What's our greatest need now?

[jdlea]

Originally Posted by memphisskin

Hmm, Michael Strahan comes to mind as a large defensive end that fell to the second round...

If we're going to miss, I wouldn't mind missing on a 6'7" 290 lb DE. I hate the combine, all these numbers are an attempt to quantify something that can't be quantified. Those combine drills are just that, drills, who cares that he sucks at the shuttle cone, or doesn't run a 4.5 40 yd dash, or only does 15 reps on the bench press. At 6'7" he's going to knock down passes, at 290 he can be effective against the run, and obviously he played well enough during the season to merit 1st round attention. And long term, we've got a Pro Bowl at TE already, would it have hurt to draft Campbell?

Most times our 2 TE sets only force the D to account for 3 pass catching threats, with the addition of Davis, it makes it 4. While I wasn't the biggest fan of the pick (I wanted Groves) I can see the logic. It makes the offense much more dynamic, all of the 2nd round picks did. I'm not mad about the draft at all.

I do agree that another end would have been nice, but I don't think Campbell will be that much better than Daniels. I would have liked to have seen Groves be the pick, but I love Fred Davis's playmaking ability and I can't be mad about that pick.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by memphisskin

Hmm, Michael Strahan comes to mind as a large defensive end that fell to the second round...

If we're going to miss, I wouldn't mind missing on a 6'7" 290 lb DE. I hate the combine, all these numbers are an attempt to quantify something that can't be quantified. Those combine drills are just that, drills, who cares that he sucks at the shuttle cone, or doesn't run a 4.5 40 yd dash, or only does 15 reps on the bench press. At 6'7" he's going to knock down passes, at 290 he can be effective against the run, and obviously he played well enough during the season to merit 1st round attention. And long term, we've got a Pro Bowl at TE already, would it have hurt to draft Campbell?

Hmm, I don't know Strahan's exact combine numbers, but I would bet a dime to a dollar that his bench press wasn't the WORST of all D-Lineman at the combine. I'm also pretty sure he ran better than a 5.0.

With Campbell's size and great sophomore season he was expected to be a top 5 pick in the NFL at some point. His junior season was below expectations and his work ethic is questionable. If your are a D-I DE at the U and you can only bench 8 reps at 225 (pre-combine Jan. 2008), something is wrong. You're either weak or lazy. I don't want to miss on a pick where there are serious warning signs for a bust. Campbell's D-Line coach from UofM is now on staff with the Skins. Campbell was available at a reasonable point in the draft and the Skins didn't take him, to me that speaks volumes.

The combine is not just "drills". It measures raw physical ability and that raw physical ability is extremely important in the NFL. Every NFL team seems to think it's pretty important, otherwise they wouldn't bother to attend.

At 6' 7", 290 Campbell doesn't have a low center of gravity, he's weak, with a questionable work ethic. At strong-side DE he would be getting BLOWN-UP at the point of attack. After that happened a couple of times how willing is he going to be to get back in there and "step it up", not very is my guess. I'd take Phillip Daniels for the next 4-5 years over Campbell in a heartbeat.

Having two TEs that are receiving threats is very important and creates match-up issues for the opposing D.

[724Skinsfan]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

I'd take Phillip Daniels for the next 4-5 years over Campbell in a heartbeat.

Dude, I agree with what you say abour Calais Campbell but if we can keep Daniels for the 4-5 years (at a reasonable price) as a legitimate starter, I swear I will cut my bollocks off.

[memphisskin]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Hmm, I don't know Strahan's exact combine numbers, but I would bet a dime to a dollar that his bench press wasn't the WORST of all D-Lineman at the combine. I'm also pretty sure he ran better than a 5.0.

With Campbell's size and great sophomore season he was expected to be a top 5 pick in the NFL at some point. His junior season was below expectations and his work ethic is questionable. If your are a D-I DE at the U and you can only bench 8 reps at 225 (pre-combine Jan. 2008), something is wrong. You're either weak or lazy. I don't want to miss on a pick where there are serious warning signs for a bust. Campbell's D-Line coach from UofM is now on staff with the Skins. Campbell was available at a reasonable point in the draft and the Skins didn't take him, to me that speaks volumes.

The combine is not just "drills". It measures raw physical ability and that raw physical ability is extremely important in the NFL. Every NFL team seems to think it's pretty important, otherwise they wouldn't bother to attend.

