BADOLBILZ Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 Thje o-line is not in shambles because MW did not pan out like everyone said he would, and at the time, it was the right choice, looking back now it was not. The o-line has been in shambles because that pick seems to be the extent of TD's moves to rebuild the line. One first round pick and a bunch of lower FA pickups. 857829[/snapback] If Mike Williams was the "right pick at the time" then so was Ryan Leaf. That's not how it works. When you draft a guy and he turns out to be a frickin' head case or has a series of injuries related to a condition you knew existed(like obesity), then you drafted the wrong guy. If they suffered a freak injury or something like that, you would get a pass, but this was just a case of throwing into double coverage instead of taking what was given to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 If Mike Williams was the "right pick at the time" then so was Ryan Leaf. That's not how it works. When you draft a guy and he turns out to be a frickin' head case or has a series of injuries related to a condition you knew existed(like obesity), then you drafted the wrong guy. If they suffered a freak injury or something like that, you would get a pass, but this was just a case of throwing into double coverage instead of taking what was given to you. 858078[/snapback] I also think that it is rather dumb to select a RT with a #4, and I don't care that he played in front of a left handed qb. The jests tried it with Chris Ward in 1978, and that didn't work out so well either. It was a stupid pick. The good news is that imo, Peters has a chance to be better than either McKinnie or Jones. A chance, ya know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YOOOOOO Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 My only two problems with TD were......his coaching decisions and allowing big PAT to walk.... other then that i thought he was doing a fine job.... I think if he brings in a more capable coach after WADE....we would have had a couple playoff seasons..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 I also think that it is rather dumb to select a RT with a #4, and I don't care that he played in front of a left handed qb. The jests tried it with Chris Ward in 1978, and that didn't work out so well either. It was a stupid pick. The good news is that imo, Peters has a chance to be better than either McKinnie or Jones. A chance, ya know? 858100[/snapback] So if we were drafting at #4 this year as well, would you not want us to draft a RT? Surely a tackle is the most worthy on the line to pick at that position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 So if we were drafting at #4 this year as well, would you not want us to draft a RT? Surely a tackle is the most worthy on the line to pick at that position. 858134[/snapback] Probably not. History tells us that RTs do not go that early as a rule. Peters is playing at a very high level, so I am not seeing a need at LT. Sure, a #4 can be a bust, but you can also get a superstar, or a ton of picks in a trade down. Hey, if I thought that there was a RT out there who would be the next Erik Williams I would say go for it, but generally, there are better ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 I find it somewhat odd that, after all of your crusading about the offensive line, you would consider someone else at that #4 pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 I find it somewhat odd that, after all of your crusading about the offensive line, you would consider someone else at that #4 pick. 858146[/snapback] Well, try to develop a deeper understanding of NFL football, and things might become more clear. Check it out.....RTs don't often go at #4 or below.....perhaps 1 every 15 or so years. it is a bad percentage move, and we already have a LT. Does this seem like something you can hold onto? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 Well, try to develop a deeper understanding of NFL football, and things might become more clear. Check it out.....RTs don't often go at #4 or below.....perhaps 1 every 15 or so years. it is a bad percentage move, and we already have a LT. Does this seem like something you can hold onto? 858147[/snapback] Its funny that you reacted in this way. I'm attempting to understand the differences between your harping on the offensive line and your stance on the draft, not what actually happens in the NFL. My understanding is that you feel the offensive line needs to be upgraded at all costs. Interestingly enough, you would advocate doing something else with a high draft pick. After all, if we need offensive linemen that bad, simply changing the spot that they are drafted at won't make much of a difference in whether they turn out good or bad, and it almost guarantees we get the O-lineman of our choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted December 5, 2006 Author Share Posted December 5, 2006 (edited) If the 'whisperer' is who I think it is, I'm reasonably sure he's no TD fan, and he has no stake in whether or not Donahoe ends up back in the league.....857927[/snapback] But Lori, my first point was that the 'whisper' was not a whisper. It was obscenely out of place. There is absolutely no logical reason at all why that one sentence statement would be included in this weeks(or any weeks) 'PFW whispers'. Examples of whispers from this week..... "Our sources tell us Saints WR Joe Horn’s aching groin may not be the only reason the former...." "We hear that CB Fred Smoot’s demotion in favor of rookie Cedric Griffin was a result of...." "Our sources at Rams Park have become more impressed with first-round pick Tye Hill...." "The two positions the Cowboys are most concerned about heading down the stretch are...." It is NOT a whisper....or anything like a whisper. As for the rest of your post.....to say TD deserves credit for 16 of 24 starters is akin to saying that I deserve credit for not crashing my car on the way to work this morning.....it is pretty much expected. He took over a salary capped laden team that was not very good.....therefore he had to replace most of