Pioli's Last 2 Drafts have been Horrible!

[shmessy]

No because he's so negative about this year's Patriots. Why can't some people sit back and enjoy this season as opposed to nitpick practically every player on the roster?

You want me to ban him because he's negative and doesn't agree with your opinion? You're kidding, right?

 

[ATippett56]

You want me to ban him because he's negative and doesn't agree with your opinion? You're kidding, right?

I could care less whether NSA agrees with my opinion.

 

[BlitzFritz]

we dont need to ban him, but he sure acts like a troll -- not on this thread, but on others where he sounds like a colts fan. basically everything he says is negative -- no reason for banning tho

all in all, mr NSA - you have to look at the whole team -- FAs, draft, trades. pioli and belichick have been amazing depth

second who would you have meriweather starting in front of? who would you have chad jackson start in front of?

third, do you factor in that we run some of the most complex offenses and defenses in the league, based on visual identification and adjustments. if could take rooks longer to learn

 

[shmessy]

I could care less whether NSA agrees with my opinion.

OK, however you bolded "Because he's negative". So you want him banned because he's negative? Help me out here, I'm trying to understand your reasoning for wanting a poster to be banned.

Honestly, why don't you just blast him out of the water with the power of your argument? Demanding he be banned is kind of defeatist, isn't it? Bannings only occur if someone is breaking the rules of the board, not if they are "negative".

BTW, I have contacted Ian via PM last week regarding NSA's link and advertising of a gambling website - - now THAT could be an actionable thing. Have yet to hear back from Ian yet on that. It's the holiday season and Ian is in retail, so it may take a little while on it.

 

[ATippett56]

OK, however you bolded "Because he's negative". So you want him banned because he's negative? Help me out here, I'm trying to understand your reasoning for wanting a poster to be banned.

I give up!

Honestly, why don't you just blast him out of the water with the power of your argument?

Some people won't listen to reason.

 

[SeanBruschi54]

OK, however you bolded "Because he's negative". So you want him banned because he's negative? Help me out here, I'm trying to understand your reasoning for wanting a poster to be banned.

Honestly, why don't you just blast him out of the water with the power of your argument? Demanding he be banned is kind of defeatist, isn't it? Bannings only occur if someone is breaking the rules of the board, not if they are "negative".

BTW, I have contacted Ian via PM last week regarding NSA's link and advertising of a gambling website - - now THAT could be an actionable thing. Have yet to hear back from Ian yet on that. It's the holiday season and Ian is in retail, so it may take a little while on it.

I havent been in this convo much Shmessy but i agree with Tippett56 the guy is annoying and acts like a troll but i understand that you cant ban him but can you at least just watch his posts for future reference?

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Oh, sweet, thanks for that!

So,

1.) The contract that the LOST player signs with the NEW team plays a large role.
2.) If you pick up more FA's than you lose, then no go. Does this include UDFAs?? I assume not.
3.) I assume you are talking about players "released", you mean off season guys, like Stokely for Colts, I know we didn't/won't get anything for him.
4.) Limit makes sense too. 32 total for the entire draft? Do they give the worst teams preference (sounds like they don't). Are you saying it is solely based on contract signed by the lost player? Presumably, the bigger the contract, the more value lost, thus the better compensation.

This is interesting (point 2). From a Colts perspective, perhaps this is another reason (besides being burned by the Simon deal) for them to NOT sign FA's? Certainly, you don't get immediate help, but you can stockpile for the future.

At this point, I am going to assume we will receive picks for:

June
Harper
Rhodes
(Received a pick for Harper in the '07 draft, I forget the exact reason why)

If the Colts received a pick for Harper in '07, then there is zero chance of getting a comp pick for him in '08. As for comp picks being a reason not to sign a FA, it's not that much of a reason--remember, the best comp pick is no earlier than after the last pick in round 3.

The record of the team makes absolutely no difference in terms of comp picks for lost FAs; if you look at the order of the comp picks in last year's draft, you'll see it bears no relation to the order of the rest of the draft. [A team's record does matter for the last comp picks tacked on to round 7 if there aren't 32 qualifying FAs.]

 

[shmessy]

I havent been in this convo much Shmessy but i agree with Tippett56 the guy is annoying and acts like a troll but i understand that you cant ban him but can you at least just watch his posts for future reference?

Most definitely.

Bannings can only be done for brreaking forum rules. Can't for "negativity" or, as ATippet put it because he "won't listen to reason."