At 6' 7", 290 Campbell doesn't have a low center of gravity, he's weak, with a questionable work ethic. At strong-side DE he would be getting BLOWN-UP at the point of attack. After that happened a couple of times how willing is he going to be to get back in there and "step it up", not very is my guess. I'd take Phillip Daniels for the next 4-5 years over Campbell in a heartbeat.

Having two TEs that are receiving threats is very important and creates match-up issues for the opposing D.

Sorry for wanting us to address our d-line, somehow I got the crazy notion that a starting defensive end should get more than two sacks on the season. Based on that obviously flawed logic, I thought it would make sense to draft a replacement for the power lifter as opposed to someone who may catch 25 passes this year.

The combine is an attempt to quantify something that can't be explained. If it could be explained, why did the best quarterback in the NFL go in the 6th round? In the end, how many times someone can benchpress 185 lbs tells me how many times they can benchpress 185 lbs, nothing more and nothing less. If those measurables actually meant something then Trung Canidate would have run for 1500 yds and 15 scores for us instead of just becoming Matt Bowen's crash test dummy.

I like PDiddy, I really do, and I like that I'm the only one who calls Philip Daniels P Diddy. But I have this crazy dream, that one day we'll actually have a defensive end that is a force.

Now again, I love that we got weapons for Campbell. But at some point we are going to have to start drafting defensive ends before the 6th round, something we haven't done since 1997. Ten years and not one d-end has been "worthy" of being picked by us before round 6?

[SouperMeister]

DE. Vinny didn't address the pass rush in the draft, and I'm not sold on Erasmus James given his frequent injuries. God forbid that Andre Carter gets hurt.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

Dude, I agree with what you say abour Calais Campbell but if we can keep Daniels for the 4-5 years (at a reasonable price) as a legitimate starter, I swear I will cut my bollocks off.

I was just throwing that out for emphasis on how much I don't want Campbell. You are absolutely right, IMO no way Daniels will be productive past 2009.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by memphisskin

Sorry for wanting us to address our d-line, somehow I got the crazy notion that a starting defensive end should get more than two sacks on the season. Based on that obviously flawed logic, I thought it would make sense to draft a replacement for the power lifter as opposed to someone who may catch 25 passes this year.

I was hoping for Phillip Merling to be drafted by us in the first round, but the way the draft played out it made sense to do what the FO did. There were a couple of picks where a DL who made sense was picked within 1-3 picks before our pick. Merling before Thomas, and I believe either Sims or the DT from ARK was right before Kelly. My point is that Campbell has a high chance of being a bust and better to get someone that can potentially help at another position than someone who won't help at all.

The combine is an attempt to quantify something that can't be explained. If it could be explained, why did the best quarterback in the NFL go in the 6th round? In the end, how many times someone can benchpress 185 lbs tells me how many times they can benchpress 185 lbs, nothing more and nothing less. If those measurables actually meant something then Trung Canidate would have run for 1500 yds and 15 scores for us instead of just becoming Matt Bowen's crash test dummy.

I never said the combine is the only way to evaluate a player, film, statistical production, interviews, background checks all are pieces of the puzzle. The combine is an important piece. The combine quantifies raw physical ability. Because a guy like Brady slips to the 6th round or a player is a bust, doesn't mean we should throw out the combine. I was high on Campbell before the combine, but to put up terrible numbers to me is a huge red flag. On the DL, cone numbers and 40 times are not as important as strength. Bench press is a pretty good indicator of overall upper body strength and Campbell will not hold up in the NFL on the DL

[memphisskin]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

I was hoping for Phillip Merling to be drafted by us in the first round, but the way the draft played out it made sense to do what the FO did. There were a couple of picks where a DL who made sense was picked within 1-3 picks before our pick. Merling before Thomas, and I believe either Sims or the DT from ARK was right before Kelly. My point is that Campbell has a high chance of being a bust and better to get someone that can potentially help at another position than someone who won't help at all.

I was just hoping against hope for a defensive lineman. Will Campbell be a bust, maybe, I have no clue or interest since he's not a Skin and I know absolutely nothing about him.

As for what the FO did, they did it. It doesn't really make sense to me, it reminded me of when they signed Randle-El and Lloyd in the same summer. Yes, you guard against busts, but if you do your job scouting and evaluating then why the need to hedge your bets?

