Let's not forget there's free agency to deal with this year, too. We can look forward to the FA period instead of dreading it this year. We'll finally be able to bring in some talent, instead of waving it all away, so we won't have to rely completely on the draft for fresh meat, as it were...
we need a
FA WR
a FA Safety
a FA LB
and a FA OL
the QB and RB can be drafted
FA WR
a FA Safety
a FA LB
and a FA OL
the QB and RB can be drafted
Carpy said:
But you have to remember that the draft is an inexact science. Getting quantity is the only way to ensure quality. Don't listen to these people who say the top 3 players are all franchise players. I guarantee at least one ends up mediocre or worse be it via injuries or otherwise.
And also, I wouldn't count on FA... it's very hard to come out ahead really. Most signings just hurt teams. All of the successful teams build their team though the draft. It's no coinsidence.
I think bringing a QB in and playing him immediately is a mixed bag, but letting a guy learn for a couple of years has proven to work a little better. Let a guy learn how to be a pro before you ask him to lead a huddle...
Other positions, not so much, but QB seems to work...
BTW, is the ENTIRE USC OFFENSIVE LINE ENTERING THE DRAFT???
Other positions, not so much, but QB seems to work...
BTW, is the ENTIRE USC OFFENSIVE LINE ENTERING THE DRAFT???
Carpy said:
i strongly agree. take young bush or leinart no question about it
I think it's insane to think that a player gets better by watching games than playing. My theory is that some qb's have fragile minds and having a bad season their rookie season stays in their head the next year.
ya know ,I'm not sure it really matters
vet or rook, it's a matter of how quickly the player adapts
vet or rook, it's a matter of how quickly the player adapts
I agree with Carpy's statement about quality v quantity. Sure the draft is a crap shoot, but I don't think another year flooded with youth is the answer.
I stick at #3 and am very happy with Leinart, Bush or Young. Again if only one of them came out and we actually got them, many would consider it immediately one of the best drafts ever. No way should we pass.
I stick at #3 and am very happy with Leinart, Bush or Young. Again if only one of them came out and we actually got them, many would consider it immediately one of the best drafts ever. No way should we pass.
Now, I do understand the point about a pick for today v. the future. That being said, if Bush is there and both QBs are gone (a very real possibility) then that stops that right there. I think OL (the other consideration if we fell back to 4-6, say) is deep enough that I'm content to take that player in the 2nd or even 3rd if Hopkins stays.
Another consideration, and my probable off-season strategy, is to shop Volek for sure, possibly Henry, possibly Kinney, possibly Tank or LT if that were possible. If I can get a couple of picks in the 2-4 rd range, then I use those additional picks to trade back up, maybe even back into round one. Now I'm looking for a top safety or linebacker. If I can get LenDale, assuming I've already got a QB and have traded Henry, then I do it.
Given the article mentioned drafting a QB for a future coach/GM, I'm less hesitant about trading say, a future 2nd rounder, to be able to get back in the first round and take a guy I think will start immediately. Just in case one of the two (Jeff/Floyd) is not there in the future, if I were them, I wouldn't mind potentially screwing (sort of) a future replacement in order to save my job. But I've also just served my present and possibly future needs by doing so.
So ideally, being conservative, I get a third for Volek (maybe a two - Jets, for example), and a 4th for Henry (maybe a three - Arizona, for example). I try to avoid giving up this year's 2nd rounder since someone who falls out of the first round will fall to us in the 2nd. Now I can use my 3rd and one of my 4ths to move up in the third; or those same picks and a future two plus a player to get into the end of the 1st; if I have an extra 2nd and a 4th, I use that with a future two to move up into the first - for example. Just thinking out loud. But that's basically what I'm thinking. If I can deal Volek and Henry to the Jets or Raiders or Cardinals (Henry would start in Arizona and Billy shouldn't take long to surpass Warner, and get to throw to Bolden/Fitzgerald) for their 2nd, then that's what I'm all about. Now I've got a two behind my own. If I have a two that high, I take that plus next year's two and target Michael Huff/Chad Greenway/Darnell Bing/DeMeco Ryans/Marcus McNeill/Antonio Cromartie etc. etc. etc. Or of course just sit there if it looks like the right people are falling.
