you must have crystal ball over there to make that statement. Kyle Brady though a great blocker never posed a threat in a one on one matchup. He put fear in nobodys heart and only time will tell .
The problem with Olsen is that he didn't do squat in Miami. While Vernon Davis was likewise a physical freak for the position, he was also pretty much Maryland's offense while he was there. In my eyes, Olsen's a late 2nd rounder at best. You can't just draft a guy based on measurables in the first and hope he turns it up a notch. First rounders are supposed to be the picks that have the highest chance of working out, not gambles. Olsen's a huge gamble because he just really hasn't proven anything. I'd try for Ben Patrick in the third if we were gonna draft for the position, he's a much more complete TE and would nicely complement Baker in 2 TE sets.
Agreed. I mean damn, I'm not die-hard against taking a reciever or offensive weapon of some sort with #25 and wouldn't be pissed if we took Meachem, Bowe, or Rice with our pick, but the point is that regardless of speed, quickness, athletic ability and potential, these guys delivered the goods in college. Olsen did not. Everyone just wan't to pick him because of his "potential". In reality, potential's just another word of saying that you haven't done anything yet.
Greg Olsen, though not a great blocker, also does not pose a threat to anyone except the team that drafts his sorry ass.
I'm sure some people will definately complain and argue with my idea, but i would like to see the Jets draft 2 offensive lineman with their first 3 picks. No matter how you put it, offensive line sets the tempo of the game and puts games away...especially with Thomas Jones running behind them. Look at teams like the Broncos. They have an awesome line and it shows year in and year out. They can trade guys like Portis and just throw someone in there and still look good. Go offensive line. I know it seems boring and annoying, but im sure winning wont seem boring or annoying.
But...why do you HAVE to draft O-linemen early (first round anyway) to have a good or even great O-line? Teams have guys from all over the draft on their O-lines, and usually only the LT is a first rounder.
OK, so how many Broncos O-linemen were first rounders? Hell...how many were second rounders? You don't need all first rounders on the O-line to have a good to great one.
so you would rather draft two offensive lineman and neglect the defense. so basically we go on the field everytime trying to be in a shoot out with other teams. there are many good players throughout the draft
I certainly don't think our defense should be neglected but they did play very well at the end of last season. A solid running game would do wonders for the offense and the defense.
i am all for the running game but out of the first three picks two of them lineman wouldnt make sense.. all we need is one more lineman which would probably be the RT a fast guy like joe Staley.
I never said they needed to have all first rd picks for a great line. It is just what I would do, because the original poster asked for comments and I gave mine. Why is it ok to want a CB, or TE, or LB, but not ok to want to take an Olinemen? IMO, it is our biggest need, and one I would like to see addressed as early as possible. You don't that's fine too, never said everyone has to agree with me. I NEVER said Olines needed to be built with 1st rounders, another poster put words in my mouth, just stating what I think the priorities should be. And my point was to dispute tanknyc's claim that lineman are a "dime a dozen" which is inaccurate and foolish. Good Olinemen are hard to comeby, otherwise the Raiders or Cardinals wouldn't have a problem.
Why am I acting like there are only 5 or 6 linemen? Where are you coming up with this crap? And I realize that you don't need to take all 1st linemen. I just don't think there is any worth taking beyond the 1st or high 2nd. That is just my opinion and where I think the priorities should lie. You people act like it is a crime to want to take an Olineman first. If that is what you meant, then "dime a dozen" was probably the wrong term to use. It is obvious that you don't think it should be as high a priority as I do, or don't have the same opinion as I do of some of the players. That's fine, but I originally just stated what my opinion was of the original poster's mock draft. And if it was up to me I would use one of the first 2 picks on OL, maybe even both.
I NEVER said you had to draft OL in the 1st. You people are putting words in my mouth. IMO, in this years draft OL is not that deep, and the ONLY ones worth taking are in the 1st round or high second. Once again, the original poster asked for comments on his draft, and I stated where the priorities should be. And as regard to my post you replied to, I only stated that because tanknyc stated that linemen are a dime a dozen, and I wanted to point out why that is inaccurate. Good OL are hard to comeby. IN NONE OF MY POSTS did I state that teams needed to take linemen early or in the first to have a great line. People are putting words in my mouth. I could be wrong, I am not a scout, but in this draft I think the best OL value is going to come from the 1st or high 2nd. I don't think there is much there beyond the 2nd. You guys just need to read what I wrote and stop reading into things.
the reason i say 5 or 6 o lineman is because between round 1-2 there will be like 5 or 6 good o lineman selected maybe.. which means there are plenty more that would be selected later