As was said before somewhere, Erasmus James may pan out. Hopefully. If he can stay healthy.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by memphisskin

I was just hoping against hope for a defensive lineman. Will Campbell be a bust, maybe, I have no clue or interest since he's not a Skin and I know absolutely nothing about him.

Earlier in response to my first post in the thread, you mentioned taking a risk on him vs. Fred Davis, shouldn't you know something about him before making that statement? IMO the FO did their homework on the guy and decided to pass because they scouted and evaluated him properly. Only time will tell if they were right or not.

As for what the FO did, they did it. It doesn't really make sense to me, it reminded me of when they signed Randle-El and Lloyd in the same summer. Yes, you guard against busts, but if you do your job scouting and evaluating then why the need to hedge your bets?

Again IMO, the reasoning for the FO drafting the way they did was to put weapons around J. Campbell to help him develop and help the offense be more open and productive. We are at a critical point with JC, if he doesn't step up late this year or at the very worst early next, we have a problem. His contract is up at the end of 2009 and we certainly need to know if he is going to be the Man for the next 7-8 years and be re-signed or do we need to go in another direction. (IMO he will be, but we've got to find out ASAP).

The signings of Randel-El and Llyod were at the urging of Al Saunders, if you want to place blame, those two fall primarily on Saunders and to an extent Joe Gibbs also. The FO delivered exactly who the coaching staff requested.

[memphisskin]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Earlier in response to my first post in the thread, you mentioned taking a risk on him vs. Fred Davis, shouldn't you know something about him before making that statement? IMO the FO did their homework on the guy and decided to pass because they scouted and evaluated him properly. Only time will tell if they were right or not.

Again IMO, the reasoning for the FO drafting the way they did was to put weapons around J. Campbell to help him develop and help the offense be more open and productive. We are at a critical point with JC, if he doesn't step up late this year or at the very worst early next, we have a problem. His contract is up at the end of 2009 and we certainly need to know if he is going to be the Man for the next 7-8 years and be re-signed or do we need to go in another direction. (IMO he will be, but we've got to find out ASAP).

The signings of Randel-El and Llyod were at the urging of Al Saunders, if you want to place blame, those two fall primarily on Saunders and to an extent Joe Gibbs also. The FO delivered exactly who the coaching staff requested.

I'm more of a believer that you build a football team from the inside out. Our two oldest units are our offensive and defensive lines, they could use some young blood. Now was Campbell that guy? Maybe. And I'd take a chance on a guy who finished the season with first round buzz, kinda like we did with the two wideouts we drafted who were both projected as first round picks. Can't have it both ways there SSB, if Campbell slide because of some bust factor it applies to Thomas and Kelly as well. But I don't think anyone is more prone to be a bust, if that were the case then they wouldn't get drafted at all. You don't know, no one knows. Heck, Mel Kiper doesn't even know. Its a known unknown, to borrow from Rummy,

I don't presuppose to know more than D&V, but did we really need two receivers in the draft? To me it speaks of indecision, we couldn't decide between the two so when the opportunity to get them both came along we did so. I love getting Campbell some weapons and see what he can do, but having to learn yet another new offense and having yet another coach critique his form is a setback.

The FO gets credit for the successes (Portis, Carter, Washington) but the failures are always at the behest of someone else (Archuleta, Lloyd, Canidate). NO! Coaches coach, they get to say what they need or would like to have, its got to be up to D&V to either say yea or nay. If Campbell had bust on him, didn't ARch deluxe have that same aura around him?

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by memphisskin

Sorry for wanting us to address our d-line, somehow I got the crazy notion that a starting defensive end should get more than two sacks on the season. Based on that obviously flawed logic, I thought it would make sense to draft a replacement for the power lifter as opposed to someone who may catch 25 passes this year.

The combine is an attempt to quantify something that can't be explained. If it could be explained, why did the best quarterback in the NFL go in the 6th round? In the end, how many times someone can benchpress 185 lbs tells me how many times they can benchpress 185 lbs, nothing more and nothing less. If those measurables actually meant something then Trung Canidate would have run for 1500 yds and 15 scores for us instead of just becoming Matt Bowen's crash test dummy.

I like PDiddy, I really do, and I like that I'm the only one who calls Philip Daniels P Diddy. But I have this crazy dream, that one day we'll actually have a defensive end that is a force.

Now again, I love that we got weapons for Campbell. But at some point we are going to have to start drafting defensive ends before the 6th round, something we haven't done since 1997. Ten years and not one d-end has been "worthy" of being picked by us before round 6?

addressing the d-line and blowing a high round pick for no reason are NOT the same thing. merling wasn't a safe pick either, but as a prospect he'd be a much better shot.

and combine times aren't a catch all, so pulling out that strawman is pretty silly. what about mike williams amazing combine? maybe the lions should have checked the red flags there.

and brady was taken in the 6th because he wasn't even the starter at his college... but carson palmer, eli manning, peyton manning, phillip rivers, ben roth, etc were all taken in the first, and they've done alright. just because the pats get lucky on one pick doesn't make the draft bullshit or change the fact that most low rounders don't make it while most high round picks have longer careers.

i don't see how turning a "campbell wasn't a very good prospect" argument got morphed into a "the draft is worthless deal" between one guy's post and your reply. if we took campbell, i would have been pretty pissed, as would quite a few others here that follow the draft pretty closely.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by memphisskin

I'm more of a believer that you build a football team from the inside out. Our two oldest units are our offensive and defensive lines, they could use some young blood. Now was Campbell that guy? Maybe. And I'd take a chance on a guy who finished the season with first round buzz, kinda like we did with the two wideouts we drafted who were both projected as first round picks. Can't have it both ways there SSB, if Campbell slide because of some bust factor it applies to Thomas and Kelly as well. But I don't think anyone is more prone to be a bust, if that were the case then they wouldn't get drafted at all. You don't know, no one knows. Heck, Mel Kiper doesn't even know. Its a known unknown, to borrow from Rummy,

I don't presuppose to know more than D&V, but did we really need two receivers in the draft? To me it speaks of indecision, we couldn't decide between the two so when the opportunity to get them both came along we did so. I love getting Campbell some weapons and see what he can do, but having to learn yet another new offense and having yet another coach critique his form is a setback.

The FO gets credit for the successes (Portis, Carter, Washington) but the failures are always at the behest of someone else (Archuleta, Lloyd, Canidate). NO! Coaches coach, they get to say what they need or would like to have, its got to be up to D&V to either say yea or nay. If Campbell had bust on him, didn't ARch deluxe have that same aura around him?

yeah, and there were people here that weren't happy with either arch or lloyd. as far as trung, he got paid nothing and was brought in because spurrier said he wanted a fast back, and that was the fastest FA available at the time, so that's not really a big deal. saying that the FO gets no blame is nuts though... where were you during lloyd/arch/etc? the FO got attacked pretty consistantly, and i've always thought their miss rate on big money FAs was WAY too high (hitting 50% of 30mill+ contracts IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH). but they've been drafting fairly well and they avoided bad signings this offseason too.

and it doesn't really speak of indecision... if trevor laws lasted one more pick, he'd probably be here instead, but the way the value worked out, we really did pretty well with taking what was there.

if we got merling and laws that would have been great, but it didn't work out, so they followed their board. at worst, we have insurance in case one of them can't play, but i'm pretty sure they'll both be on the team for a while. It's just a matter of whether they can start or just provide depth, and how fast they can improve.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by memphisskin

I'm more of a believer that you build a football team from the inside out. Our two oldest units are our offensive and defensive lines, they could use some young blood.

Not arguing your point, however there are 31 other teams who are trying to acquire the best talent and what you may want is not always available. Although we do have some good young talent there; Reinhart, Montgomery, KG, Wilson, Heyer. No super-stars but solid young talent.

Now was Campbell that guy? Maybe. And I'd take a chance on a guy who finished the season with first round buzz, kinda like we did with the two wideouts we drafted who were both projected as first round picks. Can't have it both ways there SSB, if Campbell slide because of some bust factor it applies to Thomas and Kelly as well. But I don't think anyone is more prone to be a bust, if that were the case then they wouldn't get drafted at all. You don't know, no one knows. Heck, Mel Kiper doesn't even know. Its a known unknown, to borrow from Rummy,

You're making comparisons that don't connect between Campbell & Kelly/Thomas. I don't know this to be fact, but I'm pretty sure when teams saw that Campbell was physically weak that caused his slide. No way to fix that. A physically weak stong-side DE is a huge liability. This is a "known" issue.

Why did Thomas slide? GTripp had mentioned many times in his posts that he felt Thomas was a "one year wonder". That mind set or teams having different needs probably caused his slide. His physical numbers at the combine were very good, and his production from 2007 was excellent. If he is a bust, that would be a "known unknown".

