re: Breer: Saints like Jordyn Brooks at 24, don’t care where others have him projected.

Didn’t realize ALL SNAPS was a thing. Great way to watch!

Just watched the same game and wow. Pathetic. He basically spied Hurts/played the run all game. Missed several tackles and got stuck on a guard routinely

Stats: 1 solo tackle/5 jump on the pile assists
Hurts ran for 70 yards on 9 attempts and sat the entire 4th q

Queen is too good to pass.

We have not drafted LBers well in the Sean Payton era. The only one that I can think of that has been really worth a shite has been Anzalone and that is...minimally worth a shite.

All the real contributors have been from FA or trade.

For those that put any stock into this whatsoever, Kiper's final Big Board has Brooks at #32, so a first round pick.

quote:

---

32. Jordyn Brooks, ILB, Texas Tech

HT: 6-foot | WT: 240 | Highlights

Brooks is one of my favorites in this class, a tackling machine.

Stat to know: Brooks, who started four seasons for the Red Raiders, finished his career with 367 tackles.

---

He has him as an ascending player, which likely means simply that he is catching up to what teams have actually thought all along.

quote:

---

Would it be surprising to see Brooks go before Queen? Yup.

---

Duh. Queen is an LSU player:

quote:

---

School me on Jordyn Brooks. Would this be a major reach?

---

Yes. This would be like taking Stephone Anthony over Eric Kendricks all over again if either Murray or Queen still on the board, which is very likely.

quote:

---

quote:
Yes.


No it actually wouldn't.

He's considered a late first round, early 2nd round pick by most of the respected guys, so who knows where teams have him.

You really don't have a clue (nor do I).

quote:
This would be like taking Stephone Anthony over Eric Kendricks all over again if either Murray or Queen still on the board, which is very likely.


You don't know this either.

---

I'm allowed an opinion just as you are. Taking Brooks over either Murray or Queen at 24 would not only be a reach, but a bad pick.
Just as my opinion when the Saints selected Anthony over Kendricks was a bad pick. Nobody, not even professional scouts, knows anything as a fact.
In fact, supporting my opinion, I have not seen a single analyst or scout rank Brooks as a top 25 prospect, which, by definition, would make him a reach at 24. AND, the article you quoted in the OP has the pick as a reach. Do you have ANYTHING supporting that he wouldn't be a reach at 24?

quote:

---

I have not seen a single analyst or scout rank Brooks as a top 25 prospect, which, by definition, would make him a reach at 24


That is utterly ridiculous.

---

So go on record. Do you believe Brooks is better than Murray or Queen?
Also, as I expected, nothing supporting your opinion. You say I have "no clue", but, at least, I can support my opinion with people who are paid to do this type of stuff.

quote:

---

have "no clue",

---

You don’t.


You use the media projections for player rankings when NFL teams consistently draft differently, which is why mocks are always wrong. Media value players and the draft differently than teams do, which is why mocks are always wrong. Media projections and even NFL scout projections are total wildcards because every player, even Chase Young, is a complete gamble. That’s why Michael Thomas was the 6th WR off the board in 2016. That’s why guys like Deion Jones and Erick Kendricks fell to the 2nd and this happens all the time. And guys in the top 5 bust all the time.

The shite is a gamble, so passing off other’s knowledge as your own and then passing it off as fact is why you’re wrong. No one is going to be right. Brooks could be an absolute bust but so could Queen. Is Queen a better player? I think so. But I haven’t spent hundreds of hours scouting these guys like NFL guys have. So if our staff likes Brooks more, then they’ve earned the benefit of the doubt. People are still going to melt though because the Saints won’t take who they want or because they “reached”. Brooks is certainly capable of being selected in the first round. That’s not really debatable.

I think Brooks is better than Murray in every way except for coverage and I think it’s because that’s just not what Brooks was asked to do. He spied or blitzed. He might not be effective in man but I think he can be a capable zone LB. Davis also got better in coverage as he did it more.

Could be the same with Brooks. Still, the Saints know they need more athleticism at LB and Brooks has it. I know he’s a little stiff but I think he can be an adequate cover guy. He might not be a Deion Jones type coverage LB but he doesn’t have to be