuming they have a solid FA plan, he wouldn't have to play right away. It's a weird draft in that (if healthy) he's probably a top 5 pick that should be there at 10.
I went trying to find some more information about his injury (I knew it was a knee, but is it PCL, MLC, ACL, or what?) and couldn't find out much about it. Looking at I am a bit concerned that his whole time at San Diego St. was as RT and only played 5 games at LT while at Ohio St. Those games were early in the year and during the cream puff portion of the schedule.
Yeah, I get totally get that. Assuming they have a solid FA plan, he wouldn't have to play right away. It's a weird draft in that (if healthy) he's probably a top 5 pick that should be there at 10.
I went trying to find some more information about his injury (I knew it was a knee, but is it PCL, MLC, ACL, or what?) and couldn't find out much about it. Looking at I am a bit concerned that his whole time at San Diego St. was as RT and only played 5 games at LT while at Ohio St. Those games were early in the year and during the cream puff portion of the schedule.
True. But Simmons played really well at RT last year, and looked excellent at San Diego St too. This shouldn't invalidate your concerns, of course.
And I couldn't find anything on the injury either, beyond "left knee." I expect we'll learn more at the Combine.
The draft is usually 90% projection, and right now he projects as the best pure tackle.
Banks, Campbell, Milum, Savaiinaea and Conerly will all probably be guards (although some will get a shot at OT). Ersery, Williams, and Jones Jr are probably only RTs.
After that it's guys like Blake Miller who will probably get over drafted. Or Jonah Monheim who might get moved back outside.
I went trying to find some more information about his injury (I knew it was a knee, but is it PCL, MLC, ACL, or what?) and couldn't find out much about it. Looking at I am a bit concerned that his whole time at San Diego St. was as RT and only played 5 games at LT while at Ohio St. Those games were early in the year and during the cream puff portion of the schedule.
True. But Simmons played really well at RT last year, and looked excellent at San Diego St too. This shouldn't invalidate your concerns, of course.
And I couldn't find anything on the injury either, beyond "left knee." I expect we'll learn more at the Combine.
He did play very well at RT at both places, but my concern is if he is just a RT. I big fan of Wright and think he will get better at RT, but RT is his "cap" at where he can play on the OL IMO (by that I mean me could slide into OG, but he's not "moving up the ladder" to play LT). If we are spending at top 10 pick on the OL I want to have a good feeling it will help the LT spot, not just result in an upgrade on the IOL.
Trying to take the lesson from the Jalen Carter discussion in another thread, and I'm wondering if it wouldn't be smarter to sign a FA LT like Stanley instead of drafting one. Yes, I know we have Brax and Wright, but here me out....
1. Stanley/Wright would be an excellent bookend T combo for several years. OT position group is set for 2025 and beyond, no need to rely on Brax or a developmental guy.
2. Stanley's one issue has been health, but we'd have Brax there as a great replacement if he gets hurt. Kiran is our OT4, which feels right, and he's exactly the type of prospect you want to develop for a few years. OT position is suddenly a strength!
3. Now, because we've paid for a LT, T is no longer a draft need. This draft has an elite DT, a couple really good EDGE players, and several really strong G's.
4. If a Mason or Carter doesn't happen to fall to 10, we are in a great position now to trade down and get an extra Top 100 pick. We could trade down 10-15 spots and still land one of the top G's in the draft.
5. With the extra Top 100 pick, we'd have 3 more picks in the Top 100 to address the other G spot, edge, DT.
Basically, we need to find 5 starters as it stands right now between 2 OG, 1 C, 1 DT, and 1 DE. So signing an OT might seem like the wrong move, but the net effect could really help us solve more problems than less, while making our T position top shelf.
dplank wrote: Wed Jan 15, 2025 3:24 pm
Trying to take the lesson from the Jalen Carter discussion in another thread, and I'm wondering if it wouldn't be smarter to sign a FA LT like Stanley instead of drafting one. Yes, I know we have Brax and Wright, but here me out....
1. Stanley/Wright would be an excellent bookend T combo for several years. OT position group is set for 2025 and beyond, no need to rely on Brax or a developmental guy.
2. Stanley's one issue has been health, but we'd have Brax there as a great replacement if he gets hurt. Kiran is our OT4, which feels right, and he's exactly the type of prospect you want to develop for a few years. OT position is suddenly a strength!
3. Now, because we've paid for a LT, T is no longer a draft need. This draft has an elite DT, a couple really good EDGE players, and several really strong G's.
4. If a Mason or Carter doesn't happen to fall to 10, we are in a great position now to trade down and get an extra Top 100 pick. We could trade down 10-15 spots and still land one of the top G's in the draft.
5. With the extra Top 100 pick, we'd have 3 more picks in the Top 100 to address the other G spot, edge, DT.
Basically, we need to find 5 starters as it stands right now between 2 OG, 1 C, 1 DT, and 1 DE. So signing an OT might seem like the wrong move, but the net effect could really help us solve more problems than less, while making our T position top shelf.
