Enter your username and password below to sign in to your PewterReport account.
Why is it stupid? V Jax is 29 years old meaning he probably will give us a couple more good years at most lets say 5 which is the length of his contract. You draft a young stud wide out to learn under him and then grow into a number one when V jax leaves,
Is it stupid of the NY giants when they keep drafting D linemen?
No in fact the more power you have the more trade bait you have. A 3 wide receiver set of V jax, Blackmon, and Williams would be almost unstoppable. Now do I see it happening? Probably not. But to call it stupid to stock up on talent is a stretch.
Drafting a guy 5th overall to take over for a guy we just signed for 55 million is borderline retarded. On thats not even considering we have other needs.
traew01: I **CENSORED**ing get it.. BPA is smarter than picking for needs. But what when our needs are the BPA? Stop being an idiot.
Quote from: Tampa-Two on March 17, 2012, 05:50:34 PMtraew01: I **CENSORED**ing get it.. BPA is smarter than picking for needs. But what when our needs are the BPA? Stop being an idiot.OK. Just making sure. You keep talking about needs. Anyway, that's the best case scenario when needs and BPA are aligned. And I'll always be an idiot. Can't help it.
Why not Blackmon? Because we have a head coach who in a pass oriented game, he wants to be a power running to team to closely emulate what he couldn't even excel at in college.
Quote from: Tampa-Two on March 17, 2012, 04:27:39 PMDrafting a guy 5th overall to take over for a guy we just signed for 55 million is borderline retarded. On thats not even considering we have other needs.You should read this article:The date was April 23, 2005, and the Packers were just about to make their first-round draft choice with the 24th overall selection.This was Ted Thompson’s first draft as Packers general manager, and he had a private conversation with his boss, then Packers president Bob Harlan.“Every year, just before he’d make the No. 1 draft choice, he would always call me out of the room,” recalled Harlan during a recent interview. “And he would tell me who he was going to take and why. And I can still remember our conversation about Aaron Rodgers. He said, ‘I can’t believe the guy has fallen this far, but he’s there. We may catch some heat, because with Brett (Favre) here we’re taking a quarterback.’ But he said, ‘He’s the best player on the board and I’m going to take him.’”The rest, as they say, is history. Rodgers sat on the bench for three years behind Favre before getting his starting chance in 2008, and has emerged as the best quarterback in the NFL.The key to that draft and the Packers’ current standing as the best team in the NFL is that Thompson didn’t sway from his philosophy of taking the best player available, regardless of position. The Packers didn’t need a quarterback in 2005, but that didn’t stop Thompson from making the best decision for the overall good of the franchise.In the words of Harlan, this is what Thompson told him about his draft philosophy: “When we’re in the draft room, my responsibility is to build the entire team. So he said, ‘If we’re deep at wide receiver and say I pass up a couple of great wide receivers, and the second game of the season, we lose a couple people at that position, I’m going to be kicking myself the rest of the year that I didn’t stick to my pattern and take those wide receivers.’ So he said, ‘I’m going to take the top player on the board, regardless of what position he plays, because my responsibility is to build the entire football team.’”Thompson is a man of his convictions, regardless of what the critics might say. He sticks to his philosophy, whether dealing with draft picks or unrestricted free agents.“He’s got a system that he’s going to work from and he’s not going to change and he’s not going to let people change him,” said Harlan. “He told me one time, ‘Bob I’m not going to go out in April and sign a bunch of free agents and spend a lot of money just to please the fans and then regret it in November when they’re sitting on the bench and not contributing. We’re not going to operate that way.’”