C.Biscuit97 Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Agreed. If after three years of player acquisitions and drafts Dick Jauron fails to get us to the playoffs because he rolled out the same old tired, safe, and predictable game plans that not even the Patriots or Colts rosters could overcome then he will need (as the Losman haters like to say) to be given a ticket on the next bus out of Buffalo. If Losman isn't allowed excuses, Jauron shouldn't be either. Especially given the fact that he's got a .437 winning record after 117 games as a head coach. Losman got only 35 games. It's amazing this is the guy Buffalo fans get to hang their playoff hopes on. Yet they somehow, someway buy what Dick Jauron's selling. It's amazing. Part of Jauron's excuse is Losman. I'll agree this year he doesn't have that. But what coach would have won with these scrubs: Miller, Matthews, Stewart, Burris, McNown??? P.S. And if you don't think taking a team that was 0-3 and 1-4 to 7-7 and playing for a shot at the playoffs with the amount of injuries and the Everett situation isn't a great coaching job, you're an idiot.
Steely Dan Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 I am not making a comment here on my views about Jauron......simply a comment about selectively stating numbers. If you had bothered to actually look at a typical 13-3 year (and I know you haven't), you probably will not like what you see. 2007 Packers went 13-3. But let's break that down: the number of teams they faced that ended up > .500? 4 the numbers of teams they faced that ended up <= .500? 12 Dicks W/L against the 4 better than .500 teams: 3-1 Dicks W/L against the 12 .500 or less teams: 10-2 2007 Cowboys went 13-3. But let's break that down: the number of teams they faced that ended up > .500? 6 the numbers of teams they faced that ended up <= .500? 10 Dicks W/L against the 6 better than .500 teams: 4-2 Dicks W/L against the 9 .500 or less teams: 9-1 2007 Colts went 13-3. But let's break that down: the number of teams they faced that ended up > .500? 7 the numbers of teams they faced that ended up <= .500? 9 Dicks W/L against the 7 better than .500 teams: 4-3 Dicks W/L against the 9 .500 or less teams: 9-0 2006 Ravens went 13-3. But let's break that down: the number of teams they faced that ended up > .500? 4 the numbers of teams they faced that ended up <= .500? 12 Dicks W/L against the 4 better than .500 teams: 3-1 Dicks W/L against the 12 .500 or less teams: 10-2 2006 Bears went 13-3. But let's break that down: the number of teams they faced that ended up > .500? 3 the numbers of teams they faced that ended up <= .500? 13 Dicks W/L against the 3 better than .500 teams: 2-1 Dicks W/L against the 13 .500 or less teams: 12-2 What was your point again? Dibs you are right. Cynical will not accept any argument. He needs to see the Bills make the playoffs. When they do he'll B word that Jauron could never win a SB. If they win a SB he'll say that he never said Jauron sucked just that there was nothing to make anyone believe he could do it. It's a no win situation.
Steely Dan Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Nice examples. Notice how each team fared against the better competition, something a Jauron coached team has been incapable of doing.If you expect the Bills to just make the playoffs, and nothing more, Jauron can 'probably' do that (just hope he has lots of crappy teams to play against) But if you want the Bills to actually win some playoff games, and hopefully the SB, then the Bills are going to have to beat the better teams in the league. If a Jauron coached team cannot beat the better teams during the regular season, what in the world makes people believe Jauron will be able to do it in the playoffs? Thank you Captain Obvious. In Dibs example Jauron beat more or about the same amount of greater than 500 teams. Teams that went to the SB. What's your point. Don't answer I've heard it ad nauseum. It's rhetorical. Please tell me one QB who has started for Jauron that has started for another team. And not to turn this into another one of those, but IMO, Losman will be the latest. It's one thing if DJ has had QBs that achieved success elsewhere, bujt he hasn't. The Bears were saddled with crap on offense. This is year 3 and the writing is on the wall. This the first QB Jauron has truly brought in as his own. And for all the other silly Jauron bashing comments, how great of a coach was Belichick before Brady? Now, now that doesn't apply because it's Jauron we're talking about and all the rules change for him. Part of Jauron's excuse is Losman. I'll agree this year he doesn't have that. But what coach would have won with these scrubs: Miller, Matthews, Stewart, Burris, McNown??? Anybody except Jauron.
Dibs Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Nice examples. Notice how each team fared against the better competition, something a Jauron coached team has been incapable of doing.If you expect the Bills to just make the playoffs, and nothing more, Jauron can 'probably' do that (just hope he has lots of crappy teams to play against) But if you want the Bills to actually win some playoff games, and hopefully the SB, then the Bills are going to have to beat the better teams in the league. If a Jauron coached team cannot beat the better teams during the regular season, what in the world makes people believe Jauron will be able to do it in the playoffs? You will also notice that 4 of the 5 examples had the teams losing more games against the crappy teams. You will also notice that only one of the 5 examples had less crappy teams faced than DJs 13-3 team. The reason that the examples of 13-3 teams had a greater record against winning teams than DJs is that they lost games to the crappy teams.....which DJs didn't do. One could easily argue that since he didn't lose a game against any of the crappy teams he faced......that when he faces a lesser opponent, his teams win(unlike many other 13-3 teams). Your thoughts about DJs abilities may be spot on......using his 13-3 season to try to show it will not work because his 13-3 season was just like every other.....he won 13 games.....and lost 3 games......he played a bunch of crappy teams just like every other 13-3 season team does. *How anyone can try to simplify things down to this level is beyond me. Good team has bad week....bad team has good week....bad team finishes strong......good team starts slowly.....star QB out for the matchup(for either team).....factor after factor after factor to be considered yet people want to boil it all down to 3-3 against good teams. What a joke.*
Cynical Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Please tell me one QB who has started for Jauron that has started for another team. Erik Kramer, Kordell Stewart, Chris Chandler (three off the top my head) And not to turn this into another one of those, but IMO, Losman will be the latest. It's one thing if DJ has had QBs that achieved success elsewhere, bujt he hasn't. Chris Chandler took the Falcons to the SB, prior to becoming the QB in Chicago. The Bears were saddled with crap on offense. This is year 3 and the writing is on the wall. This the first QB Jauron has truly brought in as his own. No it's not. Jauron drafted Cade McNown in 1999. Jauron was so sure of McNown's ability, he named Cade the starter for the 1999 season right after he was drafted. (Due note, this was AFTER Jauron stated Kramer was his starting QB for 99. Two days before the draft, Jauron booted Kramer). And speaking of crap on offense, who do you think the person was that said "I want this 'crap'. Get me this 'crap'"? Hint: He was the head coach. And for all the other silly Jauron bashing comments, how great of a coach was Belichick before Brady? Ah, yes. When all else fails, attempt to compare Jauron to BB. As it has been posted on the TSW before, BB has stated he had learned from his mistakes while he was the HC in Cleveland. He changed his approach to coaching. Compare that DJ. There are 2-3 Bills fans that post on here that happened to live in the Chicago area during DJ's tenure. Listen to what they say. Those people are essentially saying DJ is basically doing the same thing in Buffalo as he did in Chicago. In short, he did NOT learn from his mistakes.
Tipster19 Posted April 9, 2008 Author Posted April 9, 2008 Ah, yes. When all else fails, attempt to compare Jauron to BB. As it has been posted on the TSW before, BB has stated he had learned from his mistakes while he was the HC in Cleveland. He changed his approach to coaching. Compare that DJ. There are 2-3 Bills fans that post on here that happened to live in the Chicago area during DJ's tenure. Listen to what they say. Those people are essentially saying DJ is basically doing the same thing in Buffalo as he did in Chicago. In short, he did NOT learn from his mistakes. Now THAT is weak. I haven't agreed with much of what you have said so far but this is as about as weak of justification as I've read in quite some time. Belichick can and has learned from his mistakes but Jauron can't or won't??!! Get real. Let's add one more factor to this comparison. Belichick is a proven cheater and Jauron is a class act. That's a fact!
Steely Dan Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Now THAT is weak. I haven't agreed with much of what you have said so far but this is as about as weak of justification as I've read in quite some time. Belichick can and has learned from his mistakes but Jauron can't or won't??!! Get real. Let's add one more factor to this comparison. Belichick is a proven cheater and Jauron is a class act. That's a fact!
Cynical Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Thank you Captain Obvious. In Dibs example Jauron beat more or about the same amount of greater than 500 teams. No, Dibs example showed Jauron only beat the same or less. Only one example showed more. Anybody except Jauron. Amazingly, who acquired said scrubs?
C.Biscuit97 Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Erik Kramer, Kordell Stewart, Chris Chandler (three off the top my head) Wrong, try again. Erik Kramer was gone after the 1998 season and never played for DJ (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/K/KramEr00.htm). Additionally, it was his 2nd to last season in the NFL. Kordell Stewart never started a game after leaving Chicago, where he was was absolutely horrible (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/S/StewKo00.htm). And Chandler was 38 years old and only had 2 more starts in his career. But good job making up stuff. Chris Chandler took the Falcons to the SB, prior to becoming the QB in Chicago. Again, you're not telling the whole story. He took the Falcons to the Super Bowl five years earlier when he was 33. You honestly are crediting a QB who is 38 years with being a solid NFL starting QB??? Because if you are, that's beyond dumb. No it's not. Jauron drafted Cade McNown in 1999. Jauron was so sure of McNown's ability, he named Cade the starter for the 1999 season right after he was drafted. (Due note, this was AFTER Jauron stated Kramer was his starting QB for 99. Two days before the draft, Jauron booted Kramer). And speaking of crap on offense, who do you think the person was that said "I want this 'crap'. Get me this 'crap'"? Hint: He was the head coach. McNown was terrible and lasted like 2 seasons in the NFL. It happens. Ah, yes. When all else fails, attempt to compare Jauron to BB. As it has been posted on the TSW before, BB has stated he had learned from his mistakes while he was the HC in Cleveland. He changed his approach to coaching. Compare that DJ. There are 2-3 Bills fans that post on here that happened to live in the Chicago area during DJ's tenure. Listen to what they say. Those people are essentially saying DJ is basically doing the same thing in Buffalo as he did in Chicago. In short, he did NOT learn from his mistakes. The comparison is that this great coaching thing is pretty bunk. You become a great coach if you have a great QB. Jauron would have been in the playoffs if he had Brady and the Pats would have been on the outside looking in if they had our guys. I've never said Jauron was a great coach. But the fact that we were in the top 10 in penalties against and turnover margain points to good coaching. And the easy thing in the world would have been for Jauron to stick with Losman. Instead, he puts all his eggs in a rookie QB's basket. So, it appears he is learning from his mistakes.
Dibs Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 No, Dibs example showed Jauron only beat the same or less. Only one example showed more. Dibs' examples also showed that DJs 13-3 team ended with 13 wins against 10 "<= .500" teams.....whereas 3 of the other 5 examples ended with 13 wins against 11 or more "<= .500" teams. I don't see what is sooooo great about beating 1 extra "> .500" team(2 of the 5 examples) when you lose extra games against the "<= .500" teams. DJ had a lesser record(percentage) against the "> .500" teams than the other 13-3 teams I listed. DJ had a better record(percentage) against the "<= .500" teams than the other 13-3 teams I listed. It's all a load of hogwash......a 9-7 may show a lucky crappy team.....or an unlucky good team. An 8-8 team that didn't lose to the specified team would have been 9-7......a 9-7 team that didn't beat the specified team would have been 8-8. The only thing that is set in stone is the end result.....in this case 13-3. I have shown that(give or take) 13-3 teams play between 9-13 "<= .500" teams. That's about all that can be deduced from this analysis.
Steely Dan Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Wrong, try again. Erik Kramer was gone after the 1998 season and never played for DJ (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/K/KramEr00.htm). Additionally, it was his 2nd to last season in the NFL. Kordell Stewart never started a game after leaving Chicago, where he was was absolutely horrible (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/S/StewKo00.htm). And Chandler was 38 years old and only had 2 more starts in his career. But good job making up stuff. Again, you're not telling the whole story. He took the Falcons to the Super Bowl five years earlier when he was 33. You honestly are crediting a QB who is 38 years with being a solid NFL starting QB??? Because if you are, that's beyond dumb. McNown was terrible and lasted like 2 seasons in the NFL. It happens. The comparison is that this great coaching thing is pretty bunk. You become a great coach if you have a great QB. Jauron would have been in the playoffs if he had Brady and the Pats would have been on the outside looking in if they had our guys. I've never said Jauron was a great coach. But the fact that we were in the top 10 in penalties against and turnover margain points to good coaching. And the easy thing in the world would have been for Jauron to stick with Losman. Instead, he puts all his eggs in a rookie QB's basket. So, it appears he is learning from his mistakes. Excellent, I'm too lazy to look that up but like so much of his drivel I had a feeling it was skewed information. Thanks!
