I really want Blaylock, I want to see our OL just destroy others. An awesome Oline can make everyone look awesome just look at the Chief's oline all those years.
Can you post the article on the misinformation the FO/CS has already provided through the press in one year of management? I think I missed it, and that is something I would like to read.
It would be a Boobway/Germ thing to do, going for a TE. This regime realizes that without the right side of the OL solidified, you could have Gates on one side and Crumpler on the other side, and teams will still crush you. Blaylock or best available OG/OT, if you'd please....
No TE please, I'm satisfied with chris baker. Our needs are DT, CB, LB, OG. I feel we must go either DT or CB at #25. And use the rest of our day one picks on our other needs.
http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft07/insider/columns/story?columnist=mcshay_todd&id=2814195 this is from Todd McShay's mock draft. i don't think i agree with this selection, but Olsen would be a nice weapon to have. i still think we should go with BPA at WR/OLB/OL/CB. cheers
I wasn't trying to be a wiseass, but since you so obviously are, why don't you try looking at our weekly injury reports for 2006, or maybe the flood of Jets articles concerning the interest we had in Cutler last year, smart guy. Edit: I almost forgot about this: http://forums.theganggreen.com/showthread.php?t=5374&highlight=cutler
With what this team has put together from last years draft and free agency I cannot expect anything less than a opening day starter with our 1st round pick no DEPTH PLAYERS.
I don't see us taking a TE. Didn't we sign C. Baker to a handsome contract? I don't see dumping another chunk at that position. And it would mean someone is prolly getting cut, not Dearth (snapper), prolly not Posciak (last yr pick), most likely Sean Ryan (posciak takes his spot). I don't know much about Olsen, can he block? Or is he the Winslow / Shockey Miami TE mold?
why is everyone so satisfied with baker? wow 31 catches for 300 yards in an offense that threw short passes all year! if he was such a receiving threat why wasn't he thrown the ball more? its not like chad was heaving the ball 40 yards down the field often to WRs.
We really NEED a BIG DT for our defense to be what it can be with the new additions we have in FA. I really think this is what they have in mind, the FA LBs and DEs are pieces but a BIG DT with those pieces will make for a solid defense. Think about it,we won't need stunts and rushers in trick formations to be effective, just heavy rotation.
It's not that I'm an unsatisfied customer.. but what if he goes down again this year... are you happy with Pat Ryan, or whatever his name is being our TE? I'm not. How about the ability to throw out of a 2 TE set, where you can send both of them out in a patern, and exploit a mis-match... there is a whole new twist. Lets not all be so short sighted here. TE is a need, weather we think it's as big a need as the front office is immaterial, since they make the picks. :breakdance: Ellis
I think the FO has worked hard to put themselves in a position where they can go BPA. They should do that even if it means drafting a position I would prefer to wait on. Like many here, I want OL, LB, CB--actually NT, but none will be even close to value with our highest picks--but I have faith in Tangini. So even if they go with a "skill" player in Rd 1, they'll have a plan on how to use him. And yes, Chad--good QB with below average arm that he is--will be able to execute the game plan.
LOL...So that mock draft was an attempt to provide misinformation. I can see it now, Tannebaum and Mangini standing over whoever created that mock draft taking turns dictating picks. I can see it.
