Coby Fleener - TE Stanford

Originally posted by Kaz9er:
Its no different from assuming that Fleener would beat out Delanie for #2 TE. Fleener has a nice skill set but he is essentially a big wide reciever. In the long run there all prospects Fleener could be a bust just like Hill could be. At this point Fleener is the cleaner prospect but Hill has a higher ceiling it all depends on what a team is looking for. Personally we snatch either i would'nt be dissappointed heck we might not get either of them which would hurt my soul a lil bit lol.

LOL...okay, but now lets get back to reality.

Originally posted by NickSh49:
Again, I just don't think we NEED Coby Fleener. I think he's overvalued as a #1 pick. He is not the next GRONK or Jimmy Graham.

Give me a G/C that we cant have rotate on the offensive line for the next 10 years.

We need a legitimate red zone target. That was clear as day last season.

I don't know if he's Gronk or Graham but I definetily believe he's capable of pulling in 5-8 TD's next year. 500 yards 5-8 TD's next year and our offense is twice as good as was.

Maybe this is where I differ from you guys. I have no problem with selecting role players in the 1st. Especially late in the 1st. I think realistically we can trade up into the 2nd round and grab the G/C assuming the guy we want isn't on the board there. DeCastro, Glenn, Zeitgler, Konz, the guy from Midwest State. There's 5 great interior lineman to choose from and guards just don't fly off the board like hot cakes.

Originally posted by tjd808185:
We need a legitimate red zone target. That was clear as day last season.

I don't know if he's Gronk or Graham but I definetily believe he's capable of pulling in 5-8 TD's next year. 500 yards 5-8 TD's next year and our offense is twice as good as was.

Maybe this is where I differ from you guys. I have no problem with selecting role players in the 1st. Especially late in the 1st. I think realistically we can trade up into the 2nd round and grab the G/C assuming the guy we want isn't on the board there. DeCastro, Glenn, Zeitgler, Konz, the guy from Midwest State. There's 5 great interior lineman to choose from and guards just don't fly off the board like hot cakes.

last year our RZ offene was fine at the end of last year when playbook got going we ended something like 7 TD to 3 to 4 FG in RZ and in playoffs we were like 3 RZ TD to 0 RZ FG

would be nice to have one but RZ isnt an issue

3rd down is and for that we need a good slot WR

Originally posted by tjd808185:
We need a legitimate red zone target. That was clear as day last season.

I don't know if he's Gronk or Graham but I definetily believe he's capable of pulling in 5-8 TD's next year. 500 yards 5-8 TD's next year and our offense is twice as good as was.

Maybe this is where I differ from you guys. I have no problem with selecting role players in the 1st. Especially late in the 1st. I think realistically we can trade up into the 2nd round and grab the G/C assuming the guy we want isn't on the board there. DeCastro, Glenn, Zeitgler, Konz, the guy from Midwest State. There's 5 great interior lineman to choose from and guards just don't fly off the board like hot cakes.

WR's and OG's will be around in the 2nd, beyond Fleener and Allen you have a whole bunch of guys who need lots of developing at TE.



I'd be thrilled with Fleener in Rd 1 and Brandon Brooks in Rd 2, or Fleener in Rd 1 and Marvin Jones/McNutt in Rd 2.

All I know is if we draft Fleener Im changing teams.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by Kaz9er:
Its no different from assuming that Fleener would beat out Delanie for #2 TE. Fleener has a nice skill set but he is essentially a big wide reciever. In the long run there all prospects Fleener could be a bust just like Hill could be. At this point Fleener is the cleaner prospect but Hill has a higher ceiling it all depends on what a team is looking for. Personally we snatch either i would'nt be dissappointed heck we might not get either of them which would hurt my soul a lil bit lol.

LOL...okay, but now lets get back to reality.

See, that's the problem with you Phoenix. You are assuming Delanie is just going to get bumped off the field by Fleener. That is exactly what you are doing, and there's no guarantee of that.

Even when I try to make it simple and say "You like Fleener a whole lot. Others do not, and those others feel you undervalue Walker," you're like "Nah mah, the "facts" say that Fleener's dope and Delanie sucks," when you and I both know it is a gigantic grey area.

So root for your boy, but stop pretending that what you are assuming will indeed come to pass without a hitch. Because you are just guessing like the rest of us.

Gym time.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by Kaz9er:
Its no different from assuming that Fleener would beat out Delanie for #2 TE. Fleener has a nice skill set but he is essentially a big wide reciever. In the long run there all prospects Fleener could be a bust just like Hill could be. At this point Fleener is the cleaner prospect but Hill has a higher ceiling it all depends on what a team is looking for. Personally we snatch either i would'nt be dissappointed heck we might not get either of them which would hurt my soul a lil bit lol.

LOL...okay, but now lets get back to reality.

I honestly do believe he would beat out Delanie, but its the NFL you don't know what happens till they hit the field .

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by tjd808185:
He doesn't have to be better than Vernon. Vernon was a top 5 pick. Elite talent.

The league has evolved to the point were you can have 2 Pro Bowl caliber tight ends. Nobody is saying let's pass on a #1 receiver for Fleener. You guys are making the assumption that we have Hill or whoever to graded out to be as a number one.

This, I've seen some of the most retarded logic imaginable on here, between people assuming that a WR automatically has #1 potential if he's drafted in the 1st round or over-valuing a 2nd string tight-end that basically has hung around because he happened to be on the roster at the time and is now somehow irreplaceable for the dozen or so catches he makes a year.

Retarded?

Potential #1 WR is better then any potential #2TE

Originally posted by jreff22:
Retarded?

Potential #1 WR is better then any potential #2TE

#1 WR is better than #1 TE as well

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
last year our RZ offene was fine at the end of last year when playbook got going we ended something like 7 TD to 3 to 4 FG in RZ and in playoffs we were like 3 RZ TD to 0 RZ FG

would be nice to have one but RZ isnt an issue

3rd down is and for that we need a good slot WR

LOL...I hope you didn't write that with a straight face. The Saints game was the only time the red-zone offense looked good late in the year and that was due to the Saints retarded over-aggressive defensive schemes that left VD open. The biggest weakness of this team by far was the red-zone offense and they struggled all season throughout to convert field goals into touchdowns.


As the season went on, they improved slightly in the red-zone but were even worse on 3rd downs. A guy like Kendall Wright or Fleener could help tremendously in that department.

Originally posted by jreff22:
Retarded?

Potential #1 WR is better then any potential #2TE

It seems pretty obvious to me as well but alot folks don't see it that way lol. Hell i think id rather have a #1 WR than #1 TE if that sounds crazy well hey im a nutcase .

Originally posted by tjd808185:

Originally posted by NickSh49:
Again, I just don't think we NEED Coby Fleener. I think he's overvalued as a #1 pick. He is not the next GRONK or Jimmy Graham.

Give me a G/C that we cant have rotate on the offensive line for the next 10 years.

We need a legitimate red zone target. That was clear as day last season.

I don't know if he's Gronk or Graham but I definetily believe he's capable of pulling in 5-8 TD's next year. 500 yards 5-8 TD's next year and our offense is twice as good as was.

Maybe this is where I differ from you guys. I have no problem with selecting role players in the 1st. Especially late in the 1st. I think realistically we can trade up into the 2nd round and grab the G/C assuming the guy we want isn't on the board there. DeCastro, Glenn, Zeitgler, Konz, the guy from Midwest State. There's 5 great interior lineman to choose from and guards just don't fly off the board like hot cakes.

Why burn a pick on a guy who will never get 1K at TE? The only reason people want Fleener is because of the Stanford/Jim connection...if he played for another team people wouldn't be this hung up on him. We are not the Pats and why people assume we need to copy that style is beyond me.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
LOL...I hope you didn't write that with a straight face. The Saints game was the only time the red-zone offense looked good and that was due to the Saints retarded over-aggressive defensive schemes that left VD open. The biggest weakness of this team by far was the red-zone offense and they struggled all season throughout to convert field goals into touchdowns.

again not at the end of the season since steelers they were 7 for 11 and that doesnt include playoffs where they didnt even kick a FG in RZ i believe

Originally posted by jreff22:
Why burn a pick on a guy who will never get 1K at TE? The only reason people want Fleener is because of the Stanford/Jim connection...if he played for another team people wouldn't be this hung up on him. We are not the Pats and why people assume we need to copy that style is beyond me.

This is asinine. The 49ers don't have to copy the Patriots style, they already have their own and it is an offense that is very TE heavy. The coach is Harbaugh, he loves utilizing multiple tight-ends, this team utilizes 2 TE's more than virtually every other team in the league, a 2nd TE is basically a starter on this team, even if Fleener doesn't get 1000 yards, that part is irrelevant. The threat is what is key, the mismatch that Fleener creates is the most important thing, not to mention that VD is now 28 or 29.....so in 5 years, guess what, Fleener could very well be the guy in his prime racking up huge yardage totals.

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
last year our RZ offene was fine at the end of last year when playbook got going we ended something like 7 TD to 3 to 4 FG in RZ and in playoffs we were like 3 RZ TD to 0 RZ FG

would be nice to have one but RZ isnt an issue

3rd down is and for that we need a good slot WR

Yeah it is.

The red zone success in the playoffs was in large part because our backs were against the wall. Scoring then was never an issue. Our issue is when the score is 10-3 and we start playing conservative.

Over the course of the year we had tons of problem in the red zone and we had a total of 17 touchdowns from our passing game. It's obviousl.y a problem.

3rd downs is a problem too but when you do better on 1st and 2nd down you tend to convert more 3rd downs. On 2nd downs Smith had a 61% completion ratio and a 89 rating. We need improvement across the board out of passing game.