Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22

Thread: Jon Runyan Jr

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    FORT COLLINS COLORADO
    Posts
    8,603

    Jon Runyan Jr

    we need this kid he is projected a 4th round guy, but i feel he has the toughness and skills to slid right into a competitions and potentionaly start at RG next season

    oakland raders gm
    latavis murray trade bait

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    992
    If not, he's worth a 4th just a legit depth that can man both G spots

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    FORT COLLINS COLORADO
    Posts
    8,603
    Quote Originally Posted by Alaskajoe View Post
    If not, he's worth a 4th just a legit depth that can man both G spots
    i think he pushes for a starting OG spot. if not i agree he will make great depth and guy who can step up if bolles or wilkinson disapoint at RG. he is one of my top targets this draft i would even think of grabing in the third if we need to.

    oakland raders gm
    latavis murray trade bait

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    2,471
    I hope Denver Draft's Him !

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    5,786
    Sorry am I reading his measurables right?

    6ft4 and 245lbs?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Ozarks
    Posts
    13,702
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich_C View Post
    Sorry am I reading his measurables right?

    6ft4 and 245lbs?
    6-5 310 as far as I know.
    My Boss is a Jewish Carpenter

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    5,786
    Quote Originally Posted by FL BRONCO View Post
    6-5 310 as far as I know.
    Better but I am still concerned about size. When you look at what we are going to need to do for the next 2 years in all likelihood - we need immovable objects who move others against their will. That is in large part due to the fact that we'll need to run the ball and do it well even when other teams know we're going to do it. This will allow Lock to develop properly as an NFL QB.

    Seeing as he's projected mid rounds (3-4) even if he's undersized an OG in the NFL who's played OT is a huge asset even if they end up as a backup.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    FORT COLLINS COLORADO
    Posts
    8,603
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich_C View Post
    Sorry am I reading his measurables right?

    6ft4 and 245lbs?
    That was out of high school he is more like 6-5 320. He is also a mauler. Just watch any michigan game or the east and west shrine game and tell me he looks smalls. Cause he doesn't

    Also if 6'5 310 is to small your insane. I guess yanda whi is 6'4 305 is to small to be a guard. What about Joe Thuney is he 6'5 308. If 310 is to small you are insane and check the some best guards in the game. They are around that size.

    The question mark around his game is more his athletic ability and how well can he pull in the nfl. Then size or holding up in the run game.
    Last edited by Kyousukeneko; 01-22-2020 at 11:05 AM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    936
    We need a C/G that is for sure. Leary will be let go. McGovern may possibly leave. I feel we should resign McGovern and draft the best Center/ Guard in the second round. Either the LSU center, or the Wisconsin center who ever is available... heck, I wouldn't even mind a trade up in the second or end of 1st to get the specific individual the team covets. By all reports we will roll with our existing tackles....so we will need a quality swing tackle , possibly through Free Agency , but at least a fourth round project that Munch can develop. With all this said, I think that leaves Runyan to someone else....just my two thoughts. { remember, we still have Schlotman and Wilkerson as back-ups at the interior of the line }

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,068
    Quote Originally Posted by skeeter01 View Post
    We need a C/G that is for sure. Leary will be let go. McGovern may possibly leave. I feel we should resign McGovern and draft the best Center/ Guard in the second round. Either the LSU center, or the Wisconsin center who ever is available... heck, I wouldn't even mind a trade up in the second or end of 1st to get the specific individual the team covets. By all reports we will roll with our existing tackles....so we will need a quality swing tackle , possibly through Free Agency , but at least a fourth round project that Munch can develop. With all this said, I think that leaves Runyan to someone else....just my two thoughts. { remember, we still have Schlotman and Wilkerson as back-ups at the interior of the line }
    Yes we need a C/G more as starter. Lloyd Cushenberry is a Day 1 starter.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    FORT COLLINS COLORADO
    Posts
    8,603
    Quote Originally Posted by skeeter01 View Post
    We need a C/G that is for sure. Leary will be let go. McGovern may possibly leave. I feel we should resign McGovern and draft the best Center/ Guard in the second round. Either the LSU center, or the Wisconsin center who ever is available... heck, I wouldn't even mind a trade up in the second or end of 1st to get the specific individual the team covets. By all reports we will roll with our existing tackles....so we will need a quality swing tackle , possibly through Free Agency , but at least a fourth round project that Munch can develop. With all this said, I think that leaves Runyan to someone else....just my two thoughts. { remember, we still have Schlotman and Wilkerson as back-ups at the interior of the line }
    We need alot of help more then 1 or 2 players need like 4 or 5 new line men. Also I don't think schlotmqn can be trusted to do anything he is undersized and a forever depth guy. He is also a bit undersized for a guard. We need a lt a rg on the starting cause bolles cant be the lt moving forward and Leary needs to go asap. We also need a back up rt cause james can't be counted on to be healthy. We also need a center cause McGovern has struggled with snapping for the past few years. Either way I would be disappointed if we don't go super oline heavy cause we desperately need it

    oakland raders gm
    latavis murray trade bait

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    936
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyousukeneko View Post
    We need alot of help more then 1 or 2 players need like 4 or 5 new line men. Also I don't think schlotmqn can be trusted to do anything he is undersized and a forever depth guy. He is also a bit undersized for a guard. We need a lt a rg on the starting cause bolles cant be the lt moving forward and Leary needs to go asap. We also need a back up rt cause james can't be counted on to be healthy. We also need a center cause McGovern has struggled with snapping for the past few years. Either way I would be disappointed if we don't go super oline heavy cause we desperately need it
    I respectfully disagree with your thoughts. I think the brass in Denver Bronco headquarters do too. There have been reports that I've read and I'm sure you have too, once Drew Lock was inserted into the line-up, his quick release alone improved the line play. The team appeared to "want to play" for Drew and / or the Munchak effect finally started to kick in. Yes, Schlotman is a career back up, so we have our back up. We have Wilkinson that could fill a spot if either guard goes down. Bolles had shown improvement at the end of the season....they stated his stats for the last 6 games were above the "average" tackle, { they also stated he hasn't missed any playing time } and James has to be given the chance to perform next year....but yes we need a back-up tackle capable of replacing him if need be. So.....re-sign McGovern who no one feels played poorly last year except in pre-season......draft a starter at guard / center in Cushenbury or Biadasz , he can replace Leary and draft a Tackle in the 4rth round that Munch feels he can develop, done. 2 draft picks. Lets see what happens come April. I cannot wait !! Just hope we get Ruggs the 3rd in the first.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    FORT COLLINS COLORADO
    Posts
    8,603
    Quote Originally Posted by skeeter01 View Post
    I respectfully disagree with your thoughts. I think the brass in Denver Bronco headquarters do too. There have been reports that I've read and I'm sure you have too, once Drew Lock was inserted into the line-up, his quick release alone improved the line play. The team appeared to "want to play" for Drew and / or the Munchak effect finally started to kick in. Yes, Schlotman is a career back up, so we have our back up. We have Wilkinson that could fill a spot if either guard goes down. Bolles had shown improvement at the end of the season....they stated his stats for the last 6 games were above the "average" tackle, { they also stated he hasn't missed any playing time } and James has to be given the chance to perform next year....but yes we need a back-up tackle capable of replacing him if need be. So.....re-sign McGovern who no one feels played poorly last year except in pre-season......draft a starter at guard / center in Cushenbury or Biadasz , he can replace Leary and draft a Tackle in the 4rth round that Munch feels he can develop, done. 2 draft picks. Lets see what happens come April. I cannot wait !! Just hope we get Ruggs the 3rd in the first.
    Bolles showed signs of improvement at the end of last year also. then regress to crap. he is a below average tackle who needs to be gone. we also have had a bad line for a while. you wanna just talk about passing stats. i don't see much in the run either we got totally dominated in the trenches in both chiefs game and could use alot more push on the line. either way if Bolles is the starting LT i may consider supporting a new team. he is a below average tackle who is older and doesn't have much upside. Bolles will be 28 by the time the season starts and has shown to be a problem at LT. he needs to be gone and moved from LT more then anything. to say Bolles should start next season leaves a bad taste in my mouth. we also have no Depth at Tackle just using a fourth round on a guy is a mistake. we will get another college guy who will probably struggle if james gets injuried and we need to have insurance for him. Either way we need at least 2 NEw starters for the o-line regardless if lock is the QB or not. not to mention Depth at tackle and Gaurd. i want an O-line that will dominate in the trenches and saying we have that or are even close is kinda delusional

    oakland raders gm
    latavis murray trade bait

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    936
    Sayre Bedinger agrees with me. He just posted a new mock. Riggs in the first. Center/Gaurd in the second,...then goes Tackle in the third. One round earlier than me. Bolles will play one more year , he is on his rookie contract. Feel free to become a fan for another team when we roll with Bolles. I hear the Raiders need new fans.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    FORT COLLINS COLORADO
    Posts
    8,603
    Quote Originally Posted by skeeter01 View Post
    Sayre Bedinger agrees with me. He just posted a new mock. Riggs in the first. Center/Gaurd in the second,...then goes Tackle in the third. One round earlier than me. Bolles will play one more year , he is on his rookie contract. Feel free to become a fan for another team when we roll with Bolles. I hear the Raiders need new fans.
    Bolles starting would be a huge mistake. why would you trust a young franchise QB blind side to be Blocked by a below Average Tackle. it would be a huge mistake. expecially some one who will be a 29 by his first contract. still was second in the league with holding calls. we will see those happen more. also see our Franchise QB get hit more. he has a quick release ya. you still want him to feel safe. you also don't want him get hit regardless if he gets the ball off or not. Bolles need to go and any one that feels otherwise is wrong. it will be proven next season when he stints up the joint for a third year. any other OT would have been benched a while ago. it is ridiculous he is still starting at LT. and even more Ridiculous that peoiple want him at LT next year. lets be a top ten team for holding calls again. thats the way you have a successful offense. not to mention how they can just kill drives completely.

    if you think Bolles play was acceptible this year i want what ever you where smoking.

    oakland raders gm
    latavis murray trade bait

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •