Tall and fast. I get it. But that would mean that we missed out on getting one of the top 6 WRs (Wilson, Williams, London, Olave, Burks and Dotson)
I think Veach will trade up to get one of those WRs
If we get Watson I would rather it be at pick 50. But he is not available in half of the mock drafts at 50.
Lets just wait and see what magic Veach can drum up.

I think the sample size is small enough that you can't just look at the drop rate and say "He has bad hands."

Other than the 2020 COVID season, there's really not a year where his drop percentage stands out as a concern.

Reports from people with eyes-on at the Senior Bowl have percolated up recently, indicating he was having a tough time with route-running at that event. That's more concerning to me than the drop percentage.

Watson would be a good pick but I still think they move up for their true #1 WR whoever that may be.

No clue. I just hope we get some rationale behind whatever we decide to do. And I hope our plan to get who we want works.

Ultimately this should be a Reid-heavy selection in terms of fit and what he wants

https://mobile.twitter.com/NDSUfootb...0%2Fframe.html

6.96 3 cone for watson & 4.19 shuttle both top 5. Watson is one of the best athletes, according to the numbers, that we’ve ever seen.

So was John Ross. Numbers don't always equate to amounting to shit. Watson is as raw as your sushi. Not saying not to take a shot but I wouldn't want to see it before 62.

I like Watsons potential on tape and you can see the athleticism that the numbers show. He’s got work to do but the traits are there. And the John Ross comparison is not good. I understand the point and it’s true that he is raw. Watson also was clocked at 23 mph. Hard to coach that with the rest of his measurables.

John Ross https://www.mockdraftable.com/player/john-ross
Measurable Measurement %tile
Height 5' 11" 21
Weight 188 lbs 19
Arm Length 31½" 36
Hand Size 8¾" 9
40 Yard Dash 4.22s 99
Vertical Jump 37" 71
Broad Jump 133" 96

Christian watson https://www.mockdraftable.com/player/christian-watson

Measurable Measurement %tile
Height 6' 4⅛" 94
Weight 208 lbs 64
Wingspan 77⅝" 61
Arm Length 32½" 64
Hand Size 10⅛" 91
10 Yard Split 1.46s 97
40 Yard Dash 4.36s 91
Vertical Jump 38½" 84
Broad Jump 136" 98

No, he really isn't. No matter how many times it gets repeated.

He's just tall.

He isn't the best athlete in this class. And if you want to take pro day numbers at face value, he arguably isn't even the best tall athlete in this class because Tariq Woolen exists. Look at 6'3'' Zyon McCollum who absolutely massacred the combine; faster and more agile than Watson.

We've gotta stop overselling these guys. I have absolutely no idea where this 'generational athlete' crap came from. He's like, top 5 athletically in this class. Probably. I mean Daxton Hill beat his 40, 3-cone and shuttle times as well (officially; not some padded pro day nonsense) so I've already ticked off Calvin Austin and 3 DBs who have him beat. That's before we get into 3rd day flyers like Kevin Austin who ripped Watson's 3-cone time (again, padded pro day nonsense no less) and beat his shuttle time.

He damn sure isn't something we haven't seen before or won't see again. We see 5-10 guys with numbers in his ballpark every single draft season. Literally every one.

He's just tall. I mean he can't run routes, hasn't excelled against marginal competition and has trouble hanging onto the football. But let's just ignore all of that because he MIGHT be one of the 5 most athletic guys coming out this year.

That’s hard to argue with Jordan Davis in this class. There haven’t been many wrs to put up athletic testing numbers like Watson’s at his size. He’s just a rare talent. Will it work out? I don’t know. But I’d gamble on it.

And again - THAT'S the point I continue to try to make.

Y'all want to talk about his athleticism and won't acknowledge that it isn't the athleticism that is all that unique.

It's the height. Guys as tall as him don't typically test like he has. Guys in the 5'10 - 6'1 range do it every season.

So what you're talking about is a few inches of height that he has that some don't.

And I just don't understand why anybody cares about guy being tall in this system? We run a damn WCO w/ quick cut timing routes and a razor sharp QB who HATES throwing 50/50 balls. There's marginal benefit at best to tall WRs in this offense.

Wait a minute.

You're the same guy I had this exact conversation with 2 weeks ago.

Nevermind - not sure what we're even doing here at this point. We've gone over this already.

Carryon...

John Ross isn't a good comp? The guy is the fastest player ever in the 40-yard dash and he makes the point that elite athleticism doesn't make a WR good or worth taking high.

Watson is not the type of guy you consider in a conversation with guys like Calvin Johnson and Randy Moss, and I feel like that's the context you're trying to create for him. They were good-to-great FBS WRs with elite athleticism not subpar FCS receivers with elite athleticism.

Ok, but you're acting like his size is irrelevant. It's not. You can feel like his size is unimportant, but I can line up 32 NFL GM's (and hundreds of scouts)that are going to take issue with that.

And as for The Chiefs not caring about size-their recent acquisitions would indicate otherwise.

Hill is not 'the prototype'. That was a freak stroke of luck. Nobody thought he was going to be a top 5 WR. They took a flier on freak speed and figured he'd be a KR and gadget guy. They took Hardman because it looked like Hill was going to be out of the league.

So I don't necessarily agree.

Having questions about Watson is totally fine, but being able to move like that at 6'4" is indeed freaky. There's a reason we measure the RAS, and it does in fact appear to have some relevance as to the player's possibilities at the NFL level. The kid scored a perfect 10. He ranked #2 out of 2613 WR's tested since 1987. You know who's number one? Calvin Johnson. ****in' Megatron. So yeah, it's perfectly reasonable to say the ceiling here is ridiculously high. You can try to argue that if you want to, but it goes against any and all logic.

He's a freak. Questions about competition level? Sure. Questions about drops? Absolutely. Questions about his usage in his college offense? I think those have been answered, but sure, okay, that's legitimate.

But IF there is a generational, holy shit, WR in this draft-it's Watson. Will he be Randy Moss or Calvin Johnson? Or is he MVS? No idea. His mental make-up will be the determining factor there.

I don't know. I have no idea if Watson will be a great NFL player or not. But if you're trying to argue that the raw materials there aren't special, you're just flat wrong. #2 out of 2613.

John Ross did that at an average NFL WR size. In addition to injury problems, he's not shown much growth. That speaks to his mental make-up and character.

And THAT is why the draft is a crap-shoot. And make no mistake, it is.

If you don't like the prospect, that's a legitimate stance. Trying to argue against the raw athleticism is not.

#2 out of 2613 WR's tested since 1987. Number ****ing TWO, behind only Calvin "Megatron" Johnson.

Christian Watson will be as good as he wants to be, and that is the bottom line. That's not necessarily true of everyone. Most prospects have physical limitations in one regard or another. Watson does not.

Look, I know it looks like I'm pounding the table for Watson, and that's not really true.

I too have questions, but those questions aren't physical. I know The Chiefs have met with the kid, and so only Veach and Reid and the guys in Arrowhead know the answers.

There are legitimate concerns. I just think if you're trying to argue against the athletic ability, you're wrong.

6'4" guys aren't that quick and explosive in their movements. They're not supposed to be that fast. The kid is a freak. Comparing him to like...Calvin Austin at 5'7" and saying the athletes are similar is a farce.

And I like Austin, too. But they're not the same thing.

To the OP-as I said early on, IF they took Watson in the first, I would happy only because it would mean that they had done their homework on the mental make-up of the kid and determined that it was worth the risk. It would be a HUGE swing for potential. If they've decided the kid wants to be great and take a chance on that I'll have no issues with it.

Way too much downside to go high on Watson.

If everything works out and he gets better at playing WR he could be a nice vertical 2.