the players. After 5 years, it is no surprise that close to all of the starters were acquired by him. What is a surprise is that a full 1/3 have been replaced in just one year. We are starting our 1st, 4th, 5th & 7th round picks. We brought in no BIG name FAs & have 4 starting. I personally believe that a lot of our TD starters are potentially 'great' players.....that has nothing to do with the statement "....Tom Donahoe deserves credit for acquiring 16 of the team’s 24 starters." It is a ludicrous statement placed in an absolutely inappropriate place. Edited December 5, 2006 by Dibs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MavBavButav Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 is it weird that i read all of dibs' posts in my head with an australian accent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jester43 Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 If Mike Williams was the "right pick at the time" then so was Ryan Leaf. That's not how it works. When you draft a guy and he turns out to be a frickin' head case or has a series of injuries related to a condition you knew existed(like obesity), then you drafted the wrong guy. If they suffered a freak injury or something like that, you would get a pass, but this was just a case of throwing into double coverage instead of taking what was given to you. 858078[/snapback] i have to give you credit right now for telling me in December of his rookie year that williams will be a bust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted December 6, 2006 Author Share Posted December 6, 2006 is it weird that i read all of dibs' posts in my head with an australian accent? 858193[/snapback] Crikey, strewth, core blimey, bloody hell cobber what are ya yabbering about ya drongo? er....G'day.....um.......a dingo's got my baby.....um......hi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MavBavButav Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 Crikey, strewth, core blimey, bloody hell cobber what are ya yabbering about ya drongo? er....G'day.....um.......a dingo's got my baby.....um......hi. 858393[/snapback] hahhahaahahhaha what the heck does strewth mean? thats a new one on me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 Well, try to develop a deeper understanding of NFL football, and things might become more clear. Check it out.....RTs don't often go at #4 or below.....perhaps 1 every 15 or so years. it is a bad percentage move, and we already have a LT. Does this seem like something you can hold onto? 858147[/snapback] So...drafting a right tackle at a high position is a bad idea for the sole reason that other teams rarely do it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swift Sylvan Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 is it weird that i read all of dibs' posts in my head with an australian accent? 858193[/snapback] Well, he is the most holy. I guess you could argue that if half of the NFL players who are drafted are busts then the other half will end up being pretty good. Therefore TD if even average should go 50/50 in terms of draftees. As for free agents you are generally able to know what type of play you will get when signing them, any good GM would sign players like TKO or Fletcher if there is a need for that player on the team and you can afford one as good as them. I guess we just don't really have much basis of comparrison to see what another GM would have done these last 5 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted December 6, 2006 Author Share Posted December 6, 2006 hahhahaahahhaha what the heck does strewth mean? thats a new one on me. 858419[/snapback] Strewth is used as an exclamation(as most Aussie terms are)....it's pretty interchangeable with crickey, bloody hell, Jesus, God, !@#$(in the expletive sense)....and many more. e.g. Did you see the size of those jugs! Strewth. e.g. Strewth mate, you didn't have to kill it. Keep in mind that most Aussies only talk like that when there are Americans around....usually we speak like the upper crust English. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 So...drafting a right tackle at a high position is a bad idea for the sole reason that other teams rarely do it? 858429[/snapback] This oversimplifies it a bit, but is pretty much correct. Looking at your screen name, it indicates that you have been around to watch a lot of football. As you know, it is much harder to find someone that big who has the agility to play on the left side in college, let alone the NFL. This is why the LTs go so early, and RT as a rule do not. Look at the OG position if you will. There was a strange run between 1973 and 1975 where a Guard was taken in the top 5 (one of them was Hall of Fame Guard John Hannah). That said, it isn't THAT unusual to not see a guard drafted in round one. This (imo) is because guards have help on both sides, and are generally regarded as lesser athletes than LTs. That said, the success rate of 1st round guards is extremely high, especially as of late. Remember, this conversation was about the FOURTH PICK. I am of the very strong opinion that with less and less high quality UFAs hitting the market, the value of draft picks will escalate. A #4 could bring us enough in a trade to draft a RT AND a Guard. Btw, this could change. In recent years, safeties are going early. Years ago it was also common to not see one go in the 1st. Last season, we took one at #8 and he was the 2nd safety to go. One last thing....I already pointed out that if a team thought they were getting someone who they were predicting would be the next Erik Williams, he would be worth the #1 overall, let alone the #4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 Thje o-line is not in shambles because MW did not pan out like everyone said he would, and at the time, it was the right choice, looking back now it was not. The o-line has been in shambles because that pick seems to be the extent of TD's moves to rebuild the line. One first round pick and a bunch of lower FA pickups. 857829[/snapback] No ti wasn't. Bryant McKinnie, a LT, was the right choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts