Fewell733

I bought "Pro Football Draft Guide '08" yesterday - not really sure who's its made by, but I've been happy with it so far. Doesn't try to fake 40 times like virtually all of the mags do. It also doesn't try to overhype certain players and doesn't try to make player comparisons (which are often totally laughable - ESPN last year - John Beck = Donovan McNabb, yet also projected as a 5th rounder??) They also seem to have a good understanding of team needs and the mock draft is pretty solid, though some late risers like Rogers-Cromartie they probably have a little underrated. I also really like that the magazine includes these players actual college statistics, and even has game by game breakdowns in an index in the back.

the ESPN Draft Magazine was pretty good last year and I still look at it now and then - a few laughable evaluations but better than most of the other ones i've seen. One problem I've had with these magazines is that a lot of them don't even wait for the combine so heights, weights, and 40 times are often significantly off. Maybe this year they waited another couple weeks to get some real numbers.

I'm all for trading down. It's just hard to find somebody willing to trade with. Look for teams desperate for a RB or a QB to be the likely trading partner - somebody that has targeted Mendenhall or Stewart or one of the top QBs and doesn't think they'll last till the late teens. Detroit might now be in the market for a starting running back at least.

well we need somebody. Can't rely alone on a rookie #2 - at least need a guy to compete with him and back him up. Hackett? - I don't know why we haven't shown interest yet, our options are getting slim

I think the scouts will determine what kind of offense his style fits. He was asked his preference. I don't really care what his preference is. Modrack expressly said that Peterson was the top rb in the draft - too bad he'll almost certainly be gone by 12.

yeah, it was a joke.

That's exactly what they want you to think...

FYI - Marv and co. said today that we are not going to carry a FB for next season and will be relying on TE's to fill that need when called for. This is because the offense will almost exclusively be one back sets.

But drafting a DT or DE that will be on the field maybe once a set of down is going to improve the run D next year? Your argument cuts both ways.

no, it was addressed to Mr. Guzman

I think that would be a very slow backfield with Leonard, Bush, and A-Train. Leonard is fast for his size, but the guy is more a tweener than an answer at running back who can take a run outside and dodge tacklers (though the leap is awesome). Bush is a gamble and I don't think his style of play will translate to the NFL. Too much of a Ron Dayne type, except with a broken leg that won't heal right. No thanks. Wouldn't mind Leonard, but I'd want another guy with more quickness in the 3rd too. I have trouble picturing this happening.

How come you don't consider drafting a RB in the 2nd or 3rd as a viable option? You seem to be of the belief that its Peterson, Lynch or some anonymous nobody that will be a "stop gap." A guy like Pittman or Jackson complemented by A-Train would be fine. Though if we have a chance to get a freak like Peterson, I have a lot of trouble passing that up.

talk about overreacting....jeez

Just curious, why? I haven't heard anything about Pittman being a bad guy.

Kareem Brown is actually a DT. I don't know why they have him as a DE here. Maybe in a 3-4.

in that case, I agree.

This is a good selling point for Poz. But watch the highlights and its clear that Willis plays bigger, can shed blocks better, and has the deep speed necessary to play MLB in the cover-2. Poz is a very solid player, but he often looks small out there, and I seriously question whether he can cover the deep part of the field on passing downs as a MLB in our defense. Obviously if he's the pick, I trust our scouts and they certainly know more than I. But if it were me, I'd take Willis over him.

well you try and find difference makers early on - though there are no sure things. But it seems like you're really only talking about the first 2 rounds. The last 5 you try and find guys that will contribute and fit what you're trying to do - occassionally some inexperienced athletic freak will be available late and you can risk it or grab them in UDFA (Peters)

Though I totally agree Refynman, that was an awfully long post. Yikes, it might be a new record.

totally agree.

I'm not sure I fully follow your reasoning fully. I think what Marv is clearly trying to do is lay the foundations of a team that can be consistently competitive (competitive in the sense of being in playoff contention). Free Agents are a very small part of that mission (see Indy). Personally I like taking additional players because I think really good players are still available in the 3rd round, and sacrificing a few of those for one guy is risky when you're building a team. But I trust Marv's judgment and if the risk is worth it to him, its worth it to me.

whoops, yeah ESPN not CBS

Even though I'm a big Olbermann fan, I hope he doesn't go political for the football gig. Politics and football shouldn't mix. Olberrman knows this though, since he actually has a large background in sports broadcasting. What did ESPN expect Limbaugh to contribute anyway?

possible - Lynch's stock is apparently dropping. I'm a fan of Bradley after watching some clips - though I'm not sure Jauron would think he fits our D - though I don't know why he couldn't play Strong side where speed isn't quite as important, or even if he's just in on running downs. The guy plays with ridiculous enthusiasm and really pounds people into the ground. This is a great resource for seeing some clips of prospects: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/...aft/2007/video/

talk about ridiculous. I guess the world is a much simpler place if you always know who's fault it is. The democrats and those that vote democratic apparently. Who blames Bush for Buffalo's long term economic decline that began, what, 40 years ago? Nobody.