PDA

View Full Version : 2008 Draft Grades discussion


49ersfan_87
05-14-2008, 02:17 PM
http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/reviews/reviews.html


Didnt see a thread but here are Scott Wright's draft grades. So far he has only done 7 of the teams but i thought we could discuss his grades and whether we agree/disagree. So far the best grade has been given to the Chiefs, A-. The worst grade has been given to the Titans, with D+

Im interested in the grade he gives to the 49ers.

no love
05-14-2008, 04:00 PM
I think Atlanta did better than a B- they got their franchise QB, 3 potential defensive starters, a possible LT and a nice slot receiver in the first three rounds.

Everything after that is probably depth. But I like the addition of Brown and I think he will make a nice addition to their RB corps.

I agree with the Titans grade. They really reached without filling holes. I actually think they should have waited to take a RB, but panicked when RB's started coming off the board. Sweed and Vince together again would have been sick. They seemed to have a good feel for each other by Vince's Jr. year.

BeerBaron
05-14-2008, 04:14 PM
I think chicago will get a lower grade than they actually deserve from....everybody simply for the fact they didn't draft a QB. i can almost gurantee even scott mentions it somewhere in his review when he does them....

lets all conveniently ignore that they got a possible franchise LT that allows Tait to move to RT solidifying 2 spots at once. And lets ignore that they got a power runner in Forte who has a great chance of beating out benson for the starting job and could be our day 1 starter at RB. And lets forget that we got a much needed polished WR and a bigger DT in the 3rd who will each contribute significantly, if not earn starting jobs, this year.

lets just forget all that and ***** some more about the fact that they didnt take a QB. Who cares about getting 4 potential starters with their first 4 picks and go straight to pointing out how they didn't take a QB who wouldn't be any help this year anyway.....

LonghornsLegend
05-14-2008, 05:25 PM
I think chicago will get a lower grade than they actually deserve from....everybody simply for the fact they didn't draft a QB. i can almost gurantee even scott mentions it somewhere in his review when he does them....

lets all conveniently ignore that they got a possible franchise LT that allows Tait to move to RT solidifying 2 spots at once. And lets ignore that they got a power runner in Forte who has a great chance of beating out benson for the starting job and could be our day 1 starter at RB. And lets forget that we got a much needed polished WR and a bigger DT in the 3rd who will each contribute significantly, if not earn starting jobs, this year.

lets just forget all that and ***** some more about the fact that they didnt take a QB. Who cares about getting 4 potential starters with their first 4 picks and go straight to pointing out how they didn't take a QB who wouldn't be any help this year anyway.....


I think people overlook Grossman did make it to the superbowl before, now he has a better rushing attack and time to throw from his backside which is huge problem, because when he gets pressured he runs around with the ball exposed and bad things happen, with a healthy D, protection and a running game I expect a turnaround...Alot of people are sleeping and must of forgot how teams turn arond in just one season, besides, it's not a lock that Henne would be better then Grossman anyway.


As far as the Titans they probably got a worse grade with reaching for William Hayes, I read all these reports about them being so high on Brian Johnston who would of make a MUCH better choice, the guy had better production and better numbers, supposedly they were very high so if you want to tak a reach there why not on him?


And again, they keep grabbing WR's who at best are #2 guys, at what point do you want to get a true #1 stud to grow with your QB? That, and the fact they let Sweed fall all the way in the 2nd to get picked right before them lost points for me, no way should you let a guy you could use get picked one spot before you, whats the cost for jumping 2 spots, a future 6th? But then they felt the need to trade up for William Hayes, not Sweed by 2 spots, didn't make sense.

Turtlepower
05-14-2008, 05:26 PM
Pretty damn good assessment on the Giants by Scott. Favorite quote by Scott:

Who are we to judge the Giants when it comes to evaluating defensive ends though!

wonderbredd24
05-14-2008, 05:38 PM
If you compare what the Falcons did this year to what the Browns pulled off last year, it doesn't look as good at least at the top... B- seems fair

3. Joe Thomas 3. Matt Ryan
22. Brady Quinn 21. Sam Baker

granted, I'm a homer, but I think the Browns win out big time on talent between the two

LonghornsLegend
05-14-2008, 05:40 PM
If you compare what the Falcons did this year to what the Browns pulled off last year, it doesn't look as good at least at the top... B- seems fair

3. Joe Thomas 3. Matt Ryan
22. Brady Quinn 21. Sam Baker

granted, I'm a homer, but I think the Browns win out big time on talent between the two

And how would you even know that, seeing as how we have only seen one out of the 4 guys play a meaningful NFL game...We might have our educated guesses on how the other 3 will stack up, but ther drafted now so draft stock doesn't mean anything anymore, you can't even begin to compare the two until everybody has played.

wonderbredd24
05-14-2008, 05:43 PM
And how would you even know that, seeing as how we have only seen one out of the 4 guys play a meaningful NFL game...We might have our educated guesses on how the other 3 will stack up, but ther drafted now, so draft stock doesn't mean anything anymore, you can't even begin to compare the two until everybody has played.

So why even grade them? That's the debate. Scott gave the Browns an A+ last year in no small part to getting Joe Thomas and Brady Quinn, who he graded out as top 5 talents compared to Matt Ryan and Sam Baker. Sam Baker as it stands now clearly is not where Joe Thomas was coming out last year.

LonghornsLegend
05-14-2008, 05:45 PM
So why even grade them? That's the debate. Scott gave the Browns an A+ last year in no small part to getting Joe Thomas and Brady Quinn, who he graded out as top 5 talents compared to Matt Ryan and Sam Baker. Sam Baker as it stands now clearly is not where Joe Thomas was coming out last year.

You can grade the draft as a whole, but you can't grade what the Browns did versus the Falcons this soon, how could you say the Browns made out better and we have no idea how good Baker or Ryan will be...It's one thing to grade a team's draft, its a whole nother trying to stack up a previous draft with a future draft before those guys have even played...Of course people are going to favor Joe Thomas after making the pro bowl when Baker has only ran around in shorts so far.

SMoore
05-14-2008, 08:30 PM
You can grade the draft as a whole, but you can't grade what the Browns did versus the Falcons this soon, how could you say the Browns made out better and we have no idea how good Baker or Ryan will be...It's one thing to grade a team's draft, its a whole nother trying to stack up a previous draft with a future draft before those guys have even played...Of course people are going to favor Joe Thomas after making the pro bowl when Baker has only ran around in shorts so far.

The point is that the browns came out with what people thought at the time would be their franchise QB and LT.

The falcons on the other hand are rated lower because they got a franchise QB and then reached for a player that most think will not be a successful LT.

Going off of just the player's stock at the time of each draft, not including anything that has happened while they were pros, the browns look a lot better.

ATLDirtyBirds
05-14-2008, 08:38 PM
So why even grade them? That's the debate. Scott gave the Browns an A+ last year in no small part to getting Joe Thomas and Brady Quinn, who he graded out as top 5 talents compared to Matt Ryan and Sam Baker. Sam Baker as it stands now clearly is not where Joe Thomas was coming out last year.


You could do the same thing with Brady Quinn and Matt Ryan. Matt Ryan was valued as a top 3 pick by atleast 2 teams (Ravens and Falcons.) While Brady Quinn slid all the way down to the Browns.

Chucky
05-14-2008, 08:58 PM
You could do the same thing with Brady Quinn and Matt Ryan. Matt Ryan was valued as a top 3 pick by atleast 2 teams (Ravens and Falcons.) While Brady Quinn slid all the way down to the Browns.

The difference between Joe Thomas and Sam Baker is much much larger than the small(if any) difference between Matt Ryan and Brady Quinn

49ersfan_87
05-14-2008, 09:59 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVI-P_XQsfg

Heres a video about the 49ers "reaching" for a "frail, weak-armed QB" that was heavily questioned but paid off big time down the road.

Just a reminder that while grades are fun to do and provide a spark for discussion, they arent the end all-be all and not to get too worked up over them.

AlexDown
05-14-2008, 10:24 PM
I fully expect Scott to take a letter grade off his draft review of the Jets because they won their last game of the season.

doingthisinsteadofwork
05-14-2008, 10:48 PM
I think he was to nice to Oakland.The McFadden pick was good but it could have been better.
The Hall trade was another trade we never needed to make.
The fact that we traded our 3rd rounder this year for Mario Henderson was just awful.
Trading up to get a guy we didnt need and who wont contribute that much except for ST's was also a dumb pick.It doesnt matter if the guy could have gone in the 2nd or 3rd round he obviously didnt.Which may mean that the teams themselves never thought of him as a day one guy.Its still a bad pick.
Trading away our NB for a guy who played one game during his senior season,in a division two school and also is playing a position that isnt a need was also horrible.Not to mention were now without a NB.We just created one more hole in the team with that trade.Just stupid.
The Scott pick was good. Although the 6th round is a little bit late to start addressing needs.
The Schields pick was ok seeing how it was a 7th rounder but it probably could have been better.
Id give us a C at best.

PACKmanN
05-14-2008, 11:28 PM
Scott you gave both the Cards and Falcons Kenny Iwebema in the fourth.

MidwayMonster31
05-16-2008, 05:05 PM
Overall, good assessment on the 49ers. Their draft wasn't overly flashy, but they did get solid players. These guys will probably end up in lesser, but important roles. The only problem I had with their draft was not getting another edge-rusher.

Splat
05-16-2008, 05:09 PM
The Chiefs owned the draft that being said its just on paper and with that many picks you better do some thing with them.

Hwoarang
05-16-2008, 05:59 PM
Can't wait for the Saints review. We got 2 big steals and 1 giant steal (Carl Nicks)

no love
05-16-2008, 06:07 PM
Overall, good assessment on the 49ers. Their draft wasn't overly flashy, but they did get solid players. These guys will probably end up in lesser, but important roles. The only problem I had with their draft was not getting another edge-rusher.

Agreed. Can't say I loved the meat and potatoes. But I can't complain. I also agree that they really needed someone opposite Lawson. And for some reason the coaching staff seems to think Tully Banta Cain is a natural pass rusher....

I think Reggie Smith will turn out to be a major steal for us. He plays faster than his 40 and was projected to be a 1st-2nd round guy before he put up that time, he is this year's Frank Gore.

I also like the Josh Morgan pick. He has a ton of potential. Plus there is nothing wrong with having more big guys who run fast for special teams purposes.

LonghornsLegend
05-16-2008, 07:00 PM
Can't wait for the Saints review. We got 2 big steals and 1 giant steal (Carl Nicks)

Please inform me of what makes Nicks a steal? I'd hardly call a guy with character problems, who was a tackle that moved to guard, a steal at this point...especially not a "giant" steal, you make it seem like Nicks was supposed to go in the 1st, he went right about where he was supposed to go after getting kicked off his campus for his pro day.

Flyboy
05-16-2008, 08:43 PM
Please inform me of what makes Nicks a steal? I'd hardly call a guy with character problems, who was a tackle that moved to guard, a steal at this point...especially not a "giant" steal, you make it seem like Nicks was supposed to go in the 1st, he went right about where he was supposed to go after getting kicked off his campus for his pro day.

Him not being allowed at his Pro Day was a huge deal over nothing and was basically Bo Pelini sending a message as the new head coach of the team. The Saints had a first-round grade on Nicks and even Scott has him listed in his top five value picks.

toddmlazarchick
05-16-2008, 08:45 PM
The Redskins will probably get a G- lol

Supdawg
05-16-2008, 09:21 PM
No disrespect to Scott Wright, but I think his assessment of the Titans draft was simply horrible. He basis his argument that we had a poor draft largely in part to his personal evaluation of the players we chose.

Pick 1 - Chris Johnson. (A+) Many NFL teams had CJ as a first round graded RB. He has everything you want and need in an NFL RB. He has world class speed, lateral explosion, fluid hips, excellent hands, top notch ball security, great work ethic, and excellent vision. He had over 3k yards this year averaging 28yarps per KOR, 1400 rushing, and 600 receiving. His knocks are he played at a mid major conference and he is slightly small for an NFL RB, <200 lbs. RB's historically have proven that small school RB's can translate their success to the NFL probably more than any other position. I had the Titans picking up CJ in my mock Draft, as it was clear to me he would be the perfect person for the Titans.

Pick 2 - Jason Jones. (B) Played DT in college but is considered a tweener between DT and DE. Has a high motor and is extremely intelligent. He excels at run stuffing, and will play the 3 technique in our DL rotation. Our DL coach is extremely excited with him. The Titans lost 3 players off our DL rotation last year in Odom, Laboy, and Starks. We gained Kearse back, but we needed some solid depth behind our starters. Most think that Jones could be like a Justin Tuck player.

Pick 3 – Craig Stevens. (B+) He was considered by most to be the best blocking TE in the entire draft. Had excellent measurables and was underutilized in Cal’s offense. He was the captain of Cal’s team last year, and is a high character guy. Expected to improve an already very good TE corps and replaces our blocking specialists we lost in FA in Ben Hartsock

Pick 4 – William Hayes – (B-) The media gave us grief this pick, but he had similar measurables to Vernon Gholston. I am going to quote another poster’s summary of Bill Polian’s thoughts on William Hayes.

“The guys on Sirius asked Bill Polian about him today, asking whether he was surprised Hayes was taken so high. Before the question was even finished, Polian said "No. He's an outstanding football player." He said the Colts felt Hayes was in the mold of Rahim Brock. He also said the Colts had Hayes rated just slightly lower than the Titans but noted if you're drafting at a thin position, you have to take a guy a little higher or you might not get him at all. Even though the Sirius people, including Gil Brandt, were stumped by Hayes, Polian said NFL people were very aware of him and he had been moving up draft boards across the league.”

Pick 5 – Lavelle Hawkins, (C+) Some considered him to be a 2nd round talent, and he excelled in the Senior Bowl, and was arguably better than Desean Jackson last year at Cal. Probably will be buried on the depth chart, but has been compared to Derrick Mason

Pick 6 – Stanford Keglar – (C) Wasn’t super productive in college, but has all of the measurables that should translate to the NFL. Should be an instant upgrade on ST’s and will be groomed to be the future replacement of either Keith Bulluck or David Thornton.

Pick 7 – Cary Williams – A true developmental player. Titans have had a lot of success drafting CB’s in later rounds the past few years. He has all of the measurables you need at the NFL level, but is RAW. Perfect spot to take a guy like this. It worked last time when we selected Courtland Finnegan in round 7 who is on the cusp of being a pro bowl CB.


Most casual fans and observers think that we were missing a top flight WR. Sure I know that our WR's aren't household names, but you have to understand that our new OC's specialty is developing WR's The simple fact that all of the NFL teams passed on WR's in the first round is very indicative of just how weak this class of WR's were. I'd say that this year that no WR we could have drafted would have beaten out the guys that would be starting and would be buried on the depth chart. We have a bunch of serviceable guys on our WR crew, but why waste a pick on WR when we have the same guys already on our roster?

