slats Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 3rd round was the earliest to address the position after that. But according to you that is tantamount to ignoring the position since it wouldn't be a day-one pick. No. I cite the fact that they haven't taken a receiver higher than the fourth round as an example of what they haven't done. They also haven't traded for a WR without trading one in return. They haven't done anything but minimal FA deals at the position, never bringing in any vets expected to crack our weak top four in any given year - when this team should've been in the market for a #1. Tanny brings in talent in a lot of different ways, but he never brings in WR talent. A high draft pick, a high profile trade (you can list it again, but the Moss for Coles -WR for WR- trade doesn't cut it for me), a high priority FA signing - had they made any of these moves over the last four years or so I'd at least feel like they'd made some sort of effort at the position. But they haven't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 No. I cite the fact that they haven't taken a receiver higher than the fourth round as an example of what they haven't done. They also haven't traded for a WR without trading one in return. They haven't done anything but minimal FA deals at the position, never bringing in any vets expected to crack our weak top four in any given year - when this team should've been in the market for a #1. Tanny brings in talent in a lot of different ways, but he never brings in WR talent. A high draft pick, a high profile trade (you can list it again, but the Moss for Coles -WR for WR- trade doesn't cut it for me), a high priority FA signing - had they made any of these moves over the last four years or so I'd at least feel like they'd made some sort of effort at the position. But they haven't. I don't find fault with not burning a day-one pick at RW for the first 2 years Tannenbaum was the GM. We already had Coles & McCareins locked up long-term. Then in the 2006 season Cotchery showed he was a real starter - a good one - and was rewarded with a long-term deal of his own. The players we got in 2007 outweigh the WR's we were likely to add. Coles was under contract for 3 more seasons for big money and Cotchery was just given his deal. It would have led to us drafting a WR in round 2 (instead of Harris), and figuring him to sit on the bench or only see the field in 3-WR sets for the first 3 years of his 4-year rookie deal. Harris was the more pressing need and outstanding draft value at the time, as he was a legit first round prospect taken in the middle of round 2. Find fault with it for 2008 but that would require cherry-picking which WR prospect in round 2 you'd have taken in hindsight (instead of Keller). For 2009, we used our two day-one picks on our franchise QB (a good move IMO). My point was only this: it's not as black & white as you make it out to be. The team situations in 2006 or 2007 are not the same as they are today. He's built the best defense this team has seen in quite some time, put talent across the board on the OL and at TE, and he's found our franchise QB for the next decade. Another year wait on one of two starting WR positions is not enough to crucify him over. Not to mention the only way to find out if one of those hidden gems is on your current team is to play them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 Its like Schott only calls short passes because he doesnt want the camera men to do any work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.