JOSH BACKMAN
BALTIMORE, MD
I admired Gerald Sensabaugh's new-found ability to go in for a big hit this past season, but, to me, he too often appeared to be a step too late in coverage to make a play. I think cutting him and addressing the position in the draft makes sense. Do you all agree?
Nick: I think he's just solid. He's not great. He's not bad. He's just there. At safety it's more important not to give up bad plays than making a ton of big plays. But if they move on, they better have someone who can stay healthy. Right now that guy isn't on the roster in my opinion.
Rowan: The problem with doing that is you've now turned a position that could use help to a position that almost has to be addressed via the draft. This team has so many holes that could use filling right now that cutting Sensabaugh only adds to it. If they're going into the draft with the opinion that they're going to select a safety in the first couple rounds regardless, then that might make sense. But that also means they're not using that spot for an offensive lineman or defensive lineman, which I'd consider more pressing.
MATTHEW MILLS
GETTYSBURG, PA
It seems that we have a lot of hole to fill on this team. Would it not be wise and trade back and receive more picks than just sitting on one pick? Only because that draft is so deep.
Nick: I'm fine with that if that works for their needs. Just wait until draft day. If you're at 18 and you've got 4-5 guys you like, go for it and pick up a third. You're right, this team needs picks more than anything. But just getting mid-rounds for the heck of it can be wasteful if you pick horribly.
[embedded_ad]
Rowan: If they can get a good deal, this could be a viable option, but I see them staying put at this point. With so few obvious top selections and a lot of 1-2 round depth, I'm not sure a team in the late first round or early second would think moving up to No. 18 would be a gigantic upgrade. But that'll all depend on who drops and what happens on draft day. I think you certainly listen to offers.