In addition to the whole the Titans needed a WR angle; it's obvious to the hardcore fans that we needed two things desperately:
1. We need an offensive playmaker that could create matchup problems and help open up our run game to be more explosive.
2. We needed to seriously upgrade our PR/KOR abilities. After Pac's suspension, we went from top of the league in both categories in 06 to near the bottom in 07. We simply lacked the dynamism on ST.

Lendale White is a pretty good RB. But we have an excellent offensive line, and I can't tell you how many times LW should have had huge gains but he simply lacks the speed to explode through the hole why they were open.

Chris Johnson fills all of these needs. He will be able to line up all over the field and create matchup problems (ala Reggie Bush). He instantly upgrades our return specialist role, will be a great 3rd down back and can fill in and start in a pinch. I think the kid has the chance to be very special.

We picked up two DL and they should both come in and instantly come into our rotation at DT/DE. We got the best blocking TE in the draft which is crucial for our run first offense, picked up arguably the most explosive playmaker in the entire draft in Chris Johnson, and got some good solid depth.

All in all, the titans had a very good draft; I would rate it as a B+

As Bill Walsh used to tell his staff “It’s not about where you draft a guy, it’s how they produce.” The Titans were trashed in 2005 for “reaching” for a guy by the name of Michael Roos in the 2nd round, and now he is one of the best young LT’s in the NFL. The Titans have an excellent coaching staff who can coach guys up. Basing draft grades on perception is about as stupid as it gets.

49ersfan_87
05-16-2008, 10:44 PM
Overall, good assessment on the 49ers. Their draft wasn't overly flashy, but they did get solid players. These guys will probably end up in lesser, but important roles. The only problem I had with their draft was not getting another edge-rusher.

Agreed. Can't say I loved the meat and potatoes. But I can't complain. I also agree that they really needed someone opposite Lawson. And for some reason the coaching staff seems to think Tully Banta Cain is a natural pass rusher....

I think Reggie Smith will turn out to be a major steal for us. He plays faster than his 40 and was projected to be a 1st-2nd round guy before he put up that time, he is this year's Frank Gore.

I also like the Josh Morgan pick. He has a ton of potential. Plus there is nothing wrong with having more big guys who run fast for special teams purposes.


Pretty much agree with you guys here. The B is a solid grade and what i was expecting. I think Scott gave a pretty solid assesment on the draft. We didnt blow anyone away but we didnt really make any "questionable" picks either. It was long overdue to get a overhaul up front however. The 49ers drafted 2 defensive lineman from 2006-2007 and they were a 3rd and a 6th rounder. And they only drafted one offensive lineman in 2006-2007, which was Joe Staley. So it was nice to see a committment there because our OL and DL were below average and we lost a combined 4 starters from both units this year.

Im really glad Scott (and people in general) didnt rip on us for not drafting a WR with our 1st. What good is a WR when the QB gets pressured 2 seconds into his dropback?

vidae
05-17-2008, 12:17 AM
I agree, for the most part, with how Scott graded the Chiefs, but I'm not sure I agree with his assessment on the round three picks.

I have to downgrade them slightly for not addressing needs.

Jamaal Charles is a change of pace back and this has become a two back league. If LJ gets hurt, we had little behind him in the ways of starters, and Jamaal Charles will fill THAT role and play 3rd down/spell back type duties, and is an excellent receiver out of the backfield.

Brad Cottam was a pick I didn't agree with at first, but the more I think about it, the more I like it. He's a freak. Tall, fast, a real athlete. Obviously Tony G is still here and is still the best there is at the position, but he can't play forever. I think Cottam is a great guy to groom behind Tony for when he retires (can't hurt to learn from the best all time, can it?) but even more than that, Cottam is an excellent blocker and Chan Gailey runs a lot of two-TE sets. Having let Jason Dunn go, who was one of the best blockers we had, we needed to get another blocking TE to learn the position to eventually be the future.

Dajuan Morgan is one I'm sorta iffy on. Our safety play last year was pretty bad, but that is due to more than the players themselves. Jarrad Page does not deserve to lose his starting spot, but Morgan could potentially start over Pollard. Both of these guys are young, but Morgan could potentially start this year, depending on how camp and pre-season goes.

I agree with his assessment, but I don't think these were "just backup role" picks. They will contribute a little this year but we drafted for the future and all of these have a place in that future.

LonghornsLegend
05-17-2008, 12:25 AM
I loved the Niners draft...Richal will be a pro bowler at guard and sure up the line for years to come, and the Balmer pick is even better when I heard they had intentions of moving him inside...Anything that has to do with freeing up Willis and keeping lineman off of him I am in favor of.



And I did disagree with Scott on the Chiefs and them not addressing needs, Charles was a perfect pick, LJ has been worn into the ground and with a guy like Charles around you can have him fresh late in games with the home run hitter to sub in...Morgan was a value pick but great value, they are looking for future starters, same with the Cottam pick, these guys won't be rushed into the lineup but they are expected to be future starters, they are in a great position to suceed by not being rushed...When you are in full rebuild mode as the Chiefs are, you can afford to take bpa because you need alot of talent everywhere.

zoinks
05-17-2008, 01:11 AM
Another slightly annoyed Titans fan, here....

I find it rather humorous how so many "experts" are lambasting the Titans for not taking a WR at #24, when it's clear that none of this year's wideouts was worthy of a first-round pick.

Many of these geniuses had Desean Jackson or Limas Sweed pegged as the perfect pick at #24; these players ended up going at #49 and #53, respectively. Apparently these "experts" idea of a good draft strategy involves taking late-second-round talent at #24. Forgive me if I question this logic.

The Titans did have a need at WR, but what they were really looking for was a playmaker....a home-run hitter, in whatever form possible. So which guy is likely to make more plays.....the rookie WR who might catch 2-3 balls per game, or the versatile sub-4.3 RB/WR/KR who gets 10-20 touches per game?

Mark my words: barring injury, Chris Johnson's impact and production in 2008 will exceed that of any WR drafted this year, and his versatility will allow Mike Heimerdinger to open up the offense far more than any rookie WR could dream of.

(I do agree that the William Hayes pick seemed like a major reach...but if Bill Polian gives the kid a thumbs up, that's all I need to know).

tom
05-17-2008, 01:18 AM
Steelers should get an A+... We don't really have any needs, so we just took guys we like, guys that fit our system...

QB - Best in the biz.
RB - Had one of the best, now have 2.
FB - Set in Stone.
WR - Two legends and a potential 3rd.
TE - Heath Miller brings home the bacon.
Oline - Starks, Smith, Keomatu, Simmons and Hartwig just screams Awesomeness.

DE - Aaron Smith is a legend, and Brett Keisel is going to be bigger than napoleon.
DT - Best in the biz.
LB - This LB core is HARDCORE.
CB - Lights out.
S - Troy Polamalu can take your mama ouT! YOWZA YOWZA!

Steelers didn't have any holes, and now they have mounds!

PackerLegend
05-17-2008, 01:28 AM
Wow, way to not sound like a homer.

vidae
05-17-2008, 10:10 AM
Roethlisberger is not the best in the biz.

Sportsfan486
05-17-2008, 12:16 PM
Steelers should get an A+... We don't really have any needs, so we just took guys we like, guys that fit our system...

QB - Best in the biz.
RB - Had one of the best, now have 2.
FB - Set in Stone.
WR - Two legends and a potential 3rd.
TE - Heath Miller brings home the bacon.
Oline - Starks, Smith, Keomatu, Simmons and Hartwig just screams Awesomeness.

DE - Aaron Smith is a legend, and Brett Keisel is going to be bigger than napoleon.
DT - Best in the biz.
LB - This LB core is HARDCORE.
CB - Lights out.
S - Troy Polamalu can take your mama ouT! YOWZA YOWZA!

Steelers didn't have any holes, and now they have mounds!

Your use of the word "legends" makes me want to strangle you. .. Especially when you use it to describe Hines Ward, Santonio Holmes and Aaron Smith.... wtf? And I'm not sure I'd call Casey Hampton the "best in the biz."

Homer less imo.

Sniper
05-17-2008, 12:43 PM
Steelers should get an A+... We don't really have any needs, so we just took guys we like, guys that fit our system...

QB - Best in the biz.
RB - Had one of the best, now have 2.
FB - Set in Stone.
WR - Two legends and a potential 3rd.
TE - Heath Miller brings home the bacon.
Oline - Starks, Smith, Keomatu, Simmons and Hartwig just screams Awesomeness.

DE - Aaron Smith is a legend, and Brett Keisel is going to be bigger than napoleon.
DT - Best in the biz.
LB - This LB core is HARDCORE.
CB - Lights out.
S - Troy Polamalu can take your mama ouT! YOWZA YOWZA!

Steelers didn't have any holes, and now they have mounds!

Are these serious posts?

Bengals78
05-17-2008, 12:46 PM
Wow. If the steelers have no holes, why didnt they go undefeated and threaten the record? Homerism hurts sometimes.

Hwoarang
05-17-2008, 12:58 PM
Please inform me of what makes Nicks a steal? I'd hardly call a guy with character problems, who was a tackle that moved to guard, a steal at this point...especially not a "giant" steal, you make it seem like Nicks was supposed to go in the 1st, he went right about where he was supposed to go after getting kicked off his campus for his pro day.Some scouts called him the 2nd best tackle behind Long. He's moving to G because we have so much depth at T and G can be more easily replaced. We got a 2nd round talent in the 5th. You do the math.

TheGreatEscape
05-17-2008, 12:59 PM
I think Pittsburghs oline is what holds them back this year.

TheGreatEscape
05-17-2008, 01:03 PM
Some scouts called him the 2nd best tackle behind Long. He's moving to G because we have so much depth at T

Are you cereal? Nicks better than Williams, Albert and Clady? Heck Gosder will be a better RT and Otah's the same prospect without the age or character question marks.

Hwoarang
05-17-2008, 01:09 PM
Are you cereal? Nicks better than Williams, Albert and Clady? Heck Gosder will be a better RT and Otah's the same prospect without the age or character question marks.Dude, go talk to the scouts that had him rated that high. Don't ***** at me.

TheGreatEscape
05-17-2008, 01:26 PM
Dude, go talk to the scouts that had him rated that high. Don't ***** at me.

Who are these scouts could you send me their scouting reports on him?

Hwoarang
05-17-2008, 01:47 PM
Who are these scouts could you send me their scouting reports on him?I read it in the Advocate man, chill.

yourfavestoner
05-17-2008, 06:35 PM
You guys obviously dont know Tom.

TheGreatEscape
05-17-2008, 07:19 PM
I read it in the Advocate man, chill.

It's cool I was just wondering if you actually knew of any scouts who rated him that highly.

Hwoarang
05-17-2008, 07:40 PM
It's cool I was just wondering if you actually knew of any scouts who rated him that highly. On the contrary some scouts were quoted as saying they wouldn't touch him because of his character issues.

ATLDirtyBirds
05-17-2008, 08:38 PM
The difference between Joe Thomas and Sam Baker is much much larger than the small(if any) difference between Matt Ryan and Brady Quinn


Small if any? Maybe to you, but it seems that NFL scouts feel different.

LonghornsLegend
05-17-2008, 08:51 PM
It's cool I was just wondering if you actually knew of any scouts who rated him that highly.

There aren't any scouts who rate him that highly, that's just another case of homerism gone bad...No one in this world had Nicks rated higher then Clady or Williams, ever at any point...

But even for arguments sake, he is not the "steal of the draft" as he proclaimed.

Hwoarang
05-17-2008, 09:14 PM
There aren't any scouts who rate him that highly, that's just another case of homerism gone bad...No one in this world had Nicks rated higher then Clady or Williams, ever at any point...

But even for arguments sake, he is not the "steal of the draft" as he proclaimed.And you're just a hater. That's all I see from your posts is you hating on people.

Also Arrington's been working with Braylon Edwards in the off season. FTW!

kmartin575
05-17-2008, 10:20 PM
I agree, for the most part, with how Scott graded the Chiefs, but I'm not sure I agree with his assessment on the round three picks.



Jamaal Charles is a change of pace back and this has become a two back league. If LJ gets hurt, we had little behind him in the ways of starters, and Jamaal Charles will fill THAT role and play 3rd down/spell back type duties, and is an excellent receiver out of the backfield.

Brad Cottam was a pick I didn't agree with at first, but the more I think about it, the more I like it. He's a freak. Tall, fast, a real athlete. Obviously Tony G is still here and is still the best there is at the position, but he can't play forever. I think Cottam is a great guy to groom behind Tony for when he retires (can't hurt to learn from the best all time, can it?) but even more than that, Cottam is an excellent blocker and Chan Gailey runs a lot of two-TE sets. Having let Jason Dunn go, who was one of the best blockers we had, we needed to get another blocking TE to learn the position to eventually be the future.

Dajuan Morgan is one I'm sorta iffy on. Our safety play last year was pretty bad, but that is due to more than the players themselves. Jarrad Page does not deserve to lose his starting spot, but Morgan could potentially start over Pollard. Both of these guys are young, but Morgan could potentially start this year, depending on how camp and pre-season goes.

I agree with his assessment, but I don't think these were "just backup role" picks. They will contribute a little this year but we drafted for the future and all of these have a place in that future.

Yep. Knocking a draft for not reaching for needs is ridiculous IMO. This is not a one year rebuild. So why should we reach for needs this year when we can get more talented players that will help the team more in the long run? Reaching for needs is what got us guys like Ryan Sims and Junior Siavii.

Sniper
05-17-2008, 10:23 PM
And you're just a hater. That's all I see from your posts is you hating on people.

Also Arrington's been working with Braylon Edwards in the off season. FTW!

Arrington is a homeless man's Braylon. He could be very good if he fills out and stops beating his woman, and finds some SEC speed.

Hwoarang
05-17-2008, 10:25 PM
Arrington is a homeless man's Braylon. He could be very good if he fills out and stops beating his woman, and finds some SEC speed.No one compared him to Edwards. Jammal Brown beat his wife and tell me 1 person who wouldn't want him on their team.

BeerBaron
05-17-2008, 10:26 PM
And you're just a hater. That's all I see from your posts is you hating on people.

Also Arrington's been working with Braylon Edwards in the off season. FTW!

Arrington is a homeless man's Braylon. He could be very good if he fills out and stops beating his woman, and finds some SEC speed.

yeah really. i could go work out with braylon edwards and it wouldn't instantly turn me into a great NFL wide out.

i think colston is going to be the only great 7th rounder WR to churn out anytime soon....be happy you got that at least

Hwoarang
05-17-2008, 10:29 PM
yeah really. i could go work out with braylon edwards and it wouldn't instantly turn me into a great NFL wide out.

i think colston is going to be the only great 7th rounder WR to churn out anytime soon....be happy you got that at leastWhere did anyone compare him to Edwards? You people act like working out with him won't help at all.

