What is everyone's fascination with Mike "Lupati"??

Okay I'm kind of getting annoyed with this thing. I'm not saying he'll be a bust/bad player. But I mean come on, I see a bunch of people saying "we need Mike LUPATI!!!!!!" "pick Lupati 13th!". Umm guys, have you even seen him play? Probably not since that's not even his name, it's iupati. With an I! I saw him play a little bit, paid attention to his last game of the season that bowl game, he did pretty well. I thought it looked like he could've been called for holding a few times but oh well. In the Senior bowl practices and the game I wasn't very impressed, but I don't want to diss on the guy's whole career or anything because of one week where he was out of position. But then I see people saying "well maybe we can play him at RIGHT TACKLE!". NO, just no thank you. He looked bad at any spot besides left guard(the position he's played for a while) at the senior bowl, he has a bit of a tendency to hold, and you guys want him at tackle. Seriously? Seriously guys? Our offense is finally getting some continuity, and we want to start a rookie at a position he's never played before? And that seems like a good idea to you? That's a horrible idea IMO. If we pick the guy just play him at LG, it's not like it's impossible to improve on David Baas.

Second, I see people wanting us to pick him 13th. That's another terrible idea. He'll most likely be there at 17. NYG who picks after us is likely to draft McClain or another linebacker since they lost Antonio Pierce, and they could also use help in the secondary. TN could use a corner opposite Finnegan or maybe a safety. I doubt they'd pick Iupati. And Seattle needs a left tackle BADLY, as well as playmakers like a good running back or wr(Spiller or Bryant). The smart move if we plan on picking Iupati IMO, would be to take the guy we really like who slips down at 13(maybe Haden, Trent Williams/Bulaga, Spiller, Earl Thomas, etc) and then you take Iupati at 17(I really don't see him as a top 16 pick, I'm not an expert but I don't see teams in front of us at either spot picking a guard with their first rounder). But then you might miss out on your right tackle. To be perfectly honest, it makes significantly more sense to me to make sure we get our RT with one of our 1st rounders and a playmaker with the other.

It's Iupati with an I

Originally posted by jreff22:
It's Iupati with an I

If you read my post that's what I said... My point is everyone calling him "Lupati" has most likely never even seen him do anything.

Iupati, dude... with an "I".

Originally posted by WillistheWall:

Originally posted by jreff22:
It's Iupati with an I

If you read my post that's what I said... My point is everyone calling him "Lupati" has most likely never even seen him do anything.

Post was too long. We all have short attention spans here.

Mike's good that's why everyone wants him.

No one's calling for me at the door.
And unpredictable won't bother anymore.
And silently gets harder to ignore.
Look straight ahead, there's nothing left to see.
What's done is done, this life has got it's hold on me.
Just let it go, what now can never be.

Originally posted by DarthNiner:
Iupati, dude... with an "I".

Read the damn post that's what I said

I'd love to have Iupati but certainly not at pick number #13. If he's there at #17 then he merits some consideration (if and only if a player like Earl Thomas is off the board).

If we do draft Iupati, then he plays his intended position which is guard. Having said that, it would NOT be a bad move considering how much pressure on our QB come right up the gut. Plus we have a tough time converting 3rd and short yardage.

I for one would be estatic if we draft a Trent Williams/Bulaga at #13 and Iupati at #17 because our O Line needs help in the worst way.

because we want a good o line

Originally posted by WillistheWall:

Originally posted by DarthNiner:
Iupati, dude... with an "I".

Read the damn post that's what I said

Read the damn response above. We all have short attention spans here. When I see a whole paragraph, my eyes glaze over and don't even bother reading...

So you're saying Iupati should be "going down on" a few draft boards?

I'd rather grab him at 17 than go along with this nonsense of drafted a converted TE everyone has been posting about in Charles Brown. "Oh he's perfect in a zone blocking scheme at LT"--that's everyone else. This dude will be a rag doll in the nfl. If Iupati doesn't adjust to RT from day one, at least you have a more than solid guy at G which you don't currently have. If there is no elite T that can start the season and produce from day one at 13, then I'm for Iupati at 17 because the OL needs help.

There's no reason to take Iupati at #13, he is perfectly slotted for us and will be there at #17.

I agree, I don't even like him at 17. There are so many other players that will be available at 17 that will have a greater impact on our team then he would. To take a guard at 17 he needs to be almost flawless and I agree with most of the flaws you listed. He is big, strong, and relatively fast for his size but so was Isaac Sopoaga. Not saying that he will take as long to develop as Sopoaga did, but like Sopoaga he has a long way to go in becoming technically sound. Do we really want to make him one of the highest paid guards while he learns the proper technique? No thank you IMO.