Thread: BJ Raji information/pic page

Originally Posted by TXBRONC

What is about Raji that is changing your mind?

My short list, all having to do w/ the imminent 3-4 switch:

1-The idea that we need a hog in the middle

2-My opinion/view that our curren personnel may fit at LB, making it less of an immediate need

3-Same w/ Safety, especially since...

4-Spikes and Mays staying in school

5-As much as I like McCoy and Jackson, McD passes a LOT and Tyson may be there in round 2

I never disliked Raji, I just viewed our needs/options a bit differently.

Raji smagi...lol.

You want a nose tackle...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNCdVEfoBEo

Originally Posted by Lancane

Raji smagi...lol.

You want a nose tackle...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNCdVEfoBEo

tell me more about cody.

Originally Posted by DenBronx

tell me more about cody.

i'll tell ya all you need to know-- he ain't in this year's draft!!

Originally Posted by dogfish

i'll tell ya all you need to know-- he ain't in this year's draft!!

does that not mean he wont be in next years?

Originally Posted by DenBronx

does that not mean he wont be in next years?

I think it means that if you plan your draft around next years draft, you've missed the boat. Had we done that last year, Clady would be with another team.

Originally Posted by dogfish

i'll tell ya all you need to know-- he ain't in this year's draft!!

Yep if we're going to a 3-4 then we need get nose tackle now.

The more I think about it, the more I think Green bay is going to take Raji ahead of us. They are switching the 3/4 and need a NT almost as bad as we do. If Colin Cole(scheduled to be a free agent) signs with somebody else I think there is no way they can pass on Raji. Even if they re-sign Cole, they still might even draft Raji and give him time to develope in Capers system.

Originally Posted by broncofaninfla

The more I think about it, the more I think Green bay is going to take Raji ahead of us. They are switching the 3/4 and need a NT almost as bad as we do. If Colin Cole(scheduled to be a free agent) signs with somebody else I think there is no way they can pass on Raji. Even if they re-sign Cole, they still might even draft Raji and give him time to develope in Capers system.

With Pickett and Harrel on the roster as well, I don't see them picking Raji. Not that he wouldn't be better than both of those guys, but they've got other holes that are pretty big, specifically at OT, and CB. I know that they are switching just like we are but they already have some bigger bodies on the team, that they've invested a lot in already.

They are blaming a lot on the old defensive coaches so it looks like they are hoping that Capers and his crew can turn them into something. I would be way more concerned about SF picking him than I would the Packers.

If you don't have a stud NT in a 3-4; even the best linebackers can't do their jobs. If Raji is there at #12, it is a no-brainer.

While I am worried about Green Bay, they have other needs as well. A lot of other needs. Honestly, I see Denver being in the position last year they were with Clady. The player they want fell to them. We'll see how McDaniels and Goodman bring this together, but I don't think we'll trade up for anyone.

Raji at #12, and that is it. Otherwise, trade down.

Originally Posted by Ziggy

I think it means that if you plan your draft around next years draft, you've missed the boat. Had we done that last year, Clady would be with another team.

Or planning on next years draft can keep you from overpaying this year for a guy who might get suspended because of character issues.

Clady's situation was also different, we weren't going to have to move up to get him.

There were other good OT that we could have gotten if he were taken.

We were certainly planning on playing a scheme that would have required his type of player. This is not true of Raji, since we may run a 3-4, or a 4-3.

The other thing to keep in mind is the age of our own players, we do have some aging starters and if next years draft isn't looking good for those positions now may be the right time to bring in someone.

I don't believe that we should let our desperation for a NT cause us to way overpay for the one great NT prospect in this draft when we could fill other holes and get one next year.

As much as you can argue that we might not have gotten Clady there are a ton of total busts that we drafted that we could have avoided.

With that being said however if the FO feels that Raji is worth it, then the NT spot is important enough that we should burn our third rounder to move ahead of SF and Green Bay to make sure we get him.

Schematically Raji offers us more versatility than any other prospect. 3-4 or 4-3. He works. Can't say that for a lot of those guys, especially looking at the value.

Originally Posted by Cicero

Schematically Raji offers us more versatility than any other prospect. 3-4 or 4-3. He works. Can't say that for a lot of those guys, especially looking at the value.

yep. . . you can always find big pluggers, but raji's combination of movement skills along with bulk size makes him more than a one-dimensional clogger. . . he has the potential to excell at both the zero-technique and the one-technique, and possibly even the three-technique if he plays at the low end of his weight range. . . he's built to hold two gaps, but he's also shown rare quickness off the ball for a man his size, which combined with his power could make him pretty disruptive in the mold of shaun rogers or kevin williams. . .

DLs like that are frickin' rare, and having one gives you an awful lot of flexibility-- both short-term and long-term. . . it allows you to do more in terms of playing multiple fronts and game-planning for different styles of offense (y'all remember how sam adams didn't even suit up against indy's no-huddle offense two years ago? wouldn't happen with raji). . . and it also gives you more options schematically from year to year-- raji projects as a strong 3-4 NT, but if 4-5 years down the road we want to go back to a 4-3 he can potentially be just as effective. . . .