What will your reaction be to: "With the 6th Selection, The Redskins pick...

I don't think you can make the above statement in good-faith. Supposing that Calvin Johnson is the next Jerry Rice, would you still stand by the above statements?

There's no doubt a DT is worth more to OUR team than a WR, but that's not going to be true for a team with a good D-line and a poor WR-corps. Take San Diego as an example. If they had to choose between a DT, DE, or WR with a top 5 pick, they'd be crazy not to spend it on the WR of CJ's caliber.If Calvin Johnson was the next Jerry Rice, it would justify a top 5 selection. If he ends up being the next Joey Galloway, a very real possibility, it becomes a wasted selection.

My point is that the next Jerry Rice is not nearly as valuable as the next Reggie White, Joe Montana, LaDainian Tomlinson, Bruce Matthews, Walter Jones, or Darrell Green. Assuming that each player has an equal chance to become the greatest ever at his position, it would be better to take a shot on either line or in either backfield than at the WR position.

As far as teams drafting for need...one would think that every team in the league as a need more pressing than WR. Any team that picks Johnson in the top 10 is taking a big risk knowing that the possible return on their investment will not be as great as another position. His selectior must realize that he must be everything his scouting report promises to justify his selection. I don't believe this is true with any other position.

trade down please need to get extra picks

I never said anything about "making the safe pick". I was talking purely about positional value. For wide receivers, there is NO benefit to taking one in the top 10 as opposed to between 11-20. None. On top of this, the positional value of a WR is lower than any other player on the offense, and arguably all of the defense also. It's the only position on the field that will be a realtive non factor on more than 1/3 of offensive plays.

Calvin Johnson is (presumably) a far better receiver than Randle El or Lloyd. But are we a better offense with Johnson starting instead of Randle El. Yes, but only by a very very slim margin. There just isn't much significance in the position.

Conversely, if we were to replace Saleve'a with Branch (assuming of course that Branch will be a dominant player just as we presumed Johnson would be), the defense will be SIGNIFICANTLY stronger vs the run. The team would be much better off.

That's positional value. I don't think any position is "safer" than another position. I think that (4 year starting) seniors are always safer picks than underclassmen, simply because there is so much film on them. If a senior has bust potential, surely there will be red flags that scouts will find. If an underclassman has bust potential, there might not be adequate film on him, and some red flags may sneak beneath the scouts observations. I don't think Larry Fitzgerald was a safe pick though. He came out of school early, and thats never a "safe" thing. I remember him being regarded as the "best player in college football," and he was the 3rd pick--so don't say he wasn't highly regarded.

first, adding 800 more yards in passing offense, and another 100 running offense (cause he blocks much better than any WR we have) is a huge improvement. Maybe as much so as the couple hundred fewer yards branch would prevent. Just cause you think you can arbitrarily assign positional values on complete unknowns doesn't make it fact :P

and there is benefit in taking a WR in the top 10 if he'd be gone by pick 12 or 13 and ends up in the HoF. so saying there's no benefit is just crap. fitz was a fairly safe pick, and i didn't say he wasn't highly regarded, i said he wasn't as highly regarded as CJ on draft day.

If Calvin Johnson was the next Jerry Rice, it would justify a top 5 selection. If he ends up being the next Joey Galloway, a very real possibility, it becomes a wasted selection.

My point is that the next Jerry Rice is not nearly as valuable as the next Reggie White, Joe Montana, LaDainian Tomlinson, Bruce Matthews, Walter Jones, or Darrell Green. Assuming that each player has an equal chance to become the greatest ever at his position, it would be better to take a shot on either line or in either backfield than at the WR position.

As far as teams drafting for need...one would think that every team in the league as a need more pressing than WR. Any team that picks Johnson in the top 10 is taking a big risk knowing that the possible return on their investment will not be as great as another position. His selectior must realize that he must be everything his scouting report promises to justify his selection. I don't believe this is true with any other position.

again, you have any "proof" of this, or are you just making it up? a great QB always excedes everything else, but after that, it really depends on the situation. if you have a solid CB core and no WRs, rice is going to improve your team a lot more than darrell green might. such blanket statements are really pretty silly.

I mean, look how well minnesota did with no WRs. but they had a good OL and defense, so i guess it didn't matter, right? and you saw how much donte stallworth or TO improved the eagles offense when they were in the game. #1 WRs absolutely DO matter. the depth isn't really as important.

Sorry boy's but if CJ somehow falls to us we have to take him, we deal all the great WR's we aquired last year teams should be lineing up for them.

Branch looked out of shape at the combine, which would coincide with his lazyness, I wonder if he will be any more motivated after he becomes a millionair?

I really haven't any seen any film on Adams, or Anderson, but rest assured none of them will be near the player that CJ will be.

It's nice Adams want's to be a Skin, he must have heard the Texans were gearing up to draft him.

I think the only player that really makes sense on the defensive line may be Anderson, he has the size to stop the strong side run and can get after the QB, Adams should be a RT end, we cannot put Carter on the strong side he can't hold his ground, and Branch looks like he may be the second coming of BIG DADDY WILK.

first, adding 800 more yards in passing offense, and another 100 running offense (cause he blocks much better than any WR we have) is a huge improvement. Maybe as much so as the couple hundred fewer yards branch would prevent. Just cause you think you can arbitrarily assign positional values on complete unknowns doesn't make it fact :P

and there is benefit in taking a WR in the top 10 if he'd be gone by pick 12 or 13 and ends up in the HoF. so saying there's no benefit is just crap. fitz was a fairly safe pick, and i didn't say he wasn't highly regarded, i said he wasn't as highly regarded as CJ on draft day.Those 800/100 figures seem pretty arbitrary. The 2nd receiver got thrown at about 45 times this year. I highly doubt that CJ or anyone else can change 45 passes (about 40 receptions if he's really good) into 800 yards (~20 yards/reception). That's pretty preposterous. Realistically he might add another 75-125 yards to the passing offense over the ARE/Lloyd combo over the course of an entire season. Marginal.

Randle El had 32 receptions for 351 yards (11 yards/reception). Are you saying that Calvin Johnson could have gone for 1150 yards in a similar amount of oppertunities?

Maybe he creates a few more yards than Randle El does in the running game...but 100? Is he some sort of lineman out there who takes multiple players out of every play? Randle El isn't a crappy blocker and already does a good job taking the corner out on front side plays. But you honestly think that CJ would create 100 more rushing yards (Not to mention that ARE had over 100 yards rushing last year)?

again, you have any "proof" of this, or are you just making it up? a great QB always excedes everything else, but after that, it really depends on the situation. if you have a solid CB core and no WRs, rice is going to improve your team a lot more than darrell green might. such blanket statements are really pretty silly.

I mean, look how well minnesota did with no WRs. but they had a good OL and defense, so i guess it didn't matter, right? and you saw how much donte stallworth or TO improved the eagles offense when they were in the game. #1 WRs absolutely DO matter. the depth isn't really as important.Minnesota's offense sucked because Brad Johnson had a horrible year, and because Chester Taylor didn't come through when they needed it (no running game+no passing game despite the quality of the O Line which had an underachieving right side). Phili and NE have skimped on the WRs for years and have made top 10 offenses. Look what KC had done for many years.

Having a Santana Moss is a big deal. The guy can turn a simple screen into a 80 yard touchdown. That's a rare ability, and most top WRs in this league don't have that ability.

I think you are misunderstanding my point though. If a team has a great CB core and a weak WR core, they probably shouldn't be drafting someone in the hopes of being the next Darrell Green. However, they probably have much bigger needs than WR. Maybe they should be looking for the next Orlando Pace or Warren Sapp as opposed to the next Rice.

Common sense says that the 9 players who have the biggest effect on the offense are the guys closest to the football. If they all do their jobs to ultimate perfection, playing WR in this league is going to be pretty damn easy :P

is it me or does Alan branch have an eierry simularity to Big Daddy Wilkinson

is it me or does Alan branch have an eierry simularity to Big Daddy Wilkinson

Plus I know I spelled name wrong

is it me or does Alan branch have an eierry simularity to Big Daddy Wilkinson

In what way? Is it because they're both big defensive tackles?

In what way? Is it because they're both big defensive tackles?

I can see it, the knock on Big Daddy was that he played lazy at times. The knock on Adams is that he takes plays off at times and isn't known as a high motor guy.