Roster Analysis and First Day Draft Strategy

I'll be as brief as I can.

Offense

QB: this, unfortuantely, is our biggest problem. Who knows if Chad can come back or if Ramsey can even play. At 4, we'll likely have the opportunity to take one of two of the three big QB names this year, but should we? I am a fan of Cutler myself, but I think we've got two POTENTIALLY starting caliber QBs. I think we owe it to ourself to find out if we even need a QB before drafting one. It's tough not to address the situation since we hope to never be drafting this high again, but in the end, I don't think we should. Next year, maybe.

O-line: is a mess. I see three people that can start this year (Jones, Moore and Kendall), two who are in our long range plans. Fortunately, I think Jones can play LT, so the most important position is settled. We have some depth, but RT is a glaring hole right now.

backs: I have to realize Curtis is on his last legs, so I should be looking at backs, but the overall depth is nice and who knows, maybe I, as the FO, think I can turn Cedric into a starter, so I'm not forced to draft an RB this year.

receivers: again, depth is pretty good. Coles and McCareins, while not a flashy duo, are capable of moving the chains and making tough catches... at times. We are missing some speed, but maybe Dwight can supply that for us. I don't think I'll be looking at this position on the first day of the draft.

tight ends: another unit that was disappointing last year, but depth is nice so I won't be looking here in the draft either, probably not even on the second day. (Sorry, Jabba)

Defense

D-line: I personally feel that DRob is BETTER suited to NT than he was to 3-technique DT. There is the Ted Washington man-mountain type of NT and there is the Casey Hampton fire-hydrant type and I see Dewayne as a clone of Casey. With Pope and Pouha backing him up, there is nice depth at the nose, too. I think Ellis fits well as an end and Kimo is a nice vet. No glaring holes, but Kimo is a stopgap, so I'll be looking for a 3-4 end at some point.

LBs: a lot of interchangeable parts here. I don't know, and I'm not sure the FO knows, how they will fit together, but the only position that is definitely missing is our speed rusher. Other than that, no picks need be spent on LBs.

DBs: a mystery group that the Dyson signing may well have solidified. There's a lot of youth, but our safeties can cover, soemthing which mangini did a lot of last year. I don't know that either Dyson or Miller are great fits for zone, which he also did a lot of last year, but there is some talent here to work with - it may be a work in progress though. I don't think I'm looking here in the draft either, though depending on how they work out this year, it may be a priority next year.

First Day Strategy

#4: I'm going to sit at four and see who comes to me. If it's D'Brick or possibly Leinart, I know I've got a valuable commodity that SOMEONE will be willing to trade up for. If Mario falls to us, I take him in a second and solidify the line, because as we all know, games are won in the trenches.

#29: despite Teague's signing, I still take Mangold here. Unless someone unexpectedly drops to me here I've got to feel happy that I've got the best DE and the best C in the draft. After all, we all know games are won in the trenches.

#35: I've passed on McNeill, the supposed best RT because of his medical problems, but I see Whitworth sitting here at the top of round two. It's possible he'll still be there a round later, but I like his toughness, his durability and the fact that he is a team leader and a prototype RT. It's such an area of need that I don't want to take any risks with it and I take him here. At this point, I've settled BOTH lines for the foreseeable future. And as we all know.....

#71: I've missed out on Manny Lawson, Kiwi, Wimbley and others who would fit well as my 3-4 rush backer, but that's okay. There are a ton of agile but undersized college ends who can play that position and will end up being as good or better than two out of the three players mentioned above. One such player may be PArys Haralson. He's a mean and tough competitor who has enough agility to play the position. However, I've got to believe there are others out there who can play it also, so if a QB I like falls here, say Kellen Clemens or Whitehurst, I'd be willing to take a flier.

#97: I've already solidifed the positions I need for 2006, now I'm looking at 2007. Andre Hall. He is a bit small, but he's proven durable thus far. He's got speed, agility, toughness and hands. Sounds a lot like Curtis, doesn't it. At worst, it sounds like Blaylock. At the end of round three there may be other players that I have a more certain grade on and it's a little early to be taking fliers on anything other than QBs, but this is an area where many productive backs are found, so I am willing to trust my gut on this one.

Day two: I've got some work to do still. But instead of going for the fourteenth best player on a national championship program I'm going to go with some triangle number prospects and hope to develop them. I'll look at Chris Gocong, who I've already interviewed, David Pittman, who may be gone by round four, but has excellent measurables and a chance to be a great DB, Martin Nance, the infamous Jeremy Bloom or Willie Reid, depending on whether we feel we want size or speed at WR, an OG like MArk Setterstrom who is a pro's pro and if put in a line with Jones, Mangold, Moore, and Whitworth, could easily overcome his liabilities. I have other players, but grades are going to vary so widely by this point, that I don't see how I can possibly say who will and will not be available when.