Enter your username and password below to sign in to your PewterReport account.
x close
S&B you make some great points , but is there any reason you can't condense a lot of these comments into the same post ? LOL.
Valid point but that just tells you that offenses now dictate how the games are played. Maybe all first round picks should be on that side.
Quote from: Skull and Bones on March 31, 2012, 10:52:54 AMValid point but that just tells you that offenses now dictate how the games are played. Maybe all first round picks should be on that side.Agreed. But that does not mean all 1st round picks should be on the offensive side. Like you already said, all those teams had a good turn over ratio. Still need great pass rushers and have good DB's to get those turnovers.I don't think anyone would argue that QB is the most important position on the field, that a LT and legit number #1 WR are almost as important. Whether you like it or not, we have those 3 positions filled.
1. 6 out of the top ten passing defenses didn't even make the playoffs.2. NY Giants (29th), NO Saints (30th), NE Pats (31st), GB Packers (32nd) were at least 4 out of the 5 best teams in the NFL and they were the worst pass defense teams.
Quote from: Skull and Bones on March 31, 2012, 10:11:10 AM1. 6 out of the top ten passing defenses didn't even make the playoffs.2. NY Giants (29th), NO Saints (30th), NE Pats (31st), GB Packers (32nd) were at least 4 out of the 5 best teams in the NFL and they were the worst pass defense teams.We don't need to pick a top CB because it would give us a top pass defense, we need to pick a top CB just to help our pass defense become non-horrible
The problem comes in when projecting talent from round to round. How much of a drop off is there within the position? All the running backs are closely grouped with Richardson having the edge - but is that edge so substantial over players like Martin, Miller & Wilson that a team could not get just as much production out of those guys and draft them in the second over drafting Richardson in the first? Further more the drop off over Claiborne and other corners is large. Not taking Claiborne if he's on the board over some of the rumored second round candidates with such a large disparity with talent gap between Claiborne over those expected to be drafted is huge. So for me the better option is the corner with a longer shelf life - than that of a running back and what you could get in the second round at running back talent.