Brandon Albert

[Mike3207]

Ok, he's always there when I pick at 14 for the Bears. My GM suggests I pick him, and he has a potential of 94-96 in my system. His learning is 61, so that's a concern I have. I think he is the best available at that spot, but his below-average learning does concern me some. Should I go ahead and make the pick?

[coachchris]

Re: Brandon Albert

Ok, he's always there when I pick at 14 for the Bears. My GM suggests I pick him, and he has a potential of 94-96 in my system. His learning is 61, so that's a concern I have. I think he is the best available at that spot, but his below-average learning does concern me some. Should I go ahead and make the pick?

I have never used Brandon Albert but with a 94-96 potential I think you would be in good shape drafting him if you need a tackle. I am not sure on BA specifically but many times rookies learning with start low (61) but can go all the way up to the 90's as a max. If this is the case you will be fine because his learning should rise pretty quickly. If he was maxed at 61 I might be a little concerned.

[Mike3207]

Re: Brandon Albert

He's a guard, not a tackle but he would upgrade my offensive line. I'll go ahead and make the pick.

[MachinaObscura]

Re: Brandon Albert

I've picked him up and moved him to LT before. Good pick at 14, although I would trade down and get some good players at later picks. Scheuning at RG is often availiable as late as the 6th round and his potebtial is 87, although he starts around 71 or so (balanced philosophy)

[CW McGraw]

Re: Brandon Albert

On my Chiefs career, he was a solid starter on my elite OL. I don't recall having issues with him getting the playbook down.

[coachchris]

Re: Brandon Albert

He's a guard, not a tackle but he would upgrade my offensive line. I'll go ahead and make the pick.

That's right he is a guard when he comes out but I think the chiefs moved him to LT on my roster set. Either way hes probably a good pick for either position.

[DocBean]

Re: Brandon Albert

He's good.

Chiefs play him at LT. You can play him in either position, on either side of the ball.

He's my LT, and rated at like 93, I'm going to move him over to RT since I can't seem to find a good one, and draft Oshinowo at LT.

[Mike3207]

Re: Brandon Albert

Bump. I recently re-drafted him again, and I wanted to re-read the impressions on him again.

[Guggy107]

Re: Brandon Albert

most other teams id say yes, but youre the bears. in my opinion, the bears need playmakers. specifically a RB and a QB. QBs may not be an option at #14, but there should be a few RBs out there for the taking. id suggest going that route over albert, though he may be the best available. of course, as a rule, i draft based on need over best available

[Mike3207]

Re: Brandon Albert

most other teams id say yes, but youre the bears. in my opinion, the bears need playmakers. specifically a RB and a QB. QBs may not be an option at #14, but there should be a few RBs out there for the taking. id suggest going that route over albert, though he may be the best available. of course, as a rule, i draft based on need over best available

Most of the RBs and Qbs have a few flaws in them in the 2008 draft. You usually miss out on McFadden, Mendenhall has a low carry rating and tends to fumble the ball, and Felix Jones has low trucking. I really think Ray Rice is the way to go at HB in that draft if you miss out on McFadden. The 2008 draft is really weak at guard, and I don't want to overpay in FA for a guard. The only real problem with drafting Albert is that there may be better guards upcoming in future drafts. As for QB, Woodson is a good temporary pick until you can get better.

[Demonolith]

Re: Brandon Albert

If I splurge for any position on offense, it is almost certainly the offensive line. Skill positions like runningbacks and receivers have far less impact on the game because their primary function is dependant upon whether or not you're passing or running. Whereas your offensive linemen are involved on EVERY offensive play, no matter what. Also add in the facts that:

1. Runningbacks in general have very short relative careers.
2. In practically every draft, there tends to be some good runningbacks found in the later rounds. An all around great offensive lineman is a much rarer talent than a good runningback.

That was just my philosophy when I was playing this game. Offensive line (specifically the tackles) were my #1 priority. There are other philosophies that work well too, that's part of the beauty and charm of this game.

[edward_1385]

Re: Brandon Albert

The bears would need o-linemen just as bad as any other position... Brandon Albert is a very good player third only to Long and Clady (2008 draft only)... He is the strongest and tends to be pretty decent in negotions and not to mention he is interchangable across the entire o-line and that is what I personally covet more than anything... So drafting an elite linemen in the first round is a no brainer in my opioion...

[Guggy107]

Re: Brandon Albert

you all do make good points for drafting albert, and yeah ill concede that woodson is a good pickup at qb later in the draft. the one other arguement i can make against picking albert is that OL in head coach are for the most part useless. what im saying is there isnt that much difference between a good OL and a bad one. this was tested last year by a few people on here.

personally, i dont play the game with that in mind. i still try to draft good OL and pretend that having a high rated OL is beneficial, because that keeps it realistic for me. but just in case you are more the "take what the game gives you" type player, this could be a good arguement for not drafting albert high in the draft.

id pick ray rice! i made the mistake of taking felix jones in the first round with the bears, and he was an injury-prone bust for me.

[kcarr]

Re: Brandon Albert

most other teams id say yes, but youre the bears. in my opinion, the bears need playmakers. specifically a RB and a QB. QBs may not be an option at #14, but there should be a few RBs out there for the taking. id suggest going that route over albert, though he may be the best available. of course, as a rule, i draft based on need over best available

I am going to disagree here. Brandon is one of the few players in this draft I feel are worthy of being a 1st round pick for my team, him, the 2 longs, and kenny philips. I have drafted other guys in the first and had success but those are the only guys really way better than others in their position.

Brandon is a very good guard in pretty much any system and is good at any spot along the line in about any system. He is definitely a good building block for the oline and much better than what you can get later.

As for running backs yeah, mendenhall or jones or johnson or a few others will be around but they aren't that much better than the guys you can get later. Rice is a very good all around back. Omon, who I am using in my current franchise, starts off really weak especially in learning but put him in in one or two sets using straightforward runs and by the end of year one I will have his learning over 60. By the end of year 2 it will probably over 80 and near his max of I think 91, his vision is weak but will max at 91, his trucking is the one thing he starts decent (high 80s) in and will become a 96. He also doesn't have any glaring weaknesses other than speed and even with his slow speed he can be a very good between the tackles runner and has 2 70+ yard TDs for me.

At QB this is about as weak of class as you will find and I would suggest a veteran FA if available for the year. Otherwise brohm if he stays healthy or woodson are pretty much your best bets if you want to be able to throw the ball.

The only way in your position I see you really getting a star in the 1st round is albert or dropping back to take phillips. Brandon will help your offense all around for years to come.

[edward_1385]

Re: Brandon Albert

Again I state ditto, except for the Omon argument I have had him and he never really gets it... (used him as my starting back with the titans)

I have seen a difference between bad lineman and great linemen... Average and good are hard to really tell between them, but with great lineman I have had less sacks given up, more time to throw and a lot better production from the running game no matter who is running...

But this is just my personal experence...