Cynical Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 You will also notice that 4 of the 5 examples had the teams losing more games against the crappy teams. You will also notice that only one of the 5 examples had less crappy teams faced than DJs 13-3 team. The reason that the examples of 13-3 teams had a greater record against winning teams than DJs is that they lost games to the crappy teams.....which DJs didn't do. One could easily argue that since he didn't lose a game against any of the crappy teams he faced......that when he faces a lesser opponent, his teams win(unlike many other 13-3 teams). Your thoughts about DJs abilities may be spot on......using his 13-3 season to try to show it will not work because his 13-3 season was just like every other.....he won 13 games.....and lost 3 games......he played a bunch of crappy teams just like every other 13-3 season team does. *How anyone can try to simplify things down to this level is beyond me. Good team has bad week....bad team has good week....bad team finishes strong......good team starts slowly.....star QB out for the matchup(for either team).....factor after factor after factor to be considered yet people want to boil it all down to 3-3 against good teams. What a joke.* The only reason I brought up the 13-3 season is because people throw out Jauron's COTY award like some trump card, giving Jauron a 'free pass' on the rest of his questionable coaching record. Jauron's won/lost ratio vs teams above .500 is pathetic, overall, from year to year, and on different teams. That is a negative characteristic of Jauron's coaching, and is prevalent not only during his 'bad' years, but exists during his 'good' year.
Dibs Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 The only reason I brought up the 13-3 season is because people throw out Jauron's COTY award like some trump card..... That's fine......using the numbers out of context from that season does not support your case though. ......Jauron's won/lost ratio vs teams above .500 is pathetic, overall, from year to year, and on different teams. You have made a bold statement here......you will need to back it up with actual facts of both his coaching record.....and at least several years of won/lost ratio for good, bad and average teams vs above .500 records for anyone on the board to take it seriously.
ExpertOpinion Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Am I talking Super Bowl? It's possible maybe just not probable but I'm talking play-offs, deep play-offs. The biggest competition comes not only from our conference but from our division. Splitting the season with the Patriots will be huge for our playoff and division aspirations. Having some kind of homefield advantage in the play-offs would also make a difference in our post season success. The top contenders are New England, San Diego, Indiapolis, and Jacksonville. There are plenty more in the conference that could be mentioned but at this point of the off season but they would have to be considered dark horses just like us. If we are able to wrestle the division title away from the Patriots then the other three teams that I mentioned are either warm weather teams or a indoor team. Having a play-off game in Buffalo late in the year could prove to be huge, especially if it's inclement weather. We have much of our nucleus in place for a serious run at success. There is not one area on our team that is lacking dramaticly. Each area is just one or two players from being just average to great. QB- Edwards is going to be everything that we hope for as long as he stays healthy. He has a great release, extremely accurate and processes with what's going on the field very quickly. Having a year under his belt will only propel his results more. What is needed is an adequate back-up, whethern if it's a veteran of if Hamdan is capable of stepping up. OL- They were really coming into their own as the season progressed. Here is where we need a player, possibly two. I would really like to see an upgrade at the C position and at least a player who could fill in for Jason Peters in the event of injury. WR- Believe it or not we have very good receivers. Granted, we need a big possession type receiver for the #2 position. It's going to happen in the draft, first day actually. TE- How important is the TE position? It's important but mostly for blocking. It's easy to get frustrated when you watch the likes of Gonzalez, Witten, Gates, and others but grabbing a servicable one for pass catching could and should be addressed in the mid rds (3-5). I seen a lot of effort from Royal in some of these games last year and while he may not be the answer to what we are looking for he does solidfy one of the two TE positions. Think of Denver with Daniel Graham and Tony Scheffler. We need a Scheffler. I think that Jacob Tamme is that kind of TE and he can be available in the 4th of 5th rd. RB- C'mon, do we need to go there? We are more than adequate and this is not an area of concern at this time. DL- We have GOOD DEs. Adding a blue chip DE would most certainly make this position a force. At DT was resolved in free agency and this finally looks to be a solid position for us. Secondary- Another position that we'll add to in the draft but it's not an eyesore. We have dealt with more than our share of injuries and at this position in particular. LB- We have good, young starters but we can stand to fortify this position even more by the draft and/or June 1st cuts. Injuries of course changes the complexion of any of the above by I'm counting on the law of average for our success. STs- We have one of the best in the league even with the losses we had this off season. Between RB and STs these are the two areas where we have some comfort level. I look at our positions on our team and I'm alot more optimistic than discouraged. This was just a brief general overview but I feel that it's more accurate than not. I'm expecting big results in this year's draft and team. Wrestle the div title away from NE? Didn't they go undeafeted during the regular season last year ? What exactly are you anticipating the Bills are going to do next season? You need to readjust your expectations unless being realistic isn't your thing.
