Enemarty

This is an absolutely true statement were Modrak currently looking for a job with another employer and trying to sell himself. However, Modrak presently is not looking for a job. He is employed by the one person who would know whether ten years of first round drafting futility was Modrak's fault or the fault of someone else. So you're left with two possibilities, Ralph is so loyal to Tom that he ignores his incompetence, in which case, calls for his termination are wasted. Or perhaps Tom sets a pretty nice draft board but is only allowed more say in the decision-making process in the later rounds. As a result, the decision-makers, including now Mr. Nix, realize that Tom provides a valuable service. I dont know the answer, but the almost immediate dismissal of John Guy along with the various leaks concerning who Modrak might have drafted had it been his decision suggest there may be something to the second option. So, to play a little devil's advocate (apologize for the length): 2002 - Williams - consensus top ten pick. We were all asking for OT; McKinnie had attitude issues. Good pick - bad player. Although he turned out a real bust, can't fault Modrak or Donahoe. 2003 - McGahee - this has Donahoe written all over it. A risk that might have been worth it, but should have focused on need. 2004 - Evans - solid pick. Had a strong defense and an aging Moulds and Bledsoe needed more weapons. - Losman - no way does Modrak make the call to move back into the first. Donahoe panic - but it could have been Ralph worrying about Bledsoe's contract and wanting someone in place. Too bad, as we might have gotten A. Rogers in 2005. 2006 - Whitner - Jauron prints all over this. Frankly, had there not been so many terrible picks both before and after Whitner, we might not be so harsh on this one. - McCargo - again, I don't see Modrak making the decision to move up to get this guy. In fact, this pick is a direct result of picking Whitner over Ngata. We should have gone DT then S, but picking Whitner leads to this wasted pick. Modrak may have graded McCargo too high, but moving up to get him comes from higher authority. However, Modrak certainly has to take his share of blame for this, as a more realistic grade might have dissuaded the decision-makers from making this move. 2007 - Lynch - the McGahee pick directly leads to this. I actually like Lynch and have no problem with the pick given the circumstances at the time. Certainly not a Modrak issue. 2008 - McKelvin - Jauron and we'll see. Like Whitner, had other picks worked out better, we could live with this. I will say that McKelvin over Cromartie at the time can't be viewed as foolish. And taking Jackson (who the Eagles took at 49) over Hardy when we already had Parrish and needed a big man against strong AFC East CBs would have caused a major meltdown on this board in 2008. Hindsight is 20/20. 2009 - Maybin - Modrak on record about this. Frankly, his going on record at all speaks volumes about what he thought at the time and suggests his influence in the early rounds was not as great as we might think. - Wood - likely one of Jauron's better decisions. At least Modrak had him graded properly. 2010 - Spiller - Nix pick and may yet be a good one. May not have been the wisest pick, but if Modrak graded him high, so did everyong else. As for the later rounds, those are always going to be more challenging, but imagine how Modrak would be viewed if picks like Byrd, Williams, Parrish, Levitre, Brad Butler, even Poz were filling in around first round blue chippers instead of trying to fill in for them.

we could sign him and after his first practice, put him on IR....

and in the unusual world of NFL relationships, the year we drafted Dokes, we traded our other number 1 (3rd overall) to Cincy for Sherman White, who the older set will recall was a fairly productive D lineman for us into the early 80s. ... and of course, Cincy had drafted Sherman No. 2 overall in the 1972 draft, one spot after old Walt. One might think that with the Devlin pick that we got for Walt, our 1972 first round pick turned out ok for the franchise in the end. Add in the fact that the no. 2 guy after Patulski gave us a decent 7 years from 1977 on and things don't look so bad. Of course, had Patulski been a dominant player and stayed with us after 75, we probably don't trade our number 1 pick in 1977 to Cincy for Sherman White and don't waste our other no. 1 on Phil Dokes. Indeed, it gets even worse, as although Sherman gave us good service, with the 3rd overall pick in the 1977 draft, Cincy drafted Eddie Edwards who retired 12 years later as the all time Cincy sack leader. Then again, White was released before the 84 season, while Edwards was coming off a 13-sack season in 83 and a 9-sack season in 84 and would go on to produce for a few more seasons. If Buff had drafted Edwards in 77 instead of trading for White, who knows whether we have the number one pick in 1985, or whether we would have used it on a DE from Va Tech... So ... if one was really silly or really drunk, they could make an argument that with the first pick in the 1972 draft, the Buffalo Bills selected the all-time NFL sack leader ... but that he didn't actually suit up for the team until 1985.

+1 - also, Walt's was my first player autograph.

I agree. The man does not pull punches. Indeed, even his statement on kelsey is informative, using the term good rather than great, indicating that the man knows his football talent, but recognizes other factors when determining who to keep on the team. You may disagree with him, but you can't say he didn't explain himself, nor can you say his position is unreasonable.

... among all of our injured tight ends, he was a leader in the jacuzzi...

Your use of moran and barometer made me laugh ...

best post of the year.

I'm sorry but this is all a little too much. I thought what Leonidas wrote was very funny stuff. Sure, I can see where it would rub Tim the wrong way and I don't blame Tim for one moment from taking some time away from the board as a way of demonstrating his displeasure with the post. But it was hardly a personal attack. Leonidas took advantage of Tim's position to express a real frustration from the fan who does not happen to support the "big clubs." As a fan of European Football, having sports coverage cater to the "big club" is all too familiar and evokes the same type of commentary from Leonidas's counterparts on the other side of the pond, complete with the type of wit demonstrated by Leonidas in his post. What troubles me more is the reaction of some on this site who forget that we are citizens of the United States and Leonidas is free to express himself in any manner he chooses so long as certain legal lines are not crossed, which in my useless opinion, were not in this case. I stopped reading posts on PPP because of the intolerance of posters masked under the label of patriotism. We should not allow a similar "censorship" to form in this forum. Rant over.

Wellw, Iw forw onew thinkw thatw isw aw veryw nicew apologyw.

just have him tape your avatar to the inside of his helmet... on a more serious note, the European "football" giants Manchester United and Real Madrid made millions in jersey sales in Asia through aggressive marketing. Imagine what Russ could do if he played the Wang angle the right way....

Green Bay area reporter drumming up support for a trade to ... Green Bay. yada yada yada

For me watching Chavous was bittersweet, as his commentary was excellent, but everytime he spoke, I was reminded of how old I am, recalling a prior draft day experience when I was hoping he would drop to us. Of course, we ended up getting Cowert, so all was not lost ... well, that was the 1st for RJ year, so yeah, all was pretty much lost ... but we didn't know it at the time.

I can't stand Rich Eisen (sp?) but I have to agree that as a whole NFL Channel blew ESPN away. Picking up on what you and others have said, I would have preferred having simply Berman, Jackson and Kiper and maybe Jaws for special commentary on the QBs. Young just never shuts up and although Gruden occasionally adds an insightful comment, most of the time he simply says "he is the greatest player I've ever seen." Back when it was mainly Chris and Mel, the show really worked.

I agree and will add, as others already have, that a major part of the upgrade on offense has also been put into action with Chan himself. We have weapons on offense, but Dick and Co. didn't know how to use them.

I'm sure Russ has taken note. $$$

thank you.

post of the weekend. says it all really.

I didn't say that, but I wouldn't have any problem giving up a 6th for him. We use the next 3-4 picks to firm up both line positions, maybe include a LB and I'm happy. Campbell would be a bonus if he were had for a late pick. If Chan can make Tyler Thigpen look good, well, Campbell would do just fine for next year.

I hope they are gone. Then its all line all the time. Six linemen and Spiller. Actually, probably five lineman, Spiller and Campbell for a 6th when the Redskins get nervous after we pick in the 5th.

I disagree that Patulski was the worst ever as he showed promise the first couple of seasons and, more importantly, his was the first player autograph I ever got. But putting that aside, looking at the "pick" as it were, rather than the player, things get a little more complicated and, for me at least, temper somewhat the disappointment of Walt not becoming a 1970s "Bruuuce." First, although Patulski didn't turn out to be Bruce, he wasn't that bad. He actually played ok for a few years and when we traded him in 1976, we used the draft pick to get Joe Devlin, one of the all-time great Bills, so combining Patulski's four years with Devlin's career, the pick gave the team real value, hardly a bust pick, even if the player might not have lived up to expectations. Of course, another angle to that draft involves what we did on the d-line after trading Patulski, which was to acquire Sherman White from the Bengals. White had been drafted in the same 72 draft by the Bengals, right after Patulski at no. 2 and while Patulski had a career ending knee injury with the Cards in 76, White sticks around being fairly productive until 1983. That all sounds pretty good. Devlin's career and White giving good service on the d-line until 1983. Unfortunately, getting White to beef up the Patulski-less d-line cost us our first round pick in 1977. OK, so now the 1972 Patulski pick is looking a little more dodgy but for two things, Bills management and, oddly, the Fish. First, if you look at what we did in the 1977 draft, you'll agree that these people couldn't be trusted with picks, even in a 12 round draft, because it took us 12 rounds to finally select a decent player, Charlie Romes. We took Phil Dokes in the first (pick came from a trade with Detroit), another favorite in this thread, but did end up getting a three-time pro bowler in the seventh, you know, Mike Nelms, who we cut before the season and who would go on to be a stand-out kick returner for the Redskins. Second, in 1972, the Fish drafted Patulski's ND teammate Mike Kadish with the 25th pick. Kadish spent the year on the practice squad in Miami and was then traded to the Bills the next year for Irv Goode. Kadish gave us nine seasons on the d-line, while Goode, whom we had acquired the prior year from the Cards, but who didn't play because of injury, retired after only two more years with the Fish. Hey, we actually got one thing over on the Fish in the 70s. Oh, and a little something about the Patulski trade ... according to web lore, Walt's last year with us wasn't that good, except for the game he had against the Cardinals, who gave up only a handful of sacks that year, two of which were to Patulski who dominated Dierdorf in that game. Of course, after such a performance, the Cards traded for him after the season and although he failed to solidify their d-line, we got Devlin who became the Dierdorf of our o-line.

Based upon the two interviews, I'd switch Patulski and Cousineau on the list.

that's the Nevada thread, this is the Georgia thread...

I love it. The Deadskins have been jerking Jason around for years and only act when the all-powerful TBD starts spreading a trade rumour. So, who's the next average NFL quarterback we feel deserves a pay raise by his team...

I agree. After hearing some hype early in the fall, I made sure I watched Stanford when I could and saw enough of Gerhard to know that, in the words of Buddy Nix, he is a football player. I'd take him in the third, but I have a feeling he'll be gone late in the second.