BeerBaron
05-17-2008, 10:31 PM
Where did anyone compare him to Edwards? You people act like working out with him won't help at all.

i wasn't saying you compared him to edwards but i don't think working out with braylon is going to make a difference between being cut as training camp fodder and the next colston.

Hwoarang
05-17-2008, 10:54 PM
i wasn't saying you compared him to edwards but i don't think working out with braylon is going to make a difference between being cut as training camp fodder and the next colston.He ain't being cut. You don't trade back into the 7th for a guy you're going to cut. He's not going to be the next Colston either but he will produce i'm pretty sure of it. Also so is our head coach.

Caddy
05-18-2008, 12:38 AM
He ain't being cut. You don't trade back into the 7th for a guy you're going to cut. He's not going to be the next Colston either but he will produce i'm pretty sure of it. Also so is our head coach.

I don't know about anyone else, but that doesn't seem like a strong enough argument to guarantee someone won't get cut. He was solid value in the 7th, but giving up very little to secure him doesn't guarantee him a roster spot.

Hwoarang
05-18-2008, 12:46 AM
I don't know about anyone else, but that doesn't seem like a strong enough argument to guarantee someone won't get cut. He was solid value in the 7th, but giving up very little to secure him doesn't guarantee him a roster spot.Does anyone want to put up money he doesn't get cut? Why does everyone think he's going to be cut? Payton has done nothing but praise him. If Devery is still on this team the Adrian won't be cut.

Caddy
05-18-2008, 01:19 AM
Does anyone want to put up money he doesn't get cut? Why does everyone think he's going to be cut? Payton has done nothing but praise him. If Devery is still on this team the Adrian won't be cut.

I don't remember saying I thought he would be cut. I just said that it isn't out of the realm of possibility that he gets cut. Don't assume what I'm thinking.

LonghornsLegend
05-18-2008, 01:36 AM
This guy thinks everyone from the Saints draft is the next best thing if you ask him.

Addict
05-18-2008, 05:37 AM
No disrespect to Scott Wright, but I think his assessment of the Titans draft was simply horrible. He basis his argument that we had a poor draft largely in part to his personal evaluation of the players we chose.

Pick 1 - Chris Johnson. (A+) Many NFL teams had CJ as a first round graded RB. He has everything you want and need in an NFL RB. He has world class speed, lateral explosion, fluid hips, excellent hands, top notch ball security, great work ethic, and excellent vision. He had over 3k yards this year averaging 28yarps per KOR, 1400 rushing, and 600 receiving. His knocks are he played at a mid major conference and he is slightly small for an NFL RB, <200 lbs. RB's historically have proven that small school RB's can translate their success to the NFL probably more than any other position. I had the Titans picking up CJ in my mock Draft, as it was clear to me he would be the perfect person for the Titans.

Many teams being the titans, the titans and the titans. Johnson wasn't a first rounder... he was the fifth in line at the RB position and really was supposed to go somewhere mid-second, maybe early second. You guys reached, which is fine, just don't say otherwise once the guy is selected.

Pick 2 - Jason Jones. (B) Played DT in college but is considered a tweener between DT and DE. Has a high motor and is extremely intelligent. He excels at run stuffing, and will play the 3 technique in our DL rotation. Our DL coach is extremely excited with him. The Titans lost 3 players off our DL rotation last year in Odom, Laboy, and Starks. We gained Kearse back, but we needed some solid depth behind our starters. Most think that Jones could be like a Justin Tuck player.

'most think' sentences usually mean 'I think' but you hate feeling lonely. Regardless, he was a good pick.

Pick 3 – Craig Stevens. (B+) He was considered by most to be the best blocking TE in the entire draft. Had excellent measurables and was underutilized in Cal’s offense. He was the captain of Cal’s team last year, and is a high character guy. Expected to improve an already very good TE corps and replaces our blocking specialists we lost in FA in Ben Hartsock

granted, however most considered John Carlton to be the best blocking TE... hate to burst your bubble there. Again, you appear to feel lonely by saying 'most' agree with you...

Pick 4 – William Hayes – (B-) The media gave us grief this pick, but he had similar measurables to Vernon Gholston. I am going to quote another poster’s summary of Bill Polian’s thoughts on William Hayes.

... yeah.... eh.... if he had the same measurables as vernon gholston... that probably means he didn't do much with those measurables, so I'm gonna say either you're talking out of your ass or the titans got themselves a workout warrior.

“The guys on Sirius asked Bill Polian about him today, asking whether he was surprised Hayes was taken so high. Before the question was even finished, Polian said "No. He's an outstanding football player." He said the Colts felt Hayes was in the mold of Rahim Brock. He also said the Colts had Hayes rated just slightly lower than the Titans but noted if you're drafting at a thin position, you have to take a guy a little higher or you might not get him at all. Even though the Sirius people, including Gil Brandt, were stumped by Hayes, Polian said NFL people were very aware of him and he had been moving up draft boards across the league.”

Pick 5 – Lavelle Hawkins, (C+) Some considered him to be a 2nd round talent, and he excelled in the Senior Bowl, and was arguably better than Desean Jackson last year at Cal. Probably will be buried on the depth chart, but has been compared to Derrick Mason

wasn't a second round talent. Anyone who gets buried in the titans' crappy depth chart at receiver isn't a second round-type talent.

Pick 6 – Stanford Keglar – (C) Wasn’t super productive in college, but has all of the measurables that should translate to the NFL. Should be an instant upgrade on ST’s and will be groomed to be the future replacement of either Keith Bulluck or David Thornton.

again... not productive in college + measurables = workout warrior...

Pick 7 – Cary Williams – A true developmental player. Titans have had a lot of success drafting CB’s in later rounds the past few years. He has all of the measurables you need at the NFL level, but is RAW. Perfect spot to take a guy like this. It worked last time when we selected Courtland Finnegan in round 7 who is on the cusp of being a pro bowl CB.

see above.

Sniper
05-18-2008, 05:44 AM
No one compared him to Edwards. Jammal Brown beat his wife and tell me 1 person who wouldn't want him on their team.

Relax there slugger. I said he could be like Braylon. COULD. It's a longshot, but he COULD. Same type of body and style of play.

Addict
05-18-2008, 07:23 AM
This guy thinks everyone from the Saints draft is the next best thing if you ask him.

like, duh. I think you mean the next big thing btw ;)

draftguru151
05-18-2008, 09:30 AM
No disrespect to Scott Wright, but I think his assessment of the Titans draft was simply horrible. He basis his argument that we had a poor draft largely in part to his personal evaluation of the players we chose.

Wait, you mean Scott used his personal opinion of players for his grades? What an absolutely ridiculous idea.

Sniper
05-18-2008, 09:31 AM
Wait, you mean Scott used his personal opinion of players for his grades? What an absolutely ridiculous idea.

An absolute crock. BAN SCOTT WRIGHT DG! YOU CAN DO IT!

Hines
05-18-2008, 09:40 AM
Another slightly annoyed Titans fan, here....

I find it rather humorous how so many "experts" are lambasting the Titans for not taking a WR at #24, when it's clear that none of this year's wideouts was worthy of a first-round pick.

Many of these geniuses had Desean Jackson or Limas Sweed pegged as the perfect pick at #24; these players ended up going at #49 and #53, respectively. Apparently these "experts" idea of a good draft strategy involves taking late-second-round talent at #24. Forgive me if I question this logic.

The Titans did have a need at WR, but what they were really looking for was a playmaker....a home-run hitter, in whatever form possible. So which guy is likely to make more plays.....the rookie WR who might catch 2-3 balls per game, or the versatile sub-4.3 RB/WR/KR who gets 10-20 touches per game?

Mark my words: barring injury, Chris Johnson's impact and production in 2008 will exceed that of any WR drafted this year, and his versatility will allow Mike Heimerdinger to open up the offense far more than any rookie WR could dream of.

(I do agree that the William Hayes pick seemed like a major reach...but if Bill Polian gives the kid a thumbs up, that's all I need to know).


Considering it takes a WR at least three years to actually produce to get stats?

Hwoarang
05-18-2008, 11:39 AM
This guy thinks everyone from the Saints draft is the next best thing if you ask him.Try again. I mean please try again. I'm sorry my team has competent coaches who knows how to scout players. All our draftees will make the team, not all will be the next big thing. Just because a guy is a steal doesn't make him a HOF guy either. You people misunderstand and take things the way you want to instead of how they should be taken. And getting neg repped by a bucs fan made my day, lol.

TheGreatEscape
05-18-2008, 12:25 PM
Considering it takes a WR at least three years to actually produce to get stats?

Considering that why should a playoff caliber Tennessee team get a WR in the first round when they desperately need a playmaker for this season and no WR got picked in the first by any of the teams?

CC.SD
05-18-2008, 01:33 PM
Considering that why should a playoff caliber Tennessee team get a WR in the first round when they desperately need a playmaker for this season and no WR got picked in the first by any of the teams?

Just because Tennessee made the playoffs last year doesn't mean they are necessarily a playoff caliber team this year. They have no playmakers on offense aside from their QB. Absolutely nothing scary. I'm not against the running back pick as much as some other people, but when your franchise quarterback is throwing to Joe Nobody every play, you throw out the 3 year WR rule and draft one ASAP.

TheGreatEscape
05-18-2008, 02:17 PM
Just because Tennessee made the playoffs last year doesn't mean they are necessarily a playoff caliber team this year. They have no playmakers on offense aside from their QB. Absolutely nothing scary. I'm not against the running back pick as much as some other people, but when your franchise quarterback is throwing to Joe Nobody every play, you throw out the 3 year WR rule and draft one ASAP.

You realize you're making a case for Chris Johnson right? He's going to be the biggest first year playmaker in this draft outside of DMC, and is going to catch a lot of passes. Plus Hawkins is a guy who was a pre-combine second/third round guy. Honestly I do think that he can help out because he runs good routes and has good hands, he'll give VY another solid target while Johnson gives him a fellow playmaker.

BamaFalcon59
05-18-2008, 02:17 PM
see above.

I think Stevens is a better blocker than Carlson, I think a lot agree with me. I think Carlson was the best pass reception-blocking combination of the bunch.

zoinks
05-18-2008, 02:57 PM
You realize you're making a case for Chris Johnson right? He's going to be the biggest first year playmaker in this draft outside of DMC, and is going to catch a lot of passes. Plus Hawkins is a guy who was a pre-combine second/third round guy. Honestly I do think that he can help out because he runs good routes and has good hands, he'll give VY another solid target while Johnson gives him a fellow playmaker.

Exactly. Most Titans fans expect Johnson to be utilized in a manner similar to the way the Saints used Reggie Bush in 2006.

The big difference is that when the Saints lost Deuce McCallister last year, Bush was forced to carry the entire load...a role for which he is ill-suited. And their offense suffered.

The Titans have a bit more depth at RB....if Lendale White misses any significant time, the presence of Chris Henry allows Johnson to stay in the wildcard role, and the playbook doesn't change.

no love
05-18-2008, 06:25 PM
You realize you're making a case for Chris Johnson right? He's going to be the biggest first year playmaker in this draft outside of DMC, and is going to catch a lot of passes. Plus Hawkins is a guy who was a pre-combine second/third round guy. Honestly I do think that he can help out because he runs good routes and has good hands, he'll give VY another solid target while Johnson gives him a fellow playmaker.

I think Felix Jones is going to fill that role more than Johnson. He is more versatile in the run and pass game and the Cowboys offense is much further along at this point.

But I am a fan or Hawkins. He can probably contribute as a slot receiver.

TitanHope
05-18-2008, 09:59 PM
As far as the Titans Draft goes, I do not think it was the best, but I do think Scott discredited it too much. I feel he did not include the team's identity and other factors in his evaluation, and went purely on judging picks based on filling needs or selecting BPA.

If there is a single pick that epitomizes the Titans ineptitude when it comes to the 2008 NFL Draft it was their selection of East Carolina running back Chris Johnson in round one. Now Johnson is a fine player but he wasn't a first round value and could have been had much later. After selecting LenDale White in the 2nd round two years ago and Chris Henry in round two last year the Titans have now invested three premium draft choices in a single position and it's entirely possible that they still don't have a top-notch NFL starter. They are basically taking the same approach at the running back position as they have taken at wide receiver: Quantity over Quality. Instead of bringing in a stud to address the problem once and for all the Titans just keep going back to the well year after year. Personally I would have jumped at the chance to give Vince Young the top wideout he so desperately needs and while there may not have been a Randy Moss or Calvin Johnson in this draft the Titans had their choice of every pass catcher available and 2-3 years from now they may wind up regretting passing on Devin Thomas. Now you can make the case that Chris Johnson is a versatile weapon who can be a playmaker for Young and the Tennessee offense and that is true to a degree, however at the end of the day Johnson is going to be a 3rd down / situational-type in the NFL. With all of their needs that a luxury the Titans simply could not afford, especially not with their #1 pick. Self-indulgent is the only way to describe this selection and after taking Chris Henry and Chris Johnson in back-to-back drafts it is clear that the Titans are very susceptible to falling in love with "Workout Warriors", which is not a good habit to get into.

I disagree.

While I agree that WR is a great need, the Titans needed an immediate playmaker, whether it was a WR, RB, TE, or what have you. That's the thing the offense lacked last year. It was more important to obtain a player who could perform that role than it was to give VY a #1 target. The WR corps is serviceable, and has young potential. Mike Heimerdinger is great at developing WR's, and wants a year to work with the current group. Thus, the ideal pick was Chris Johnson. Johnson isn't going to be a strictly situational-type/3rd down RB. He's going to be used in a #2 RB role who will see the field on any down. He'll run wild behind a great offensive line, and will be helped by the threat of VY's scrambling ability. He also can catch the ball extremely well, and is great after the catch - he can be a dynamic receiving threat. Then, factor in his returning abilities. A higher premium has been set on skilled returners, so Johnson's returning abilities increase his value. Johnson will provide the offense with better field position, will spell LenDale White and add uncanny speed to the RB rotation, and will provide a receiving threat out of the backfield. If utilized correctly, he has as much impact than an every-play WR.

Again, if we went with Limas Sweed or Philip Merling, I would have been happy. I was very high on Limas Sweed, and disagree with those that say there were no 1st RD quality WR's. The fact of the matter is that the Titans can be self-indulgent. They have a dominant DEF, a great OL, and a franchise QB. They're a run-first team, and have never greatly valued WR's. To trash this pick despite it fitting in perfectly with the team's identity and what the FO was looking for makes no sense. But, since it wasn't a great value pick and didn't fill presumed positional need, it was trashed. People thought the Titans needed a dymanic aspect on offense, and since the WR's weren't anything special, they assumed that a dynamic WR was the answer. The Titans did in fact fill that dynamic aspect on offense, but because it wasn't a WR, it gets discredited. That seems silly to me.

While most felt that Tennessee should have gone with a wide receiver in round one you could just as easily made the case for them taking a defensive lineman. After losing Antwan Odom, Randy Starks and Travis LaBoy in free agency the Titans had some major question marks along their defensive line and they helped address those concerns with the selection of Eastern Michigan's Jason Jones in round two. Jones had been playing out of position at defensive tackle in college but he was still very productive, notching 50 tackles for a loss and 14 sacks the past three seasons. A big base end at 6-5 and 270 lbs., Jones isn't necessarily a dominant natural pass rusher but he plays the run well and offers a lot of versatility. Look for Jones to eventually be a 1st and 2nd down type of defensive end with the ability to also move inside in obvious passing situations. In round three the Titans made another highly questionable decision when they chose California tight end Craig Stevens. Stevens was known mostly for his blocking prowess in college but in workouts he showcased better speed and athleticism than most expected which enabled him to rise up draft boards. However, Tennessee signed Alge Crumpler to be their starting tight end this offseason and with Vince Young-favorite Bo Scaife still in the mix as well Stevens will probably be limited to a role as a 3rd string blocking specialist. Not much bang for your buck with a 3rd round pick.

Jason Jones was a great pick. Our DL requires athletes, and Jones is a helluva athlete. He fits our DL, and has versatility. I'm really excited about this guy. Plus, he fills the positional need and value that greatly affects opinion. Though, I must include that our DL is helped greatly by the scheme and coaching of Washburn. Oh, and by guys named Albert Haynesworth and Kyle Vanden Bosch. They can stick Kearse/Joe Six-Pack in at LE and they'll have success. LaBoy and Starks are easily replaceable, but I do wish that they would have kept Odom.

The Stevens pick stumped me at first, but I can't deny that it makes sense. As I said earlier, the Titans are a run-first team. Crumpler and Scaife are good TE's, but they're not the best run-blocking TE's. The Titans lost their blocking TE in FA, so they needed someone to fill that void. Stevens fills it, and can impact the running game in his rookie year. Plus, he has potential as a receiver, and is a task to bring down. For most teams, a blocking specialist isn't something to invest in early, and it sure ain't a sexy pick, but for the Titans it was a valued role. Besides, why is he automatically 3rd string? Scaife isn't a good receiver, and struggles to stay healthy. Crumpler may have some side-affects from his injuries too. So TE depth was a concern, and the perfect TE for the team was available. Besides, the offense relies on the TE moreso than the WR, so depth at the position is a must. Were there arguably better players available? Yes, but Stevens has his identity and role settled before the season even starts. When you're able to do that with a draft pick, it's not a bad choice to get him over guys with character concerns (Marcus Harrison, Manningham) or higher bust potential (Jermichael Finley).

With the first of three 4th round picks the Titans made arguably the biggest reach of the 2008 NFL Draft when they selected Winston-Salem St. defensive end William Hayes. Not only was Hayes a major reach in round four but the vast majority of teams didn't even have him rated as a draftable prospect so they might have been able to get him in the 7th round or as a free agent. Even worse, they actually traded up to get him! Hayes was relatively productive, albeit against Division II competition, and he worked out well (4.6 speed) but he is undersized and very much a developmental prospect. No matter how you look at it Hayes in the fourth round was a huge reach and if we weren't sure what direction the Titans draft was going in beforehand this pick was a clear indicator. With their next selection the Titans actually made their best move of the entire draft when they chose Cal wide receiver Lavelle Hawkins. After playing in the shadow of DeSean Jackson the past few years Hawkins really had a coming out party at the Senior Bowl and it would not have been a major shock if he had come off the board a round earlier. Hawkins certainly isn't the biggest (5-11, 187) or fastest (4.52) receiver out there but he's a jack-of-all-trades who does everything well and isn't afraid to do the dirty work. Hawkins may never be a starter in the NFL and a best-case scenario for him is probably a #2 role but he was a good pick in the fourth round and will certainly bolster the Titans receiving corps.

I hated that we traded up for Hayes, but I understand why. First off, Coach Washburn loves this guy, and the FO greatly values the opinions of coaches (Chris Henry was the love child of RB Coach Sherman Smith, who is now the OC for Washington). I read an interview with Hayes, and he seems like a great character player. Very humble and very appreciative. Gotta live a player with that attitude. Plus, Hayes has worlds of potential, and fits our DL with his athleticism. Washburn is a great DL Coach, so his infatuation with Hayes signals how good Hayes could be. A developmental pass-rusher in the 4th RD isn't a bad pick. They likely traded up because there were many 3-4 teams in front of their original pick, including the Cardinals who took Kenny Iwebema with their pick. They had a chance to get their guy, and went after him. If Hayes was as valued as Bill Polian, one of the best GM's in the NFL, said he was, then it was a good trade.

Lavelle Hawkins was a great pick, and like Jason Jones, he fills a need and is of good value. I can't say that he'll crack the starting lineup, though.

Later in round four the Titans opted for another "Workout Warrior" when they selected Purdue outside linebacker Stanford Keglar. Based on his college career Keglar was slated to be more of a late round pick but a standout performance at the Scouting Combine enabled him to make that big leap up into the middle rounds. However, with Keith Bulluck and David Thornton firmly entrenched as the starters the best Keglar can hope for in the near future is a backup job. With their final pick Tennessee chose Washburn cornerback Cary Williams in round seven. At 6-1 and 185 lbs. with 4.4 speed Williams certainly has the physical tools you look for in a pro corner and while he is still raw and didn't face top competition in college he is an intriguing late round developmental prospect. The Titans obviously had a lot of success when they selected Cortland Finnegan out of Samford in the 7th round of the 2006 NFL Draft and they can only hope Williams turns out to be even half as good as Finnegan.

Keglar may be a developmental LB, but the OLB depth was greatly lacking. LB depth was a need, and Keglar fills that need. He also adds special teams ability. Bulluck and Thornton as the starters provides time for Keglar to develop, and once the time comes when Bulluck or Thornton leaves, we'll have a groomed replacement. He has great upside, and was even rated as the 12th best OLB according to your rankings. So landing him at the end of the 4th RD was a good value. Fills need, has good value, and has starting potential for the future.

As you said, the Titans have had great luck with late-round CB's. Reynaldo Hill started at LCB for a long time, and Cortland Finnegan is now the current starter at LCB. Cary Williams has the potential to be another gem like the previous two. Williams also adds special teams help, and can be the Gunner the punt coverage unit needs. That's how Finnegan got his start. Williams has more talent and potential than Hill did. Williams has better size than Finny, but Finny has better speed and more fluid hips. Williams will be interesting to follow over the next few years. 7th RD picks usually are UDFA's that teams want dibs on, but I think this is a good pick.

With the possible exception of Jason Jones there probably isn't a rookie starter in this class and whether you are the worst team in the league or coming off a Super Bowl win that is simply unforgivable. Sure guys like Johnson, Stevens and Hawkins will bolster depth and play complimentary roles but there is absolutely no excuse for a team with so many legitimate weaknesses and needs like Tennessee to make seven selections and not land at least one or two high-impact performers. The AFC South is quickly emerging as one of the premier divisions in the entire league and the Titans needed to make some upgrades this offseason just to keep pace with Indianapolis, Jacksonville and the up-and-coming Houston Texans but it sure doesn't look like that is the case. In fact, they probably took a step backwards. Unless or until this franchise finally decides to give Vince Young some weapons to throw to they will continue to stunt his development and hold back the entire team from reaching its full potential. Based on their performance in the 2008 NFL Draft some serious questions have to be raised about the performance of those who are in charge of the Titans War Room. Tennessee won't make the playoffs in '08 and this poor draft will be a key factor.

GRADE: D+

It's unforgiveable to only have one rookie starter? Teams don't draft with the intention of only getting rookie starters - that's what FA is for. If a team does draft like that, they're probably a team that has numerous holes. Teams draft for future success, and select players they fill will help their team. The Titans did land impact performers, and if they didn't, why is that bad for a team? Jacksonville came out of their draft with one impact performer in Derrick Harvey, a situational pass-rusher in Quentin Groves, and three guys who may struggle to make the roster. Yet, they are graded with a B-. There's no consistency in that regard.

It's a bold move to say the Titans will miss the playoffs because of this one draft class. You put too much emphasis on the Titans not drafting a WR early, and it seems like that one reason is why you think so poorly of this draft class. I think that's unfair. I agree that this wasn't the best draft class this year, but I feel your negative outlook on the Titans draft is caused by your vehement opinion on the Titans not drafting a WR. The team doesn't have as many holes as you make them out to be, and your limited knowledge of the team affects your grade. The offense as a whole was improved by the additions of Mike Heimerdinger, Alge Crumpler, Justin McCareins, Jake Scott, Chris Johnson, Craig Stevens, and Lavelle Hawkins. Not investing a early pick in a WR is not going to ruin our season - the team's identity is not built that way.

I do agree, though, that Mike Reinfeldt's approach to the draft is sometimes worrisome.

Caddy
05-18-2008, 10:06 PM
Try again. I mean please try again. I'm sorry my team has competent coaches who knows how to scout players. All our draftees will make the team, not all will be the next big thing. Just because a guy is a steal doesn't make him a HOF guy either. You people misunderstand and take things the way you want to instead of how they should be taken. And getting neg repped by a bucs fan made my day, lol.

Yeah I'll take full responsibility for that. :)

jnew76
05-19-2008, 12:20 AM
Try again. I mean please try again. I'm sorry my team has competent coaches who knows how to scout players. All our draftees will make the team, not all will be the next big thing. Just because a guy is a steal doesn't make him a HOF guy either. You people misunderstand and take things the way you want to instead of how they should be taken. And getting neg repped by a bucs fan made my day, lol.

2007 Saints Draft

#27 - Robert Meacham - WR - 0 Downs Played in NFL - Might be the only WR Jason David can cover.

#66 - Usama Young - 14 Games active. Played some nickel & dime - 25 tackles in 14 games - 1 pass defensed - Could not beat out JASON DAVID!!

#88 - Andy Alleman - OG - Akron - 0 Downs played in NFL

#107 - Antonio Pittman - RB - Ohio St. - Cut in preseason

#125 Jermon Bushrod - OT - Towson - Played in 1 NFL game in week 11.

#145 David Jones - DB - Wingate - Cut in preseason

#220 Marvin Mitchell - LB - Tennessee - 10 Games Played - 9 Tackles

Now that is clearly a display of competant coaching/scouting. Not to mention that the prize free agent acquisition (Jason David) got beat like he stole drug money from the mafia. You are clearly not a Homer.

OzTitan
05-19-2008, 01:10 AM
Yeah, gotta say, Scott's analysis of the Titans seems more emotionally connected to the absence of an early chosen WR than proper analysis. The Titans need a true #1 WR bad, but not so bad you put every other need on hold and reach for whatever WR is there in perhaps the worst 1st round WR class in decades. Please, somebody explain to me how that makes sense - and yet 99% of analysts would have praised the Titans for doing it.

A big play offensive threat was need #1b, and it was met. Every other picks satisfactorily meets the Titans' needs of DL depth, LB depth and ST stud in Keglar, blocking TE and a stab at a slot WR in Hawkins. To say the Titans didn't target needs is confusingly ignorant - if anything they targeted needs too much and reached a little in most rounds, but that is not something that can really be proven and is obviously subject to change.

Bengals78
05-19-2008, 01:33 AM
Im just waiting on the Bengals to get ripped in similar style as the Titans, albeit not as bad.
Main points: Cant believe they didnt trade up for ellis. When we got good value in Sims later on and a playmaking OLB instead of losing picks. Rivers+Sims > Ellis+a third round OLB

We will get crap for drafting Shirley, but he is a 5th rounder and can be easily cut ala Mathias Askew.

Back to teams already graded out, I think the Titans got the shaft for not drafting 1st rd WR. I cant blame them in a week WR crop. They got the playmaker they wanted. They arent a heavy throwing team. A playmaking RB holds more value to the running based team than a first round WR who isnt gonna be as used as the RB.

Larry
05-19-2008, 12:19 PM
I loved the Niners draft...Richal will be a pro bowler at guard and sure up the line for years to come, and the Balmer pick is even better when I heard they had intentions of moving him inside...Anything that has to do with freeing up Willis and keeping lineman off of him I am in favor of.

Yeah I also loved the Chilo Rachal pick, that kid is a big mean run mauler that will run through you. Frank Gore is going love running behind Rachal.

Bengals78
05-19-2008, 01:50 PM
Yeah I also loved the Chilo Rachal pick, that kid is a big mean run mauler that will run through you. Frank Gore is going love running behind Rachal.

I was real high on him going into the draft. He is gonna fill Larry Allen's spot very nicely

BeerBaron
05-19-2008, 03:38 PM
I think the Redskins write up and grade is a good one.

No clear cut immediate starters but lots of guys to provide depth and improve for down the road

Addict
05-19-2008, 03:47 PM
I think the Redskins write up and grade is a good one.

No clear cut immediate starters but lots of guys to provide depth and improve for down the road

yeah, solid piece by scott, the grade looks about right too.

Canadian_draft_fan
05-19-2008, 08:51 PM
I think the Redskins write up and grade is a good one.

No clear cut immediate starters but lots of guys to provide depth and improve for down the road

Scott actually gave them a better grade than I did. I didn't like the Brennan pick and agreed with him on the Davis = luxury pick description.

By the way there are some Redskins fans who thought the Bears' draft was A+ - best of all 32 teams. I was pretty impressed with their draft myself.

BeerBaron
05-19-2008, 08:59 PM
Scott actually gave them a better grade than I did. I didn't like the Brennan pick and agreed with him on the Davis = luxury pick description.

By the way there are some Redskins fans who thought the Bears' draft was A+ - best of all 32 teams. I was pretty impressed with their draft myself.

nice. i dont know about A+ but i think it was a better draft than most will give them credit for because they didnt take a QB. I'll take a starting LT, potential starting RB and a WR, DT and SS who can all contribute right away and may start down the road over a 2nd round or later QB any day.....

luee
05-20-2008, 01:09 AM
C. For one of the better drafts of the decade? I think this year's draft is a solid B without boom or bust super Mario. If he becomes a star another A+. Aside from him all the choices were very good values with no reaches. None of the bigtime reaches the previous GM was so famous for. Phillips falling to 31 made it a success.

