Dibs

He didn't say that......he said it would be extremely unlikely......which is quite reasonable considering the fact that over half of all top ten picks bust out......and a high percent of the ones that don't, don't shine in their rookie year.

I always heard it was "Every time you masturbate, you kill a kitten." I thought it was a directive. When I was a teenager I was out half the night, every night looking for kittens to kill. sometimes 4 a night Of course, as I got older I learned about killing kitty.......

I wouldn't think so......the Bucs team that won the superbowl had an extremely pedestrian offense & the Bears team that got there last year had(apart from the first 6 weeks of the season) a fairly poor offense.

Mmmmm. I believe as you do(& many others) that having a strong run D is extremely important to a teams success...... ......but...... Indy won the superbowl ranked last in yards & last in yards per carry. Exception to the rule? Probably. Indication of how good their Offense is? Probably. Indication of how the Tampa-2 is a different style of D to the more traditional types.....i.e. does not require as much run stopping as other Ds? Possibly. Counteracts your generalization? Definitely.

Though I don't believe it an easy thing to simply slot in a rookie/FA RB, the recent superbowl success of the Colts, Ravens & Patriots has me thinking. All three of those teams built the a superbowl caliber unit....then added a RB. Ravens in 00 with Lewis. Patriots in 01 with Smith & 03 with Dillon. Colts in 06 with Addai. This has me thinking about solution #5..... Solution 5: Basically ignore RB this year. Draft at best a 3rd rounder(you never know) and give the team(esp. the OL) a year to gel. Use all the resources available this year to fix the rest of the team. Then, next off-season....hopefully the team is looking to be on the verge.....add a 1st round RB or decent FA RB. With a young defense with a few years experience, a probowl level QB & WR and a very solid OL, one would hope that any half good RB would produce at above average levels......and with a bit of luck the team might emulate the superbowl winners mentioned above.

I don't believe it beneficial to tank a game to get a better draft pick. You may as well just be honest about it & forfeit the game. I do however think there is a possible benefit for players to not play their absolute hardest in games where teams have been guaranteed playoff spots. As example, having your star RB strive for the extra yard in a meaningless game could cause injury & hinder the teams playoff chances. In this instance, I would think that sure, you play to win......you just don't play your guts out to win.

But they're OK with bomb making if done somewhere out of the way?

We already have one of the common factors for this phenomenon. Dockery.

Hmmmmm....seems to be a mistake made by several teams every year. Perhaps it's not as simple as you are assuming it to be.

It was a simple misunderstanding......Carole Middleton is an avid poker player & had never actually seen a royal flush.

Falling: Peterson.

I remember last year thinking that all of the mocks that had D'Brick falling to us at #8 were obviously the most insightful & astute mocks out there. A bit like the ones that have Peterson falling to us at #12 this year. Rose coloured glasses......the only way to read mocks.

I agree with the philosophy of the DTs will determine how good/bad the D performs(give or take). I tend to think however that the coaching staff will take a wait & see approach. McCargo & Williams will be second year guys & we now have (hopefully) another strong rotation player in Walker. With such HUGE holes at RB & LB, it would be quite a commitment to spend even more resources on the DL. If they do go DT in the 1st, I can't see them going after Branch. You mentioned Tommie Harris.....& I agree it would be great for our D to have a similar player. Okoye is a lot closer to Harris.....& for that matter, so is McCargo. Harris(like Sapp) is listed at 300lbs. Branch is being spoken of as the possible NT in a 3-4 D.....he does not seem a good enough fit for the Tampa-2. Needless to say, it would be great if McCargo develops into our Harris.

I have no respect for people who add the last word to a set of initialized words.....like PIN number etc. I also have no respect for people who cannot seem to tolerate flaws in others.

There are certainly some who believe that Marv & Co. achieved the best they could in the draft & that Whitner was the only way to go. Sure....with them....call them out & make fun of them. They are deluded. There is always a potential better way to go.....particularly with hindsight. What you(and others) argue however is not that the Whitner decision was one of many reasonable options.....but was in & of itself a bad decision. This has not shown itself to be the case. It may do, but a majority would agree it's leaning towards a successful pick. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Just because(in hindsight) a decision is not the best decision.....does not mean that it is a bad one. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- People have said bad lines. We drafted a DT in the 1st round. Surely that counteracts the arguments that the DL was ignored.....even if McCargo does not pan out we certainly spent resources addressing the unit. We now have the potential for a good OL. Rome......not being built in a day....built it's OL in the second year when they had a better understanding of how good Peters could be at LT. I would have done it in year 1 myself.....& who knows, might have ended up waisting resources on a stud LT that I didn't need. (Speaking of OL, I'll be PMing you soon to get your input on great OTs....I'm finally doing my study ) I don't understand peoples problems with this. There are many ways to skin a cat......so Marv didn't follow your way....that does not mean his way won't work.....or that your way wasn't better.....or his way isn't better. Time will tell.

I'm sure there was a report a short while ago saying the opposite. I know who I think is perhaps not being totally honest.....or at least is self deluded.

Actually, he only had around 120 tackles....but.....those numbers are still very good. This link shows the list. You'll see he was 16th in tackles & only one ahead of him had more sacks. I'm sure the Packers are very happy with him.

Maybe he should try wearing those big studs on his shoes......or slowing down a bit more before he changes direction. You can do yourself an injury if you slip while running too fast.....that could effect his overall predicted draft position.

*you forgot Oakland*I agree(sort of)......but there are other factors. Denver & Houston obtained legit 1000 yard RBs via FA. They did not have to give up anything in compensation, therefore they are perhaps not very comparable to the Turner situation.....why give up picks when you can have a legit multi 1000+ RB for nothing? Oakland has not given up on Jordan....but for insurance added Griffith(whom can play RB) & Rhodes...both via FA so like above, not really comparable. Cleveland signed an 'old before his time' RB(Lewis) for 1 year. Why? I assume to give them extra freedom re: the draft. Again, I can't see it being comparable....another pure FA(no compensation) deal. Detroit already had RBs & added long-shot Duckett(who doesn't count IMO & was a FA) & helped themselves out with a player trade for Anderson. Again, not comparable. I agree with your assessment of the Giants moves not being significant. That leaves the Ravens & Jets. These two I find very comparable to us(& Ten & GB) trading for Turner. You are right in that if Turner is considered to be of the same caliber as McGahee & Jones(both multi 1000+ RBs) his pricetag was probably too high(at the time).....otherwise, why not get Turner instead of McGahee or Jones? I'm thinking it more likely that the Ravens & Jets however, viewed their new RBs as overall better prospects. Basically, why give up picks for a guy who has not shown he can be a legit #1 RB when you can give up picks for a guy who has? This is of course not saying Turner can't become a legit #1......just that the 'competition' had better resumes. Now that most teams have acquired their #1 RB.....with the draft looming I'd say it was a buyers market re:Turner. His pricetag(trade value, not salary) might well be quite low now.....but who would pay it when you have the opportunity to grab a younger/cheaper/better(?) RB in the draft?

Is there enough room on the bandwagon for 1 more? The only way we pick a WR is if Johnson falls to 12.......in other words, not going to happen.

Ignoring all of the rest of what you wrote........do you know what average means?

I'm not so sure about that(bold).....there is a chance......very small but quite possible that Peterson drops to 12. There may well be a tentative deal already in place....i.e. "If Peterson is drafted before #12, we'll trade X & Y for Turner." My guess, either way, is that Turner will be part of a trade on day one of the draft.

Yep....Kenoy Kennedy is a household name. And what do you ya know? Lions selected a safety first chance they get. They run the cover-2 where Safeties are considered very important. O.J. Atogwe. That's their starting other safety. Heard of him? They run the cover-2 where Safeties are considered very important. Actually....yes. Their starting SS was probably undecided at that point. They ended up starting a guy with no NFL experience (Landry). UFA I think. Ed Reed is not quite the same player he was after his injury & the Ravens have a history of stacking their secondary. Dawkins was entering his 11th season.....he's getting on. Their starting SS is(was) Considine.....a 2nd year 4th rounder with virtually no experience. I think we should really assume that Marv & Co. did look at the teams picking behind them......looked at the odds......and made a reasonable decision.....and ended up with a guy that can play football(potentially great football). ......or you could be right & Marv & Co. didn't think things through & didn't take the trade because.....they were scared?.....they were fixated on a player?.......they were taking a nap?

See, I just don't get all the harping on about what happened. You(and others) act like it was a horrendous thing to not trade. When in fact it was a decision that at the time(without the benefit of hindsight) was totally reasonable to stay put & take the player they were obviously fairly certain had a great chance to become a very productive NFL player(as opposed to potential busts etc) A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush(I misquoted this last time). Do you play poker(Texas Hold'em)? Are you any good? Let's say you have 77 & limp in to see the flop....and in the flop is a 7......but 2 diamonds. It becomes apparent that somebody is chasing the flush. Now being a good player, you know that he only has a 1 in 3 chance of getting the flush & busting your trips 7s. Do you..... count on the odds & try to milk every cent from him.....or..... bet BIG after the flop so that he cannot justify the chase. If you milk & he hits the flush you lose it all. If you milk & he doesn't hit you get more money. Trading is the equivalent to milking in this situation. They knew what we had with Whitner(pretty much) & were content with a hefty profit. Had they traded & gotten unlucky, all of the players wanted might not have been there & we might have been left with bigger hit/miss players.....or ones that didn't suit the systems/team. I know this was a long way to make a point but you seem to think that the gamble of trading up/down is an obvious when in fact it is taking a bigger chance than staying put & being safe. You can say(hindsight) that trading probably might have been the better option......but you seem to constantly imply that not trading was ridiculously stupid/moronic/dumb/short sighted etc, etc when in fact it was a justifyable decission to trade/not trade at the time we selected. Do you honestly expect Marv(or anyone) to have 'the best' draft possible?