Why did Kelly slide, poor 40 times and his outbursts at OU pre-draft. However his 40 times and physical numbers are very similar to Anquan Boldin and his production in college was excellent. The Redskins needed a big physical receiver with great hands, a blazing 40 was not a necessity especially when they drafted Thomas prior (4.3 40 yd dash) and have Moss / ARE. If Kelly busts, it would be due to unforeseen issues, another "known unknown".

don't presuppose to know more than D&V, but did we really need two receivers in the draft? To me it speaks of indecision, we couldn't decide between the two so when the opportunity to get them both came along we did so.

I don't buy the "indecision" argument. What other receivers do we have besides Moss, getting older and he has had hammy issues in his past (death for a speed receiver), and ARE (really a 3rd receiver at best)? Thomas and Kelly while both big (6' 2" & 6' 4") have different skill sets, Thomas is more of a burner and threat in space, while Kelly is an Art Monk type of receiver, big target, excellent hands, catches in traffic. We also got excellent value for both based on their projected draft position.

I love getting Campbell some weapons and see what he can do, but having to learn yet another new offense and having yet another coach critique his form is a setback.

And how could this be avoided, keep Saunders and QB coach Bill Lazor? Not a great idea. Zorn is a former NFL QB and excellent QB coach. He will teach Campbell proper technique and is a huge upgrade at QB coach from Lazor. The WCO may be the best fit for Campbell as he excelled in it the year he ran it at Auburn. I will also give Zorn the benfit of the doubt coming from the Holmgren (back to Bill Walsh) coaching tree.

The FO gets credit for the successes (Portis, Carter, Washington) but the failures are always at the behest of someone else (Archuleta, Lloyd, Canidate). NO! Coaches coach, they get to say what they need or would like to have, its got to be up to D&V to either say yea or nay. If Campbell had bust on him, didn't ARch deluxe have that same aura around him?

You make way too many generalizations. It really depends on how the organization is structured and who pushes for what within the organization. First off Snyder shouldn't be making football decisions anyway, he should be signing checks, raising SB trophies and making sure the balance sheet looks good. Final football decisions need to be made by a President of Football Operations (Joe Gibbs) or a GM-type (VC, don't feel like researching his exact title). Joe Gibbs approved and supported Saunders and Danny worshiped the ground GIbbs walked on so whatever Gibbs said was done. But in Gibbs' defense, he hired Saunders to be the OC, his OC said "I need these guys to be effective." Gibbs and the FO went and got the guys.

I haven't given anyone in particular credit for Portis, Carter, Washington because I don't know who within the organization pushed for each guy. I do know that Saunders pushed for Lloyd and ARE. I do know that Arch-Deluxe was a GW FUBAR, I don't think Arch had outright bust on him, his strength/weaknesses were known. Arch was good near the LOS and would hit you, but sucked in coverage. GW tried to put a square peg in a round hole and have Arch play deep half in a Cover-2. If he had used him near the line in a Cover 1 he would've been more effective in the short term, but in the long run with more spread sets he would've ultimately been exposed. If you want to go back to Trung Candidate it was either Spurrier or Pepper Rodgers who screwed the pooch on that one.

[memphisskin]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Not arguing your point, however there are 31 other teams who are trying to acquire the best talent and what you may want is not always available. Although we do have some good young talent there; Reinhart, Montgomery, KG, Wilson, Heyer. No super-stars but solid young talent.

You missed my whole point. That good young talent you talk about is three undrafted free agents, 1 3rd rounder (Reinart), 1 5th rounder (Montgomery) and 1 6th rounder (Gholston). My point was to address the lines with first day draft picks, not free agents and late round picks that you hope pan out, thats it.

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

You're making comparisons that don't connect between Campbell & Kelly/Thomas. I don't know this to be fact, but I'm pretty sure when teams saw that Campbell was physically weak that caused his slide. No way to fix that. A physically weak stong-side DE is a huge liability. This is a "known" issue.

You're right, you don't really know why Campbell slid. My comparison was that all three guys slid, it happens and I hope it works out in our favor. I would still take a flyer on a guy who was 6'7" and 290 lbs, seems to me that he can get stronger. It happens all the time, people develop at different times. And it seems like spending a summer with a power lifter like P Diddy Daniels would improve anyone's strength. My only point was getting a young guy that Daniels could groom and not constantly depending on undrafted free agents and 5th, 6th and 7th round picks but actually getting someone with a little more talent.