If everything works out? That would mean:

1) his hands aren’t an issue
2) his numbers at NDSU WERE depressed by the offensive system and success on the ground and not at all indicative of his ability
3) he blossoms as a route runner

If all 3 of those things are true, we’re not taking about a “nice” #2. We’re talking about a guy in conversation for best WR in the league. DK Metcalf height/speed, but with the short-area quickness of a good slot WR.

They’re big IFs. But his size/speed/elusiveness/quick twitch combo ARE elite. If the IFs are answered in a positive manner. the ceiling is highly vaulted.

I don't see his upside as much better than a MVS plus.

But at least the Packers didn't spend a top pick on MVS.

He didn’t face a real fbs corner until the Senior Bowl. That makes things more difficult to evaluate

Actually Watson did.

He played against Robert Rochelle, a 4th round draft pick for the Rams in Lance's only game last year.

Watson was shut down. It was bad.

This is exactly my position, we already have tall, quick, occasionally iffy hands and so-so route running with MVS. I don't see the value in getting another guy.in the same mould

No, his upside is much, much higher. MVS doesn't have near the agility.

Watson's upside is, well, Megatron.

His floor is wash-out. That's what's scary.

Now maybe you feel like that is more likely-and I'm not sure I disagree with you. I'm really not pounding the table for Watson in the first. I think there's a legitimate, big risk there.

#2 Relative Athletic Score since 1987, behind only Calvin Johnson. In 35 years, that's the only real comparison. #2 out of 2,613.

To downplay that potential is silly.

Now there are very real questions, and yes, it's a big risk and I'm not sure the risk is worth a #1. I think there are safer bets. Much safer.

But if Veach and Andy decide this is their guy after meeting with him, I'll assume they've decided his head is on straight and he's worth it.

Arguments against the athleticism are bogus. Arguments against the production are valid.

This kid will never be a decent #2. He'll either be a star, or a JAG.

I'm not arguing he doesn't have the athleticism. I'm arguing that you don't take a kid high in the draft based solely on that athleticism, and that's what you'd be doing by taking Watson at 50+. John Ross was an example that all the speed and athleticism don't mean shit. Hell, Watson is a major reach at 62 IMO but at least I wouldn't hate it. I wouldn't mind him as a shot in the dark but he's by no means worth a high pick because he simply isn't anything near a good WR yet. He's a project and a relatively big one. I'd love him at 94/103. 1st round? Early 2nd? Now that's just plain stupid in my eyes. It's what Veach did with Gay. I fully expect some team to do the same with both Watson and the CB from UTSA, Woolen. At least Woolen has looked alot better as a football player than Watson has though.

Pretty reachy...dream scenario is a trade of 30 down to no lower than 37, and add another 2nd (may have to throw in a 4th or a pick from 2023). If a team grabs Watson before 50, you would still have an extra shot at your next favorite who would be more likely to contribute right away, , whether it is Metchie, Tolbert, Bell, Moore, Pierce, or even Ezukama a bit later, and then throw a late dart at Gray, Thornton, et al

Good post. He's not a good football player. Use your draft picks early on good football players with traits.

You draft dart throws like Watson later. Most guys don't change as much as people think.

I don't necessarily disagree with you, although I think you over-exaggerate the kid as a football player. The tape I've seen is not nearly that bad. I think in year one, he's a vertical threat and gadget player, and the rest could be grown into. I agree though, it's a project, and the possibility that he never reaches his potential is there.

I'd take him at #50, but I'm a gambler. I'd take a chance on the speed and athleticism.

Have you actually watched any film on the kid? Because I literally have no idea how you could have if that is your take.

You want to argue that it won't translate against NFL talent, and I can see that, but saying he's not good at football is...yeah, you haven't watched any tape on the kid.

I'd rather draft Khalil Shakir in the 2nd than Watson.

6 feet, runs a 4.4 40 and is a beast on the field.

