PDA

View Full Version : Mock Draft Updated - 9/28


Scott Wright
09-28-2007, 05:39 AM
Just wanted to let everyone know that I have updated my mock draft and there were a lot of changes in terms of the draft order and players. I also upped the number of underclassmen included from 10 to 12, basically because this senior class is not all that strong.

Feel free to discuss the mock in this thread and as always bring on the constructive criticism but be sure to explain your reasoning.

You can check it out via the link on the main page and as always please don't direct link in this thread. Feel free to click on some ads if you see something that interests you too! :)

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com

Note - If the date at the top of the page isn't September 28, 2007 then you aren't viewing the latest version and probably need to refresh or clear your cache.

Green Bay Scat
09-28-2007, 05:48 AM
still no earl bennett? sigh, oh well

M.O.T.H.
09-28-2007, 05:55 AM
No agruments w/ the Mcfadden pick. Just thinking about a Mcfadden/Barber duo, gives me chills.

I def. agree that we need a corner w/ our second first but, Ikegwuonu scares me a bit. There is no denying his talent but, he had some serious charges brought up against him. Great talent but, that burglary charge raises some big character concerns.

Scott Wright
09-28-2007, 05:57 AM
still no earl bennett? sigh, oh well

Even if I put Earl Bennett into the player pool he wouldn't be a first rounder. I like him and he's a good player but not a first round-type in my opinion. 2nd round? Sure.

EDIT: He kind of reminds me of a Steve Smith or Keary Colbert.

bearfan
09-28-2007, 06:29 AM
Scott, sadly I think the Bears will be picking sooner in the draft. Right now we have lost our CBs for a few weeks, plus Harris. Our offense is hopefully going to improve w/ Griese in, and hopefully it will be enough. That said, I dont like the Chad Henne pick. There were a lot of comparisons to Grossman here, and we hate Grossman in Chicago. Since Matt Ryan is unavaliable, I would give us an OL b/c our guys are the oldest in the NFL. JDB or Erik Ainge (who I love) could be had in the 2nd round for us, and then either a WR/RB/OL in the 3rd.

Caddy
09-28-2007, 06:35 AM
I like the idea of upgrading the Buccaneer's under tackle depth and think that Sedrick Ellis is a realistic option for the Buc's if they end up picking in the middle of the first round. I also think that a WR of some description would be a decent pick.

BufFan71
09-28-2007, 06:51 AM
Though Glenn Dorsey is a great player....
John McCargo has looked very good this year so far

Scott Wright
09-28-2007, 06:56 AM
Scott, sadly I think the Bears will be picking sooner in the draft. Right now we have lost our CBs for a few weeks, plus Harris. Our offense is hopefully going to improve w/ Griese in, and hopefully it will be enough. That said, I dont like the Chad Henne pick. There were a lot of comparisons to Grossman here, and we hate Grossman in Chicago. Since Matt Ryan is unavaliable, I would give us an OL b/c our guys are the oldest in the NFL. JDB or Erik Ainge (who I love) could be had in the 2nd round for us, and then either a WR/RB/OL in the 3rd.

I really don't see the Grossman comparisons with Henne. If anything Matt Ryan is closer to Grossman.

Jughead10
09-28-2007, 06:56 AM
First time I think I have ever said this concering a Giants pick in one of Scott's mock drafts, but horrible pick for the Giants. You basically could have given us the BPA at any defensive position but DE and I would have been happy. Giants would never take a RB that high. If anything they have shown that they are a very above average run blocking unit under Coughlin and can make guys better than they probably really are.

Jughead10
09-28-2007, 06:58 AM
I really don't see the Grossman comparisons with Henne. If anything Matt Ryan is closer to Grossman.

Grossman and Henne are similar physically. As far as size and body type.

georgiafan
09-28-2007, 08:19 AM
I can't complain about the falcons pick for obvious reasons, I would rather have Mcfadden and wait for a QB in the 2nd. But if Leftwhich or Harrington doesn't improve that probley won't happen.

AkiliSmith
09-28-2007, 08:31 AM
For the Bengals:

A new stud defensive tackle would be good, but they desperately need linebackers. Of all the linebackers on the roster, only 4 are signed beyond this season, and that includes Pollack and Thurman. Keith Rivers would be a tremendous pick at that point, and a great fit in the hole at weak side linebacker.

NIN1984
09-28-2007, 08:32 AM
I like Sam Baker but unbelievably Raiders O-line is not playing that bad in fact it is a lot better than last season and I mean a lot better. Raiders drafted Mario Henderson who will take over for Barry Sims in the near future because he fits the ZBS so well. I think Lane Kiffin will give him a shot at being the LT. Raiders big problem is the D-line with Sapp 34 and Burgess 29 and may be looking for a new contract after the season, he could be gone. With Dorsey and Campbell gone in your mock, I would have liked to see Raiders go Chris Long or Sedrick Ellis.

constant cough
09-28-2007, 08:48 AM
I hope you didn't drop Early Doucet out of the first round just because he's missed a couple of games because of a freak groin pull. The guy's a stud. Once he has a big game against Florida and the rest of the SEC not to mention once he works out at the combine I suspect he'll go first round. Early's quick, great route runner, good hands and is as strong as an ox. If he can catch those bullets from Russell he can catch them from any NFL QB.

Scott Wright
09-28-2007, 08:51 AM
I hope you didn't drop Early Doucet out of the first round just because he's missed a couple of games because of a freak groin pull. The guy's a stud. Once he has a big game against Florida and the rest of the SEC not to mention once he works out at the combine I suspect he'll go first round. Early's quick, great route runner, good hands and is as strong as an ox.

The big thing with Doucet is that he's not necessarily special in any regard. He's big enough but not huge. His timed speed is okay but certainly not eye-popping. With his measurables I think he has to really show something this year to get into the first round and to this point he hasn't done that yet.

doingthisinsteadofwork
09-28-2007, 09:00 AM
Were picking at 9!yes!Sam Baker seems like the best pick here with Calais gone.

Forenci
09-28-2007, 09:05 AM
I have to agree with the statement that the Giants pick wasn't that great. I mean the offense as a whole isn't much of a concern to me, other than maybe left tackle, but I still think Diehl has done a good job so far.

Our offensive line is probably one of the better run blocking lines so I'm really not concerned with who gets the ball as it seems like Ward is doing fine and Jacobs should be back toting the rock soon enough.

Our defense has been so putrid this season I wouldn't be surprised if our first five picks were all on the defensive side, and to be honest, I wouldn't mind if it was.

I don't mean to sound harsh, I just figured that since the Giants defense has been horrible it'd make sense to draft something on that side of the ball.

D-Unit
09-28-2007, 09:44 AM
I like the draft order! :D haha.

Can't say that the McFadden pick would surprise me. I hope Dallas takes Jake Long or Glenn Dorsey instead.

I agree that Colt won't be a first rounder. But 4 QBs in round 1 is high considering recent years past.

naruto613
09-28-2007, 09:49 AM
No Colt Brennan in the 1st round? I'd rather take Colt than ever take Henne.

Addict
09-28-2007, 10:23 AM
Big yay, I'm gonna go educate myself upon your new writings, lord Wright.

Young Legend
09-28-2007, 10:42 AM
I like Sam Baker but unbelievably Raiders O-line is not playing that bad in fact it is a lot better than last season and I mean a lot better. Raiders drafted Mario Henderson who will take over for Barry Sims in the near future because he fits the ZBS so well. I think Lane Kiffin will give him a shot at being the LT. Raiders big problem is the D-line with Sapp 34 and Burgess 29 and may be looking for a new contract after the season, he could be gone. With Dorsey and Campbell gone in your mock, I would have liked to see Raiders go Chris Long or Sedrick Ellis.


Barry Sims.32 his best days are way behind him..Cornell Green 31 a journey man..both are most likely gone at the end of the season.IMO Mario Henderson fits better at RT..Sam Baker is a realy good pass blocker..would make a better fit at LT..and with Gallery playing realy well at LG..that would give the raiders a realy good left side..and a left side that NEEDS to protect for JaMarcus Russell next year..

Chris Long..fits in 3-4..and the raiders have do it all.Tommy Kelly..who plays RE,LE and UT..Burgess is still under contract for a couple years so he isnt going anywere..

d34ng3l021
09-28-2007, 11:11 AM
I am on the bandwagon fo Woodson and really want him for my Falcons. If we are picking first overall, I would rather have him.

steelernation77
09-28-2007, 11:45 AM
I'm not sold on a CB in the first round for the Steelers. Ike Taylor played poorly last year but he's looked good so far, and Bryant McFadden will be pretty solid next year as a number 2. The coaching staff loves William ***, who looked good in preseason and Deshea Townsend is still solid. Colclough never really factored in, so losing him won't be a big deal. I could see them going corner end of the first day, but I feel like they have to address the O-line first.

D-Unit
09-28-2007, 11:46 AM
I am on the bandwagon fo Woodson and really want him for my Falcons. If we are picking first overall, I would rather have him.
How would Petrino pass on Brohm? Brohm's family has been on Petrino's staff.

Hines
09-28-2007, 12:06 PM
a corner over a olineman or pass rusher? what is your reason for it? i do like cason a lot but i think we should go pass rusher or olineman in the first round

The Dynasty
09-28-2007, 12:08 PM
Nice Pick for the Vikings. We need a Big Name Receiver to help out that offense. Good pick since Woodson was gone.

Vikes99ej
09-28-2007, 12:24 PM
I love DeSean Jackson, but I don't know about the Vikings pick. I don't know how our WR corps is going to improve if we keep adding young, inexperienced wide recievers to it. I'd almost say go after Sam Baker and put him at RT. We have so much trouble at that spot.

VoteLynnSwan
09-28-2007, 12:45 PM
Chad Henne wouldn't be a great pick for the bears i think... Physically he's about the same as we have now. We need either someone big enough to see over the line, or someone mobile enough to escape the rush, Chad Henne offers us neither of those things.

Jughead10
09-28-2007, 12:50 PM
Chad Henne wouldn't be a great pick for the bears i think... Physically he's about the same as we have now. We need either someone big enough to see over the line, or someone mobile enough to escape the rush, Chad Henne offers us neither of those things.

Agreed. Colt Brennan or Matt Ryan would be better fitted for the Bears. I would prefer Ryan if I were a Bears fan.

Turtlepower
09-28-2007, 12:54 PM
Agreed. Colt Brennan or Matt Ryan would be better fitted for the Bears. I would prefer Ryan if I were a Bears fan.

Except Ryan was taken at 19 by the Jags. Honestly, they should not draft a QB in the first. For a team that has such a stout defense, a reliable veteran would be better suited for their team. I think giving up a 6th or 7th for either Kurt Warner or Billy Volek would be their best bet.

23trufant
09-28-2007, 01:09 PM
I like the Seahawks pick but I am more of a fan of Martin Rucker over John Carlson. Do you think Rucker can jump him?

Jughead10
09-28-2007, 01:16 PM
Sadly I can't see Carlson going in the first round unless his workouts are unbelievable. He certainly won't have a ton of senior year film to display.

Geo
09-28-2007, 01:24 PM
I'm not crazy about Henne being anywhere in the first round either.

Trojans14
09-28-2007, 02:29 PM
I like the draft order! :D haha.

Can't say that the McFadden pick would surprise me. I hope Dallas takes Jake Long or Glenn Dorsey instead.

I agree that Colt won't be a first rounder. But 4 QBs in round 1 is high considering recent years past.

Why would Dallas ever take Long or Dorsey that high? It doesn't make much sense especially with the BPA still on the board.

Dallas simply doesn't draft OL in the first round, and they used 2 picks on OT's last year. They also resigned Colombo and gave Davis big money.

Dorsey is a better fit for the 4-3. You also have to wait to see how Tank Johnson pans out before you even think about spending a top pick on NT, something 3-4 teams never do in the first place. The Cowboyss are potentially 3 deep at NT next season with Fergie/Tank/Ratiliff.

Julius Jones most likely will not be re-signed, and both McFadden and Barber are used to sharing a backfield.

It makes perfect sense for Dallas to draft the BPA in that spot.

McFadden would be an absolute no-brainer.

BuckNaked
09-28-2007, 02:50 PM
Except Ryan was taken at 19 by the Jags. Honestly, they should not draft a QB in the first. For a team that has such a stout defense, a reliable veteran would be better suited for their team. I think giving up a 6th or 7th for either Kurt Warner or Billy Volek would be their best bet.

Bill Volek is a reliable veteran?

T-RICH49
09-28-2007, 02:54 PM
Instead of Woodson I'd rather see KC take Campbell if there is no OL worthy of the pick

benchod
09-28-2007, 02:54 PM
Except they're going to have to resign Barber at the end of this season and putting another 60 million into the RB position may not make sense depending on how the cap situation plays out. There's also the whole Romo extension to work out.

Wade Phillips uses an attacking style 3-4 anyways, so the linemen don't have to hold lineman to free up linebackers. Dorsey is an intriguing prospect who wouldn't be that bad in their system.

Essentially, it all depends on how the cap situation, but D-Unit has a point in drafting Dorsey or McFadden.

bearsfan_51
09-28-2007, 02:59 PM
I actually like Henne over Brennan, but I don't think I'd go with either in the 1st round.

The board breaks down pretty poorly for the Bears, but I'd probably go with Limas Sweed if that was the case.

Regardless, I think we'll be picking higher than 23 anyway.

thule
09-28-2007, 03:05 PM
Why would Dallas ever take Long or Dorsey that high? It doesn't make much sense especially with the BPA still on the board.

Dallas simply doesn't draft OL in the first round, and they used 2 picks on OT's last year. They also resigned Colombo and gave Davis big money.

Dorsey is a better fit for the 4-3. You also have to wait to see how Tank Johnson pans out before you even think about spending a top pick on NT, something 3-4 teams never do in the first place. The Cowboyss are potentially 3 deep at NT next season with Fergie/Tank/Ratiliff.

Julius Jones most likely will not be re-signed, and both McFadden and Barber are used to sharing a backfield.

It makes perfect sense for Dallas to draft the BPA in that spot.

McFadden would be an absolute no-brainer.

Are you the old timer cowboys fan that swore we were going to take mike williams?

ATLDirtyBirds
09-28-2007, 03:30 PM
Andre Woodson>Brian Brohm.

Borat
09-28-2007, 04:14 PM
Scott, do you think any of the WRs have No.1 wideout capabilities? I ask because you have the Niners taking a WR on every mock (which I'm OK with) but we have a bunch of No.2 or No.3 WRs already and I'm wondering if there's a No.1 to be had in the draft.

Jonny
09-28-2007, 04:45 PM
The Giants need defense, defense, and more defense (besides DL).

Canuck
09-28-2007, 05:55 PM
Nice read as always. Although the Saints are desperate for a corner, we need a DT in the worst way and I don't see how they could pass on Sedrick Ellis if he's still on the board. Also, if our history of drafting has taught me anything, it's that the Saints always have needed a corner and the Saints always will need a corner because we never draft one in the 1st round. We passed on Marcus McCauley and Chris Houston last year and McCauley again in the 3rd where we took Usama Young. I was disappointed we didn't take him, but they seem to like Young and if he turns out to be the prospect they think he will, then we might be okay. However, we have nobody in development at DT and with an uninspiring LB crew, our run-d isn't scaring anybody. I'd hope that we can draft Rey Maualuga at MLB, but if he stays in school, I'd go with his teammate (by which I mean Ellis... although I'd have no problems with Keith Rivers.)

Also, where do you have Colt Brennan going and how is Chad Henne a better prospect than John David Booty? (I'm asking, not questioning.)

Green Bay Scat
09-28-2007, 06:18 PM
Even if I put Earl Bennett into the player pool he wouldn't be a first rounder. I like him and he's a good player but not a first round-type in my opinion. 2nd round? Sure.

EDIT: He kind of reminds me of a Steve Smith or Keary Colbert.

id agree with u there, but steve smith nor keary colbert were ever a #1, and EB is in the tough SEC. right now i dont think hes a first, but by years end, and if he goes to the combine, ill think he'll be a first, just like Chris Williams being a potential late first early second guy with a good senior day/combine

wiscbadgerfootball
09-28-2007, 06:40 PM
hmmm Slaton isn't a terrible pick although I'm still not sold with him as an NFL prospect.. If Ikegwuonu were to leave early I wouldn't mind the Pack picking him up

falconsrule
09-28-2007, 06:59 PM
No way Atlanta takes Brohm with the 1st pick.....Scott you mention that Brohm is not an "elite" prospect so why would Atlanta select a player with the #1 pick if he is not "elite".More realistic senerio Atlanta offers the 1st pick to Dallas if Dallas dont accept we select McFadden.

Larry
09-28-2007, 07:16 PM
Limas Sweed is a solid pick at the end of the first round for the Niners.

reigle9
09-28-2007, 07:46 PM
I actually like Henne over Brennan, but I don't think I'd go with either in the 1st round.

The board breaks down pretty poorly for the Bears, but I'd probably go with Limas Sweed if that was the case.

Regardless, I think we'll be picking higher than 23 anyway.

I'm a firm believer in that statement. I wouldn't take either before the third.

PACKmanN
09-28-2007, 07:46 PM
love the Jenkins pick but hate the spot where you have us drafting.

Eddyc85
09-28-2007, 10:58 PM
Titans pick isn't bad but I disagree about Odom being a 2nd stringer, he's having a really good year. But I would like another big playmaker at DE much like Javon Kearse was. But wide receiver is still our greatest need and come draft time I think there will be a few more first round worthy wide receivers. I'd also like to know why you didn't include Mario Manningham in the first round.

I do question how low were drafting. How can the Saints be drafting ahead of us? Have you not seen them play this year? I would honestly like to know why you think the Titans will have a worse year than last year despite starting off much better.

As for Henne, I think he's incredibly overrated. I'm not just saying that as an Ohio State fan. He's got plenty of talent around him to work with and has zero accuracy outside the pocket. I think Booty would be a better fit for the Bears. I'm also not convinced the Jags take a QB, Garrards been playing well, they just need more talent at wide receiver.

theogt
09-29-2007, 12:05 AM
Why would Dallas ever take Long or Dorsey that high? It doesn't make much sense especially with the BPA still on the board.

Dallas simply doesn't draft OL in the first round, and they used 2 picks on OT's last year. They also resigned Colombo and gave Davis big money.

Dorsey is a better fit for the 4-3. You also have to wait to see how Tank Johnson pans out before you even think about spending a top pick on NT, something 3-4 teams never do in the first place. The Cowboyss are potentially 3 deep at NT next season with Fergie/Tank/Ratiliff.

Julius Jones most likely will not be re-signed, and both McFadden and Barber are used to sharing a backfield.

It makes perfect sense for Dallas to draft the BPA in that spot.

McFadden would be an absolute no-brainer.What he said. That was probably the easiest decision on the board (other than Brohm to Atlanta).

D-Unit
09-29-2007, 12:24 AM
Flozell Adams is a FA and is doubtful to return. James Marten was drafted to be a RT. Doug Free was drafted in the 4th round and is a major project and is a extremely injury prone. Couldn't even make it out of the preseason. A move to Guard isn't out of the realm of possibility.

Jake Long makes the Dallas OL dominant. The last time Dallas' OL was dominant, the team won 3 SBs. It doesn't matter who the RB is, when the line can perform at a high level. RB is probably the deepest position in the draft. ...and yeah, DMAC is used to playing in a committee... so what? You want to use a pick that high for someone who will be a part time player in a committee? Yeah, real smart. How much money will he want being drafted that high? Jamarcus Russell just got 68M... it'll be less much not THAT much less. ROI is marginal and money spent on a RB will hurt the team financially in the long run. Barber is RFA, Romo and TNew need to be extended and they will command a pretty penny.

With Flo gone, you are putting your faith in Doug Free. If he doesn't pan out, the Cowboys are screwed. If he does, uh... he'll want big money too. Give the big money to Long and save the money you would've spent on DMAC and pick up a RB later in the draft. It's a committee approach, there are plenty of backs capable of spelling Barber some carries.

Dorsey is an elite DT capable of playing the role of a 3-4 NT in Phillips' one gap scheme. Ferguson is old and assuming that he returns from a full recovery, he still returns to the same guy that can't command a double team. His position needed to be upgrade even while he was healthy.

I'll give you the Tank Johnson point... He could exceed expecations, but cautious observers are simply hoping he can provide good depth. Ratliff is being forced into the role. He's a natural fit at end.

So say what you have to say about McFadden being the "no brainer" pick, because you're right. If we picked him, I'd assume Jerry had "no brain".

foozball
09-29-2007, 12:51 AM
cant complain about the texans pick, although i think they'll be picking in the 14-18 range. could go OL if Charles Spencer doesn't come back healthy. best DB available would be nice as well.

d34ng3l021
09-29-2007, 01:11 AM
How would Petrino pass on Brohm? Brohm's family has been on Petrino's staff.

Petrino isnt in charge of drafting that much. Its McKay who does most of the drafting, and it seems as if Woodson is the better player with more upside.

D-Unit
09-29-2007, 01:13 AM
Petrino isnt in charge of drafting that much. Its McKay who does most of the drafting, and it seems as if Woodson is the better player with more upside.
Well, I'd be surprised. As they say, "It's all about who you know...."

You think Petrino would be happy passing on Brohm?

jayceheathman
09-29-2007, 02:10 AM
Well, I'd be surprised. As they say, "It's all about who you know...."

You think Petrino would be happy passing on Brohm?

He passed on Omobi Okoye who went to Louisville and is having a good season so far. Although, passing on a QB is harder that passing on a DT.

d34ng3l021
09-29-2007, 02:41 AM
Well, I'd be surprised. As they say, "It's all about who you know...."

You think Petrino would be happy passing on Brohm?

I am sure as a professional, he will be okay with it. He is gonna know that Woodson is the better prospect and is a better pick for the team.

And we didnt pick Okoye (which is understandable because we really needed a DE) and we didnt pick Bush (even though he was there til the 4th round. Pretty lame. We needed a power RB too).

But I think it comes down to the gap between Brohm and Woodson. It depends how much better Woodson is than Brohm as a prospect. If Woodson is better by a slight bit, then Brohm could be the pick, because of the Petrino connection.

Trojans14
09-29-2007, 03:29 AM
Flozell Adams is a FA and is doubtful to return. James Marten was drafted to be a RT. Doug Free was drafted in the 4th round and is a major project and is a extremely injury prone. Couldn't even make it out of the preseason. A move to Guard isn't out of the realm of possibility.


I think it's stretch to use the words like "major" and "extremely" that's just an effort to try and help your argument. Free looked very good in pre-season, which is good for the future of the team but I don't think we have to rely on him next season. Also, I haven't heard a word about him being moved to guard, that just seems like another guess of yours to bolster your point of view.

At this point in time I fully expect Flo to return to Dallas. Either under a 3 or 4 year deal that would hopefully be front loaded, or if we are forced to, franchise him for a season.

The Cowboys are in win now situation.

Hopefully for the next few seasons.

Starting Flo is much more desirable to a team like Dallas, than forcing a rookie into that role.

We don't have any sort of track record for drafting OT's in the first round, it seems even less likely that we would use one with a top 5 pick.

Jake Long makes the Dallas OL dominant.

You know this how?

Since when do rookie OT's step in and improve a unit over an experienced Vet. like Flo?

I hope you're talking about 3-4 years down the road and not in his rookie season. Which is all well and good if he does pan out but McFadden would not only help us win long term, but IMO he gives us an even greater chance to win the Super Bowl next year than the opportunity we have this season.

IMO, in most drafts Long isn't even a top 5 pick. He's not a 5 star elite prospect, which means you can't convince me that he is worth the kinda of contract that selection would demand or that this unit would be any better next season with him in place of Flo.

McFadden is that rare elite talent...maybe the lone 5 star prospect in this draft. Yet you'd pass up that opportunity to take a tackle we don't yet need?

DMAC is used to playing in a committee... so what? You want to use a pick that high for someone who will be a part time player in a committee? Yeah, real smart. How much money will he want being drafted that high? Jamarcus Russell just got 68M... it'll be less much not THAT much less. ROI is marginal and money spent on a RB will hurt the team financially in the long run. Barber is RFA, Romo and TNew need to be extended and they will command a pretty penny.

If we do end up with a top 5 pick and you look at the cream of the crop from the '08 draft, McFadden is the best fit for what Dallas is looking to do next year as well as in the future.

He is easily the best player in this draft, and there really aren't any other fits for this team that are worth the kind of contract a top 5 pick calls for.

Trading back is certainly a solid option if the price is right, but a guy like Long isn't worth that contract, and Dorsey isn't a good fit for what Dallas needs.

With Flo gone, you are putting your faith in Doug Free. If he doesn't pan out, the Cowboys are screwed. If he does, uh... he'll want big money too. Give the big money to Long and save the money you would've spent on DMAC and pick up a RB later in the draft. It's a committee approach, there are plenty of backs capable of spelling Barber some carries.

You're assuming Flo is already out the door. I don't see him leaving in the off-season, so he's still in the fold as far as I'm concerned.

We don't have to draft McFadden, if the FO feels that they can get a solid option later in the draft to share carries with MB3 than so be it. Just make sure you trade out of the top 5 if the Browns pick ends up being that high.

Dorsey is an elite DT capable of playing the role of a 3-4 NT in Phillips' one gap scheme. Ferguson is old and assuming that he returns from a full recovery, he still returns to the same guy that can't command a double team. His position needed to be upgrade even while he was healthy.

You've assumed something for like the 3rd time in this post alone.

How do you know Dorsey is fully capable of playing in the 3-4?

That's a projection made by you, with no on-field play that can back it up. He's a penetrating DT and a solid one at that...but he projects to the 4-3 defense, not as an NT.

Yet you somehow think he's worth converting into an NT and paying him top 5 money, with no knowledge as to how he'll hold up in our scheme?

That doesn't even take into account that teams never take NT's that high in the draft. They find space eaters in the later rounds and go from there. You do realize that don't you?????

From where I stand, if we are lucky enough to land a top 5 pick, it's McFadden or a trade down.

moc182
09-29-2007, 03:30 AM
I love Stewart, but there are better players available at bigger needs. Sed Ellis or Rey Rey would be better, but knowing the Giants they'll break my heart in the first as usual.

D-Unit
09-29-2007, 04:19 AM
I think it's stretch to use the words like "major" and "extremely" that's just an effort to try and help your argument. Free looked very good in pre-season, which is good for the future of the team but I don't think we have to rely on him next season. Also, I haven't heard a word about him being moved to guard, that just seems like another guess of yours to bolster your point of view.

Yeah, Free looked good against NFL back ups until he was injured. He's got a history of injuries and you cannot deny that. Free was moved around in training camp and took snaps at Guard while McQuistan lined up at LT. If you remember there was a lot of movement along the line as Phillips was trying different things out. Both Flozell and Columbo were both not participating due to injury. But I guess since you never heard of it, it must just be a guess of mine and of course, you can't be wrong.

At this point in time I fully expect Flo to return to Dallas. Either under a 3 or 4 year deal that would hopefully be front loaded, or if we are forced to, franchise him for a season.

If you think Flo is returning then that's why we differ in opinion. If you're right, and you want to wait out on Free then passing on Long is ok. DMAC still doesn't make a lot of sense though. I'd prefer to trade down.

I'd be willing to bet my mortgage that Flozell isn't franchised. That's a good one.

Let me ask you... why would you want him for another 4 years? His play has clearly depreciated and he's the most penalized OL on the team. ....and why would you want his new contract front loaded? Typically you want it back loaded so in case he doesn't pan out, you can cut him and free that salary from your cap. I don't get the front loaded part.

The Cowboys are in win now situation.

True, but we have enough youth at core positions that it's not a small window. The key is managing your cap so that you can afford to extend your key players. Drafting DMAC is all about blowing your cap.

Hopefully for the next few seasons.

Starting Flo is much more desirable to a team like Dallas, than forcing a rookie into that role.

We don't have any sort of track record for drafting OT's in the first round, it seems even less likely that we would use one with a top 5 pick.

History is not an indicator of the future. You should know following Jerry Jones that he is not the same GM today as he was when he first started. There has been a lot of growing pains and he continues to learn and improve. I just don't get the logic when people say that he won't ever draft an OT in the first since he never has. Do you realize how many different variables are involved in making a decision like that? It's gotta be the right time for the right player fitting the right need under the right system and the right coach and on and on.... Saying history says so is completely naive.

You know this how?

Since when do rookie OT's step in and improve a unit over an experienced Vet. like Flo?

First off, "like Flo"? Have you seen him lately? Secondly, since when? How about Marcus McNeil, Jamaal Brown, Tony Ugoh... How about since them?

I hope you're talking about 3-4 years down the road and not in his rookie season. Which is all well and good if he does pan out but McFadden would not only help us win long term, but IMO he gives us an even greater chance to win the Super Bowl next year than the opportunity we have this season.

IMO, in most drafts Long isn't even a top 5 pick. He's not a 5 star elite prospect, which means you can't convince me that he is worth the kinda of contract that selection would demand or that this unit would be any better next season with him in place of Flo.

Well, I'm not going to try to convince you... but uh.. Scott Wright has long ranked as his #1 prospect right now.
http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/sub/rankings.html


McFadden is that rare elite talent...maybe the lone 5 star prospect in this draft. Yet you'd pass up that opportunity to take a tackle we don't yet need?

You never spend Top 5 pick money on a RB. They are a dime a dozen. QB, LT, DE, and CB...yes. NFL salaries prove that.

If we do end up with a top 5 pick and you look at the cream of the crop from the '08 draft, McFadden is the best fit for what Dallas is looking to do next year as well as in the future.

Says you.

He is easily the best player in this draft, and there really aren't any other fits for this team that are worth the kind of contract a top 5 pick calls for.

Says you.

Trading back is certainly a solid option if the price is right, but a guy like Long isn't worth that contract, and Dorsey isn't a good fit for what Dallas needs.

Says you.

You're assuming Flo is already out the door. I don't see him leaving in the off-season, so he's still in the fold as far as I'm concerned.

Says you.

We don't have to draft McFadden, if the FO feels that they can get a solid option later in the draft to share carries with MB3 than so be it. Just make sure you trade out of the top 5 if the Browns pick ends up being that high.

Says you.

You've assumed something for like the 3rd time in this post alone.

Look who's calling the kettle black.

How do you know Dorsey is fully capable of playing in the 3-4?

He's a damn good defensive lineman. You think I'm assuming he's taking the role of QB? No. He's a defensive lineman. He's not changing positions. He's got all the tools to make it in Wade Phillip's 3-4 defense. Maybe you don't understand that defense. Sounds like it.

That's a projection made by you, with no on-field play that can back it up. He's a penetrating DT and a solid one at that...but he projects to the 4-3 defense, not as an NT.

And you're saying that a penetrating DT is NOT A FIT???

Yet you somehow think he's worth converting into an NT and paying him top 5 money, with no knowledge as to how he'll hold up in our scheme?

You somehow think you know the scheme? Why don't you figure out the difference between a NT in a 2 gap 3-4 defense and a NT in a 1 gap 3-4 defense.

That doesn't even take into account that teams never take NT's that high in the draft. They find space eaters in the later rounds and go from there. You do realize that don't you?????

Honestly, by reading your comments, you simply don't understand the defensive system that Wade Phillips has installed here in Dallas. "Space Eaters" are apart of the Bill Parcells defense. Phillips operates a one gap penetrating defense where his DL do not need to be "space eaters".

I'm not trying to be mean to you or anything, but here's some words straight from Phillips and some players mouths... maybe it can provide some insight for you. You seem to think Parcells is still around... he's not.

[ Phillips said so many 3-4 defenses "play it only one way ... and you have to plug in a player that can play that way. ... Ours, we have the players and then we plug in saying this is what we're going to do with the 3-4 because you can stunt, or you're stronger, or you're quicker or you can rush the passer."

Spears and Chris Canty each had only one sack while starting on opposite ends last season. That's because they were forced by Parcells' system to read or react instead of attack and often got stuck at the line of scrimmage dealing with offensive tackles or tight ends.

"There's a lot more opportunity," Spears said. "You may not make a tackle, but if you've pushed your guard back or put the tackles three yards in the backfield and the running back has to bounce and somebody else tackles him for a loss, you're pretty much affecting that play. That's what this scheme is."

In the preseason, Canty had Denver's Jay Cutler in reach before the quarterback ducked away from him Saturday night. But nose guard Jason Ferguson was right there to get the sack. He didn't have a sack last season, when the nose guard was preoccupied with opposing linemen and rarely would have been in position for one.

"I didn't even know I got a sack. I thought it was a tackle for a loss," Ferguson said. "It was a sack. I forgot to dance." ]

As you can clearly see, Dorsey's skill set is tailor made for Phillips' style defense that is more "attack" than "space eat".

From where I stand, if we are lucky enough to land a top 5 pick, it's McFadden or a trade down.

From where you stand it looks like shaky ground. That said, Jerry is dumb enough to make the move, especially since DMAC is a Razorback.

I have made my comments in bold. If you haven't taken anything from that to change your mind at all, then you can just disagree with the truth.

Crow
09-29-2007, 07:28 AM
Can't argue Oakland's pick too much considering where we're slotted and who's available. If Henderson pans out, he and Baker would make for a pretty athletic tandem of tackles...if Henderson pans out.

A DL would be really great, though. ZBS schemes generally don't require 1st round OLs, and great DLs are much harder to come by. And, truth be told, the Raiders OL is by far outperforming the DL at this point.

scottyboy
09-29-2007, 08:30 AM
I honestly think Dorsey would be the best fit for Dallas. Long is also an option, with DMac a distant 3rd IMO. I would p!$$ myself is Dallas ended up with Dorsey. Him in the middle with Ware coming off the outside(along with maybe Ellis/Spencer) is pretty scary.

now, Cowboy fans, let's say the Brownies do better than expected and have a pick in the 8-12 range. Dorsey, Long and DMac are gone. Do you go Baker? or possibly Desean Jackson?

keylime_5
09-29-2007, 09:24 AM
Good mock, Scott. I liked where you had most of the guys going to and in the order you did it. Especially thought the top 10 was good. Loved the Browns pick......oh wait....yeah.

neko4
09-29-2007, 10:32 AM
Im not a big fan of Slaton, but nice pick

Iamcanadian
09-29-2007, 10:50 AM
I find this mock kinda questionable. I know that mocks at this time of the year are extremely difficult but I think Scott is relying too much on last year's performance and not enough on what guys are actually doing this year.
Red Flags have to be going up on Brohm especially about leadership. I know Petrino may want his guy from Louisville but he may also want the best prospect at that position and I'm no longer sure Brohm is that.
Henne is another example where leadership has to be asked about plus he's injured.
Buffalo is the cheapest franchise in the NFL which explains their extremely poor record over the last dozen years. They have an awful lot of money tied up in their DL, so I'm not sure it's a no brainer to say they draft Dorsey. Their offense is miserable and may be their priority in the draft.
Tommy Blake has had 2 leaves of absence from his team for what are believed to be mental problems. When a college player begins to miss time on the field for whatever reason, his chances of being a 1st rounder dimish considerably.
I just happen to place more importance on this year's performance and think Scott is being too slow in reacting or he could turnout to be correct.

Iamcanadian
09-29-2007, 11:36 AM
[QUOTE=D-Unit;638871]

True, but we have enough youth at core positions that it's not a small window. The key is managing your cap so that you can afford to extend your key players. Drafting DMAC is all about blowing your cap.

'While trading down is an option, it cannot always be obtained and whether you draft McFadden or anybody else in the top 5, their salary is slotted whether it's a RB or anybody.'

History is not an indicator of the future. You should know following Jerry Jones that he is not the same GM today as he was when he first started. There has been a lot of growing pains and he continues to learn and improve. I just don't get the logic when people say that he won't ever draft an OT in the first since he never has. Do you realize how many different variables are involved in making a decision like that? It's gotta be the right time for the right player fitting the right need under the right system and the right coach and on and on.... Saying history says so is completely naive.

'Here I completely agree, everybody said Al Davis doesn't draft QB's and we can all see what happened there.'

You never spend Top 5 pick money on a RB. They are a dime a dozen. QB, LT, DE, and CB...yes. NFL salaries prove that.

'No, the top ones are not a dime a dozen, in fact most of the top RB's have all been 1st rounders. NFL salaries simply indicate that RB's have shorter careers and teams are reluctant to pay them big long term salaries after they finish their rookie contracts. NE and Indy had no problem drafting a RB in round 1.'

You somehow think you know the scheme? Why don't you figure out the difference between a NT in a 2 gap 3-4 defense and a NT in a 1 gap 3-4 defense.

'I think your being a bit niave here and way off base. What choices does Phillips have at NT in Dallas, he certainly played a 2 gap 3-4 in San Diego with Williams as his NT. I don't think there is such a beast as a 1 gap NT in a 3-4 unless a team is desperate and hasn't anybody else to fill the position. I cannot see Phillips drafting Dorsey to fit his defense as a NT, DE yes, NT, no way. A NT by definition must be able to play 2 gaps or teams are going to run on you all day.'

Honestly, by reading your comments, you simply don't understand the defensive system that Wade Phillips has installed here in Dallas. "Space Eaters" are apart of the Bill Parcells defense. Phillips operates a one gap penetrating defense where his DL do not need to be "space eaters".

'Again, Phillips is making due with the personnel has has on hand. In San Diego where the DL personnel was perfect for a 3-4, Phillips clearly perferred "space eaters". You can bet that he will draft some bigger NT to better fit his scheme.'

[ Phillips said so many 3-4 defenses "play it only one way ... and you have to plug in a player that can play that way. ... Ours, we have the players and then we plug in saying this is what we're going to do with the 3-4 because you can stunt, or you're stronger, or you're quicker or you can rush the passer."

'I think all he is saying is he is using a scheme that suits his personnel and not trying to put as square peg in a round hole. It doesn't mean he wouldn't perfer a certain type of player at certain position.'

"There's a lot more opportunity," Spears said. "You may not make a tackle, but if you've pushed your guard back or put the tackles three yards in the backfield and the running back has to bounce and somebody else tackles him for a loss, you're pretty much affecting that play. That's what this scheme is."

'I agree that Phillips may perfer an attacking 3-4 vs a laid back 3-4 but that doesn't indicate that he perfers a 1 gap NT. He never used a 1 gap NT at San Diego.'

As you can clearly see, Dorsey's skill set is tailor made for Phillips' style defense that is more "attack" than "space eat".

'I'm sure Phillips would love a Dorsey to play DE in his defense but there is absolutely no way he'd draft him as a NT.'

From where you stand it looks like shaky ground. That said, Jerry is dumb enough to make the move, especially since DMAC is a Razorback.

'Seems to me that Jerry is anything but dumb and might draft McFadden because he thinks he could lead his team to the SB. What your saying is that anybody who doesn't follow your advise is dumb by definition, h...mmmm.'

d34ng3l021
09-29-2007, 01:01 PM
Can't argue Oakland's pick too much considering where we're slotted and who's available. If Henderson pans out, he and Baker would make for a pretty athletic tandem of tackles...if Henderson pans out.

A DL would be really great, though. ZBS schemes generally don't require 1st round OLs, and great DLs are much harder to come by. And, truth be told, the Raiders OL is by far outperforming the DL at this point.

Thats a huge myth. You can get by by getting later round OL and teach them the ZBS, so your run game excels, but when it comes to pass blocking, they are terrible. I know this. I am a Falcons fan.

Trojans14
09-29-2007, 02:03 PM
I have made my comments in bold. If you haven't taken anything from that to change your mind at all, then you can just disagree with the truth.

Let's recap:

1.) You are in favor of drafting a 4 star prospect over a 5 star prospect strictly based on position.

That's intelligent.

Remember even Scott agrees with me, and he probably won't be giving any of his "elite" grades to a Senior this year. Yeah that includes your boy Jake Long. However, I fully expect Darren McFadden to receive that status. Ya know, the guy he called probably the best RB to come along in the last decade.

2.) All RB's are a dime a dozen and aren't worth top 5 money.

I'm sure San Diego is kicking themselves for drafting LaDainian Tomlinson 5th overall right now. What a fool AJ Smith looks like. If Darren McFadden is the only elite prospect in this draft, and your team could use a RB, than you draft him, simple as that.

3.) Dorsey is a better fit for Dallas than McFadden.

I like how you avoided the fact that not a single NFL team that runs the 3-4 has spent a top 5 pick on their NT. They rarely spend a first round pick on the position, something that seems to completely allude you. Yet you want Dallas to be the first when we already run 3 deep at the position.

Again, brilliant.

I fully understand Wade's 3-4 vs. Parcells. I also understand that it doesn't take a top 5 pick to plug that spot in his 3-4. We are more than set with a healthy Fergie, and Ratliff. Adding Tank Johnson will only add more depth to a position that's fully stocked and won't need any more help come '08. By all means though, let's throw a top 5 pick in the mix just to make sure we're safe.

Also, don't forget that Wade's best NT he's ever had is 6'3 and weighs 348.

4.) Darren McFadden ruins our cap space.

Is he somehow going to get more money than Long or Dorsey would? How come they don't kill our cap but he does? Oh right, you don't want to draft him so it wouldn't progress your stance by admitting how foolish that sounds.

The same amount of money would go to any one of those players. If McFadden kills our cap space, so would either one of them.

Fact is, Dallas is in very good position cap wise and having that top 5 pick will only hurt us if we draft a player that doesn't live up to the contract. I'll take my chances that McFadden does over either one of those guys, especially considering what the Cowboys already have on their roster.

Finally, and make sure you re-read this part so you fully understand it. If there was an elite 5 star OT prospect in this draft class, than the decision to take McFadden would become much more difficult, as you could make strong cases for each player. That would go for WR as well.

However, there is no Orlando Pace or Calvin Johnson types in this draft...which means you'd have to drop down a tier to draft a player like a Jake Long and pass up a superior prospect.

That is easily the most flawed line of thinking any GM could use.

With no OT or WR in that elite group, and a need for RB once Julius walks it becomes a "no-brainer" for Jerry and Co. to bring McFadden into the fold.

Shiver
09-29-2007, 02:11 PM
2.) All RB's are a dime a dozen and aren't worth top 5 money.

I'm sure San Diego is kicking themselves for drafting LaDainian Tomlinson 5th overall right now. What a fool AJ Smith looks like. If Darren McFadden is the only elite prospect in this draft, and your team could use a RB, than you draft him, simple as that.

For every San Diego there are three or four teams that wish they didn't draft a RB that high in the draft.

Trojans14
09-29-2007, 02:26 PM
For every San Diego there are three or four teams that wish they didn't draft a RB that high in the draft.

Busts happen at every position, and at every level of the draft.

You minimize that by taking the best player on the board.

Whoever drafts McFadden will be doing just that.

Crow
09-29-2007, 02:58 PM
Thats a huge myth. You can get by by getting later round OL and teach them the ZBS, so your run game excels, but when it comes to pass blocking, they are terrible. I know this. I am a Falcons fan.
Maybe Atlanta just had bad pass blocking linemen.

You don't have to take a tackle in Rd1 to get a good pass blocker.

D-Unit
09-29-2007, 03:14 PM
Let's recap:

1.) You are in favor of drafting a 4 star prospect over a 5 star prospect strictly based on position.

That's intelligent.

Remember even Scott agrees with me, and he probably won't be giving any of his "elite" grades to a Senior this year. Yeah that includes your boy Jake Long. However, I fully expect Darren McFadden to receive that status. Ya know, the guy he called probably the best RB to come along in the last decade.

You are talking as if the number of stars you have on your player rater is the determining factor in where you are selected. Can we agree that's not true? Can we also agree that final grades are not out yet and that we still have a season left to play?

Jake Long is considered an elite tackle prospect, even if he's not the next Orlando Pace. He could've been a top 5 pick last year.

2.) All RB's are a dime a dozen and aren't worth top 5 money.

I'm sure San Diego is kicking themselves for drafting LaDainian Tomlinson 5th overall right now. What a fool AJ Smith looks like. If Darren McFadden is the only elite prospect in this draft, and your team could use a RB, than you draft him, simple as that.

LT doesn't play in a system that uses a committee. He also is not good when his OL doesn't block well for him. See 2007.

Also, if you think DMAC is the only player that will become a successful player in the NFL out of this draft, then I will have to start ignoring your posts, because that is stupid.

3.) Dorsey is a better fit for Dallas than McFadden.

I like how you avoided the fact that not a single NFL team that runs the 3-4 has spent a top 5 pick on their NT. They rarely spend a first round pick on the position, something that seems to completely allude you. Yet you want Dallas to be the first when we already run 3 deep at the position.

Again, brilliant.

NT is arguably the most important position in a 3-4 defense. NTs are not traditionally taken that high because they don't grade that high. Dorsey is graded that high. I guarantee you that if Dallas is picking in the top 5 that Dorsey will be heavily looked at.

I fully understand Wade's 3-4 vs. Parcells. I also understand that it doesn't take a top 5 pick to plug that spot in his 3-4. We are more than set with a healthy Fergie, and Ratliff. Adding Tank Johnson will only add more depth to a position that's fully stocked and won't need any more help come '08. By all means though, let's throw a top 5 pick in the mix just to make sure we're safe.

A healthy Ferg never commanded a double team. He's not a space eater and he doesn't provide enough of a threat to get into the backfield. You cannot disagree with that. He's also old and ACL injuries take over a year to recover from. When are you hoping that he'll be back? How confident are you that he'll perform well? Ratliff and Tank are nothing but depth options. Neither can provide a dominant presence in the middle like a Dorsey. I hope they can, but we'll see. They haven't yet.

Also, don't forget that Wade's best NT he's ever had is 6'3 and weighs 348.

Well, you keep mentioning Ferg, Ratliff and Tank, don't you?

4.) Darren McFadden ruins our cap space.

Is he somehow going to get more money than Long or Dorsey would? How come they don't kill our cap but he does? Oh right, you don't want to draft him so it wouldn't progress your stance by admitting how foolish that sounds.

The same amount of money would go to any one of those players. If McFadden kills our cap space, so would either one of them.

If Doug Free pans out like you hope (and you better hope he pans out, cuz Romo is screwed otherwise), then he'll get a big contact like all good LTs get... or you franchise Flozell, like you said, then you have to add that big contract to the big contract you gave to DMAC.

Oh and btw, Free's run blocking is a weak part of his game.

If you draft Long, Free or Flo won't have the leverage to command a big contract and you still have money left to address other positions. A RB can be selected outside of the top 5 and be great in our RB by Committee approach.

Doesn't take a mathematician to figure that out. Hopefully, you're not too confused.

Fact is, Dallas is in very good position cap wise and having that top 5 pick will only hurt us if we draft a player that doesn't live up to the contract. I'll take my chances that McFadden does over either one of those guys, especially considering what the Cowboys already have on their roster.

How so? Can you explain our cap situation?

Finally, and make sure you re-read this part so you fully understand it. If there was an elite 5 star OT prospect in this draft class, than the decision to take McFadden would become much more difficult, as you could make strong cases for each player. That would go for WR as well.

However, there is no Orlando Pace or Calvin Johnson types in this draft...which means you'd have to drop down a tier to draft a player like a Jake Long and pass up a superior prospect.

That is easily the most flawed line of thinking any GM could use.

With no OT or WR in that elite group, and a need for RB once Julius walks it becomes a "no-brainer" for Jerry and Co. to bring McFadden into the fold.

You are so caught up on how many stars a player has it's pathetic. How many stars did Ryan Leaf have again?

Make sure you read this, "Jake Long is an entirely better option than resigning Flozell Adams or relying on Doug Free."

See my great answers in bold. See if you can start to "get it".

Trojans14
09-29-2007, 03:29 PM
See my great answers in bold. See if you can start to "get it".

I really don't think you understand what value means.

You have it built in your head that taking a RB in the top 5 isn't smart, and that LT and NT are much more worthy positions of that lofty status.

That's all well and good on paper, but then you have to fill in the names and talent levels of the players in the discussion.

Darren McFadden is on another tier than Long and Dorsey...it's as simple as that.

If you can't understand that concept, than there really is no point in furthering the discussion.

I don't even consider Dorsey an option for Dallas, so I will exclude him from here on out. No 3-4 team drafts an NT that high, especially a team that's already 3 deep at the position. It's moronic.

However, if Long was in the same tier as McFadden than I would completely understand your logic, and I wouldn't be against drafting him over McFadden.

Unfortunately, that's not the case.

Long doesn't even necessarily project to LT in the pros, many people believe he's much more suited to play RT in the NFL. Again, that would mean even more value lost if that is indeed the case.

But you keep on keepin on with your little theories that only make sense when speaking strictly about positions and not actual players, and I'll gladly take the BPA.

P-L
09-29-2007, 03:43 PM
Let's recap:

1.) You are in favor of drafting a 4 star prospect over a 5 star prospect strictly based on position.

That's intelligent.

Remember even Scott agrees with me, and he probably won't be giving any of his "elite" grades to a Senior this year. Yeah that includes your boy Jake Long. However, I fully expect Darren McFadden to receive that status. Ya know, the guy he called probably the best RB to come along in the last decade.

Jake Long is currently Scott's #1 player. Even after he factors in McFadden and other juniors, Long will likely remain Scott's #2 or #3 prospect. Are you telling me that Scott is only going to give one prospect in the entire draft "elite status?" Just because your in love with McFadden, doesn't mean he is the only prospect worth a damn in the entire draft. Draft sites and experts all over the place disagree with you that Jake Long is a "4 star prospect."

2.) All RB's are a dime a dozen and aren't worth top 5 money.

I'm sure San Diego is kicking themselves for drafting LaDainian Tomlinson 5th overall right now. What a fool AJ Smith looks like. If Darren McFadden is the only elite prospect in this draft, and your team could use a RB, than you draft him, simple as that.Again, Darren McFadden is NOT the only elite prospect in the draft. However, you see it that way because you want the Boys to draft him. Like Shiver said, there are plenty of other RB drafted high that don't pan out for their teams. Even when the players at RB don't become busts, there is almost always other players at more important positions that become superstars. Looking back at it, if you were Baltimore who would you rather have at #5 overall: Jamal Lewis or Brian Urlacher? Of the 32 starting RB in the league, only six of them were drafted in the top 5, only 1 of those in the top 3.

3.) Dorsey is a better fit for Dallas than McFadden.

I like how you avoided the fact that not a single NFL team that runs the 3-4 has spent a top 5 pick on their NT. They rarely spend a first round pick on the position, something that seems to completely allude you. Yet you want Dallas to be the first when we already run 3 deep at the position.

Again, brilliant.

I fully understand Wade's 3-4 vs. Parcells. I also understand that it doesn't take a top 5 pick to plug that spot in his 3-4. We are more than set with a healthy Fergie, and Ratliff. Adding Tank Johnson will only add more depth to a position that's fully stocked and won't need any more help come '08. By all means though, let's throw a top 5 pick in the mix just to make sure we're safe.

Also, don't forget that Wade's best NT he's ever had is 6'3 and weighs 348.I can't disagree too much here. I'm not sure that drafting a NT that highly is worth it. However, a decent amount of people feel like Glen Dorsey is the best player in the draft. If Jerry Jones goes through his evaluations and feels like Dorsey is the best player available (remember he preferred Mario Williams to Reggie Bush) then wouldn't that fit your "You minimize that by taking the best player on the board" theory?

4.) Darren McFadden ruins our cap space.

Is he somehow going to get more money than Long or Dorsey would? How come they don't kill our cap but he does? Oh right, you don't want to draft him so it wouldn't progress your stance by admitting how foolish that sounds.

The same amount of money would go to any one of those players. If McFadden kills our cap space, so would either one of them.

Fact is, Dallas is in very good position cap wise and having that top 5 pick will only hurt us if we draft a player that doesn't live up to the contract. I'll take my chances that McFadden does over either one of those guys, especially considering what the Cowboys already have on their roster.Actually your thinking about it in terms of just straight money, and not cap space. Marion Barber is going to become a RFA at the end of the year. Most people expect Dallas to give him a pretty decent sized contract extension. If you guys draft McFadden, your looking at something like 6 years, $60 million, with $30-$32 million guaranteed ON TOP of what you gave Marion Barber. I'm not going to pretend to know how much money Dallas is going to give Barber. Tying $13-$15 million OR MORE into the RB is ruining your cap space. Sure, Long and Dorsey will make the same amount of money, but they'll be making it at positions of need and not at a position of luxury. If the Boys let Barber walk, then that's fine. Draft McFadden. However signing Barber to a pretty big extension and throwing tons of money at McFadden would be a horrible decision.

D-Unit
09-29-2007, 03:47 PM
I really don't think you understand what value means.

You have it built in your head that taking a RB in the top 5 isn't smart, and that LT and NT are much more worthy positions of that lofty status.

RB in the top 5 can have value, but I don't see the value of a RB that will be apart of a committee being valued that high.

That's all well and good on paper, but then you have to fill in the names and talent levels of the players in the discussion.

Darren McFadden is on another tier than Long and Dorsey...it's as simple as that.

If you can't understand that concept, than there really is no point in furthering the discussion.

That's not a concept. That's your opinion.

I don't even consider Dorsey an option for Dallas, so I will exclude him from here on out. No 3-4 team drafts an NT that high, especially a team that's already 3 deep at the position. It's moronic.

Ok, you keep saying NT is 3 deep. Do you think the players there are good? ATL Falcons are 3 deep at QB. Same boat.

However, if Long was in the same tier as McFadden than I would completely understand your logic, and I wouldn't be against drafting him over McFadden.

Unfortunately, that's not the case.

Long doesn't even necessarily project to LT in the pros, many people believe he's much more suited to play RT in the NFL. Again, that would mean even more value lost if that is indeed the case.

Last time I checked having the ability to play both Tackle positions was a good thing.

Long has been a higher rated player since High School. McFadden emerged last year.

But you keep on keepin on with your little theories that only make sense when speaking strictly about positions and not actual players, and I'll gladly take the BPA.
Your theory is straight BPA. My theory is BPA that fits a need. So that's where we'll have to agree to disagree. I'm moving on. You haven't made me a believer in your logic.

Trojans14
09-29-2007, 03:54 PM
Jake Long is currently Scott's #1 player. Even after he factors in McFadden and other juniors, Long will likely remain Scott's #2 or #3 prospect. Are you telling me that Scott is only going to give one prospect in the entire draft "elite status?" Just because your in love with McFadden, doesn't mean he is the only prospect worth a damn in the entire draft. Draft sites and experts all over the place disagree with you that Jake Long is a "4 star prospect."


I'll let Scott answer that one for me:

"As I was going through and working on my rankings for the last week or so I came to the realization that this crop of seniors just isn't very good. That's not to say there isn't talent because there is but at this point there isn't one player who I am prepared to give my top grade of "Elite" to, not even guys like Jake Long, Glenn Dorsey or Brian Brohm. There is still a long way to go in the draft process and plenty of time for someone to make a move but we may have to wait for underclassmen like Darren McFadden to add some real star power to this draft."

Not all top 5 picks are created equal. Some drafts you may be fortunate enough to have 7-8 elite prospects, some you may only have 1 or 2.

McFadden will get that "elite" status, Long and Dorsey will not.

Which would make the pick for Dallas a very simple one.

D-Unit
09-29-2007, 04:36 PM
I'll let Scott answer that one for me:

"As I was going through and working on my rankings for the last week or so I came to the realization that this crop of seniors just isn't very good. That's not to say there isn't talent because there is but at this point there isn't one player who I am prepared to give my top grade of "Elite" to, not even guys like Jake Long, Glenn Dorsey or Brian Brohm. There is still a long way to go in the draft process and plenty of time for someone to make a move but we may have to wait for underclassmen like Darren McFadden to add some real star power to this draft."

Not all top 5 picks are created equal. Some drafts you may be fortunate enough to have 7-8 elite prospects, some you may only have 1 or 2.

McFadden will get that "elite" status, Long and Dorsey will not.

Which would make the pick for Dallas a very simple one.

Long has been elite since High School.

Trojans14
09-29-2007, 04:40 PM
Long has been elite since High School.

What does his HS status have to do with this discussion?

It's not relevant at all.

"...there isn't one player who I am prepared to give my top grade of "Elite" to, not even guys like Jake Long, Glenn Dorsey..."

-Scott Wright

I'll take his word over yours on this topic.

bearsfan_51
09-29-2007, 05:04 PM
You act like that is set in stone dude. Even with those comments you're leaving out a few key points.

1) All he said was "yet" and clearly stated that there is a LOT of time to go in the process. I doubt that many people would have given Jamarcus Russell a 1st round grade at the beginning of last year.

2) He never actually said McFadden would be given an elite grade. It was implied, but to continually quote him as if it's doctrine, when he doesn't even say that, is kinda weak.

3) Scott is wrong all the time.

I have no horse in this fight. If I were Dallas and McFadden was available I'd probably take him too, but bringing up Scott continually is a really weak argument.

Trojans14
09-29-2007, 05:18 PM
You act like that is set in stone dude. Even with those comments you're leaving out a few key points.

What's implied is that Long/Dorsey won't receive an elite grade, but there is a chance that some other player will step up and reach that status.

He never actually said McFadden would be given an elite grade. It was implied, but to continually quote him as if it's doctrine, when he doesn't even say that, is kinda weak.

It's my opinion that McFadden already has reached that elite status. I used Scott's quote to back up my stance.

3) Scott is wrong all the time.

I have no horse in this fight. If I were Dallas and McFadden was available I'd probably take him too, but bringing up Scott continually is a really weak argument.

I have only used one of Scott's quotes, where's the problem in that?

He does this for a living and I respect his opinion.

It's only seems weak if you disagree with both of us.

Maybe I should have used McFadden's HS stats to back up my claims...but then again that wouldn't make any sense.

bearsfan_51
09-29-2007, 05:25 PM
You couldn't be further from the truth. He said this (I'm assuming very early in the college season) and then also said that there was a long way to go. To say that they won't now, 6-7 months before the draft, is stupid.

Now if you want to say that McFadden is the best prospect in in September and use Scott's quote to back that up fine. That's not really what Scott said, but at least you're not completely distorting the quote to make it say what you want it to say.

Trojans14
09-29-2007, 05:35 PM
[QUOTE=bearsfan_51;639541]You couldn't be further from the truth. He said this (I'm assuming very early in the college season) and then also said that there was a long way to go. To say that they won't now, 6-7 months before the draft, is stupid.

[QUOTE]

He said it 8 days ago, to be exact.

Hey you may be right, but at this point I doubt it.

[QUOTE=bearsfan_51;639541]Now if you want to say that McFadden is the best prospect in in September and use Scott's quote to back that up fine. That's not really what Scott said, but at least you're not completely distorting the quote to make it say what you want it to say.[QUOTE]

Your interpretation of Scott's quote seems slightly different than mine. To me it reads like Long/Dorsey/Brohm are all quality football players but won't reach that elite prospect status. They've all been on the seen for quite some time now...I doubt his opinion is going to change significantly enough to bump them up to an elite prospect within the next couple months. Again, I could be wrong here...ask him if you want.

It's my opinion that McFadden is the best prospect in this draft, and the next guy down isn't in his tier...so that's a drop off.

In other drafts that wouldn't be the case, but in this draft it just so happens to work out that way.

That doesn't mean Long or Dorsey won't have productive NFL careers, I just wouldn't want to spend top 5 money on either player if I was the Dallas Cowboys.

D-Unit
09-29-2007, 06:36 PM
[QUOTE=bearsfan_51;639541]You couldn't be further from the truth. He said this (I'm assuming very early in the college season) and then also said that there was a long way to go. To say that they won't now, 6-7 months before the draft, is stupid.

[QUOTE]

He said it 8 days ago, to be exact.

Hey you may be right, but at this point I doubt it.

[QUOTE=bearsfan_51;639541]Now if you want to say that McFadden is the best prospect in in September and use Scott's quote to back that up fine. That's not really what Scott said, but at least you're not completely distorting the quote to make it say what you want it to say.[QUOTE]

Your interpretation of Scott's quote seems slightly different than mine. To me it reads like Long/Dorsey/Brohm are all quality football players but won't reach that elite prospect status. They've all been on the seen for quite some time now...I doubt his opinion is going to change significantly enough to bump them up to an elite prospect within the next couple months. Again, I could be wrong here...ask him if you want.

It's my opinion that McFadden is the best prospect in this draft, and the next guy down isn't in his tier...so that's a drop off.

In other drafts that wouldn't be the case, but in this draft it just so happens to work out that way.

That doesn't mean Long or Dorsey won't have productive NFL careers, I just wouldn't want to spend top 5 money on either player if I was the Dallas Cowboys.
There's no real need for McFadden. He's a nice to have player. The offense is already top shape. The defense still has shown problems creating pressure on the QB. We've drafted Ware and Spencer and we're still saying pass pressure is a problem. Like I said before... It all starts up front with the NT. If the NT cannot command a double, then he doesn't free up a blocker for the attackers to be more effective. DTs are more important in the NFL than DEs or OLBs in our case.

Paul
09-29-2007, 06:44 PM
I honestly think Dorsey would be the best fit for Dallas. Long is also an option, with DMac a distant 3rd IMO. I would p!$$ myself is Dallas ended up with Dorsey. Him in the middle with Ware coming off the outside(along with maybe Ellis/Spencer) is pretty scary.

now, Cowboy fans, let's say the Brownies do better than expected and have a pick in the 8-12 range. Dorsey, Long and DMac are gone. Do you go Baker? or possibly Desean Jackson?

Cowboys will select Ray Rice in the 2nd just so we can piss you off.

Trojans14
09-29-2007, 07:37 PM
There's no real need for McFadden. He's a nice to have player. The offense is already top shape. The defense still has shown problems creating pressure on the QB. We've drafted Ware and Spencer and we're still saying pass pressure is a problem. Like I said before... It all starts up front with the NT. If the NT cannot command a double, then he doesn't free up a blocker for the attackers to be more effective. DTs are more important in the NFL than DEs or OLBs in our case.

I'm more than fine with the group of NT's Dallas will have in the fold for '08. I see no need to address the position in the off-season unless Fergie can't come back for some unforeseen reason. Plus for about the 5th time, you don't spend a top 5 pick on an NT. I've yet to see a team do it, have you?

What you're still not understanding is the impact of the player, not the position.

Like I said before, if there was an OT that carried the same grade as McFadden than I'd be on board with drafting said player.

It's not my philosophy to draft for need when there is clearly better value on the board at a position that also could use an upgrade.

This isn't a McFadden or bust chant, it's just that their isn't any one else on his level this year...at least not at this point.

We'll see what happens.

KCStud
09-29-2007, 07:55 PM
KC will NOT, I repeat, will NOT take any QB. I guarantee it. Herm loves Brodie and thinks he has a lot of potential. No matter how good or bad Croyle does it won't matter. That's not enough time to judge him.

KC needs the best available OL period. They will either take an OL or a CB

D-Unit
09-29-2007, 07:56 PM
I'm more than fine with the group of NT's Dallas will have in the fold for '08. I see no need to address the position in the off-season unless Fergie can't come back for some unforeseen reason. Plus for about the 5th time, you don't spend a top 5 pick on an NT. I've yet to see a team do it, have you?

What you're still not understanding is the impact of the player, not the position.

Like I said before, if there was an OT that carried the same grade as McFadden than I'd be on board with drafting said player.

It's not my philosophy to draft for need when there is clearly better value on the board at a position that also could use an upgrade.

This isn't a McFadden or bust chant, it's just that their isn't any one else on his level this year...at least not at this point.

We'll see what happens.
You keep talking about the depth of NT.

Answer these questions:

1. When do you expect Ferguson to be ready to return from his ACL injury?

2. Considering his age, and his ineffectiveness in the past, what gives you confidence in him to perform better than he did when he was healthy? Or are you thinking that he was good enough before?

3. Do you think Tank Johnson can excel as our starting NT if given the chance?

4. Do you see Jay Ratliff as the long term solution?

5. Where do you see the bigger drop off in talent in the draft? The DTs after Dorsey or the RBs after McFadden?

Hines
09-29-2007, 08:04 PM
after thinking about it more, i really like the cason pick now..him and taylor could be a good duo

scottyboy
09-29-2007, 08:10 PM
Cowboys will select Ray Rice in the 2nd just so we can piss you off.

i think i would jump off of a bridge if that happened

Trojans14
09-29-2007, 08:12 PM
You keep talking about the depth of NT.

Answer these questions:

1. When do you expect Ferguson to be ready to return from his ACL injury?

2. Considering his age, and his ineffectiveness in the past, what gives you confidence in him to perform better than he did when he was healthy? Or are you thinking that he was good enough before?