Cynical Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 You have made a bold statement here......you will need to back it up with actual facts of both his coaching record.....and at least several years of won/lost ratio for good, bad and average teams vs above .500 records for anyone on the board to take it seriously. Rather quickly: Year - Team - Ave. vs. better than .500 - Overall w/l for that year 99 - Bears - .250 - (6-10) 00 - Bears - .308 - (5-11) 01 - Bears - .500 - (13-3) 02 - Bears - .333 - (4-12) 03 - Bears - .250 - (7-9) 06 - Bills - .125 - (7-9) 07 - Bills - .125 - (7-9) As a comparison, 2001 Packers (12-4) faced 5 teams greater than .500 and went 4-1 against those teams (.800). Note: I came up with an overall average of .267. Somebody on this board had posted an overall average of .187. I believe the .187 average includes his playoff record and his time as interim HC of the Lions. I did not include those in the above averages.
Dibs Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Rather quickly:Year - Team - Ave. vs. better than .500 - Overall w/l for that year 99 - Bears - .250 - (6-10) 00 - Bears - .308 - (5-11) 01 - Bears - .500 - (13-3) 02 - Bears - .333 - (4-12) 03 - Bears - .250 - (7-9) 06 - Bills - .125 - (7-9) 07 - Bills - .125 - (7-9) As a comparison, 2001 Packers (12-4) faced 5 teams greater than .500 and went 4-1 against those teams (.800). Note: I came up with an overall average of .267. Somebody on this board had posted an overall average of .187. I believe the .187 average includes his playoff record and his time as interim HC of the Lions. I did not include those in the above averages. You do realize that if you go through a bunch of teams & compare DJs 13-3 team to other 13-3 teams, 7-9 teams to other 7-9 teams etc & you find that he does in fact win less percent against "better than .500" teams than the directly correlated ones chosen......ignoring the myriad of factors which actually make this a futile exercise.....it would correspondingly show that he has a better win percentage than the directly correlated ones chosen over teams with a "<=.500" record. What would that say about a coach? It potentially says that his teams play above themselves. That his 7-9 teams should be perhaps comparable to a 5-11 team in regards to beating good teams.....but come up with the goods more often against teams of similar caliber. It can actually be interpreted that he is a better coach than the records would imply. I personally don't think so......but then again, I don't think you can use a stat like that to do anything more than be a curio.
1billsfan Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Part of Jauron's excuse is Losman. I'll agree this year he doesn't have that. But what coach would have won with these scrubs: Miller, Matthews, Stewart, Burris, McNown??? P.S. And if you don't think taking a team that was 0-3 and 1-4 to 7-7 and playing for a shot at the playoffs with the amount of injuries and the Everett situation isn't a great coaching job, you're an idiot. Wow, I don't know what else there is to say. If you seriously think that Dick Jauron is a great, or even a good, coach who has just had the misfortune of being saddled with bad players and bad circumstances throughout his 7 seasons (117 games) worth of head coaching, then I can't help you. It's absurd to have so much faith in someone with such a long history of failure (yet you seem to have only gave Losman a fraction of time to prove himself compared to Jauron). It's never been Dick's fault, um yeah ok. Will you being saying this next offseason when the Bills have extended their playoff drought? Or will the 8th season of bad coaching finally prove to you that Jauron sucks. Sorry but 7 season's is enough of an indicator for me, thank you. P.S. The teams that the Bills played to drag themselves out of those holes sucked so bad they would make Paris Hilton blush. Is it asking too much that he beat a good NFL team one day? Apparently it is.
