Dibs Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 Why would we want Ngata? Don't get me wrong, he's a good player... but he can't penetrate gaps, and our system requires a Tommie Harris type DT and not Pat Williams. That's the part that seems to bypass a lot of fans. There was no error in not drafting N'Gata at all. Apart from the concept that he could have ended up the Mike Williams of DTs(sure things are only sure things in hindsight.....and he was never considered that)......we had just started the T2 D. That being the case, the argument from these fans should be against that decision(going with the T2 D).....not against the following decision(to not draft N'Gata) which was honestly a no-brainer once the first decision had been made.
Dibs Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 Would they have made the Whitner pick and passed on Ngata had they known that McCargo was not a starting-caliber NFL player? I doubt it. I think they would have......but not traded up for McCargo(obviously). My bet is we may well have ended up with Bunkley, as apart from McCargo he was the only other highly rated penetrating DT in the draft. Who knows what would of happened? I know there would have been countless(literally) different scenarios that could have occurred. Maybe we should try and figure out each possible scenario of what could have happened......would that be fun?
LongLiveRalph Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 I clarify this by saying that, by all accounts Whitner is a good leader and a pretty good safety. But Huff's struggles in Oakland don't make the Whitner pick any better. They still took him about 10 spots too high. This is simply idiotic. When you're filling a need, drafting a future starter and captain, and GETTING THE GUY YOU WANT....It doesn't make it a bad pick at #8 but a good pick at #17. If people would get Mel Kiper's nuts off their chin for 15 seconds, you'd realize that "reaches" don't really exist. It's an inexact science....The analysts and the organizations are trying to do something that's IMPOSSIBLE: predict the future. "Ranking" a bunch of 21 and 22-year old players doesn't mean anything as far as what they will do from ages 23-33. How can JaMarcus Russell be a consensus #1 or #2 overall pick, while Trent Edwards is a consensus 3rd or 4th rounder? How does Tony Romo go undrafted? How does Alex Smith go #1 and Aaron Rodgers falls to #25? The Patriots' front office is so genius, they drafted five other players before getting their franchise QB at #199. Somebody like McCargo...You can be critical. The Bills traded other picks to move up and take a guy who was injury prone and played on a 5-6 college team WHO HAD TWO OTHER PLAYERS FROM THEIR DEFENSIVE LINE TAKEN IN THE FIRST ROUND. I'd call that one suspect. The Whitner pick??? They got the guy they wanted, at a position they wanted to fill. Who cares if CBSSportsline.com had 2 WR's, 3 OL's, and 2 DT's "ranked" ahead of him? The Bills didn't. And they got the guy they wanted. Why trade down and miss a chance at your PLAYER to get "value"??? Last time I checked, PLAYERS play...
LongLiveRalph Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 Perhaps something about UT causes players to be drafted too high? Failure of NFL teams to evaluate heart? Perhaps something about the coddling they receive in Austin leaves them unprepared to handle criticism? It only seems to be the big guns. Guys like Priest Holmes, who don't have the world gifted to them, turned out ok. The lottery picks? Consistent busts throughout the Mack Brown era.
BUFFALOTONE Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 Exactly. Get it jackoff??? They could have had Ngata with the 1st pick in the draft. Instead, they traded a 2nd and 3rd to get McCargo who's a bust, and then had to spend an additional 3rd and 5th rounder to get Stroud. With those extra picks I'm sure they could have found an average safety which Whitner is. Were you Matt Millen's assistant in Detroit? he does have some what of a point.
Coach Tuesday Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 Why are we still talking about the Whitner pick? That draft was a disaster for a different reason: they wasted important 2nd and 3rd round picks trading up for a bust DT. Let's focus on that, not our defensive captain who might have been drafted a few spots too high but will probably retire as one of the greatest Bills of all time. McCargo was the problem with that draft. Can't we all agree on that?
