No DT's taken Rd #2 and only 2 in Rd #3

[Shamrock]

I thought that McCargo was an interesting pick at # 26, only from what i've read in Mock (right word) drafts.

I have no idea of college football- in Oz it's not shown on pay TV very often, maybe a 'Bowl game. The only other way is the 'net.

Anyway, I noted that Rd #1 had 3 Dt's taken. Then Nada in Rd # 2 whatsoever (?) and only 2 (Dvoracek and Wroten) in Rd #3. Overall, then that's 5 DT's out of nearly 100 picks.

I can remember drafts when it's been almost 5 DT's taken Rd # 1 alone.

Maybe McCargo was a Rd #2 or Rd # 3 prospect but after the 2 higher rated DT's- Bunkley and Ngata went (after all we'd taken Whiten) there was such an obvious drop off in DT talent that ML and Co. felt the need to gamble in order to get a DT. Is that possible?

[Acantha]

I thought that McCargo was an interesting pick at # 26, only from what i've read in Mock (right word) drafts.

I have no idea of college football- in Oz it's not shown on pay TV very often, maybe a 'Bowl game. The only other way is the 'net.

Anyway, I noted that Rd #1 had 3 Dt's taken. Then Nada in Rd # 2 whatsoever (?) and only 2 (Dvoracek and Wroten) in Rd #3. Overall, then that's 5 DT's out of nearly 100 picks.

I can remember drafts when it's been almost 5 DT's taken Rd # 1 alone.

Maybe McCargo was a Rd #2 or Rd # 3 prospect but after the 2 higher rated DT's- Bunkley and Ngata went (after all we'd taken Whiten) there was such an obvious drop off in DT talent that ML and Co. felt the need to gamble in order to get a DT. Is that possible?

678981[/snapback]

Not just possible, they said as much in the press conference. They said at 26 there would have been 15 more picks until their pick in the 2nd, and there wasn't anyone else they had grade near as high. (not quoting...just summing up)

[Tipster19]

Great observation Shamrock. This puts the trade up in a better perspective. I applaud the guts to head off other teams from being able to draft what was a much needed player for us. I rather have quality players than quanity.