I'm thinking positive dammit. I refuse not to. Two CBs, Two WRs and a QB/WR/Return guy, etc. 5 more picks to go. We've got two potential studs at CB in this draft. WR was (is?) a position of need. We're doubling up on our needs just like we did last year. QB is still a need. Everyone here is yammering on about Henne at the QB spot of the future but the reality of the situation is that Henne is unproven. Beck is gone for a Banana. Lets not throw these guys under a bus without them taking an NFL down, ok?
Are you trying to say that people that get paid to do this might know what they are doing more than arm chair GMs, scouts, and front office wizards? Nah surely not.
how do you know? I don't know that they were good picks but they were the picks we made. I can't do anything about them and I think they know a little more about picking players than I do. It's only their job. Maybe they were a reach but it's not like it was a position we were solid at. We needed the help.
You don't know this. Not really. In your opinion they are horrible picks. The fact here is that you don't agree with the picks. Myself I would have also gone in a different direction. But I 'm not going to call them bad picks, yet. Because I don't know it to be a fact. While I do appreciate your being skeptical, a bit of perspective will greatly benefit.
I don't think it's negativity to express your surprise and/or even disappointment with a particular pick. Although, I can see where it might be perceived that way. I don't like the Pat White pick. But, that has more to do with when we picked him than picking him. I just think there were other/better options available at the time. Does my opinion matter? Not really. I'm just another fan that thinks he knows what he's talking about. I'm not a pro scout. Hell, truth be told I don't even watch a lot of college football. So, I really do have to give our FO the benefit of the doubt. Re; the Turner pick, and regardless of whether or not it was a reach, I am happy they finally drafted a big WR. So, based on nothing more than his size, I am happy we selected him. Not knowing anything about him, I can only hope he turns out to be a good WR at the pro level.
Regardless of how the rest of our draft turns out (and for the record, I think White will be a player) I think we've walked away with a CB combo that by the end of 2010 we'll be comparing to Surtain/Madison. I'm skeptical about the Turner pick because my gut is telling me that we wanted Barden and panicked when he got taken right in front of us. Hartline I know nothing about. 5 more picks to go, at least 2 of those will be guys that see the field in 09 IMO.
one question to add to this. what has the front office done to deserve such doubts and concerns over who we picked? they only took us from 1-15 to 11-5...
I liked the Davis, Smith and Turner picks. Actually, loved them. But the Hartline and White picks were terrible to me. We should have drafted Ungar, Sintim, or Barwin instead of White. And harline was projected to go 5th or later, so this was a reach.
Because they're infallible... Because despite a great history of drafting there are periods where they've drafted busts up and down the board. If you want to bury your head and the sand and follow the cultish "In Tuna we trust" ****, then go for it. There are some people who're individual thinkers and will make up their own mind for themselves and don't need you or anyone else telling us how to feel. I know... Crazy right?
are these guys busts? we don't know. why not do something crazy like... give them a chance? ****ing insane!!!! you want to doubt a front office that took us to the AFCE championship and the playoffs after 1-15 be my guest. but just because they draft players you don't like you give them ****? that's BS.
Umm, yeah. You're gonna have to stop making sense, it doesn't mesh with the rest of the message board today.
i'm not gonna say this was a horrible draft but i expected a better one in the later rounds with this front office/scouting department having a full yr together. there were a few more reaches than i expected but we also got players with great potential in turner,the t.e and the safety and add the value we got in davis and smith but hartline was a "wtf?did they let the waterboy pick a player?"move i don't get from the brass and the white was a big reach for the position he was picked but will be a great fit for us so i can't argue too much about him.
my whole point with this is the execution has been set before the trial. i'm willing to call these guys busts or reaches if they don't pan out. for now the jury is out but i'm giving the players and the team the benefit of the doubt.
I don't get the argument that people thinks the FO is infallible its actually that because of their history of success people tend to trust their picks. Everyone knows that the probability of any team's draft picks all being successes is extremely low. If 3 to 4 picks for any team end up starting or even providing depth then teams consider that a successful draft and that's how SB teams are built. It seems like everyone wants these guys to be starters day one and that's crazy. What's happened in the draft is the team has gotten secondary depth and receiver/ST depth at the very least. For me that's successful and were three of the Fins weakest spots last year. I guess I just get upset to see people who think they know more than the professionals at this. Yes you (generic term here) may know a lot but I'll take the guys who have proven NFL track records and turned this team around in one year. Maybe I'm being absurd but for me I have trust that these guys will prove it on the fields (although I agree about the Barden-Turner situation but that doesn't make me say the guy will be a bust). I just don't understand how there are so many draft experts out there that don't have jobs with NFL teams...it's truly amazing.