MikeSpeed Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 I was very optimistic this off-season, until I read an interview with DJ that said the O game plan would not change much from last year. I know I know where my link? I don't have one. Even if I did I wouldn't know how to include it here. But if you have been reading the papers the last few months you read it too. I'm hoping it was his way of playing his cards close to the vest.
The Senator Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 I was very optimistic this off-season, until I read an interview with DJ that said the O game plan would not change much from last year. I know I know where my link? I don't have one. Even if I did I wouldn't know how to include it here. But if you have been reading the papers the last few months you read it too. I'm hoping it was his way of playing his cards close to the vest. Actually, I think what Dick said was something on the order of, "I think it's fair to say there will be significant change; hopefully, it will be kept to a minimum." (Whatever the heck that means! ) I'm paraphrasing, but used to use it in my signature lines so I think it's pretty close. That said, I think the Bills will win the Superbowl and Marv's Dick will be Coach of the Year! GO BILLSSS!!!!
colin Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 You do realize that if you go through a bunch of teams & compare DJs 13-3 team to other 13-3 teams, 7-9 teams to other 7-9 teams etc & you find that he does in fact win less percent against "better than .500" teams than the directly correlated ones chosen......ignoring the myriad of factors which actually make this a futile exercise.....it would correspondingly show that he has a better win percentage than the directly correlated ones chosen over teams with a "<=.500" record.What would that say about a coach? It potentially says that his teams play above themselves. That his 7-9 teams should be perhaps comparable to a 5-11 team in regards to beating good teams.....but come up with the goods more often against teams of similar caliber. It can actually be interpreted that he is a better coach than the records would imply. I personally don't think so......but then again, I don't think you can use a stat like that to do anything more than be a curio. u r my fav poster!!! i like the whole reality/facts based thing you do. i hope we come back to this thread late in the season to see what our team and coach look like. for me we have to beat New england. at least one time, we have to beat them. that will put us over the top and allow us to go to and into the playoffs. what do we need to beat new england? we need to get to brady, we need to punish them for putting 8 in the box, and we need to control the ball. for 1, adding a corner will help the most. clearly aggressive line play gets to the qb, but you have to be able to cover while getting to him. the giants, baltimore, and philly all had the corners last year to match up. we used to sack brady well when we had clements, losing clements cut our sack total in half from 06 to 07 (other stuff happened, but that was the big change). a bigger or more physical guy who can bother moss (along with ko or whitner over top making his day horrible) will allow us to put enough pressure on brady to set him off. for 2, we need a wide out aside from evans to punish the big slow plodding ne D. you can't physically beat them up enough without putting them back on their heels, they are too big and too good. a real physical guy aside from evans (and a TE with some production would help as well) to go after their slow and depleted secondary will be what we need. for 3 we need good steady play from the O. an upgrade at one of our interior blocking positions (c or rg) would help with this. 4 out of our first 5 picks will have to be CB WR TE G/C the order will depend on the who the best player available at each pick is, but i suspect we go in pretty much the order i've laid out above. we have D line, we have line backers, we have 1 decent CB and two very good safties, we have great special teams, we have an OL, we like our young QB, we have stud RBs, we have one very good WR, we have one TE who can play physically. we need those extra peices. the only way i'd go DL in the first like people are saying (or even OL) is if a top 5 type guy (long, long, golston, ellis, dorsey) falls to us (maybe otah, dunno if he can play inside tho). o/w it is a choice between the best corner and wr available. i think there might be more talent there at corner, and a deep WR class means we can get our big guy in the second (unless kelly is such a super TO clone that we just need to grab him). we are adding 4 solid players -- studs to our front 7 (johnson, stroud, mitchell, poz) and getting healthier (denney, mccargo). if we can cover for a few seconds we will mash brady's queer little pretty face into the turf.
Recommended Posts