No contest, Shakir is better, IMO.

Yes, watched him when Lance came out. Wasn't impressed then and he looks no different now.

One of the reasons I'd double dip in the first two rounds at DE and WR is that we are always picking at the end of the round. You can just take high floor guys, and probably get pretty good football players, but I think you have to take the extra shot at star potential when you can. That's why I'd love to see a Karlaftis paired with a Mafe/Eketibie and a more polished WR pick (choose one, I like Pierce, Pickens, Metchie) with a Watson. If you hit on a star and a quality starter at each spot somewhere in there you're in good shape.

Agree on Jones in the 1st...I would only consider Wyatt, and he has some very concerning off-field issues. I definitely want a DL, even 2, but not in Rnd 1 unless Wyatt falls, and that is still a "maybe". I could see a DL in the 3rd or 4th, and maybe use 7th to trade u to get a Wild Card like Eric Johnson from Missouri State

If you watch college tape of Valdes-Scantling and college tape of Watson and come away thinking they're the same guy, we don't have much else to talk about.

I won't bang the table for Watson, but some of the hate he's getting on this site is way over the top.

No, he isn't a perfect prospect and yes, there are questions and yes, he's raw. But calling him a BAD college football player? Based on what? Being the leading receiver at an elite, title-winning program 3/4 years, in an offense that throws the ball like 35 percent of the time. Come on now.

I prefer Pickens if they're taking an upside stab at WR in the late 1st/early 2nd. But if the Chiefs take Watson in that range, I'll get it.

If a team takes him before the Chiefs even have a chance to get to him, I won't be surprised, either. And I won't be surprised if he explodes or busts.

He's a definite high-risk, high-reward kid. In his favor, he's an NFL player's kid, with no character red flags, and he went to a program that is highly established and disciplined and was a contributor every year but his redshirt freshman one (edit: I had his stat progression wrong in my head. He was leading receiver as a junior during the COVID year)

Against him, obviously there have been a lot of athletic fast guys who haven't made it all work.

I like Shakir, but 2nd is too high unless all the mocks are wrong.

He's a higher floor player and a guy I like in the 3rd/4th. He's more polished at the moment, and less risk, but is not of the same potential as Watson. Shakir-now that's a nice #2 WR potential.

Again, maybe Watson never reaches that Megatron potential. Maybe it's even LIKELY. But if he DID...

#2 out of 2,613 WR's tested in 35 years.

We know he's tall. We know he's fast. What do you like about the way he plays WR?

I do really quite like Shakir. I wish he were a better accelerator because that could limit his ability from the slot in the NFL. Because he's more of a build-up speed guy, I'd love to see him at the X but he didn't operate from there much at all in college. Can he get off the line against NFL CBs? He's dangerous on those crossers when he's moving, that's for sure. Might have the best highlight reel of insane catches in the draft though.

The intrigue with watson is use as a gadget player early in his career. And with the success of deebo, why couldn’t he be successful without being polished early in his career and get better over time? After considering how many of burks plays were gadget plays, how much better of a prospect is burks considering his athletic testing questions? As far as polish, burks has many of the same questions as watson in addition to his testing numbers. Consider that travon walker at 6’5” 270 lbs ran 6.89 3 cone and burks ran a 7.3 3 cone. Again, when I watch burks, I see deebo but the risk still remains. If we drafted burks, he’d have a gadget role and have to be developed. Why can’t watson have that same role? He shows that he has the ability to be the same type of player as burks without the risk of testing numbers. I still have burks ahead of watson but with deebo, we know these gadget guys can be successful. Funny to me how many of y’all are high on burks but low on watson when they would play the same role? Can you explain that?

I like how quick his feet are. I love his change of direction ability and general athletic explosiveness. I like that despite being raw and needing extra work on route-running at the Senior Bowl, he was still the standout WR at that (shows conversion of those traits into production), out-performing even some darlings of this forum (Tolbert, Austin, Melton).

I love his physicality. He's a good and willing run blocker, but more importantly he is a potential YAC monster because not only is he really fast with good twitch and change of direction, he's also physical and willing to take on contact for extra yard.

I wish he had played in a more pass-friendly offense. I don't like the raw nature of his football skill set that results.

I wouldn't spend a 1st on him if calling the shots, based on what I know currently. But something around 50 (even in the low-to-mid 40s?) yeah

I'm not going to say it's a comp but there is a little Godwin here.

Watson is also a good leader and makes contested catches with his length.

Why is that onus on the ones that like Burks better? Burks is clearly the higher-rated prospect by every board on the planet. I think this falls on you.

I'm not going to compare him to Burks at all. I'll be clear, I'm not that much a fan of Burks in this offense.

I'm going to say this, I think Watson's floor is MVS. He can be a deep-threat guy, just chuck it up there dawg and we'll see what happens. I have no doubts about that. Same size, same speed, very similar guys coming out from a skills perspective, and relatively equitable collegiate production in similar offenses (South Florida was run-oriented with Marlon Mack and D'Ernest Johnson). If MVS didn't jump terribly, his RAS scorecard would look identical to Watson's.

I look at this though, MVS was a 5th round pick. Now, if MVS had a 5th round value then why on Earth should we be inclined to think that Watson should have much higher than that? At this point, the comps are identical sans vertical jump. So, is Watson's ability to jump 8 inches higher than MVS in shorts worth 3 or 4 rounds? Honestly, that's what everyone is talking about, the Mel Kiper's of the world included. I'm just trying to be realistic here and I really feel like this whole "RAS" shit is blown well out of proportion in comparison to the on-field.

As I said, I like the shot on the kid but I just don't like him above a good crop of others, and before 62 is pushing it.

The Cassel Wars will seem tame by comparison if we draft this kid in the 1st.

It will be positively Frank Clark-esque.

Who wants to start the "Christian Watson ****ing Sucks!" thread?

I'll be deep in that thread.

Just like if we trade up for Jameson Williams and that kid never pans out. I'll create that thread from day ****ing one.

I know this, I'll get called to the table again when I say the same shit about him as I said about Willie Gay. LOL.

Meh...you hated Gay. I hated Bolton. It's whatever at this point.

I loved both of 'em. You guys must be ****ing reeruned or something.

I'm not perfect. I saw Bolton as a 2 down LB and wanted Terrace Marshall.

I'm not sure how I'd have felt had I not sat in the stands and watched him play his whole career.

He was always just different out there. And it didn't matter if it was against CMSU or Georgia. He was a guided missile and always around the football.

He's been one of the few exceptions to my 'plays faster than he tests is bullshit' rule. Most guys play exactly as fast as they test. But once I saw Bolton's numbers, I knew they weren't indicative of who he was as a player.

I just had an unfair advantage there.

I can admit that I didn't watch a ton of Mizzou games. So I wouldn't know shit about him.

I was killed on the Gay draft thread too.

But Gay brings more to the table than Watson, IMO.

With Gay I think its our coaches expecting him to be something he's not.

He's dumb and has bad instincts. So don't use him like an eraser. You send Gay at the QB or you should blitz and then drop him in coverage.

He's a weaponized pawn that can make big plays. Use him correctly.

Precisely the kind of pick that gets you to Super Bowls. Trust what you see on film more than in the undies; Bolton was always in the right place, when he hit you, you stayed hit...the only knock was that he couldn't cover (which was never a blatant shortcoming imho). This is exactly what Nakobe Dean will go through this year...wonder if any FOs will learn a lesson?

John Ross is such a poor example because athleticism and ability weren't the reasons he was a bust.

He could never stay healthy. Ever. Not in college, and not in the pros. That's why he was a bust.

Fair-ish, I suppose.

How about another "He's an elite athlete" for you...

