Boomer, CK, Con!!! What say you?

I feel you with the no Front 7 thing. That really bugs me. The ONLY way I can make sense of this draft is to step back and remind myself of the following:

1) This regime's philosophy on rebuilding from the beginning was to start from the inside and move out. Last year was inside (3 DL; 3OL). This year was outside (3 DB; 3 WR/TE). Maybe the plan from the very beginning was to do exactly what they just did, draft values be damned.

2) In implementing that philosophy they have consistently engaged the tactic of making sure to fill a need and build depth by taking at least two of everything. They drafted redundantly on the OL and DL last year, and they did it again this year, just with receivers and DBs.

3) A successful draft for this regime may not be what we consider a successful draft. We want to see value for each pick. We want to see certain roles filled to strengthen our obvious weaknesses (pass rush). Maybe their definition of a successful draft was to stick with the plan they set a year ago, which was to make sure they use picks on each position, one by one, drafting two or more at a time to hedge their bets, thus filling this roster with talent on a balaced scale.

Again, I didn't much care for this draft (loved last year's), but I may find myself liking it in two years when we're winning playoff games because we have solid talent across the board. We'll see.

 

drafting and building a team works by sticking to your philosophy not just plugging players in regardless of the need all over the place - unless that is your philosophy.

their philosophy seems to be what you mentioned stlouis. going away from that is how the team fails IMO.

 

Keep in mind the roster adjustments that other teams will undoubtedly be making in the coming months. We may be able to add some nice depth, and we should have around 8-9 million (4-5 if we cut Wilford) to work with I believe.

 

we have no cap to gain by cutting wilford. Thats why hes still there.

 

I know, we lose cap, around 2-4 million I've heard.

 

Nalbone is a TE.

 

Hartline makes more sense than Turner. Hartline is a special teams ace and I believe was drafted based on is work ethic, attitude and being so versatile for a Wideout. He will see his time on ST.

The Turner pick was awful imo I'll stand by that. After I cooled down and thought about it.

I like the White pick only because the drafting of White makes the Wildcat 100000000X more dangerous.

However I really didn't like this draft and I will stand by what I say until they prove me wrong.

 

I know, I spoke of two players, Nalbone , and the guy whose name I cannot remember.

 

Thanks for interesting reads on this page. A lot of semi-educated fans (like me) feel like we should give the FO the benefit of the doubt because of last year (and in Parcells' case, the 20 years before that). If this was a Cam Cameron draft I think the board would be in flames right now.

I guess they really, really believe in the Wildcat.