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

I don't buy the "indecision" argument. What other receivers do we have besides Moss, getting older and he has had hammy issues in his past (death for a speed receiver), and ARE (really a 3rd receiver at best)? Thomas and Kelly while both big (6' 2" & 6' 4") have different skill sets, Thomas is more of a burner and threat in space, while Kelly is an Art Monk type of receiver, big target, excellent hands, catches in traffic. We also got excellent value for both based on their projected draft position.

The indecision argument is evident when you factor in that we have way more holes on our roster than just wideout and the offense. I'm all for Thomas and Kelly since we have them, but there were other DE's on the board when we picked Davis and Kelly, two went after Kelly. Thomas and Kelly are 6'1" and 6'3", according to the roster on redskins.com. I thought our need was for a big wideout, we already have two wideouts on our team who excel in space (ARE and Moss) so why do we need a third? I'll give you Moss getting older, happens to everyone outside of Hancock, and having a history of hamstring problems. But 1) we had a problem with hamstring problems across the roster last season, which Snyder addressed. And 2) I remember way back in '98 when another speed receiver with a history of hamstring problems suddenly pulled it together at a similar age as Moss, Isaac Bruce. Also, it took us a month to hire a head coach and when it looked like Fassel was the head coach and Zorn the offensive coordinator negative fan reaction quickly scuttled that plan. Unless you buy that VC and DS don't leak things to the press, in which case I'd like to talk to you about buying a bridge from me in San Francisco.

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

And how could this be avoided, keep Saunders and QB coach Bill Lazor? Not a great idea. Zorn is a former NFL QB and excellent QB coach. He will teach Campbell proper technique and is a huge upgrade at QB coach from Lazor. The WCO may be the best fit for Campbell as he excelled in it the year he ran it at Auburn. I will also give Zorn the benfit of the doubt coming from the Holmgren (back to Bill Walsh) coaching tree.

Now that you mention it, yes keep Saunders and Lazor. If you feel like Campbell was progressing, if the team made the playoffs, then yes bring those guys back. If we are truly trying to give Jason Campbell a chance, why do we keep switching things up on him? Tony Romo has had two offenses, Donovan McNabb one, and Eli Manning one. Jason Campbell has had three. How will he catch those guys, which he has to do for us to take the next step as a team, if we keep hitting the reset button? Is the WCO offense a good fit for Campbell, I again hope you're right. But I hate the WCO, so I'm admittedly biased.

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Snyder shouldn't be making football decisions anyway, he should be signing checks, raising SB trophies and making sure the balance sheet looks good.

Finally a point I can agree with!

[memphisskin]

Originally Posted by That Guy

addressing the d-line and blowing a high round pick for no reason are NOT the same thing. merling wasn't a safe pick either, but as a prospect he'd be a much better shot.

and combine times aren't a catch all, so pulling out that strawman is pretty silly. what about mike williams amazing combine? maybe the lions should have checked the red flags there.

and brady was taken in the 6th because he wasn't even the starter at his college... but carson palmer, eli manning, peyton manning, phillip rivers, ben roth, etc were all taken in the first, and they've done alright. just because the pats get lucky on one pick doesn't make the draft bullshit or change the fact that most low rounders don't make it while most high round picks have longer careers.

i don't see how turning a "campbell wasn't a very good prospect" argument got morphed into a "the draft is worthless deal" between one guy's post and your reply. if we took campbell, i would have been pretty pissed, as would quite a few others here that follow the draft pretty closely.

I think what someone does in pads and in competition in the fall should count more than what they do in t-shirts and tights in April. I don't think the draft is bullshit, but rather a crapshoot.

Regardless of who the Skins picked, there are going to be people who are going to be pissed. I think taking two wideouts and a backup tight end is overkill. If those guys turn our team from also ran into genuine contender, great, I'm all for it, I'm a Skins fan after all. I don't see how taking a d-lineman in the second round is "blowing a draft pick" but taking a backup tight end is going to open up our offense. Fred Davis at best, at BEST, is the 5th option when he hits the field behind both wideouts, Cooley, and then Portis. I'm all for improving, but improving your 5th option on offense is not as important as getting someone who can sack the qb. I was using Campbell as an example, again not stumping for Campbell. There were plenty of DE's that we could have taken, all I asked was for one. Is that so wrong?