Captain Hindsight Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 This is simply idiotic. When you're filling a need, drafting a future starter and captain, and GETTING THE GUY YOU WANT....It doesn't make it a bad pick at #8 but a good pick at #17. If people would get Mel Kiper's nuts off their chin for 15 seconds, you'd realize that "reaches" don't really exist. It's an inexact science....The analysts and the organizations are trying to do something that's IMPOSSIBLE: predict the future. "Ranking" a bunch of 21 and 22-year old players doesn't mean anything as far as what they will do from ages 23-33. How can JaMarcus Russell be a consensus #1 or #2 overall pick, while Trent Edwards is a consensus 3rd or 4th rounder? How does Tony Romo go undrafted? How does Alex Smith go #1 and Aaron Rodgers falls to #25? The Patriots' front office is so genius, they drafted five other players before getting their franchise QB at #199. Somebody like McCargo...You can be critical. The Bills traded other picks to move up and take a guy who was injury prone and played on a 5-6 college team WHO HAD TWO OTHER PLAYERS FROM THEIR DEFENSIVE LINE TAKEN IN THE FIRST ROUND. I'd call that one suspect. The Whitner pick??? They got the guy they wanted, at a position they wanted to fill. Who cares if CBSSportsline.com had 2 WR's, 3 OL's, and 2 DT's "ranked" ahead of him? The Bills didn't. And they got the guy they wanted. Why trade down and miss a chance at your PLAYER to get "value"??? Last time I checked, PLAYERS play... That may have been one of the best posts ive ever read
el Tigre Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 he played strong his first two years, where he was counted on for run support (which he isn't strong at). the thinking was that moving him to free would let him be more of a playmaker, which seemingly has failed also. True,and the Raiders also gave a big free agent contract to Gibril Wilson. Wilson is a physical SS who's strong in run support,no way Huff takes his job.
Sisyphean Bills Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 That's the part that seems to bypass a lot of fans. There was no error in not drafting N'Gata at all. Apart from the concept that he could have ended up the Mike Williams of DTs(sure things are only sure things in hindsight.....and he was never considered that)......we had just started the T2 D. That being the case, the argument from these fans should be against that decision(going with the T2 D).....not against the following decision(to not draft N'Gata) which was honestly a no-brainer once the first decision had been made. I'm not convinced that Ngata is quite so one-dimensional as he is being made out in this thread. The Ravens system is built around a DL that eats blockers and lets its LBs, especially Ray Lewis, fly to the ball and make plays. Ngata has shown he is capable of playing in that system. On the other hand, Ngata was a dominant DT in the Oregon system which asked him to penetrate and be a disruptive force. The guy was so cat quick off the snap, and powerful, that he was a constant threat to single-handedly penetrate the LOS and block field goals and extra points. The Whitner pick needs to be justified or not on its own terms and not by trying to paste labels on other excellent players.
Dawgg Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 The Whitner pick needs to be justified or not on its own terms and not by trying to paste labels on other excellent players. Indeed. And thus far, Whitner has made more waves with his rhetoric than his play.
Pete Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 What a surprise. Another high-round, highly touted Texas bust!
2003Contenders Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 This is simply idiotic. When you're filling a need, drafting a future starter and captain, and GETTING THE GUY YOU WANT....It doesn't make it a bad pick at #8 but a good pick at #17. If people would get Mel Kiper's nuts off their chin for 15 seconds, you'd realize that "reaches" don't really exist. It's an inexact science....The analysts and the organizations are trying to do something that's IMPOSSIBLE: predict the future. "Ranking" a bunch of 21 and 22-year old players doesn't mean anything as far as what they will do from ages 23-33. How can JaMarcus Russell be a consensus #1 or #2 overall pick, while Trent Edwards is a consensus 3rd or 4th rounder? How does Tony Romo go undrafted? How does Alex Smith go #1 and Aaron Rodgers falls to #25? The Patriots' front office is so genius, they drafted five other players before getting their franchise QB at #199. Somebody like McCargo...You can be critical. The Bills traded other picks to move up and take a guy who was injury prone and played on a 5-6 college team WHO HAD TWO OTHER PLAYERS FROM THEIR DEFENSIVE LINE TAKEN IN THE FIRST ROUND. I'd call that one suspect. The Whitner pick??? They got the guy they wanted, at a position they wanted to fill. Who cares if CBSSportsline.com had 2 WR's, 3 OL's, and 2 DT's "ranked" ahead of him? The Bills didn't. And they got the guy they wanted. Why trade down and miss a chance at your PLAYER to get "value"??? Last time I checked, PLAYERS play... Agreed. Moreover, I firmly believe that the Whitner pick was also a consensus pick on Marv's part. Remember that in the 2006 draft, there was a perceived drop-off after the first 7 picks. Some folks (some of them possibly in the War Room a the time) thought we should go QB with Leinart and Cutler still on the board. Some thought we should go DT with Ngata and Buckner both available. I believe that there were varying opinions not only about the positions but also the players at each position. Whitner was a safe selection that everyone could live with. And I think that may be why -- more than anything else -- Marv elected to go that route.