49ersfan_87
05-20-2008, 06:32 PM
Just an interesting tidbit from reliable 49ers beat writer Matt Maiocco


The 49ers liked Sweed. They considered him with the second-round pick. In fact, they had two cards ready to go: Sweed and Chilo Rachal. After some debate, they selected Rachal. I think they liked Sweed better than Thomas, but I don't know that for sure.


http://49ers.pressdemocrat.com/default.asp?item=2204883

If the 49ers picked Sweed, i wonder if they would have gotten a higher/lower grade (not just from Scott, but everyone)?

ninerfan
05-21-2008, 03:23 AM
In hindsight I think Scott's grade of the Chiefs was pretty harsh. I loved their picks especially on day 1.

BeerBaron
05-21-2008, 09:15 AM
i think the cowboys write up and grade is pretty accurate.

Addict
05-21-2008, 11:44 AM
In hindsight I think Scott's grade of the Chiefs was pretty harsh. I loved their picks especially on day 1.

A-? Harsh?

umphrey
05-21-2008, 12:44 PM
A- infers that their draft had decent room for improvement, in terms of them picking the right players, having more/higher picks, and having things shake out favorably for them.

I don't really see how that could be true for the Chiefs. That was the best draft of the league this year and maybe the best in recent memory, when looking on paper after draft day. I think Scott is just being conservative because drafts change so much after 1 year.

kmartin575
05-21-2008, 02:17 PM
A-? Harsh?

Yes, because he criticized our 2nd day picks for not drafting on need. But drafting by need is what has gotten us into trouble in the past and what has gotten many other teams in trouble. This team isn't going to win many games this year. So why draft for need when we could use talent just about anywhere on the team? I would hate to draft a position we needed instead of taking a more talented player. 2 or 3 years from now we are going to be glad that we added the more talented player.

Hwoarang
05-21-2008, 06:57 PM
2007 Saints Draft

#27 - Robert Meacham - WR - 0 Downs Played in NFL - Might be the only WR Jason David can cover.

#66 - Usama Young - 14 Games active. Played some nickel & dime - 25 tackles in 14 games - 1 pass defensed - Could not beat out JASON DAVID!!

#88 - Andy Alleman - OG - Akron - 0 Downs played in NFL

#107 - Antonio Pittman - RB - Ohio St. - Cut in preseason

#125 Jermon Bushrod - OT - Towson - Played in 1 NFL game in week 11.

#145 David Jones - DB - Wingate - Cut in preseason

#220 Marvin Mitchell - LB - Tennessee - 10 Games Played - 9 Tackles

Now that is clearly a display of competant coaching/scouting. Not to mention that the prize free agent acquisition (Jason David) got beat like he stole drug money from the mafia. You are clearly not a Homer.Yet you fail to look at '06 when we got Bush in the 1st. Roman Harper in the 2nd/Starting SS, Jahri Evans our starting G in the 4th, Zack Strief who is our future starting T in the 7th and of course Colston. Rob Ninkovich would have been very good too if he didn't get hurt. So please don't jump to conclusions. Especially on teams you don't know much about.

BeerBaron
05-22-2008, 04:11 PM
i like the bucs write up. accurate and good i feel.

LonghornsLegend
05-22-2008, 09:33 PM
i like the bucs write up. accurate and good i feel.

I agreed with most, just not the part about taking starters...I don't feel like you always need to do that, Geno Hayes and Dre Moore are great picks, even if they don't start this year they have potential to be future starters and both were excellent value...Dexter Jackson is going to have about as much impact as Desean Jackson was as well, so just them taking Talib 1st over a WR then still grabbing Jackson would of pushed them to at least a B...I think looking back hey will have one of the best drafts this year top to bottom.

Addict
05-24-2008, 05:48 AM
A bit harsh on the bengals' grade I think, he pretty much likes all their picks in the early rounds and a B seems a bit off.

GermanSaint
05-24-2008, 09:06 AM
Try again. I mean please try again. I'm sorry my team has competent coaches who knows how to scout players. All our draftees will make the team, not all will be the next big thing. Just because a guy is a steal doesn't make him a HOF guy either. You people misunderstand and take things the way you want to instead of how they should be taken. And getting neg repped by a bucs fan made my day, lol.


i wouldn´t go too far homey.

when i think of teams/GMs with a great draft-trackrekord , the saints are one of the last on the list.

loomis is great in making the capmanagement
and chosing good charakter guys. but the pretty good draft in 06 with two starters on day two was followed by a crap draft in 07 with no starter and a RB who costed us two picks and was cut after preseason.
so your argument for trading back in the draft to pick arrington and this is a guaranteed rosterspot , i have to say : nana !
antonio pittman costed us much more value than arrington , to begin with. as arrington he had many guys in front of him on paper. its pretty set in stone that he is nothing more than 5th or 6th receiver right now. ( normally we keep 5th WR active and one inactive on gamedays ).
so we can do a little math :
colston and patten are sure starters with meachem in the wings ( no one of them getting cut i bet : ))
terrence copper is our ST-ace . doing all you want from him + is a solid target as 4th receiver.
we have two spots now for henderson , more , arrington and the other UDFAs.
so there is no guarantee at all. before payton go to the season with 7 WR he will take 5 TE , 6 RB and probably 5 OT . that being said , i doubt arrington is more than a longshot right now.
and a lot of teams had colston on the radar , but he was listed as a TE prospect by some stupid scouts before the draft.
again : we should be glad to have ONE draft as an expeption , for having two starters out of day 2. the other 5-6 Drafts were full of busts starting in round 2 already.

just look at what polian did with his diamonds, and look back what loomis did. i would laugh all day , if it wasnt that sad.

themaninblack
05-24-2008, 05:49 PM
A bit harsh on the bengals' grade I think, he pretty much likes all their picks in the early rounds and a B seems a bit off.

Im somewhat surprised that Scott gave us a B TBH I thought we were going to get a B- at most.

Addict
05-25-2008, 07:44 AM
Im somewhat surprised that Scott gave us a B TBH I thought we were going to get a B- at most.

well your draft was solid yet unspectacular. I don't mind it getting a B, it's just a little weird after such a positive write-up.

BroadwayJoe10
05-26-2008, 11:27 PM
I expected the jets draft grade to be low, considering scott has it in his mind that the jets won a meaningless game that cost them mcfadden. The thing i do not understand is how the vikings got a B+ grade and the jets landed a B-.

Scott said "i am going to be conservative with my grade though and assume that only Allen and Johnson are sure-fire future starters but that still isn't a bad haul." I don't understand how Johnson and Jared Allen gives them a B+ whereas the jets landed Kris Jenkins (3rd and 5th), Vernon Gholston and Dustin Keller. Jenkins isn't on the same level as allen right now, but could potentially have a bigger impact on the defense considering our previous lack of a NT.

Basically just wondering what allen and johnson have over jenkins, gholston and keller.

no love
05-27-2008, 03:17 AM
I expected the jets draft grade to be low, considering scott has it in his mind that the jets won a meaningless game that cost them mcfadden. The thing i do not understand is how the vikings got a B+ grade and the jets landed a B-.

Scott said "i am going to be conservative with my grade though and assume that only Allen and Johnson are sure-fire future starters but that still isn't a bad haul." I don't understand how Johnson and Jared Allen gives them a B+ whereas the jets landed Kris Jenkins (3rd and 5th), Vernon Gholston and Dustin Keller. Jenkins isn't on the same level as allen right now, but could potentially have a bigger impact on the defense considering our previous lack of a NT.

Basically just wondering what allen and johnson have over jenkins, gholston and keller.

Allen is in his prime and is a proven player, while Johnson had probably the highest upside at his position. I think JDB is a perfect fit for the Vikings offense and they got him a round later than Ainge. You also forget that they got a steal in John Sullivan as a future center to replace Birk who has had some contract/injury issues as of late.

Really in the end it's all about how valuable Allen is. He is an excellent two-way end in his prime. On the other hand Jenkins isn't really the player he was during his pro-bowl years and has been in sort of a downslide for quite a while due to weight and injury concerns. He is also projecting to a new position which requires more responsibility, compared to Allen who will have it EASIER on his new team.

diabsoule
05-29-2008, 09:16 AM
I am very happy with the Saints grade and I think it is much deserved.

BeerBaron
05-29-2008, 09:34 AM
im a little surprised he gave them as good as he did since i dont think he really liked the porter pick and they didnt pick again until the 5th....

LonghornsLegend
05-29-2008, 10:13 AM
I don't know what he didn't like about the Porter pick, they got a guy in the 2nd who has great speed and is a man corner which they are severely lacking, seeing as how thats the pick that was slotted to be up for Shockey, I like grabbing another corner instead of more offense...If that defense plays to potential that are looking at a nice turnaround...They landed two DT's with potential and a starter quality CB, throw in Vilma, and they should improve at every level of their defense which has always been the liability.

Flyboy
05-29-2008, 10:55 AM
The way I took it was that as a player Porter was great value but there is already a logjam at the position. Regardless, I see Porter starting in the nickel for us.

Flyboy
05-29-2008, 10:59 AM
im a little surprised he gave them as good as he did since i dont think he really liked the porter pick and they didnt pick again until the 5th....

Considering that Porter was one of the best man-to-man cover corners in the draft and fits our defensive scheme exactly (unlike Jason David) & Mike McKenzie might start on the PUP & bringing in Vilma for a fourth rounder, I don't see what there is not to like.

BeerBaron
05-29-2008, 11:01 AM
Considering that Porter was one of the best man-to-man cover corners in the draft and fits our defensive scheme exactly (unlike Jason David) & Mike McKenzie might start on the PUP & bringing in Vilma for a fourth rounder, I don't see what there is not to like.

i didnt say i didnt like him, but i remember seeing scott write about how he doesnt see porter fitting in and all that.....

just what i read

Shane P. Hallam
05-29-2008, 11:16 AM
Also, I think the fact that Allen was a sure thing and Johnson was a good value pick. Combined with many thinking that Gholston and Keller may have been reaches. Just saying.

BeerBaron
05-30-2008, 09:56 AM
ok, ill say it, i think the steelers grade was a bit harsh.

im not liking this "did they get a rookie starter?" aspect of it. It may help out a lot when he does the Bears grade but some teams, llike the steelers today, I don't think had a position where a rookie could have made an immediate impact.

i hear plenty living in steelers country about how very few rookies ever start and do well in Lebeau's defense because it takes at least a year to learn it all and even with the departures on the o-line, I don't think there was a position on the steelers offense where a rookie could break in and start.

so i think they did really well and a B- just isnt doing them justice

keylime_5
05-30-2008, 11:12 AM
The whole 'rookie starter' thing is stupid. You can have 0 rookies play much at all their first year and end up having the best draft of all down the road, I don't think playing time as a rookie should effect the immediate draft grade, it might make you look stupid 3 years from now. However I think Pittsburgh's draft ignored their lines where they had a lot of needs and that might hurt them in the future. Can't blame them for picking BPA, but it was bad luck that the BPA wasnt a lineman IMO.

LonghornsLegend
05-30-2008, 12:18 PM
The way I took it was that as a player Porter was great value but there is already a logjam at the position. Regardless, I see Porter starting in the nickel for us.

Albeit there are alot of bodies at CB, I felt like you guys needed a young, man corner with speed somewhere in there, if Porter can develop into a starter thats a huge boost for that defense...I still have images of Roddy White abusing McKenzie like nobody's business, and we know about David already, so adding Porter and not throwing him in the bunch is a great pick, especially not reaching for a corner in the 1st and getting a guy who does the same at this point.


Also isn't Pressley going to play the 3 tech and Ellis at NT? Not sure, but if everything pans out from this draft including Vilma, its a draft that can put you over the top the next year.

LonghornsLegend
05-30-2008, 12:26 PM
ok, ill say it, i think the steelers grade was a bit harsh.

im not liking this "did they get a rookie starter?" aspect of it. It may help out a lot when he does the Bears grade but some teams, llike the steelers today, I don't think had a position where a rookie could have made an immediate impact.

i hear plenty living in steelers country about how very few rookies ever start and do well in Lebeau's defense because it takes at least a year to learn it all and even with the departures on the o-line, I don't think there was a position on the steelers offense where a rookie could break in and start.

so i think they did really well and a B- just isnt doing them justice



I think it was harsh too, in the 1st rd all the lineman went early, even guys like Cherileus who they might of looked at, considering the Steelers are a power running team, and Parker just broke his leg, with everything Najeh has going on Mendenhall was an excellent pick, consider his value was anywhere from 9-18 range, he has a blend of speed and power and will do wonders for that team I have no doubts about it...Sweed was a guy considered the top WR by some, a 1st rounder by others, and Big Ben wanted that big target at WR, these are guys you cannot pass up, they might of regretted it even more if they reached for need on guys and passed up that caliber of talent.


I don't really knock the way the Steelers draft because they are one of the most consistent teams out there when it comes to drafting, they will let a pro bowler go and draft another one with no problems...Now while they still need lineman, its not like they are so bad that they will struggle this year, they got their playmakers this year, in the future I'm pretty sure they will focus on their lines, but they are not as bad as people make them out to be.

kmartin575
05-30-2008, 05:14 PM
Giving the Chiefs and Saints the same grade is a joke. Excuse the Chiefs for not reaching for a need. Grading a draft should be about getting good value, not about filling every need. I find it very hard to believe any team in the NFL added as much talent as the Chiefs did in the draft. That doesn't mean we will be a good team, we simply had the best draft. Downgrading our draft because we didn't reach for lesser talent is a complete joke.

Unbiased
05-30-2008, 06:02 PM
Giving the Chiefs and Saints the same grade is a joke. Excuse the Chiefs for not reaching for a need. Grading a draft should be about getting good value, not about filling every need. I find it very hard to believe any team in the NFL added as much talent as the Chiefs did in the draft. That doesn't mean we will be a good team, we simply had the best draft. Downgrading our draft because we didn't reach for lesser talent is a complete joke.

For who did the Saints reach? The only possible reach I could see is Melhaff for the sole reason being he was the first kicker selected. However, the top punter selected, Durant Brooks came off the board just ten selections earlier. Therefore, I do not see Melhaff as a reach. Please explain how the Saints reached for a need.

johbur
05-30-2008, 06:05 PM
Giving the Chiefs and Saints the same grade is a joke. Excuse the Chiefs for not reaching for a need. Grading a draft should be about getting good value, not about filling every need. I find it very hard to believe any team in the NFL added as much talent as the Chiefs did in the draft. That doesn't mean we will be a good team, we simply had the best draft. Downgrading our draft because we didn't reach for lesser talent is a complete joke.

Look at KC and Minnesota. Vikings get props for getting Jared Allen as part of this draft, but I don't see a big ding on KC for losing the best pass rusher in the game today.

keylime_5
05-30-2008, 07:02 PM
Well Kansas City basically traded Jared Allen for a stud young left tackle in Branden Albert, fair trade at this point I'd say. KC replaced an unhappy stud with one who fills a huge need.

