And this is why you sit where you are and make your picks, taking the best possible talent when you do. You're right, the odds are against any particular player surviving the NFL battlegrounds for long. In that environment you take as many good players as you can and you avoid the temptation to anoint some guy and make a big deal for him. Nobody is smarter than a torn ACL.
" One of the most surprising picks was the New York Jets' decision to take tight end Kyle Brady of Penn State with the ninth pick even though they already have veteran Johnny Mitchell. New coach Rich Kotite said Brady was the best player on their board.
when you think you have a franchise QB you are anticipating he will be there for a decade +. I don't think teams agve up on players as quickly then as they did now so it's reasonable to have expected Dilfer to be around and Indy winning a few more games. pretty much every team is going to say that so I don't know what that proves. Kotite was a terrible coach but he did bring in some talent that made it possible for BP to nearly get us to the playoffs year 1.
Fair enough, but at this moment and by the time their careers are over are different. I know thats not what you were talking about but when you draft a player your thinking long term. Milliner might never be as good as Richardson but its easy to look back after the draft and say that. That, to me, doesnt mean the draft philosophy of taking BPA doesnt work. Jets obviously thought that Milliner was the better player cause they took him first, teams are going to be wrong and right on those things all the time.
The only thing this proves is that "BPA" is sometimes not really the "BPA" and that the draft is a crapshoot.
Agreed. That why drafting should be about future needs and not the present needs, with the exception of maybe rounds 1 & 2. Once you have a deep enough team, you can afford to draft more toward the future and worry less about the position, but even when you do that you are still factoring in team needs, they are just long term rather than short term. Idzik seems to be all about the long term, while Tanny was more about winning now which only gave us limited windows to win rather than sustained success. We didn't just draft 3 offensive linemen last year for the fun of it. DaBrickashaw isn't going to be around forever, Colon is just a temp fix. Don't be surprised if we draft 3 more this year.
I appreciate what Mike did, he built teams that were capable of winning SBs which we have only had a few of in our history but I want to be a team that competes for SBs almost every year. I want to be a team that in most years is in the hunt for div titles and playoff byes. Maybe it's knowing he came from winning organizations and seeing what Seattle just did but I kind of feel like we could be one of those teams soon, if geno can be our longterm solution we could be a really good team for a while.
I don't even feel that our future success hinges on Geno. If he ends up being a good QB, obviously that's the better scenario, but if he isn't the answer, we can look elsewhere and still be a good team.
I think we are going to have a good team around the QB and that will help him but if we know he's good and can handle it then it gives us more of a margin for error. We aren't lucky enough to ever have a Brady type but you don't need an all time great to win.
What's he supposed to say, "We didn't take Sapp because we think he's a pothead and a lowlife?" Richie was all about good character players that wouldn't make waves. So was Hess. Also, jilozzo has already posted something that contradicts that. Kotite is such a doofus that he may have even thought that Brady was better than Sapp, but the Jets scouting people evidently didn't.
I can't go off an assumption. If they thought Brady was BPA then that's what they thought. Can't really prove it one way or the other.
Personally i think drafting the BPA in your areas of NEED is the best way to approach the draft. In our case in the first 3 rounds i would draft the BPA at CB/WR/TE/OLB/FS/G