I'd be good with this. Plus, you could try Braxton out at G if you wanted.
dplank wrote: Wed Jan 15, 2025 3:24 pm
Trying to take the lesson from the Jalen Carter discussion in another thread, and I'm wondering if it wouldn't be smarter to sign a FA LT like Stanley instead of drafting one. Yes, I know we have Brax and Wright, but here me out....
1. Stanley/Wright would be an excellent bookend T combo for several years. OT position group is set for 2025 and beyond, no need to rely on Brax or a developmental guy.
2. Stanley's one issue has been health, but we'd have Brax there as a great replacement if he gets hurt. Kiran is our OT4, which feels right, and he's exactly the type of prospect you want to develop for a few years. OT position is suddenly a strength!
3. Now, because we've paid for a LT, T is no longer a draft need. This draft has an elite DT, a couple really good EDGE players, and several really strong G's.
4. If a Mason or Carter doesn't happen to fall to 10, we are in a great position now to trade down and get an extra Top 100 pick. We could trade down 10-15 spots and still land one of the top G's in the draft.
5. With the extra Top 100 pick, we'd have 3 more picks in the Top 100 to address the other G spot, edge, DT.
Basically, we need to find 5 starters as it stands right now between 2 OG, 1 C, 1 DT, and 1 DE. So signing an OT might seem like the wrong move, but the net effect could really help us solve more problems than less, while making our T position top shelf.
Not opposed to it, but I think he will be 31 next season. Also, the results we have had with players with injury history is beyond bad. I just fear we sign him and then he misses even more time than he has in the past.
dplank wrote: Wed Jan 15, 2025 3:24 pm
Trying to take the lesson from the Jalen Carter discussion in another thread, and I'm wondering if it wouldn't be smarter to sign a FA LT like Stanley instead of drafting one. Yes, I know we have Brax and Wright, but here me out....
1. Stanley/Wright would be an excellent bookend T combo for several years. OT position group is set for 2025 and beyond, no need to rely on Brax or a developmental guy.
2. Stanley's one issue has been health, but we'd have Brax there as a great replacement if he gets hurt. Kiran is our OT4, which feels right, and he's exactly the type of prospect you want to develop for a few years. OT position is suddenly a strength!
3. Now, because we've paid for a LT, T is no longer a draft need. This draft has an elite DT, a couple really good EDGE players, and several really strong G's.
4. If a Mason or Carter doesn't happen to fall to 10, we are in a great position now to trade down and get an extra Top 100 pick. We could trade down 10-15 spots and still land one of the top G's in the draft.
5. With the extra Top 100 pick, we'd have 3 more picks in the Top 100 to address the other G spot, edge, DT.
Basically, we need to find 5 starters as it stands right now between 2 OG, 1 C, 1 DT, and 1 DE. So signing an OT might seem like the wrong move, but the net effect could really help us solve more problems than less, while making our T position top shelf.
Not opposed to it, but I think he will be 31 next season. Also, the results we have had with players with injury history is beyond bad. I just fear we sign him and then he misses even more time than he has in the past.
Fair, but having Brax as our swing tackle directly addresses the injury issue and was part of my thinking here. An acknowledgment that we WILL have injuries, and when that happens we don't want to be left with some scrub. Kiran would move up to the swing T role in 2026 when Brax departs, so we even have built in succession planning. I would not put Brax at G, he's a T and would be maybe the best swing T in the NFL if we did this.
Signing Stanley wouldn't bother me one bit. I would welcome it.
He's going to be expensive though and he's struggled with injuries. But... I think the perception that you are upgrading isn't necessarily the reality (if you believe PFF).
I still think they are a year away from drafting a LT unless they plan to take someone and intern them at guard for a year.
wab wrote: Wed Jan 15, 2025 4:20 pm
Signing Stanley wouldn't bother me one bit. I would welcome it.
He's going to be expensive though and he's struggled with injuries. But... I think the perception that you are upgrading isn't necessarily the reality (if you believe PFF).
I still think they are a year away from drafting a LT unless they plan to take someone and intern them at guard for a year.
Banks or Campbell might be ideal for this. The question then becomes is this more valuable than landing Graham if available or one of the top DEs and grabbing a G in the 2nd?
wab wrote: Wed Jan 15, 2025 4:20 pm
Signing Stanley wouldn't bother me one bit. I would welcome it.
He's going to be expensive though and he's struggled with injuries. But... I think the perception that you are upgrading isn't necessarily the reality (if you believe PFF).
I still think they are a year away from drafting a LT unless they plan to take someone and intern them at guard for a year.
Banks or Campbell might be ideal for this. The question then becomes is this more valuable than landing Graham if available or one of the top DEs and grabbing a G in the 2nd?
If Graham or Carter happen to be there, I think you have to take one of them over a guy you are going to play at guard. Hopefully the Bears approach FA in a way that gives them flexibility in the draft.