3. Do you think Tank Johnson can excel as our starting NT if given the chance?

4. Do you see Jay Ratliff as the long term solution?

5. Where do you see the bigger drop off in talent in the draft? The DTs after Dorsey or the RBs after McFadden?

I'm not sure when Fergie will be back, it's to early to tell...but I do expect him to play next season. He was more than fine at NT for us before.

I can't say for sure how well Tank will perform. He is only 25 and has had solid experience at the NFL level, albeit in another scheme.

Ratliff has played very well for us, and would be a solid backup NT for any Wade Phillips run defense. I'm hoping both Tank and Fergie will be ahead of him on the depth chart, that would mean we have zero need for an addition.

Your 5th question has no importance to me. I would never draft an NT that high...it seems like every single team that runs the 3-4 would agree with me (Seeing as no 3-4 team has drafted an NT that high...something you refuse to admit) especially when you consider what Dallas already has in the fold.

What you should be asking yourself is why on earth would you pass on the drafts best player, in order to take an NT we don't need or an OT that many believe will have to play RT in the NFL?

Oh right, McFadden wouldn't be worth that contract...so let's give to a lesser talent.

M.O.T.H.
09-29-2007, 08:26 PM
Just to clear some things up...Fergie has a torn bicep, not an ACL injury...he'll be ready by the start of next year.

D-Unit
09-29-2007, 08:34 PM
Just to clear some things up...Fergie has a torn bicep, not an ACL injury...he'll be ready by the start of next year.
Right. That's good. Still.... Dorsey >>>>>>>>>>>>> Ferguson.

M.O.T.H.
09-29-2007, 08:37 PM
Right. That's good. Still.... Dorsey >>>>>>>>>>>>> Ferguson.

I think you are underrating Fergie a bit but, i wouldnt necessarily disagree. I'm a big dorsey fan and he could do several different things in our D. I wouldnt completely ax or be against the idea of drafting him.

Nice Marion sig, D.

D-Unit
09-29-2007, 08:42 PM
I'm not sure when Fergie will be back, it's to early to tell...but I do expect him to play next season. He was more than fine at NT for us before.

I can't say for sure how well Tank will perform. He is only 25 and has had solid experience at the NFL level, albeit in another scheme.

Ratliff has played very well for us, and would be a solid backup NT for any Wade Phillips run defense. I'm hoping both Tank and Fergie will be ahead of him on the depth chart, that would mean we have zero need for an addition.

Your 5th question has no importance to me. I would never draft an NT that high...it seems like every single team that runs the 3-4 would agree with me (Seeing as no 3-4 team has drafted an NT that high...something you refuse to admit) especially when you consider what Dallas already has in the fold.

What you should be asking yourself is why on earth would you pass on the drafts best player, in order to take an NT we don't need or an OT that many believe will have to play RT in the NFL?

Oh right, McFadden wouldn't be worth that contract...so let's give to a lesser talent.
Because McFadden would be a part time player.

Because McFadden is not the only good player in this draft.

Because McFadden hurts the cap.

Because McFadden does not address a need.

Because the right way to build a team is starting from the trenches.

I mean really, the way you talk it's as if McFadden is from another planet and everyone else in the draft won't be just as successful respectively at their positions. Long and Dorsey will have excellent NFL careers.

By your logic, the team with the #1 pick should take McFadden regardless of their needs. That's dumb.

By your logic, we should've kept our pick and selected Brady Quinn last year because he was the BPA. Who cares if we have Romo?

You haven't convinced me of anything. All your points hold no water. All you revert to is, "I think McFadden is the only elite player in the draft". Sorry if I think there are other players who will have a great impact in the NFL.

D-Unit
09-29-2007, 08:51 PM
I think you are underrating Fergie a bit but, i wouldnt necessarily disagree. I'm a big dorsey fan and he could do several different things in our D. I wouldnt completely ax or be against the idea of drafting him.

Nice Marion sig, D.
Fact of the matter, I was really excited about Ferg's signing in the beginning, but he has completely disappointed me. Our Pass Rush is pathetic. We've added the rushers. We've added the attacking scheme. What's the problem? The DL. More importantly, the NT. Until we get a dominant NT, like the Patriots and Wilfork, the Steelers and Hampton, the Chargers and Williams, the Cowboys' defense will always be a tier below. Luckily for us, Phillips' 1 gap 3-4 scheme does not require a mammoth NT to be effective. Guys like Dorsey don't grow on trees. It's been a long time since the draft has had a DT graded as high as him. I can't even remember when... 2003? Dewayne Robertson? Kevin Williams? '02 John Henderson? He wasn't a top 5 pick either... I seriously can't remember when a DT was talked about as a top 3 pick.

Trojans14
09-29-2007, 08:52 PM
Right. That's good. Still.... Dorsey >>>>>>>>>>>>> Ferguson.

I love how you know this already.

You're comparing a Vet. like Ferguson, who was one of the Cowboys best defenders in '06 to a Senior in college who has never played NT in his entire life.

Simply Amazing.

Hines
09-29-2007, 08:53 PM
I love how you know this already.

You're comparing a Vet. like Ferguson, who was one of the Cowboys best defenders in '06 to a Senior in college who has never played NT in his entire life.

Simply Amazing.

i think he is comparing dorseys potential to ferguson right now..

scottyboy
09-29-2007, 08:55 PM
I love how you know this already.

You're comparing a Vet. like Ferguson, who was one of the Cowboys best defenders in '06 to a Senior in college who has never played NT in his entire life.

Simply Amazing.

i could do that with plenty of cases

Ray Rice>>>>>> Ron "No gain" Dayne
Andre Woodson>>> Kerry Collins
Mike Teel>>>> Tom Brady
Courtney Greene>>>>>>>>> James Butler

Trojans14
09-29-2007, 09:01 PM
I mean really, the way you talk it's as if McFadden is from another planet and everyone else in the draft won't be just as successful respectively at their positions. Long and Dorsey will have excellent NFL careers.


You've got comprehension skills, bro.

I've said over and over that if there was another OT or WR prospect on par with McFadden than by all means select that player.

This draft doesn't have one. Last years did...the year before did...most do.

Sorry if that hurts your stance.

Also wanting an NT that high is ridiculous. NFL GM's never do it, but somehow you've convinced yourself that it's a good idea.

The more you post, the less I think you know what the hell you're talking about.

You didn't even know what kind of injury Fergie had.

If you can't understand basic truths about the way NFL teams draft, and the concept of taking BPA than I'm not sure what to tell you.

Trojans14
09-29-2007, 09:03 PM
i could do that with plenty of cases

Ray Rice>>>>>> Ron "No gain" Dayne
Andre Woodson>>> Kerry Collins
Mike Teel>>>> Tom Brady
Courtney Greene>>>>>>>>> James Butler


Ferguson has had a solid pro career and played great for Dallas as an NT.

You can't predict that Dorsey will be better than him, when he's never played the position before in his life.

At least if you want credibility you wouldn't.

Hines
09-29-2007, 09:08 PM
You've got comprehension skills, bro.

I've said over and over that if there was another OT or WR prospect on par with McFadden than by all means select that player.

This draft doesn't have one. Last years did...the year before did...most do.

Sorry if that hurts your stance.

Also wanting an NT that high is ridiculous. NFL GM's never do it, but somehow you've convinced yourself that it's a good idea.

The more you post, the less I think you know what the hell you're talking about.

You didn't even know what kind of injury Fergie had.

If you can't understand basic truths about the way NFL teams draft, and the concept of taking BPA than I'm not sure what to tell you.


2003 dewayne robertson 4th overall by the jets
2001 gerard warren 3rd overall by the browns
2001 richard seymour 6th overall by the patriots

scottyboy
09-29-2007, 09:08 PM
Ferguson has had a solid pro career and played great for Dallas as an NT.

You can't predict that Dorsey will be better than him, when he's never played the position before in his life.

At least if you want credibility you wouldn't.

I never said he would... I was proving your point moot, that you can predict some college players better than some vets in the league...

Trojans14
09-29-2007, 09:12 PM
2003 dewayne robertson 4th overall by the jets
2001 gerard warren 3rd overall by the browns
2001 richard seymour 6th overall by the patriots

Sorry to break this to you, but Seymour is a DE, and neither Robertson or Warren was drafted to play NT.

Trojans14
09-29-2007, 09:14 PM
I never said he would... I was proving your point moot, that you can predict some college players better than some vets in the league...

It doesn't make any sense to me to try and predict something like that with no evidence to base it off of, but you're right it is just an opinion and he can claim anything he wants.

scottyboy
09-29-2007, 09:15 PM
It doesn't make any sense to me to try and predict something like that with no evidence to base it off of, but you're right it is just an opinion and he can claim anything he wants.

mine werent opinions, they were all facts. Everyone is true now, and will become true when they go pro

Trojans14
09-29-2007, 09:22 PM
mine werent opinions, they were all facts. Everyone is true now, and will become true when they go pro

Haah...Good stuff.

I went to Rutgers, so I'd love to see Ray Rice have a great pro career.

Tough loss to Maryland, my buddy was there and sent me some pics. The crowds and tailgaiting is so much better than the old days when I was there.

We were lucky to win more than one game during my stretch.

scottyboy
09-29-2007, 09:25 PM
Haah...Good stuff.

I went to Rutgers, so I'd love to see Ray Rice have a great pro career.

very nice, some here would say I'm somewhat a fan of Rutgers.

i would love to stop this conversation at that, before my keyboard gets short circuited from the tears...

Dorsey is a freak, i feel he's on a different level than the other "elite" DT prospects. His "speed" for a DT is very good, and he is one big boy

draftguru151
09-29-2007, 10:50 PM
And by somewhat he means that 3,274 of his posts are about Rutgers.

D-Unit
09-30-2007, 12:54 AM
You've got comprehension skills, bro.

I've said over and over that if there was another OT or WR prospect on par with McFadden than by all means select that player.

This draft doesn't have one. Last years did...the year before did...most do.

Sorry if that hurts your stance.

Also wanting an NT that high is ridiculous. NFL GM's never do it, but somehow you've convinced yourself that it's a good idea.

The more you post, the less I think you know what the hell you're talking about.

You didn't even know what kind of injury Fergie had.

If you can't understand basic truths about the way NFL teams draft, and the concept of taking BPA than I'm not sure what to tell you.
You're telling me that I have comprehension skills??? Oh too funny!

I know what you've been saying over and over. You keep saying that because someone thinks McFadden has one more star than Long or Dorsey as a prospect that automatically means he's better. That's nuts. What is the bottom line here? It's an indicator of whether that player has what it takes to make it on the next level. How accurate are the very best of graders or even the consensus grades? Fact of the matter is that those "stars" can be completely irrelevant. So whether a player has one or five stars at any given point in time, is completely unrelated to the actual success of the player... not to mention those grades can always change and they will as the draft gets closer. If any draft was done over, do you think teams would draft the same knowing what they know now? Of course not. Those predraft grades are meaningless. You seem so caught up on this idea that the amount of "stars" a prospect has determines their ultimate success or failure in the NFL.

