colin

it all counts guys. the likeyhood of a bust out by a guy with a poor 40 time is much higher than the same guy with a good 40 time. speed is a great thing to have on a team.

like dibs has pointed out (and by my count a few times) the ideas touted by posters about what possy to or not to take at what pick are just not founded. it's about the player. you are not drafting a DE, you are drafting the guy who plays DE at that slot. i love the idea of getting a freeney type pure pass rusher off the edge to provide more passrush and to rotate in and out of our line, but is the 3rd rated guy in the draft really that good off the edge? those 2 guys didn't strike me as terrors when i watched them play. a really good WR can make a HUGE impact on ur O. toss in a decent TE and we have an O with more guys who can hurt you since when we had a healthy moulds and price. that will trump a middling or even good DE every time. the point about aaron is good as well. he's not good and dissapears too much until you actually compare him to every other DE in the NFL. bruce smith was the best rusher and far and away the best 3-4 DE ever. asking a de to play like he did is asking your running back to break big runs like barry sanders did but with no line support. it's just not realistic.

cb's really are the best high draft value. they can play right away, very often are starters on their new team (and an upgrade). they can be big impact players, they can really super charge your pass D, and they are soooo expensive to replace. as much as a good pass rush helps your corners, corners help your pass rush. the giants went from OK to great rushing the passer by adding a couple of corners. we went from very good to terrible by losing clements. good teams have good corners.

krumrie was a great/very good player and is a guy who breathes and lives football. as far as being a coach it is hard to say, but tim anderson was absolutely horrible and not once did he show any pro ability.

i don't see how harvey is good enough to take him over WR just because. he can play, but the only way he is worth that pick for our team is if he is a sudden tenacious pass rusher. doesn't really look that to me. if kelly is healthy, or thomas projects as a real stud, then they are absolutely worth drafting at the 11th pick. just because some draft guy thinks they could be had at te 18th pick or whatever doesn't mean you can just force the 18th picking team to trade with you or anything, if you have no other player you want to draft over a guy and reasonable doubt that he'll be there with your highest available down trade partner, then taking him makes sense. that's what indy did with freeney, and if the WR there is better than the other guys by enough, that's what we'll do this season.

i always like a pass rusher, but if our FO likes a WR they will take him. we clearly need O playmakers more than D line, the question is do have a WR good enough to draft at 11 (which means can we get him some other way, not does he project to a lower slot, because if we miss him for a value then we are still short a wr). i'd take boldin in a second, is he even available?

there certainly was a bail out tho -- the people long bear stearns credit were bailed out in a huge way. taking financial risk is certainly not easy money, and it mischaracterises it to say that it is making money without producing anything. risk taking is important for economic transactions and the economy as a whole -- the rub in this instance is people who took the ultimately wrong risk of being long BS credit don't get the sting they should.

without speaking specifically about hardy, you have got to be joking! i know you want to show your good guy badge to the world, but more than half of all domestic assaults are initiated by women. there are plenty of women that will scratch your eyes out, hit you in the face with a frying pan, or stab you. would you just sit there like a chump and get knifed up?

clearly you need to read the board more. aaron is terrible and overrated, and only gets coverage sacks (which means anybody on earth could have gotten them, and the WRs just stopped running). smart and insightful posters are quick to point out how he dissapears at times, is on the bench resting sometimes, and doesn't generate consitent pressure. good DE's generate pressure nearly every play, and we can deduce form that opposing qbs of teams with above average DEs complete less than 30% of their passes and good DEs average ~ 35 sacks per year.

leinart is a party kid who doesn't have the drive or the dedication to the game. staying one more year taking one jerk off course shows this kid is a cream puff. his team already won the crown a couple times, he had the heisman already, he just came back cuz he liked being a star and was expecting a cakewalk to the top. one thing to stay because you have unfinished biz, but he stayed because he figured he'd just go to the big dance when he felt like it. compare that the fire that adrian peterson has while being a similarly high profile guy, leinart is a fruity softy.

if kelly is healthy he will be a FRIKKEN MONSTER. he has such a smoothe effortless style and along with his size and physicallity teams will flip trying to cover him and Lee. that will take a man out of the box and allow the passes to RBs, TEs, parrish, and just better running.

i think harvey has the chops to be considered at the 11 spot, but you really need to be an expert and spend time with the players to figure if he is worth it vs a cb or a wr. he's not vernon gholston or c long good, so it's not a no brainer. we have some beef on D now, if we spend a top 3 round pick on a DE we need a guy we can rotate in without our crop of DEs who can generate pressure consistently (with the rest of the line playing their roles of course, not tiny tim getting flipped over and the G and T all over aaron every snap). we need quicks and a guy who can play with leverage, flow to the ball, and get sacks/pressures. if he can do that then we should take him. if he is lacking in any of those catagories he is not worth the 11th pick FOR US. a wr that might o.w. go 18th might be, since we have a horrible O and small WRs

if this guy is a true super star guard (like larry allen, hutch type guy) and can play RG then getting him at 11 would make sense. even tho we need playmakers badly, if we can get a 3rd for jp and trade our 2nd and extra 3rd for a 1st, we can still grab a stud WR and get a good TE in the 3rd round. that would beast up our line pretty crazy. we'd be like KC a few years ago!

i think the real secret (from looking at the colts drafts) is get get a friggen super star stud every draft and you'll be ok peyton -- maybe best ever? edge -- super star RB morris -- miss wayne -- stud probowl top 5 type wr freeney -- best pass rusher in the nfl (top 3 anyway) and a monster clark -- top 3 tight end snaders -- D player of year, stud and a half jackson -- very solid cb if not great addai -- stud rb, from day 1 gonzo -- p1mp wr, very promising. i think getting great players > always getting linemen

the reason for a big wr is so he can get the jump balls reach further for fade outs and comebacks use his body to screen the d on slants and inside routes be physical at the line and block cbs take a toll on smaller dbs so they have to take different positions to cover different passes (as the big body makes playing straight up hard). of course the skills to play at the highest level are rare, size is rare, and together they are even more rare. overall every O really does need at least one big (or at least physical if not big) wr to post up on guys and run the corners and slants. we don't have that at all.

i like a couple drafts here. imo there are 2-4 guys at wr or te that COULD be the real stud we need, i hope our fa gets the ones they want. if a true super star OL or DL falls to us at 11 i think we could get him as cb/wr/and te are so deep this year. that said, if our fo thinks top picks go to playmakers and they can find diamonds with our many day 2 picks for our lines i can handle that. imo more projects in the mid rounds work out at the line than at play maker positions.

i agree about the o and qb. he wants to see what our team is like. IMO he is likely to get 80 for 1300+ and some TDs, so after that he will like it here and we'll re up for about 8-9 a year and 30 upfront. if we do it during the season (along w peters) that will be great as it uses up our cash this year, and lets us go out and sign or extend guys again.

total joke. when you look at DEs in the 3-4 since, you realize how insane bruce was. when people tell me LT or white were better than bruce, they often bring up how each changed how their positions were played. i point out that bruce played the position in way that no one before or since has ever been capable of playing. being lined up over the tackle for nearly every play in your career and still leading the nfl all time in sacks. if smith were a 4-3 for his entire career he would have cracked 30 in more than one year. his playoff sack numbers would be redunk as well.

rating a wr is tough, but it's skewed lately. the top wrs now have very big stats compared to guys of old. they are also much more impressive physical specimens. good point above about the play offs -- if we had won a single sb reed would have been in first ballot, yet he doesn't get enough credit for his playoff contribution. as sick as moss is, i'd much rather play him than TO in the playoffs, moss is like brady; perfect when on but once off he just isn't nearly the same player.

i don't think we'd have to give up a 3rd -- we can make them pay to play. i think 22nd and 28th would be awesome --- a CB and a WR, and we'd get a TE and a lineman in the 2nd and 3rd.

to me the contracts are what they are: no one is coming cheap so you have to pay up. that said, we added two big time run blockers (again look at how the skins ran against dock and how the faiders went going right) to an O that has some bigtime speed at wideout and a quick QB. all we are left with is a hole at rb, and i think a good rb will play even better than he is on our team with that line, particularly if he has some speed (why imo mcgahee was expendable). so for me it is about what picks we give up. if we can still have 3 day one picks, and land a guy like willis, and get turner then i'd consider that solid. if it costs us a shot at a good LB then i don't think so.

last season we lost milloy sam adams vincent posey mike williams losing them didn't really hurt us. frankly i expect the only guy we will miss to be nate. our running game wasn't good, so missing mcgahee won't make a big negative impact, and on d those guys didn't perform that well. we have added 2 solid big men to each line and our young team has one more year coming together. i expect us to be better

he won the butkis and was the best player on a team. he made big impacts in the sec, he looks day one pro ready. a more physical vilma

i don't think the bills pass on peterson unless someone offers the world (like GB giving up 1st, second and perhaps more). if peterson does fall to us, i see us trading back up into the 1st and getting a solid LB if available. with some (a lot) luck we might nab a falling peterson and willis. that might leave us with only one additional day one pick tho, but we could use that on the best CB, DT, or LB on the board then.

there is ALWAYS a run on a position in every draft, sometimes more than one position. last year it was DBs and pass rushers. guys went entire rounds ahead of where the mag people had them projected. if willis goes early lbs will get run on, if ANY db goes top 8 then dbs will get run on. i think it is most likely that all d line will get snapped up early. the 2 or 3 top pass rushers will get nabbed way early, then branch and okoy, then next level guys like carriker and so on. a run on dbs and d line would be great for us, we'd get the best lb or rb in the nation, and perhaps have a big trade down chance.