I also agree that NO should not have the same grade as KC. NO should be A- and KC should be A+. KC got Glenn Dorsey, Branden Albert, Brandon Flowers, Brad Cottam, and Jamaal Charles with their top 5 picks. NO got Sedrick Ellis (<Glenn Dorsey), Tracy Porter, DeMarrio Pressely, Carl Nicks (steal), and the Wisconsin kicker top 5. KC had their 5 in the first three rounds and used them seemingly in a very wise way. NO didn't have that many mid round picks. KC's draft was obviously superior at this point in evaluation.

kmartin575
05-30-2008, 11:02 PM
For who did the Saints reach? The only possible reach I could see is Melhaff for the sole reason being he was the first kicker selected. However, the top punter selected, Durant Brooks came off the board just ten selections earlier. Therefore, I do not see Melhaff as a reach. Please explain how the Saints reached for a need.

I never said the Saints reached. My post really had nothing to do with the Saints, I just thought it was a joke that the Saints had the same grade as the Chiefs. Granted drafts really should be graded 3 or 4 years later but as of right now I simply do not see how any team added as much talent as the Chiefs did. Again, my post was in no way a reflection on the Saints draft. I actually think they did quite well, just that there is no way their draft was equal to the Chiefs.

Flyboy
05-30-2008, 11:10 PM
Giving the Chiefs and Saints the same grade is a joke. Excuse the Chiefs for not reaching for a need. Grading a draft should be about getting good value, not about filling every need. I find it very hard to believe any team in the NFL added as much talent as the Chiefs did in the draft.

That's pretty easy to do when you have the most picks in the draft. :rolleyes:

And, I like how people are forgetting that the 4th rounder we didn't have was due to us acquiring Jon Vilma.

LonghornsLegend
05-31-2008, 12:06 AM
Well Kansas City basically traded Jared Allen for a stud young left tackle in Branden Albert, fair trade at this point I'd say. KC replaced an unhappy stud with one who fills a huge need.

Actually, KC traded Allen for Branden Albert, and their two 3rd rd selections...Those were also apart of the deal.

kmartin575
05-31-2008, 01:56 AM
That's pretty easy to do when you have the most picks in the draft. :rolleyes:

And, I like how people are forgetting that the 4th rounder we didn't have was due to us acquiring Jon Vilma.

That doesn't matter. The fact is, we arguably added the most talent of any team.we also got great value with alot of our players. Nobody thought Dorsey would fall to 5. He did. Nobody thought Albert would fall to 15. He did. Jamaal Charles was ranked by many as a 2nd round prospect. We got him in the 3rd round. Brian Johnston was graded by some as a 4th or 5th round prospect. We got him in the 7th. Some people had said Dajuan Morgan was potentially the best free safety in the draft. We got him in the 3rd round.

Again, the only reason our draft grade was dropped was because we didn't reach for need. That is completely ridiculous.

vidae
05-31-2008, 02:13 AM
That's pretty easy to do when you have the most picks in the draft. :rolleyes:

And, I like how people are forgetting that the 4th rounder we didn't have was due to us acquiring Jon Vilma.

A lot of teams have had many, many picks and didn't draft half as well as the Chiefs did this year.

I get the argument to an extent, but we seemingly filled a need/got great value for -every single- one of our picks, save the last (I don't know much about him, so I could be wrong here). That is the point he's trying to make.

The Saints had a killer draft, but the Chiefs got downgraded because we picked "backups" when we picked anything but.

diabsoule
05-31-2008, 03:31 AM
A lot of teams have had many, many picks and didn't draft half as well as the Chiefs did this year.

I get the argument to an extent, but we seemingly filled a need/got great value for -every single- one of our picks, save the last (I don't know much about him, so I could be wrong here). That is the point he's trying to make.

The Saints had a killer draft, but the Chiefs got downgraded because we picked "backups" when we picked anything but.

When looking at the Chiefs draft class this year I feel they could have anywhere between 3-5 starters.

Glenn Dorsey and Brandon Albert should be both starters at DT and LT respectively. Both were fantastic values at where they were selected.

Brandon Flowers could potentially be a starter and should be a good fit in the Chiefs system. If he is not a starter then he should be the nickel back, which if that's the case you may as well call him a starter.

I felt the Chiefs could have went elsewhere with the Jamaal Charles pick. The pick filled a slight need but I felt that other positions could have been addressed other than a change-of-pace back for Larry Johnson. WR is a position of need and with both Early Doucet and Mario Manningham on the board the Chiefs could have gone in that direction.

I liked the Brad Cottam pick, probably more than others. I think put in the right situation he could develop into a stud a few years down the road. Tony Gonzales is one of the best in the business and still has a few years left in him so who better to learn behind? The Chiefs would have needed to address a TE sooner or later and I feel that Cottam will be something special.

The DaJuan Morgan pick makes me scratch my head. Bernard Pollard and Jarrad Page are both young and talented. Why select someone who may just benefit on ST? Again Mario Manningham was still on the board as well as Andre Caldwell. Chad Rhinehart would've been a nice selection as well as Oniel Cousins or Cliff Avril. I don't like this pick.

I liked the William Franklin pick. I think he could contribute right away and both Brandon Carr and Barry Richardson are good gambles.

I look for Kevin Robinson to be nothing more than a ST contributor and to be gone in a few years if he stays around that long. I loved the Brian Johnston pick. I can't say enough how much I loved it. The Mike Merritt pick I felt was garbage and they might as well have thrown it away but he was a late 7th round pick.

I would've given the Chiefs an A even. No plus, no minus.

SaintsMan
05-31-2008, 01:51 PM
Saints got a lot of players that were considered great values or steals also. Well our whole draft, except for Mehlhaff which was still a good pick for us. We lost a couple games last year because of our kicking woes and the only other kicker we have on the roster is Martin Gramatica.

umphrey
05-31-2008, 03:19 PM
Well Kansas City basically traded Jared Allen for a stud young left tackle in Branden Albert, fair trade at this point I'd say. KC replaced an unhappy stud with one who fills a huge need.

Stud offensive guard, actually.

LonghornsLegend
05-31-2008, 03:38 PM
Stud offensive guard, actually.

Actually he's a LT, and has been playing LT...Nice try though.

rascal
05-31-2008, 04:17 PM
Chiefs had a great first day, but IMO they dropped the ball a bit in the second round.

umphrey
05-31-2008, 04:23 PM
Actually he's a LT, and has been playing LT...Nice try though.

He's a stud guard, a risky prospect at tackle. That is what I was trying to say, but apparently you missed it.

He's played what, 2 games at LT in college and a couple weeks of OTAs. That doesn't make him a stud there...

LonghornsLegend
05-31-2008, 05:49 PM
Whether he bust or not, he's still drafted to play LT and will play LT, thus he is a LT...Obviously he will move down to guard if he can't handle it, but he has the frame and athleticism for LT...Just because he's risky doesn't mean thats not his position, there were alot of other risky prospects along with him...Vince Young was a risky prospect, but he was still a Quat-a-back *VY tone :D*

keylime_5
05-31-2008, 05:58 PM
I think Albert will be a good left tackle. Possibly a stud even as a rookie. Great fit in KC's offense too.

vidae
06-01-2008, 02:08 AM
I didn't like the Morgan pick at first either, but I'm not sure Pollard is the long term solution there. I think Page is an excellent young safety and I think him and Morgan would be a very killer combo.

I like the Jamaal Charles pick a lot. Yeah, he will only see "change of pace" type play time, but if LJ gets hurt, we have a real threat in the backfield now. Also, with his speed and catching ability, you could line Charles up outside if you wanted to. Throw different looks. Two back sets, etc. There is some versatility there.

Personally, I'm glad we didn't take Mario Manningham, but Rhinehart would have been intriguing.

Either way, they seem pretty happy with how the offensive line is playing out and the fact it was addressed at all made every Chiefs fan happy.

Yatta!
06-02-2008, 05:19 AM
Ok I could write an essay about my thoughts on the Packers draft but that's already been done. Check out this thread for draft reviews by pretty much all the Packers fans on this board: http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=21782

Instead I'd just like to add a few points after reading Scott's review. Firstly, we were never going to end up with any starters from this draft unless we traded up for an elite player and we covered all of our needs. Now we did reach a couple of times but there was also some good value picks (Brohm, Lee and Finley). Overall, I would expect Jordy Nelson, Patrick Lee and Jerimichael Finley to become full time starters. It wouldn't surprise me if Breno Giacomini did as well but we have a lot of young, raw lineman so basically I expect one of our picks to pay off and become a starting tackle (Colledge, Moll, Barbre, now Giacomini).

Now onto Brian Brohm, without doubt it was a luxury pick but it is not necessarily a bad pick. It adds to the pressure on Rodgers but there was always going to be a lot of pressure on him following Favre, especially when we have a division winning team. Hopefully Rodgers takes to the limelight and grows into the role as starter and I expect him to do so. In this case, we will end up in a similar situation to the one Cleveland are in at the moment - and that is not a bad thing. By no means is it 'only a matter of time until Brohm is under centre'; the job belongs to Rodgers and it is his to lose.

If Rodgers doesn't pan out or goes down injured then we have another solid option at quarterback. After sitting for a while, Brohm is likely to be a better option than almost every veteran backup still on the market and should eventually develop into a starting calibre quarterback.

In either scenario, the selection of Brohm definitely will not 'set the franchise back years'. Either Rodgers performs and there is no issue or Rodgers does not take to the role, in which case we have a talented rookie waiting to come in who will have sat for the best part of the season at least.

Basically if Rodgers doesn't work out then its much better to have a talented, backup quarterback in house than having to wait until next year to solve the problem and therefore if anything this will give the Packers more time to take advantage of their current talent levels.

MidwayMonster31
06-02-2008, 08:02 AM
The case for drafting Brohm was that the Packers were not going to find any good veteran backups because there were none. The case against drafting Brohm was that the Packers could be putting both of them in a bad spot, where if Rodgers gets the Grossman treatment, then switching quarterbacks would throw off the consistency of the team.
The problem I had with their draft is that most of the pieces are in place for them to contend, but their first two picks they made will probably not have any impact for some time. Nelson will be stuck behind Driver, Jennings and possibly Jones for at least 2 years. If they kept their first pick and picked Phillips, then that would've been a better move IMO.

Caddy
06-02-2008, 08:14 AM
I think the Packers will still be on the market for a veteran signal caller. It is true that Brian Brohm will have more potential than any one who appears on the market, but the experience a journeyman QB has could be invaluable to the Packers who have a pretty good team otherwise. I could see them picking up a guy like Chris Simms (who is pretty much destined to be cut) just for some insurance.

BeerBaron
06-02-2008, 09:38 AM
even outside of brohm, i think the entire packers draft is a little questionable....

i completely agree with the grade of a C- and I wouldn't have been surprised had it been a titans-esque D.

like someone already said above, the packers have all of the main pieces in place to still contend and just need rodgers to develop, but this draft produced very few players who will add to that right away and there were a few spots they could have used someone....

ill stick by an assessment ive had of them for a while now and that is god help them if one of their starting corners goes down.....i didn't know that lee was only a one year starter, so add how raw he is in there and theyd be in serious trouble in the secondary if something happens to harris or woodson...

umphrey
06-02-2008, 12:56 PM
Here's what I posted in the team forum




Wow, I knew Scott was going to tear our draft apart but this is even worse than I expected.

With their next pick the Packers made one of the most controversial, and in my opinion worst, picks of the draft when they chose Louisville quarterback Brian Brohm. Don't get me wrong, I like Brohm and think he was a terrific value late in round two but he was not the right pick for Green Bay. By selecting a signal caller so early the Packers showed a complete and utter lack of confidence in Aaron Rodgers and essentially killed any chance he had of succeeding. Sure they needed to bring in a backup quarterback and an insurance policy but the right move would have been to add in a veteran who posed no legitimate threat to Rodgers, not a high-profile rookie. Rodgers will begin the year as the starter but it's only a matter of time until Brohm is under center in Green Bay and after using a #1 pick on a signal caller and spending three years developing him in their system they will be starting all over at the position, which is not an ideal situation for a team that hopes to contend for a Super Bowl in the very near future. To me both Nelson and Brohm were self-indulgent luxury picks and a classic case of a team thinking they are better than they are and ignoring need. That is one of my pet peeves when it comes to the NFL Draft.

First off, he's talking up a late second rounder to be more than it is. More importantly, he talks about Rodgers like he's a high school prom queen or something. Like he's always been handed a job, never had any competition in his life. How can he assume that this will even be detrimental to him, when he talks about competition being healthy for other positions? Derek Anderson and Drew Brees may disagree with him. I don't think you can definitively say either way.

Also he knocks us for "ignoring need" when we did fine. We probably wanted Cason but SD snatched him from us. Odds are, at that point, Lee was our next top rated corner, so we could have drafted him at 36 or 60. Scott probably would have given us a higher grade if we took him at 36. What was our other big need, part time TE and DE depth perhaps? OL depth? We found quality talent at these positions later in the draft, and we didn't need to use early picks there at all.

I know the Brohm pick is kind of a love or hate thing, but I guess it kind of annoys me how some people chose to ignore the excellent talent we drafted in the late second round, and what a perfect fit he is for us, in a time where the position is somewhat shaky. Odds are that in 2 years if Brohm looks like a starter we will be happy we made the pick, however Rodgers turns out.

Geo
06-02-2008, 01:03 PM
Brohm shouldn't have fallen that far, Packers got a steal. Similar to Trent Edwards to the Bills last year, although I think Rodgers is better than Losman.

Still, if Rodgers doesn't work out or they want to trade him for a 1st or 2nd rd pick after this season (he'll be a FA after 09), they can do that now.


PS. The broken links to the reviews means I'm not reading them anymore, I'm too lazy to find them. Whatever.

Mr. Stiller
06-02-2008, 01:04 PM
Here's what I posted in the team forum




Wow, I knew Scott was going to tear our draft apart but this is even worse than I expected.



First off, he's talking up a late second rounder to be more than it is. More importantly, he talks about Rodgers like he's a high school prom queen or something. Like he's always been handed a job, never had any competition in his life. How can he assume that this will even be detrimental to him, when he talks about competition being healthy for other positions? Derek Anderson and Drew Brees may disagree with him. I don't think you can definitively say either way.

Also he knocks us for "ignoring need" when we did fine. We probably wanted Cason but SD snatched him from us. Odds are, at that point, Lee was our next top rated corner, so we could have drafted him at 36 or 60. Scott probably would have given us a higher grade if we took him at 36. What was our other big need, part time TE and DE depth perhaps? OL depth? We found quality talent at these positions later in the draft, and we didn't need to use early picks there at all.