It doesn't matter that Long or Dorsey may be 4 star prospects and McFadden is a 5 star prospect. It just doesn't.

I can't believe you just told me, "If you can't understand basic truths about the way NFL teams draft, and the concept of taking BPA than I'm not sure what to tell you."

NFL Teams DO NOT just take BPA. Not only are each team's definition of BPA different, but they also consider NEED. Once you understand that, then maybe I'll start to listen to you.

Do you think there is a magical draft board out there that list's BPA and all teams just go down the list one by one in order? That's what it sounds like you're telling me. So why even have a draft? Maybe the NFL should just assign a list of players that teams get based of BPA.

HorusKing
09-30-2007, 01:25 AM
The Dan Conner pick for the Houston texans makes no since to me I can see them drafting a runnng back in the first round because Ahman Green isn't the long term fix.

Trojans14
09-30-2007, 03:19 AM
You're telling me that I have comprehension skills??? Oh too funny!

I know what you've been saying over and over. You keep saying that because someone thinks McFadden has one more star than Long or Dorsey as a prospect that automatically means he's better. That's nuts. What is the bottom line here? It's an indicator of whether that player has what it takes to make it on the next level. How accurate are the very best of graders or even the consensus grades? Fact of the matter is that those "stars" can be completely irrelevant. So whether a player has one or five stars at any given point in time, is completely unrelated to the actual success of the player... not to mention those grades can always change and they will as the draft gets closer. If any draft was done over, do you think teams would draft the same knowing what they know now? Of course not. Those predraft grades are meaningless. You seem so caught up on this idea that the amount of "stars" a prospect has determines their ultimate success or failure in the NFL.

It doesn't matter that Long or Dorsey may be 4 star prospects and McFadden is a 5 star prospect. It just doesn't.

I can't believe you just told me, "If you can't understand basic truths about the way NFL teams draft, and the concept of taking BPA than I'm not sure what to tell you."

NFL Teams DO NOT just take BPA. Not only are each team's definition of BPA different, but they also consider NEED. Once you understand that, then maybe I'll start to listen to you.

Do you think there is a magical draft board out there that list's BPA and all teams just go down the list one by one in order? That's what it sounds like you're telling me. So why even have a draft? Maybe the NFL should just assign a list of players that teams get based of BPA.

Man, the concepts I've been talking about are completely lost on you. This is hopeless, but I'll try again.

This whole 4 star, 5 star thing really is screwing with your brain, isn't it? Let's call them tiers instead of using a "star" system.

When NFL teams put their boards together it doesn't go 1-to whatever, and then whoever the BPA is when their up they select. Any non-moron understands that, and I haven't been stating that from the beginning.

What I am saying is that it's a tiered system.

Let's use 2006 as an example.

Teams may have all had Reggie Bush/Mario Williams/Vince Young/Matt Leinart/D'Brick graded out evenly, thus they were all are on the same "elite tier."

The top tier is always the smallest group and so on down the line. 2006 happened to have a plethora of top tier talent, a rather rare large group of players, which may have also have included AJ Hawk, and Michael Huff.

Calvin Johnson/Adrian Peterson, and maybe JaMarcus Russell would have been in that group last season.

This season, IMO the only player that would garner such a lofty status is Darren McFadden.

With Dallas having a potential top 5 pick, I certainly wish this crop was more like the '06 group...but at this point that just doesn't seem to be the case.

The only time I might pass on a top tier player and go with a lesser talent would be if I was either in dire need of a franchise QB or that spot was already filled with an elite talent.

Which brings be back to my original point. If you have a position open for that top tier player, which Dallas does, than there is no reason to take a lesser talent just because you feel it's a more important position on the football field.

Did you want to mention anyone else besides Dorsey or Long? The NT we don't currently need or the OT that struggles in pass protection and might have to play RT in the pros.

This is all kind of ridiculous any way...you've even admitted that McFadden would be a great pick for Dallas, haven't you?

"McFadden - While he would truly be a dream selection and put Dallas' offense over the top"

Dream selection, eh? Sounds like a man that might actually understand what's going on.

Who said that gem?

I think you already know the answer.

scottyboy
09-30-2007, 06:20 AM
The Dan Conner pick for the Houston texans makes no since to me I can see them drafting a runnng back in the first round because Ahman Green isn't the long term fix.

I like that pick for you guys. Him and Demeco would just give your D a bunch of young talent. With Connor next to Demeco you've got 2 great young playmaking LB's and upfront with Okoye and Mario.

you could get a very good RB later in the draft like rounds 2-5. There are so many examples in the NFL of late round picks starting in the NFL

Scott Wright
09-30-2007, 07:46 AM
Personally, as good of a prospect as McFadden is I wouldn't take a running back #1 overall for one simple reason: Money.

I'm just not prepared to devote that kind of salary cap space to the position and give him more money than guys like LT and LJ.

That's even more true this year when the running back class has a chance to be the best I've ever seen depending on which underclassmen come out.

Forenci
09-30-2007, 09:28 AM
Honetly, I don't think Glenn Dorsey would make a great NT. I think he'd make a decent one, but for all the money that you'd be giving him, I don't see him being superb playing NT.

I think it'd kind of be a waste too. Dorsey is a real threat as a pass rusher and run stopper, and for that to really show on the field I think he needs a 4-3 system.

I could be wrong, but that's just my opinion. I feel if he goes into the 3-4 system he won't be as productive. Part of it may have to do with the fact I believe he's not big enough to play NT. If I were Dallas I'd use my second 1st Rounder to pick up someone like Frank Okam. Now that's a guy I could see doing well in the 3-4 NT spot.

draftguru151
09-30-2007, 10:22 AM
Calvin Johnson/Adrian Peterson, and maybe JaMarcus Russell would have been in that group last season.

You mean the guy drafted 7th overall was one of 2/3 guys in that elite tier? But he didn't go top 3. >_<

daullaz
09-30-2007, 10:58 PM
I'm sure this has been brought up already Scott, but you have New England listed as forfeiting their first-round pick. It seems very unlikely that they miss the playoffs, and as you know if they qualify for the post-season, they will lose their 2nd- and 3rd-round picks instead. So you should think about putting them in there at #32 and giving them a player in your next mock.

VoteLynnSwan
09-30-2007, 11:25 PM
I'm sure this has been brought up already Scott, but you have New England listed as forfeiting their first-round pick. It seems very unlikely that they miss the playoffs, and as you know if they qualify for the post-season, they will lose their 2nd- and 3rd-round picks instead. So you should think about putting them in there at #32 and giving them a player in your next mock.

it's the opposite of what you just said.

soybean
10-01-2007, 01:07 AM
does anyone else think that when all is said and done that Carolina will be picking a QB in the first round? Delhomme had a nice career but I think his time is done and Carr well... just ask stoner about carr...

Trojans14
10-01-2007, 02:05 AM
You mean the guy drafted 7th overall was one of 2/3 guys in that elite tier? But he didn't go top 3. >_<

Yes that's what I'm saying.

His injury history caused him to drop.

On talent alone he was in that elite class.

D-Unit
10-01-2007, 02:15 AM
With Cleveland winning today, it's not looking like that will be a top 3 pick anymore. Time to move on. Thank goodness, McFadden would've been the worst pick ever for the Cowboys.

Now we should be talking about Sedrick Ellis, Desean Jackson or Ryan Clady. :D

Crow
10-01-2007, 03:00 AM
Oakland just stomped a 300 yard mudhole in Miami and walked it dry. Regardless of the Fins' ranking in run defense, 300 yards is a staggering number. I think maybe the need for a 1st round OL has been greatly exaggerated.

Not that I wouldn't consider it. But that pick would be better spent on a DL or WR, value permitting of course.

Trojans14
10-01-2007, 03:23 AM
With Cleveland winning today, it's not looking like that will be a top 3 pick anymore. Time to move on. Thank goodness, McFadden would've been the worst pick ever for the Cowboys.

Now we should be talking about Sedrick Ellis, Desean Jackson or Ryan Clady. :D

Worst pick ever today, but a dream selection only 5 days ago.

Simply amazing.

thule
10-01-2007, 03:35 AM
I'm going to laugh if Jerry Jones trades up using both first's to draft McFadden. Hopefully D doesn't follow in the ways of kwhy.

Grig
10-01-2007, 10:57 AM
Oakland just stomped a 300 yard mudhole in Miami and walked it dry. Regardless of the Fins' ranking in run defense, 300 yards is a staggering number. I think maybe the need for a 1st round OL has been greatly exaggerated.

Not that I wouldn't consider it. But that pick would be better spent on a DL or WR, value permitting of course.

Noooo. OL or Secondary please.

Crow
10-01-2007, 01:36 PM
Too many #1 picks in the secondary as it is. Our coverage isn't going to get any better until we start applying pressure. Our current DLs aren't capable, apparently.

daullaz
10-01-2007, 09:39 PM
it's the opposite of what you just said.

That actually makes more sense. Thanks.

DaSuperfan
10-02-2007, 05:43 PM
I don't like the Henne pick either. I think the Bears are better suited to draft OL in the first because we're super old up front. We need to add some fresh blood. The problem I have is that Jerry Angelo is the one drafting for this team. His track record for drafting offensive players is abysmal and I have no faith him whatsoever to evaluate offensive players. His track record for defensive talent is at the other end of the spectrum. He knows his defense and that's why most of our draft picks on defense have been great.

Addict
10-02-2007, 05:54 PM
I don't like the Henne pick either. I think the Bears are better suited to draft OL in the first because we're super old up front. We need to add some fresh blood. The problem I have is that Jerry Angelo is the one drafting for this team. His track record for drafting offensive players is abysmal and I have no faith him whatsoever to evaluate offensive players. His track record for defensive talent is at the other end of the spectrum. He knows his defense and that's why most of our draft picks on defense have been great.

O-line really isn't as big a problem as qb for your team. Both your QB's (i.e. Rex and Brian) are turnover machines, so maybe winning games for you guys would start with getting a qb who knows the difference between a FREAKIN' WIDE RECEIVER AND A DEFENSIVE BACK!

DaSuperfan
10-02-2007, 05:58 PM
O-line really isn't as big a problem as qb for your team. Both your QB's (i.e. Rex and Brian) are turnover machines, so maybe winning games for you guys would start with getting a qb who knows the difference between a FREAKIN' WIDE RECEIVER AND A DEFENSIVE BACK!

While I agree with you, I was only referring to the mock draft that was posted on this site. If the board fell the way it did, there's no sense in drafting a QB just to draft a QB if he's not good. I'm not a Chad Henne fan by any means and think it would be better suited for the Bears to go in another direction if the draft actually went like that.

But, by in large, I agree that we need a some new talent at QB. I'm just scared that Jerry Angelo is the one that's pulling the trigger. His eye for offensive talent has been horrible.