Breshad Perriman

Aside from his rookie season when he tore his PCL, not much in terms of anything "major" in the injury department.

And go.

Sure, but we can do the same exercise with "route runners".

It's a matter of risk.

Philosophically, i believe that elite physical attributes lessen the risk of a player being a bust. It doesn't mean he won't bust, but at least there's some physical tools that can be utilized by a good coaching staff to maximize what they can do with him. Mecole Hardman, for example.

I've cooled on Watson since my first few watches. To me, he's kind of a larger Will Fuller.

But i also think the hate around him is a bit overblown too.

Will Fuller is a beast when he's on the field and healthy.

If Watson was a healthy Fuller I would be trading up for him.

Fuller has been nothing but a one-trick pony with suspect hands.

He's eclipsed 700 yards only once in his career.

Will Fuller probably ran close to as many routes his last year at Notre Dame as Christian Watson did in his entire career at North Dakota State. Watson ran like 350 routes, total, over the course of 4 seasons (3 as starter).

He very well could be a BIGGER version of Fuller.

Again. Not advocating for a first-rounder on him or even a trade up. But the pushback against him is a little over the top. And you especially are underplaying his ceiling.

What the real key is - and we only have murky information about - is how well/quickly he took to coaching on route running at the Senior Bowl. There are written reports of him needing a lot of extra attention on route running at the Senior Bowl. He has the physical traits for it, and there are clips of him doing "little guy" things on releases at the line.

Just a matter of how he took to it.

FWIW, Christian Watson currently has the same odds on FanDuel Sportsbook to go in the first round as Travis Jones, David Ojabo, Skyy Moore, Roger McCreary, Kaiir Elam, and Bernhard Raimann. They're all at +150, so not favorites to go in the first, but it wouldn't be a surprise at all.

George Pickens has slightly better odds to go in the first right now, but he's still not favored at +125.

Jahan Dotson is favored to go in the first at -150.

It would be a shocker if Watson makes it out of the second round. A team will bet on his measurables and development potential.

I'd still have Will Fuller on call if I were Veach.

If this draft goes well enough and we get comfortable with our top 4 WR options (JJSS, MVS, Hardman, draft pick), I would say we have the depth to absorb the injury risk in Fuller and take what we can get when he's healthy.

He's a really REALLY nice fit for this offense and could have a Watkins in the '19 SB run kind of impact if he just happens to be healthy at the right time. And if not, well we wouldn't really be relying on him.

I agree with a lot of this. I do agree with the "hate." I don't "hate" him and hope I'm not projecting that, I just don't like him as the pick at 30 or 50. My opinion is that's massive reaching based almost exclusively on those athletic traits. Personally, I stand by my comp to MVS with Watson, and I don't think that warrants a day 2 pick. I'd probably grade Watson as a 4th round guy. I don't think he'd be there in the 4th when KC picks, so I'd be mostly okay with him in the late 3rd. I've moved towards the mean by being on board with late 2nd but that's not where I value him. In the end, it doesn't matter what I think but I'm a draft nerd so I guess I just appreciate the thrill of looking back and seeing if my analysis was on or not.

I'm more of a believer in a team taking big swings later, most ideally in the 3rd and 4th rounds. If I were to zone in on a WR with speed for days and on the ascent that might be really good in a couple of years, then give me Danny Gray in the 3rd. A pass rusher that has some amazing physical tools but needs to get bigger and refine technique? Give me Amare Barno in the 3rd. I like those stabs. I think they merit, probably, 4th-round grades but I like them late 3rd because they probably aren't going to be there when KC picks in the 4th.

Because Watson has been a paragon of health...

Yes, he's always hurt and had to play second fiddle to DHop for many years.

Tremendous player when healthy. Unfortunately that isn't too often these days.

But yeah, I'm in at the right price.

Par for the course.

I've become among the largest 'Watson Haters' as a result of saying I don't think I'd consider him until the late 2nd.

An FCS kid with disappointing production and genuine red flags regarding his readiness for the next level and I'm STILL willing to at least consider the possibility of taking him in the top 70 picks - somehow that makes me a hater, I guess.

Ain't a lot of room for disagreement during draft season. It's just the way it goes...

I'd be extremely disappointed with Watson in the first. This class is deep at WR and I see him as more of a mid-late second round guy. Give me a corner or safety in the first over Watson.

There's really only one person that I would say is swerving into "hate" territory. And it's neither of you.

I will say, DJ, we've been around and around on his production levels. Considering he had 30 percent of their overall receiving yards (and 35 percent each of his last two seasons), I think you might find the NDSU coaches have a differing opinion on whether his production was disappointing or not.

I know you feel like they would feed him the ball more if he were a truly elite NFL prospect, but I'm not so sure. I see a guy that was clearly their No. 1 weapon when they did throw the ball, on a team that just didn't need to throw the ball much and doesn't believe in it.

He wouldn't be the first guy whose college system didn't take full advantage of him.

Good lord, why?

No, I don't think so. I mean as I said a couple of weeks ago on this subject, we're like 12 picks apart on where we'd each take the kid. I think the discussion overall is sometimes bordering on silly, but at the end of the day, you'd consider him as early as #62. I'd take him at #50. Are we really worlds apart? It's 12 picks.

Not really. Apart from I think you'd probably be pleased to take him at 50 whereas I'd grumble the whole time I'm turning the card in at 62 and make the VP of player personnel make the announcement so that Watson wouldn't see the sour look on my face when I did it.

Cuz he's fast and physical. Until he gets hurt. And I think the roster can accommodate him.

Ultimately I recognize that I'll only get 8(ish) games out of him. My hope would be that it's the RIGHT 8-10 games.

Gimme 3-4 games early in the season to get out of the gates quickly, give me another 2-3 games late in the year to get your feet under you and then a playoff run.

If you can do that at the price point that Fuller's likely to command and all you cost me is a little cap space and a short-term IL stint, that works for me.

Odds are very good that Christian Watson won't even be available at 50. He could be, but probably not.

Shit, there’s a chance he isn’t even there at 29.

And a chance he's there at 94.

Though I do think the WR market going batshit insane has pushed the entire class up a bit.

Yep, Green Bay could very well select him at 28 and that wouldn't be shocking. He could fill that MVS role for them.

He's a polarizing prospect for sure. This thread is evidence of that.

I think he probably makes it out of the first round but isn't making it to 50. I doubt the Chiefs take him.

ROFL

**** a whole bunch of that. Hard pass.

Someone never picked up Will Fuller from the fantasy waiver wire and it shows.



*and then dropped him three weeks later

It's interesting. Ultimately, none of us know diddly about how these kids project to the NFL. The GMs know...well, somewhat more, but it's still a crap-shoot.

The talking heads know...I don't know, some even less maybe than some of us. But there's a bunch of hype about these guys because the draft class is viewed in a vacuum. The best prospect in this draft might not even be a top ten pick in say, 2018's draft.

But that wouldn't be interesting television, or click-worthy internet.

It seems like a deep draft to me, and I've seen it repeated as such. I think there are a lot of potential stars outside of the first round, but most of course, will wash out.

I don't know. Thursday can't get here fast enough.

I can tell you this, though-no matter what Veach does, I'm not going to criticize until I see the product on the field.

Gonna watch more Christian Watson today. Eerie feeling the Chiefs may take him.

I'm gonna have to be ready to do battle with DJ and all them.

<iframe src="https://giphy.com/embed/TuZ8v66TzGeYJW23as" width="480" height="400" frameBorder="0" class="giphy-embed" allowFullScreen></iframe><p><a href="https://giphy.com/gifs/theoffice-episode-2-the-office-tv-TuZ8v66TzGeYJW23as"

Its a draft that has a lot of talent but not much obvious superstar talent.