As I mentioned, I have PM'ed Ian about the advertising of a gambling website that NSA does and am waiting for Ian's response.

But yes, your point is right on Sean, that poster is being watched very closely.

 

[ATippett56]

At this point, I am going to assume we will receive picks for:

June
Harper
Rhodes
(Received a pick for Harper in the '07 draft, I forget the exact reason why)

thanks again.

Edit:

keep forgetting about Mike Doss. IIRC, we did NOT cut him, but he was signed by the Vikes

The Colts will receive compensatory pick consideration for Cato June, Nick Harper, and Dominic Rhodes. The Colts received a fourth round draft pick in 2007 from the New Orleans Saints for Jason David since the former Colts cornerback was a restricted free agent.

 

[cstjohn17]

You really should know more about the cap before you go stating that there will be less available cap space.

1) Miguel has said that the 2008 cap is probably going to be going UP since there is an excess of cap room around the league.
2) The Pats have some 3 million that they can push into next year to help cover NLTBE bonuses.
3) Off the top of my head, the Pats can free up 10 million by not picking up the options on Washington and Stallworth. Hell, they can re-do both contracts to spread the hit out over the last few years of the contract.
4) The Pats can free up more money by giving Colvin an extension and spreading out his money.
5) My guess is that the Pats will have some 20 million to work with. Which is what they had this year and they didn't use it all. And that is AFTER giving Ty Warren an extension. And signing Samuel to the Franchise Tender.


Gay won't command that much money. Neither will Paxton. It will be interesting to see what the Pats do with Wilson. I expect Moss to re-sign with the Pats for good money.

The real question will be at ILB and with Samuel. Bruschi may return for one more season, but I think that Seau might call it quits if he gets his ring. It will be interesting to see if the Pats draft someone or if they sweet talk Dansby into coming over to the dark side *lol*



Bears - 2 years ago, they were junk.
Colts - Regularly let people go and have lots of holes to fill year in and year out
Saints - See Bears
Patriots - have been at the top of the league for 5 years running now and 6 of 7. Over that time, they've accumulated talent from Free Agency and from previous drafts.

There are only 53 spots and 8 practice squad spots. When you go into the draft NOT NEEDING to draft players, you can take fliers on people like Oldenburg, Rogers, Lua and Richardson.

Also, lets not forget that the Pats tried to sneak Rogers onto their practice squad and the Cowboys picked him up off waivers.

I should really learn how to multi-part quote, it is pretty cool. But for now I will take a brute force approach. For the record I approve of the Patriots approach, the goal is to win not build 'the best young team in the league'. The Pats have walked the balance and usually erred on the side of having productive veterans as opposed to youthful backups. Next year by necessity a lot of positions will have to be handled by rookies or cheap veterans who are new to the system. As long as they have Brady and BB they are in the hunt.


1) Cap Space - There are a lot of ifs in those statements, if this is done and this is done and this is done.... I don't think the Patriots are hurting but they have two premier players who are UFAs (Moss & Samuel) and have several other key contributors, these players will have to be replaced. Likely by younger cheaper players.
2) ILB & CB - Yep, that is where the holes will be. I wish we had the next wave of players on our roster but we don't instead we have the deepest most talented team in the league, hard to complain.

The analogy for the 2008 Patriots is consistent with the 2007 Colts, in some cases (CB) the Colts were able to effectively replace players but in others (OLine) they were not. The overall depth of their team is not as good as it was in 2006 and there chances for a Superbowl are diminished but not eliminated. We will have to wait and see, if the Pats have a great draft like in 2003 then may be the favorites in 08, otherwise they are one of the 3-4 teams with a realistic shot. Hard to complain about being an elite team but winning the Superbowl this year is paramount.

 

[Jacky Roberts]

Look at Mr. Pioli's superb drafts the last 2 years..........NOT!!! This guy is in a MAJOR SLUMP with our draft picks, my friends. It is Bobby Grier-esque!! We better keep trading draft picks away for the Randy Moss's and Wes Welker's of the world, because we will most likely draft STIFFS if we keep the picks!! You can make excuses all you want folks, but these last two drafts are HORRIBLE. Good thing we lost a #1 pick for spygate. Otherwise, we would just draft another guy that will make NO CONTRIBUTION whatsoever for the first 2 years of their career like Chad Jackson. Ugh!!

2006 NFL DRAFT
1 21 (21) Laurence Maroney, RB, Minnesota(DUD)
2 4-d (36) Chad Jackson, WR, Florida(BUST)
3 22 (86) David Thomas, TE, Texas(STIFF)
4 9-b (106) Garret Mills, TE, Tulsa(STIFF)
4 21 (118) Stephen Gostkowski, K, Memphis(GOOD)
5 3-c (136) Ryan O'Callaghan , OT, California(JAG)
6 22-* (191) Jeremy Mincey, OL/DE, Florida(STIFF)
6 36-* (205) Dan Stevenson, OL, Notre Dame(STIFF)
6 37 (206) Le Kevin Smith, NT, Nebraska(STIFF)
7 21 (209) Willie Andrews, CB/S, Baylor(JAG)

2007 NFL DRAFT
1 24 (24) Brandon Meriweather S Miami (FL)(JURY OUT)
4 28 (127) Kareem Brown DT Miami (FL)(CUT)
5* 34 (171) Clint Oldenburg OL Colorado State University(JAG)
6 6 (180) Justin Rogers DE Southern Methodist University(JAG)
6 28 (202) Mike Richardson CB Notre Dame(IR)
6* 34 (208) Justise Hairston RB Central Connecticut State(BUM)
6* 35 (209) Corey Hilliard T Oklahoma State(BUM)
7 1 (211) Oscar Lua ILB USC(BUM)
7* 37 (247) Mike Elgin OL University of Iowa(BUM)

Stupid thread.

ban?

 

[TheseColorsDontRun]

What is with this National Sports Advisors gar-baj. I'm sick of it.

This is stupid.

 

[He Ban Me]

If the Colts received a pick for Harper in '07, then there is zero chance of getting a comp pick for him in '08. As for comp picks being a reason not to sign a FA, it's not that much of a reason--remember, the best comp pick is no earlier than after the last pick in round 3.

The record of the team makes absolutely no difference in terms of comp picks for lost FAs; if you look at the order of the comp picks in last year's draft, you'll see it bears no relation to the order of the rest of the draft. [A team's record does matter for the last comp picks tacked on to round 7 if there aren't 32 qualifying FAs.]

Typo on the Harper thing, as Tippett explains below(I meant Jason David).

I think I disagree somewhat on the comps/FA signings. But, I guess it depends on the caliber of FA we are speaking of. Of course, a guy like Adalius Thomas is a bit different than say, a guy like Kevan Barlow. I was hopeful that the Colts would like Barlow enough to sign him (thought he'd be good in short yardage, and pick up the slack for the departed Rhodes). Well, they did not sign him, Pitt picked him up, and then cut him (before regualr season, I think). Point is, if you bring in an established, yet low end vet, you might be taking your chances it will be a bust, and you end up losing twice. The player is no good, and you lost a comp pick. Getting a young guy, fresh out of college, with presumably some upside might be preferred over swinging and missing on an aging vet on the downhill side of his career.

 

[Real World]

David Thomas was an unfortunate loss. Are Oscar Lua and Mike Richardson

key draftees? Do most of the Colts draftees make their team every year

because they are a lousy team?

It is a fact that the Pats have not drafted as well as some of the other

teams the past couple of years. Fortunately, they have made up for this

by trading picks for known quantities and signing key free agents. The

down side to this is most of the wide receiver acquisitions are for one

year. The Patriots have ransomed some of the future for success today.

As one of the older members of the forum agewise , I look forward to

another Superbowl trophy.

They traded a 4th for Moss, and a 2nd for Welker. Moss hasn't left yet, and Welker is 25 years old, and signed for 6 years. Is that not value, or in what way have the Patriots "ransomed some of their future" as you say? Welker is the future, and Moss is incredible value for a 4th round pick that has a 10-20% chance of being a league player. They traded their 2007 #28 for what should be a top 5-10 pick in 2008. I'd say that's stocking the future, not ransoming it.

 

[captain stone]

Look at Mr. Pioli's superb drafts the last 2 years..........NOT!!! This guy is in a MAJOR SLUMP with our draft picks, my friends. It is Bobby Grier-esque!! We better keep trading draft picks away for the Randy Moss's and Wes Welker's of the world, because we will most likely draft STIFFS if we keep the picks!! You can make excuses all you want folks, but these last two drafts are HORRIBLE. Good thing we lost a #1 pick for spygate. Otherwise, we would just draft another guy that will make NO CONTRIBUTION whatsoever for the first 2 years of their career like Chad Jackson. Ugh!!

2006 NFL DRAFT
1 21 (21) Laurence Maroney, RB, Minnesota(DUD)
2 4-d (36) Chad Jackson, WR, Florida(BUST)
3 22 (86) David Thomas, TE, Texas(STIFF)
4 9-b (106) Garret Mills, TE, Tulsa(STIFF)
4 21 (118) Stephen Gostkowski, K, Memphis(GOOD)
5 3-c (136) Ryan O'Callaghan , OT, California(JAG)
6 22-* (191) Jeremy Mincey, OL/DE, Florida(STIFF)
6 36-* (205) Dan Stevenson, OL, Notre Dame(STIFF)
6 37 (206) Le Kevin Smith, NT, Nebraska(STIFF)
7 21 (209) Willie Andrews, CB/S, Baylor(JAG)

2007 NFL DRAFT
1 24 (24) Brandon Meriweather S Miami (FL)(JURY OUT)
4 28 (127) Kareem Brown DT Miami (FL)(CUT)
5* 34 (171) Clint Oldenburg OL Colorado State University(JAG)
6 6 (180) Justin Rogers DE Southern Methodist University(JAG)
6 28 (202) Mike Richardson CB Notre Dame(IR)
6* 34 (208) Justise Hairston RB Central Connecticut State(BUM)
6* 35 (209) Corey Hilliard T Oklahoma State(BUM)
7 1 (211) Oscar Lua ILB USC(BUM)
7* 37 (247) Mike Elgin OL University of Iowa(BUM)

People will point to this year's draft and say that their 2nd-rounder netted Wes Welker, and SF's 4th netted Randy Moss. Two terrific moves. However, the rest of this draft is historically putrid. I was dumbfounded that weekend; I am disgusted this weekend. Just look at the names on that '07 list. Was it arrogance or ignorance, or both, which emanated from Foxborough? And I don't completely buy the argument that this was a very weak draft. There were still decent players available at the end of the 4th round, and beyond. Bottom line: there is a serious hole in the scouting department that needs to be filled, ASAP.

Regarding the 2006 draft, I had no problem with the first day's picks. Dillon was in decline; we needed a RB. Givens was gone; we needed a WR. I may have taken S Ko Simpson in the 3rd round, but Dave Thomas wasn't getting past Houston at the top of the 4th round. The rest of that draft left a lot to be desired, however. Gostkowski and Mills were both taken 2 rounds too early; Jeremy Mincey was the first defensive player drafted, and he wasn't even the best available at his own position. Is that a record: waiting until the 6th round, with your 7th selection, before drafting a defensive player?

And don't forget the 2004 draft. Wilfork was the right choice. I wanted to take LB Karlos Dansby at the end of the 1st round, and I feel that way now more than ever; and this has been Watson's best season so far, too. The rest of that draft was ******ed, from the Booby Grier/**** Steinberg school of drafting ath-a-letes instead of football players. Guss Scott and Dexter Reid were taken at least 3 rounds too early; and Cedric Cobbs instead of Michael Turner? Just terrible.

The reasons for our iffy depth at DB, and our non-existent depth at LB (which, BTW, is by far the worst in the NFL - and it's not even close) can be directly attributed to the last four drafts. If Sanders and Meriweather prove to be Safeties worthy of starting on a SB contender, and if Pierre Woods can contribute during meaningful snaps from the LOS, then I won't feel as bad as I do now. I won't be holding my breath until that happens, though.

 

[Jimke]

They traded a 4th for Moss, and a 2nd for Welker. Moss hasn't left yet, and Welker is 25 years old, and signed for 6 years. Is that not value, or in what way have the Patriots "ransomed some of their future" as you say? Welker is the future, and Moss is incredible value for a 4th round pick that has a 10-20% chance of being a league player. They traded their 2007 #28 for what should be a top 5-10 pick in 2008. I'd say that's stocking the future, not ransoming it.

A very realistic scenerio for the Pats is that Moss, Samuel, Gaffney, and
Gay leave for more money, Bruschi and Seau retire, and the Pats do not
pay the excessive bonuses that are due to Stallworth and Washington.
Who are the young players the Pats have drafted the past two years to
to replace them? Poor drafts converted the Pats from a very good team
to a lousy team after Bill Parcells left.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

People will point to this year's draft and say that their 2nd-rounder netted Wes Welker, and SF's 4th netted Randy Moss. Two terrific moves. However, the rest of this draft is historically putrid. I was dumbfounded that weekend; I am disgusted this weekend. Just look at the names on that '07 list. Was it arrogance or ignorance, or both, which emanated from Foxborough? And I don't completely buy the argument that this was a very weak draft. There were still decent players available at the end of the 4th round, and beyond. Bottom line: there is a serious hole in the scouting department that needs to be filled, ASAP.

