On Nov 18, 10:59 pm, nerd <thehatefuln...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Damn you bitches are slow. Now make yourselves pretty for me.
Considering he isn't even half as good as Flynn,and he is on his way to a sucky team..I say Good Luck Brian. Kinda surprised it wasn't Cleveland or Oakland Really a "spurning" of major proportions.
> Probably half of most GM's draft picks could be described as "botched". I figure Ted Thompson's record is average to above average.
Nevertheless, botched pick. And if your philosophy is to rely mainly on drafting, you had better be well above average at it if you're going to build a Super Bowl caliber team.
On Nov 19, 10:53 am, iarwain <iarwai...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Probably half of most GM's draft picks could be described as "botched". I figure Ted Thompson's record is average to above average.
> Nevertheless, botched pick. > And if your philosophy is to rely mainly on drafting, you had better > be well above average at it if you're going to build a Super Bowl > caliber team.
True enough, missing on 1sts and 2nds (Harrell, Brohm) doesn't help any.
> Probably half of most GM's draft picks could be described > as "botched". I figure Ted Thompson's record is average to > above average.
Nevertheless, botched pick. And if your philosophy is to rely mainly on drafting, you had better be well above average at it if you're going to build a Super Bowl caliber team.
Drafting QBs is far from a science. Think McNown, Leaf, ad nauseam. Now th8ink Aaron Rodgers. I also believe TT knew Harrell was a gamble. Who knows? MAYBE he'll get on the field one day, though the chances are by now vanishing small.
> On Nov 19, 10:53 am, iarwain <iarwai...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > Probably half of most GM's draft picks could be described as "botched". I figure Ted Thompson's record is average to above average.
> > Nevertheless, botched pick. > > And if your philosophy is to rely mainly on drafting, you had better > > be well above average at it if you're going to build a Super Bowl > > caliber team.
> True enough, missing on 1sts and 2nds (Harrell, Brohm) doesn't help > any.
MikeC <mcastleb...@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Nov 19, 10:53?am, iarwain <iarwai...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > Probably half of most GM's draft picks could be described as "botched". ?I figure Ted Thompson's record is average to above average.
> > Nevertheless, botched pick. > > And if your philosophy is to rely mainly on drafting, you had better > > be well above average at it if you're going to build a Super Bowl > > caliber team. > True enough, missing on 1sts and 2nds (Harrell, Brohm) doesn't help > any.
> MikeC <mcastleb...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Nov 19, 10:53?am, iarwain <iarwai...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > Probably half of most GM's draft picks could be described as "botched". ?I figure Ted Thompson's record is average to above average.
> > > Nevertheless, botched pick. > > > And if your philosophy is to rely mainly on drafting, you had better > > > be well above average at it if you're going to build a Super Bowl > > > caliber team. > > True enough, missing on 1sts and 2nds (Harrell, Brohm) doesn't help > > any.
> Mayes? Michels?
> Wolf had a history of missing on 1s and 2s.
> Mike
Yeah thats kind of my point. There's 32 first round picks every year and how many guys can you name off the top of your head who become superstars or perennial pro bowlers every year from these draft classes? Not too many. The draft is to some degree a crap shoot which is why I agree with Thompson's strategy of getting as many picks as possible. Sure you can trade your whole draft for a couple of 1sts and a 2nd but holy cow are you screwed if you miss on those picks. Much better to buy as many raffle tickets as you can - so to speak.
> The draft is to some degree a crap shoot which is why I agree with Thompson's strategy of getting as many picks as possible.
It seems to be a generally good idea, although I really liked Thompson's move of trading up this last draft to get us Matthews. There, I said something nice about Ted.
iarwain <iarwai...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > Wolf had a history of missing on 1s and 2s. > Wolf didn't have a strategy of relying mainly of the draft like > Thompson does,
Actually, yes, he did. He made some key acquisitions very early in his tenure outside the draft, but after 95 were almost entirely draft-driven.
iarwain <iarwai...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > He made some key acquisitions very early in his tenure outside the draft, but after 95 were almost entirely draft-driven. > So he built the Super Bowl team using free agents (throw Andre Rison > in there too), then when he changed his strategy the team went > downhill.
No, when his luck and the coach changed, the team didn't make it any further than the divisional round.
iarwain <iarwai...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > No, when his luck and the coach changed, the team didn't make it any further than the divisional round. > Just coincidence that when he quit signing pro bowl quality players > the team's fortunes changed, eh?
He kept signing pro bowl quality UFAs; they didn't pan out.
iarwain <iarwai...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > He kept signing pro bowl quality UFAs; they didn't pan out. > I thought you said he changed his strategy.
No, I said "No, when his luck and the coach changed, the team didn't make it any further than the divisional round." I also pointed out they were draft-driven after about 1995; essentially, he started missing on the FAs, so any new players were draftees, 'cause the Joyners and Nickersons of the world weren't panning out for us.
|