KD in CA Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 This is simply idiotic. When you're filling a need, drafting a future starter and captain, and GETTING THE GUY YOU WANT....It doesn't make it a bad pick at #8 but a good pick at #17. If people would get Mel Kiper's nuts off their chin for 15 seconds, you'd realize that "reaches" don't really exist. It's an inexact science....The analysts and the organizations are trying to do something that's IMPOSSIBLE: predict the future. "Ranking" a bunch of 21 and 22-year old players doesn't mean anything as far as what they will do from ages 23-33. How can JaMarcus Russell be a consensus #1 or #2 overall pick, while Trent Edwards is a consensus 3rd or 4th rounder? How does Tony Romo go undrafted? How does Alex Smith go #1 and Aaron Rodgers falls to #25? The Patriots' front office is so genius, they drafted five other players before getting their franchise QB at #199. Somebody like McCargo...You can be critical. The Bills traded other picks to move up and take a guy who was injury prone and played on a 5-6 college team WHO HAD TWO OTHER PLAYERS FROM THEIR DEFENSIVE LINE TAKEN IN THE FIRST ROUND. I'd call that one suspect. The Whitner pick??? They got the guy they wanted, at a position they wanted to fill. Who cares if CBSSportsline.com had 2 WR's, 3 OL's, and 2 DT's "ranked" ahead of him? The Bills didn't. And they got the guy they wanted. Why trade down and miss a chance at your PLAYER to get "value"??? Last time I checked, PLAYERS play... Bravo. Please remember to repost this next spring when we are inundated with the usual nonsense about player rankings and 'reaches'.
The Cincinnati Kid Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 This is simply idiotic. When you're filling a need, drafting a future starter and captain, and GETTING THE GUY YOU WANT....It doesn't make it a bad pick at #8 but a good pick at #17. If people would get Mel Kiper's nuts off their chin for 15 seconds, you'd realize that "reaches" don't really exist. It's an inexact science....The analysts and the organizations are trying to do something that's IMPOSSIBLE: predict the future. "Ranking" a bunch of 21 and 22-year old players doesn't mean anything as far as what they will do from ages 23-33. How can JaMarcus Russell be a consensus #1 or #2 overall pick, while Trent Edwards is a consensus 3rd or 4th rounder? How does Tony Romo go undrafted? How does Alex Smith go #1 and Aaron Rodgers falls to #25? The Patriots' front office is so genius, they drafted five other players before getting their franchise QB at #199. Somebody like McCargo...You can be critical. The Bills traded other picks to move up and take a guy who was injury prone and played on a 5-6 college team WHO HAD TWO OTHER PLAYERS FROM THEIR DEFENSIVE LINE TAKEN IN THE FIRST ROUND. I'd call that one suspect. The Whitner pick??? They got the guy they wanted, at a position they wanted to fill. Who cares if CBSSportsline.com had 2 WR's, 3 OL's, and 2 DT's "ranked" ahead of him? The Bills didn't. And they got the guy they wanted. Why trade down and miss a chance at your PLAYER to get "value"??? Last time I checked, PLAYERS play... I agree with everything said here. Enough said. Nice post, guy.
Steely Dan Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 Would they have made the Whitner pick and passed on Ngata had they known that McCargo was not a starting-caliber NFL player? I doubt it. Ngata is a 3-4 DL. Nuff said. Bravo. Please remember to repost this next spring when we are inundated with the usual nonsense about player rankings and 'reaches'. Seconded.
Dawgg Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 Ngata is a 3-4 DL. Nuff said. He played that in college, but he'd also be a great nose tackle in the 4-3. Nuff said.
Ramius Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 Indeed. And thus far, Whitner has made more waves with his rhetoric than his play. Once again, your football analysis leaves much to be desired.
Ramius Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 Why are we still talking about the Whitner pick? That draft was a disaster for a different reason: they wasted important 2nd and 3rd round picks trading up for a bust DT. Let's focus on that, not our defensive captain who might have been drafted a few spots too high but will probably retire as one of the greatest Bills of all time. McCargo was the problem with that draft. Can't we all agree on that? Good post coach. McCargo was the mistake (but really the only mistake) of the 2006 draft. That draft set this team up nicely for the future.
LabattBlue Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 ...but will probably retire as one of the greatest Bills of all time. Pretty lofty expectations for a guy whose biggest press to date has been the player meetings at his house.
Dawgg Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 Pretty lofty expectations for a guy whose biggest press to date has been the player meetings at his house. Seriously. His famous Thursday night film sessions and letting Leodis crash at his house are two of his finest accomplishments in the NFL!
Recommended Posts