Another consideration, and my probable off-season strategy, is to shop Volek for sure, possibly Henry, possibly Kinney, possibly Tank or LT if that were possible. If I can get a couple of picks in the 2-4 rd range, then I use those additional picks to trade back up, maybe even back into round one. Now I'm looking for a top safety or linebacker. If I can get LenDale, assuming I've already got a QB and have traded Henry, then I do it.
Given the article mentioned drafting a QB for a future coach/GM, I'm less hesitant about trading say, a future 2nd rounder, to be able to get back in the first round and take a guy I think will start immediately. Just in case one of the two (Jeff/Floyd) is not there in the future, if I were them, I wouldn't mind potentially screwing (sort of) a future replacement in order to save my job. But I've also just served my present and possibly future needs by doing so.
So ideally, being conservative, I get a third for Volek (maybe a two - Jets, for example), and a 4th for Henry (maybe a three - Arizona, for example). I try to avoid giving up this year's 2nd rounder since someone who falls out of the first round will fall to us in the 2nd. Now I can use my 3rd and one of my 4ths to move up in the third; or those same picks and a future two plus a player to get into the end of the 1st; if I have an extra 2nd and a 4th, I use that with a future two to move up into the first - for example. Just thinking out loud. But that's basically what I'm thinking. If I can deal Volek and Henry to the Jets or Raiders or Cardinals (Henry would start in Arizona and Billy shouldn't take long to surpass Warner, and get to throw to Bolden/Fitzgerald) for their 2nd, then that's what I'm all about. Now I've got a two behind my own. If I have a two that high, I take that plus next year's two and target Michael Huff/Chad Greenway/Darnell Bing/DeMeco Ryans/Marcus McNeill/Antonio Cromartie etc. etc. etc. Or of course just sit there if it looks like the right people are falling.
Does Fisher not owe Chow something for coming to Tennessee? Wouldn't Chow be the one to make the choice as to which QB works best in his system? And truthfully isn't Mac an ankle injury away from being done? I'm betting we take Cutler over VY..we may trade down but Cutler will be the choice....
Nash
I'm glad you didn't say Leinart
because I don't think Norm is enamored with Matt
I'm glad you didn't say Leinart
because I don't think Norm is enamored with Matt
There's no rule that says we have to keep all of our rookies signed. If you make 10 selections, just keep the ones that work out and ditch the rest.
We have a better chance of getting solid starters by making more selections as opposed to less higher selections, though... History doesn't lie.
We have a better chance of getting solid starters by making more selections as opposed to less higher selections, though... History doesn't lie.
Titans2008 said:
well, historically Jeff hasn't done that
hell, he's hung on to players LOOONG after they proved useless
Those of you old enough to remember some of the older drafts would probably laugh hysterically if you were to go back and read some of the press some players received as "sure thing franchise players" compared to where they are now.
I remember a lot of people who thought Brian Urlacher was a "project" who might have to play safety from lack of size. I remember the people who thought Dwight Freeney was too small to play D-Line in the NFL. I remember the people who thought Drew Bree's arm was too weak and talking about he was a "product of the system". I remember the people who thought Peter Warrick was the surest pick at receiver ever. I'm sure you all remember the unblockable Courtney Brown. The list goes on and on...
I remember a lot of people who thought Brian Urlacher was a "project" who might have to play safety from lack of size. I remember the people who thought Dwight Freeney was too small to play D-Line in the NFL. I remember the people who thought Drew Bree's arm was too weak and talking about he was a "product of the system". I remember the people who thought Peter Warrick was the surest pick at receiver ever. I'm sure you all remember the unblockable Courtney Brown. The list goes on and on...
Nash said:
Pacman was a fine player pick, but Chow was pissed we passed on MW. I don't think he'll be too happy if he's blocked out of decisions consistently. But block out Schwartz, by all means. Munchak had more influence in the draft than Chow. Wonder if he was happy with the WR picks.
Really? Got a source for that? Of course he said before the draft he'd like Mike but he is an OC, he wants as much talent on that side of the ball he can get. I don't remember a comment at all from him on the Jones choice.GLinks said:
I remember hearing him say positive things regarding the 3 rooks
i do not remember him complaining about Mike
i do not remember him complaining about Mike
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