I know the Brohm pick is kind of a love or hate thing, but I guess it kind of annoys me how some people chose to ignore the excellent talent we drafted in the late second round, and what a perfect fit he is for us, in a time where the position is somewhat shaky. Odds are that in 2 years if Brohm looks like a starter we will be happy we made the pick, however Rodgers turns out.

Worst case scenario you Matt Schaub him for a swap of a first round pick and 2 3rds.

BamaFalcon59
06-02-2008, 02:02 PM
Worst case scenario you Matt Schaub him for a swap of a first round pick and 2 3rds.

Two seconds

TheGreatEscape
06-02-2008, 03:02 PM
If the packers weren't confident in Rodgers enough to take a QB on day one how is it a bad idea to grab a QB early that they think could win their confidence. The only way this is a bad situations is if both Brohm and Rodgers bust.

Mr. Stiller
06-02-2008, 03:04 PM
Two seconds

Even Better

niel89
06-02-2008, 03:05 PM
more like C jordyzzzz burning yo deefence

Mr.Regular
06-02-2008, 03:45 PM
The Brohm pick wasnt bad at all.
Either A) Rodgers gets hurt or blows after a couple years and we have someone waiting in the wings, or
B) We can trade Brohm for a Schaub-esque deal.

Whats not to like? Not to mention, backup QB was arguably the second biggest need on our team, and the FA options available were disgustingly bad. Brohm was an excellent pick IMO. The whole draft was great, typical Ted Thompson.

Geo
06-02-2008, 04:12 PM
Rodgers hasn't fully proven himself, and QB is just about the most important position on the field in today's league. It's not like Brohm at the end of the 2nd was a luxury pick in any way, why rake the Packers over a great pick that was fortunate to land in their laps? They're one of the best drafting teams in the league by far, this is another example.

Granted, Brohm would be much better off playing in a dome than at Lambeau, I'll definitely give that.

buckeyes4ever
06-02-2008, 04:28 PM
No disrespect to Scott Wright, but I think his assessment of the Titans draft was simply horrible. He basis his argument that we had a poor draft largely in part to his personal evaluation of the players we chose.

Pick 1 - Chris Johnson. (A+) Many NFL teams had CJ as a first round graded RB. He has everything you want and need in an NFL RB. He has world class speed, lateral explosion, fluid hips, excellent hands, top notch ball security, great work ethic, and excellent vision. He had over 3k yards this year averaging 28yarps per KOR, 1400 rushing, and 600 receiving. His knocks are he played at a mid major conference and he is slightly small for an NFL RB, <200 lbs. RB's historically have proven that small school RB's can translate their success to the NFL probably more than any other position. I had the Titans picking up CJ in my mock Draft, as it was clear to me he would be the perfect person for the Titans.

Pick 2 - Jason Jones. (B) Played DT in college but is considered a tweener between DT and DE. Has a high motor and is extremely intelligent. He excels at run stuffing, and will play the 3 technique in our DL rotation. Our DL coach is extremely excited with him. The Titans lost 3 players off our DL rotation last year in Odom, Laboy, and Starks. We gained Kearse back, but we needed some solid depth behind our starters. Most think that Jones could be like a Justin Tuck player.

Pick 3 – Craig Stevens. (B+) He was considered by most to be the best blocking TE in the entire draft. Had excellent measurables and was underutilized in Cal’s offense. He was the captain of Cal’s team last year, and is a high character guy. Expected to improve an already very good TE corps and replaces our blocking specialists we lost in FA in Ben Hartsock

Pick 4 – William Hayes – (B-) The media gave us grief this pick, but he had similar measurables to Vernon Gholston. I am going to quote another poster’s summary of Bill Polian’s thoughts on William Hayes.

“The guys on Sirius asked Bill Polian about him today, asking whether he was surprised Hayes was taken so high. Before the question was even finished, Polian said "No. He's an outstanding football player." He said the Colts felt Hayes was in the mold of Rahim Brock. He also said the Colts had Hayes rated just slightly lower than the Titans but noted if you're drafting at a thin position, you have to take a guy a little higher or you might not get him at all. Even though the Sirius people, including Gil Brandt, were stumped by Hayes, Polian said NFL people were very aware of him and he had been moving up draft boards across the league.”

Pick 5 – Lavelle Hawkins, (C+) Some considered him to be a 2nd round talent, and he excelled in the Senior Bowl, and was arguably better than Desean Jackson last year at Cal. Probably will be buried on the depth chart, but has been compared to Derrick Mason

Pick 6 – Stanford Keglar – (C) Wasn’t super productive in college, but has all of the measurables that should translate to the NFL. Should be an instant upgrade on ST’s and will be groomed to be the future replacement of either Keith Bulluck or David Thornton.

Pick 7 – Cary Williams – A true developmental player. Titans have had a lot of success drafting CB’s in later rounds the past few years. He has all of the measurables you need at the NFL level, but is RAW. Perfect spot to take a guy like this. It worked last time when we selected Courtland Finnegan in round 7 who is on the cusp of being a pro bowl CB.


Most casual fans and observers think that we were missing a top flight WR. Sure I know that our WR's aren't household names, but you have to understand that our new OC's specialty is developing WR's The simple fact that all of the NFL teams passed on WR's in the first round is very indicative of just how weak this class of WR's were. I'd say that this year that no WR we could have drafted would have beaten out the guys that would be starting and would be buried on the depth chart. We have a bunch of serviceable guys on our WR crew, but why waste a pick on WR when we have the same guys already on our roster?

In addition to the whole the Titans needed a WR angle; it's obvious to the hardcore fans that we needed two things desperately:
1. We need an offensive playmaker that could create matchup problems and help open up our run game to be more explosive.
2. We needed to seriously upgrade our PR/KOR abilities. After Pac's suspension, we went from top of the league in both categories in 06 to near the bottom in 07. We simply lacked the dynamism on ST.

Lendale White is a pretty good RB. But we have an excellent offensive line, and I can't tell you how many times LW should have had huge gains but he simply lacks the speed to explode through the hole why they were open.

Chris Johnson fills all of these needs. He will be able to line up all over the field and create matchup problems (ala Reggie Bush). He instantly upgrades our return specialist role, will be a great 3rd down back and can fill in and start in a pinch. I think the kid has the chance to be very special.

We picked up two DL and they should both come in and instantly come into our rotation at DT/DE. We got the best blocking TE in the draft which is crucial for our run first offense, picked up arguably the most explosive playmaker in the entire draft in Chris Johnson, and got some good solid depth.

All in all, the titans had a very good draft; I would rate it as a B+

As Bill Walsh used to tell his staff “It’s not about where you draft a guy, it’s how they produce.” The Titans were trashed in 2005 for “reaching” for a guy by the name of Michael Roos in the 2nd round, and now he is one of the best young LT’s in the NFL. The Titans have an excellent coaching staff who can coach guys up. Basing draft grades on perception is about as stupid as it gets.

The deal is that Chris Johnson may be a great running back, but Scott wasn't marking them down based on personal oppinion (Infact if I remember correctly he had some good things to say about Johnson). What he was gradeing them down for was the fact that they have spent alot of resources on that position in the past few years adn havnt hit yet, yes they may hit this year but there were also alot of other needs and to waste another pick on a back that may or may not turn out to be a pro back is not a good pick. Oh, and as far as our comparison to Reggie Bush... Reggie Bush is not even close to being a top running back, he isnt even an every down type player.

neko4
06-02-2008, 07:41 PM
How come Jared Allen gets mentioned for Minny, but Ryan Grant doesnt get mentioned for Green Bay?

I mean Allen could go to Minny and be a bust and they wouldve wasted a first on him. Its unlikely but still possible.

We traded this years 6th for Grant and he made us a more balanced team. He's already done more in one year than most 6th Rounders do in a lifetime. Even if (knock on wood) Grant busts this year, hes already helped us alot more than most 6th Rounders would

Splat
06-02-2008, 09:06 PM
Chiefs had a great first day, but IMO they dropped the ball a bit in the second round.

CB was a huge need for the Chiefs and they got Brandon Flowers in round two who many felt should have been a late first round pick?

Did you mean dropped the ball on the second day I disagree with that as well but could understand some one making a case for it?

GB12
06-02-2008, 10:02 PM
The thing that made the Packers draft for me was Patrick Lee. He was who I wanted at 36 where we took Nelson. Had we taken Brohm where we did and then missed out on Lee I would have been furious. I have been very high on Lee for a long time and fully expect him to take over at CB when Harris is done. He a guy that can fit right into our defense with out having to change anything. Corners like that aren't easy to find for what we run. This one pick allowed me to put a different perspective on the draft. Picking another WR when we are already 4 deep with our first pick doesn't look to great at first and believe me I was not happy with the Brohm selection, but in the end it doesn't really matter. We got the corner that we needed and other than that we didn't have any glaring needs. Had we gone Lee at 36, Brohm at 56, and then Nelson at 60 I think the general opinion would be more accepting to our draft, but it's the same result. Deeper into it, we got our back up TE that we needed in Finley in the third, a great pick I think in Thompson in the 4th, and a couple of lineman to compete with the young guys we already have. I guess the most puzzling pick is Brett Swain. Eventhough it was a 7th round pick, what the hell are we going to do with him. Driver, Jennings, Jones, Martin, and Nelson will be our 5 WRs. If we keep 6 Shaun Bodiford would be the last. We already have a couple WRs on our practice squad too.

In short:

Future replacement at corner - Check
Back up tight end - Check
Rotational DE - Check
QB depth - CheckWe covered everything that we needed and got good players for them. We knew going into the draft that with so few needs we'd have a good number of luxury picks, it's just the order that threw people. What didn't we address that we should have or where didn't we fill a need with a quality player? I don't have anything for those if anyone else does please share your opinion. I think that right there is a measure of a good draft.

I myself wasn't a huge fan of this draft right away, but the deeper I look the more I like it. For those who still think this was a D or F grade cover up the first two picks with your finger and grade our draft as if those didn't exist. That would have been widely considered as a great draft for filling all our needs with good players without picking until 60. It's easy to look at the first two picks and think it's a horrible draft because we didn't need those positions that early (and that's what I was thinking while watching) but when you look at it as a whole it's pretty good.

Anyway I'm kind of rambling on now so I'll stop, but try looking at it from all angles.

jared
06-03-2008, 09:45 AM
Brett Swain ran a 4.41 at his school's pro day, not a 4.6. That's what got him noticed. He also averaged almost 17 YPC for SDSU. He may not make GB's active roster but he's not slow.

MidwayMonster31
06-03-2008, 10:42 AM
I thought the Bills did better than a B.
McKelvin was the best player available and fit a need. Hardy could be good, even though I thought Sweed would be better at that spot. Defensive End was a problem last year and now Chris Ellis was picked. They also got some good development prospects and traded for Marcus Stroud.
These guys should have an impact next year.

LonghornsLegend
06-03-2008, 11:16 AM
I thought the Bills did better than a B.
McKelvin was the best player available and fit a need. Hardy could be good, even though I thought Sweed would be better at that spot. Defensive End was a problem last year and now Chris Ellis was picked. They also got some good development prospects and traded for Marcus Stroud.
These guys should have an impact next year.

I still have my reservations about how McKelvin is going to fit, he seemed from everything I saw an ideal man corner, and Buffalo plays a heavy zone scheme for their corners, so it will be a slight adjustment for him...If were talking strictly zone I'm not sure he was still the best corner for them, there were guys like Talib, Flowers, Cason who I felt would fit the scheme better, but I will hold passing judgement until I see him play...Not to say McKelvin cannot play zone, but he just seemed like an ideal fit playing alot of man and breaking on the ball...Zone guys have to have great ball skills, good hands, since their facing the QB to turn alot of errant throws into turnovers.

keylime_5
06-03-2008, 11:26 AM
McKelvin is not a perfect fit for Buffalo but I think it can work out since they do play some man and aren't a tampa 2 quite like Indianapolis or Chicago or Tampa. They play a lot of cover 2 but mix in some man. I think the ball skills will hurt him but he won't get beat like a (insert cliche here) if he's as good as he's supposed to be. I like Buffalo's secondary a lot though now with Whitner, Simpson, McKelvin, and McGee.

Geo
06-03-2008, 11:29 AM
I thought Buffalo did great in the Draft, the one area I wasn't too crazy about was TE but maybe the kid from Kansas (I think it was) they drafted can fit the bill. Getting the best corner in the draft imo and then still getting James Hardy in the 2nd was awesome, and they needed a pass rusher so Ellis is a very good 3rd round pick who fits the defense.

d34ng3l021
06-03-2008, 12:09 PM
I loved the Falcons first day. I am becoming a bigger and bigger Matt Ryan fan the more I read about him. He is just the type of guy who puts in extra hours in the film room and everyone on the team can respect and be lead by. As great as Glenn Dorsey would have been, we would have traded up to get Henne if we drafted Dorsey. I am glad that didnt happen.

Sam Baker was a pick of desperation, but none the less, I think it was a good pick. It was obvious that OTs would not last and we needed to protect our franchise QB. Baker is a guy who I think should be a solid pass protector at the worst.

Curtis Lofton looks to be a Ryans or Tatupu type player. Lacking in athleticism but making up for it in instincts. He might struggle as a rookie though, just because I think we are screwed at the DT position as of now. In the future though, I expect Lofton and Boley to wreak havoc together.

Chevis Jackson was a solid pick, but was a slight reach. He has the experience and comes from a good LSU defense. Should be a solid cover 2 CB.

Harry Douglas was another reach. I like him a pick and he is a perfect slot guy, but in the middle of the 3rd? Eh. He has been outstanding in camp though.

I hated the Thomas DeCoud pick. I just didnt like him as a prospect and I dont see him being more than a ST player.

Robert James wtf?

I like the Kroy Biermann pick. He should be a good situational pass rusher.

Thomas Brown was a weird pick and I would have rather we used Jason Snelling more, but whatever. I kinda like him and I look forward to seeing him on the field.

Gravedigger42
06-04-2008, 12:49 PM
Every year Scott rips into TT's picks yet he year after year he proves to know what he is doing. Just last year I remember the " Packers record was better than their talent" quote from Scott when evaluating the draft. Now this self indulgent luxury picks are his pet peeve. From a guy who's never drafted a player that sounds a little high and mighty to me. TT picked BPA from his board which we all know is very different from most others. The Pack filled many needs and I see Nelson as an eventual replacement for DD. Everyone talks about CB's being old and need guys to groom but no one mentions that Donald is starting to get up there. Sure there are other guys but no team can ever have too much talent at a position. Injuries and age start taking their toll and we'll be glad we have a couple extra quality WR's. Last year Jones was a reach and maybe even shouldn't have been drafted but now he's locked in as #3 and possibly #2 if anyone get hurt. surely according to Scott's analysis of Jones last year we needed to get another WR, oh but now that one season has passed we'll forget that assessment of JJ and call Nelson a luxury/ self indulgent pick.

Sorry Scott I just plain think your wrong and under qualified to make those kinds of statements about a guy that has a proven record of building successful teams through the draft.

no love
06-05-2008, 03:04 AM
Sorry Scott I just plain think your wrong and under qualified to make those kinds of statements about a guy that has a proven record of building successful teams through the draft.

Chill out. He gave the Packers a passing grade, it's not like he gave them a failing grade. If you don't like the grade thats fine, but it's still Scotts site and he can grade the packers however the hell he feels and we are all still going to read it. If you don't like/trust Scotts scouting don't read it and don't troll.

Besides, I don't think you are under qualified to make rash statements about the quality of Scotts scouting.

Addict
06-05-2008, 04:28 AM
Chill out. He gave the Packers a passing grade, it's not like he gave them a failing grade. If you don't like the grade thats fine, but it's still Scotts site and he can grade the packers however the hell he feels and we are all still going to read it. If you don't like/trust Scotts scouting don't read it and don't troll.

Besides, I don't think you are under qualified to make rash statements about the quality of Scotts scouting.

http://www.untwistedvortex.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/dontfeedthetroll.jpg

luee
06-05-2008, 08:17 AM
the only really bad grade so far, D+, was given to the Titans. Fisher has been a very successful coach but recent drafts have not provided many productive bodies. This could easily have been the worst. Every pick was a reach. Not your bottom of the round to top of the round reaches but your who is he in the third round type reaches. Reminds me of the pre-Jerry Reese Giants. As Scott pointed out these were not even reaches for need, more blindfolded draftboard style.

Speaking of the Super Bowl champs, Reese has learned his work well. Possibly not as spectacular as last year but all solid big college producers with good S/S numbers who have the potential to contribute immediately.

A little luck involved with number one. The top all around safety dropped to 31. The team could afford to gamble with Super Mario and Woodward. Not too many slots open. No reaches only values. A lot of potential with the two mid-round LBs. one of the few areas that may be weak with the departures of Kmitch and Torbor.

A solid B with A potential depending on MM.

Bearsfan123
06-06-2008, 09:40 AM
i thought the Bears grade was pretty generous. I still dont like the Kellen Davis pick over guys like Andre Woodson or Josh Johnson, but Scott pretty much said it all when he said that we will most likely be in the market for a QB next year. I didnt know Forte wasnt being looked at primarily as a RB. That should worry us.

BeerBaron
06-06-2008, 10:10 AM
hicago certainly addressed most of their needs with this effort but they opted not to bring in a quarterback and that may come back to haunt them. Sure they signed a couple of undrafted free agents in Nick Hill of Southern Illinois and Caleb Hanie of Colorado St. but those guys are third string or practice squad types, which means they will live or die with Rex Grossman and Kyle Orton.

you almost got all the way through scott.....almost man! i was liking the write up, agreeing with the grade......but then you brought up the QB thing.....

the bears were going to live or die this upcoming year by orton or grossman anyway, would a late round quarterback really have shut anyone up?

they got potential starters at LT and RB for this season with williams and forte in the first two rounds and then 3 more guys who have the potential to at least make impacts with their next 3 picks in bennett, harrison and steltz.

tell me which one of those guys who can make an impact as rookies you would have liked for the bears to replace with a QB who likely would not have seen the field under good circumstances this year anyway?

to come away with that many guys who can make an impact on the field this year, a year in which that division is still very winnable with the packers pretty much guranteed to take at least one step back with a 'rookie' QB (in terms of starting experience) and the vikes having their own major questions at the spot, and the lions being the lions, i just don't believe the Bears needed to spend one of those picks on a rookie QB who, best case scenario, never sees the field.

i think the Bears did just what they should finding guys who can help them now. The defense will be healthy and both Orton and Grossman have gotten this team to the playoffs when the defense was healthy and they had an adequate offense, something Forte, Williams and maybe even Bennett have a chance to help out with.

So you gave them a B, which I like, but you just had to mention the QB....

Geo
06-16-2008, 02:14 PM
Solid appraisal for the Colts' draft class by Scott. In terms of talent and fits for the team, a great job as usual, but now they need to develop them. Plus you could include one or two UDFAs who could very conceivably make the roster.

rascal
06-17-2008, 10:24 AM
I can't see how the Broncos got a B with their draft class.

Clady, Royal, Peyton, Williams, Torain, and Powell all have the potential to contribute a lot this year if not flat out start. Lichtensteiger will start when Nalen retires. Not to mention Barrett who has a high ceiling.

And not one mention of the UDFA's they brought in. HELLO WESLEY WOODYARD!! And that kicker from OU (Hartley) who has been mentioned as the #1 kicker.

Addict
06-17-2008, 10:59 AM
I can't see how the Broncos got a B with their draft class.

Clady, Royal, Peyton, Williams, Torain, and Powell all have the potential to contribute a lot this year if not flat out start. Lichtensteiger will start when Nalen retires. Not to mention Barrett who has a high ceiling.

And not one mention of the UDFA's they brought in. HELLO WESLEY WOODYARD!! And that kicker from OU (Hartley) who has been mentioned as the #1 kicker.

UDFA's don't count for anyone since it's a DRAFT review.

I did read the Bronco's write-up and I gotta admit I'm a bit surprised Scott only gave them a B after all the positive things he says.

Geo
06-17-2008, 11:12 AM
Carlton Powell was a great late round pick for the Broncos, much better than Marcus Thomas last year. He might not be a playmaking DT, but he's a lunch-pail hard worker with good character. Powell can play the run well and also pressure the pocket some, he could be a great part of a strong rotation to be built up.

rascal
06-17-2008, 11:57 AM
UDFA's don't count for anyone since it's a DRAFT review.

It is part of the draft process so I don't see why not. He also mentioned UDFAs in the Bears write up.

rascal
06-17-2008, 11:59 AM
Carlton Powell was a great late round pick for the Broncos, much better than Marcus Thomas last year. He might not be a playmaking DT, but he's a lunch-pail hard worker with good character. Powell can play the run well and also pressure the pocket some, he could be a great part of a strong rotation to be built up.

I don't know if he will be better than Thomas, but you certainly have to love his character and work ethic. That's one thing you have to truly like about the Broncos picks, and offseason as a whole, for the large majority they brought in high character guys and released guys who were not (Henry and Walker namely).

Mr.Regular
06-17-2008, 01:30 PM
Once again Scott praises a team for trades in whih they dealt picks for players. The Packers traded a 6th this year for Ryan Grant but that doesnt help their grade at all?! HUH!?

The Vikings send the farm for Jared Allen.... Great move. The Browns send their first three picks for Quinn, Williams, and Rogers.... Great move. The Packers send a 6TH ROUND PICK for Ryan Grant, and its not even touched upon?! Cooooooome on, throw us some love Scotty!

MURPHMAN
06-20-2008, 09:21 AM
Um, Scott....I have been waiting patiently for the Panthers write up for six weeks. 31 teams are done. You haven't forgotten us have you?

TheGreatEscape
06-20-2008, 09:56 AM
I don't know if he will be better than Thomas, but you certainly have to love his character and work ethic. That's one thing you have to truly like about the Broncos picks, and offseason as a whole, for the large majority they brought in high character guys and released guys who were not (Henry and Walker namely).

Henry's not really a low character guy, he just likes to get high and when he does he forgets to wear a love-glove, and honestly, if that's the only thing he forgets with how much he must smoke, that's simply impressive.

BeerBaron
06-20-2008, 09:57 AM
Once again Scott praises a team for trades in whih they dealt picks for players. The Packers traded a 6th this year for Ryan Grant but that doesnt help their grade at all?! HUH!?

The Vikings send the farm for Jared Allen.... Great move. The Browns send their first three picks for Quinn, Williams, and Rogers.... Great move. The Packers send a 6TH ROUND PICK for Ryan Grant, and its not even touched upon?! Cooooooome on, throw us some love Scotty!

you've been complaining and he finally missed another one with the ravens sending a pick for Fabian Washington.

Brothgar
06-20-2008, 10:34 AM
Personally I think Scott was dead on with his assessment of the Packers draft. Yeah Brohm was a great value pick BUT it may have destroyed Aaron Roger's confidence. If I would have said that Jordy Nelson was taken before Limus Sweed in a mock draft a week before the draft I would have been ridiculed if I gave GB a WR in the first I would have gotten it bad as well so I can't really see how Pack fans can say Scott is being unfair to the Packers in his draft grade.

Now that I've gotten that off my chest I must say I am surprised with how high the Lions draft grade is Lions fans don't even have them this high. It isn't my place to argue with you because lets face it you were the first to have Jake Long as #1 and one of if not the first to have Jordy Nelson in the 2nd round when everyone else had him as a 3rd-5th round slot so it is likely that you know something I don't. I agree with you in that I like the Cherilius pick if he didn't go to us at 17 he would have been in Houston at 18 and we would have been looking at Dwayne Brown or Carl Nicks. I'm not as sold on Dizon as others are since there has been no indication that he will start at MLB this season if he does then I agree that it was a great pick. Other than that I'd say you were dead on in the Lions draft as well

BeerBaron
06-20-2008, 10:51 AM
Personally I think Scott was dead on with his assessment of the Packers draft. Yeah Brohm was a great value pick BUT it may have destroyed Aaron Roger's confidence. If I would have said that Jordy Nelson was taken before Limus Sweed in a mock draft a week before the draft I would have been ridiculed if I gave GB a WR in the first I would have gotten it bad as well so I can't really see how Pack fans can say Scott is being unfair to the Packers in his draft grade.

Now that I've gotten that off my chest I must say I am surprised with how high the Lions draft grade is Lions fans don't even have them this high. It isn't my place to argue with you because lets face it you were the first to have Jake Long as #1 and one of if not the first to have Jordy Nelson in the 2nd round when everyone else had him as a 3rd-5th round slot so it is likely that you know something I don't. I agree with you in that I like the Cherilius pick if he didn't go to us at 17 he would have been in Houston at 18 and we would have been looking at Dwayne Brown or Carl Nicks. I'm not as sold on Dizon as others are since there has been no indication that he will start at MLB this season if he does then I agree that it was a great pick. Other than that I'd say you were dead on in the Lions draft as well

i didn't say anything at the time but i agree dead on that he overrated the lions draft a bit.

BamaFalcon59
06-20-2008, 10:56 AM
Eddie Royal and Calton Powell were great pickups for the Broncos. Royal especially has a ton of potential; very fast, extremely quick, good route runner, great hands, and a great return man. The only negatives for him are size and lack of college receiving production, which was mostly due to an ineffective passing offense and four talented wide receivers.

IceKubes
06-20-2008, 01:10 PM
Personally I think Scott was dead on with his assessment of the Packers draft. Yeah Brohm was a great value pick BUT it may have destroyed Aaron Roger's confidence. If I would have said that Jordy Nelson was taken before Limus Sweed in a mock draft a week before the draft I would have been ridiculed if I gave GB a WR in the first I would have gotten it bad as well so I can't really see how Pack fans can say Scott is being unfair to the Packers in his draft grade.

Now that I've gotten that off my chest I must say I am surprised with how high the Lions draft grade is Lions fans don't even have them this high. It isn't my place to argue with you because lets face it you were the first to have Jake Long as #1 and one of if not the first to have Jordy Nelson in the 2nd round when everyone else had him as a 3rd-5th round slot so it is likely that you know something I don't. I agree with you in that I like the Cherilius pick if he didn't go to us at 17 he would have been in Houston at 18 and we would have been looking at Dwayne Brown or Carl Nicks. I'm not as sold on Dizon as others are since there has been no indication that he will start at MLB this season if he does then I agree that it was a great pick. Other than that I'd say you were dead on in the Lions draft as well

Not saying that Cherilus wasn't a good pick for you guys but Houston was not going to take him at 18, just like we would not have taken Otah or Baker. Brown is a perfect fit for the system we run and the other guys are a bit more on the mauling side except for maybe Baker but he did run somewhat poorly compared to Brown (Probably more polished as a pass protector though). Not really my opinion on which guy is more talented etc. just that I think all the teams got what they were looking for in terms of fit.

Sveen
06-20-2008, 01:36 PM
Looks like Scott has forgotten about the Panthers... ;)

TheGreatEscape
06-20-2008, 01:54 PM
Looks like Scott has forgotten about the Panthers... ;)

With good reason.

I know I'm just provoking BlindSite, but arguing with him about the panthers is just hilarious.

Mr.Regular
06-20-2008, 02:26 PM
People chill, Ive been neg repped for my comments, because I brought up how Scott factors in deals for players into some team write ups and not others. Its no big deal, I was just pointing it out. Plus he is a Viking fan so its natural for me to point it out! It was all in fun, Scotty is the best in the business, we all know that!

Brothgar
06-21-2008, 12:48 AM
Not saying that Cherilus wasn't a good pick for you guys but Houston was not going to take him at 18, just like we would not have taken Otah or Baker. Brown is a perfect fit for the system we run and the other guys are a bit more on the mauling side except for maybe Baker but he did run somewhat poorly compared to Brown (Probably more polished as a pass protector though). Not really my opinion on which guy is more talented etc. just that I think all the teams got what they were looking for in terms of fit.

Unlike Otah I who is slow I think that Cherilius could be molded into a ZBS type RT. Since we are running a varient of the ZBS now I think he would be able to do the same in Houston but that is my oppinion.

Scott Wright
06-21-2008, 08:05 AM
Sorry for the delay on getting the Panther review up, I had internet issues the past couple of days.

It is up now though and that officially concludes NFLDC's 2008 NFL Draft coverage!

I am already working on stuff for the '09 coverage re-launch though and while I don't have a specific date yet it will probably be either late July or at the absolute latest August 1st.

Bearsfan123
06-21-2008, 08:55 AM
Sorry for the delay on getting the Panther review up, I had internet issues the past couple of days.

It is up now though and that officially concludes NFLDC's 2008 NFL Draft coverage!

I am already working on stuff for the '09 coverage re-launch though and while I don't have a specific date yet it will probably be either late July or at the absolute latest August 1st.

Yay! I was just gonna ask when the re-launch will be. Great coverage as always Scott. We all appreciate it. ^_^

T-RICH49
07-05-2008, 04:42 PM
I didn't like the Morgan pick at first either, but I'm not sure Pollard is the long term solution there. I think Page is an excellent young safety and I think him and Morgan would be a very killer combo.

Yeah Pollard does give me great confidence he will improve.right now he seems more of a ST player and not a S and I think Herm has to feel the same hence the pick


Either way, they seem pretty happy with how the offensive line is playing out and the fact it was addressed at all made every Chiefs fan happy.

would have liked another OL or 2 but yeah all in all I am happy