Regarding the 2006 draft, I had no problem with the first day's picks. Dillon was in decline; we needed a RB. Givens was gone; we needed a WR. I may have taken S Ko Simpson in the 3rd round, but Dave Thomas wasn't getting past Houston at the top of the 4th round. The rest of that draft left a lot to be desired, however. Gostkowski and Mills were both taken 2 rounds too early; Jeremy Mincey was the first defensive player drafted, and he wasn't even the best available at his own position. Is that a record: waiting until the 6th round, with your 7th selection, before drafting a defensive player?

And don't forget the 2004 draft. Wilfork was the right choice. I wanted to take LB Karlos Dansby at the end of the 1st round, and I feel that way now more than ever; and this has been Watson's best season so far, too. The rest of that draft was ******ed, from the Booby Grier/**** Steinberg school of drafting ath-a-letes instead of football players. Guss Scott and Dexter Reid were taken at least 3 rounds too early; and Cedric Cobbs instead of Michael Turner? Just terrible.

The reasons for our iffy depth at DB, and our non-existent depth at LB (which, BTW, is by far the worst in the NFL - and it's not even close) can be directly attributed to the last four drafts. If Sanders and Meriweather prove to be Safeties worthy of starting on a SB contender, and if Pierre Woods can contribute during meaningful snaps from the LOS, then I won't feel as bad as I do now. I won't be holding my breath until that happens, though.

I see it the way you do. Great trade moves with the draft but pissed away the rest. No success in trading away lower picks to 'move up' and get a guy who could develop into say a LB or CB, instead we drafted a slew of OLs that we cut. To compound the error, I'm convinced BB wanted Rogers and Mills on the PS but they were too valuable in the market. Rogers is someone who'd be helpfull as a situational LB backup now.

The prior draft where we spent 2 picks on Maroney and Chad 'No Action' Jackson is not looking good. Although I don't think Maroney is anything resembling a 'bust' it is clear that he is underperforming as a round 1 RB in his 2nd year. Yet, I'm still a bit hopefull about Maroney mainly because did folks notice his running style against the Eagles? Full tilt full time right into the hole, just the way the 4th & 5th string backs ran against Buffalo. The time he was hit early behind the LOS were situations where there was in effect a 'run blitz'; just a bad play call.

 

[Lloyd_Christmas]

People will point to this year's draft and say that their 2nd-rounder netted Wes Welker, and SF's 4th netted Randy Moss. Two terrific moves. However, the rest of this draft is historically putrid. I was dumbfounded that weekend; I am disgusted this weekend. Just look at the names on that '07 list. Was it arrogance or ignorance, or both, which emanated from Foxborough? And I don't completely buy the argument that this was a very weak draft. There were still decent players available at the end of the 4th round, and beyond. Bottom line: there is a serious hole in the scouting department that needs to be filled, ASAP.

The "rest of this draft" consisted of one 4th rd pick, one 5th rd pick, and a bunch of 6th, and 7th rounders! Why don't you go visit drafthistory.com and look throughout the years at all players drafted in the last 3 rounds, especially the 6th and 7th rds. Find out what the percentage of drafting a decent player in those rounds turns out to be. I bet it is probably around 5%.

You are also forgetting that we traded away a 1st rounder for SF's 1st rounder next year which moved it from the lower end up to the upper end... a significant jump. Also, didn't we trade away a 3rd for 3rd next year?

For the person (not you) who wanted us to trade these lower round picks to get a few picks higher up... who the he!! to you think is going to make that trade with us??? They would be an idiot if the did that!

Regarding the 2006 draft, I had no problem with the first day's picks. Dillon was in decline; we needed a RB. Givens was gone; we needed a WR. I may have taken S Ko Simpson in the 3rd round, but Dave Thomas wasn't getting past Houston at the top of the 4th round. The rest of that draft left a lot to be desired, however. Gostkowski and Mills were both taken 2 rounds too early; Jeremy Mincey was the first defensive player drafted, and he wasn't even the best available at his own position. Is that a record: waiting until the 6th round, with your 7th selection, before drafting a defensive player?

Having lost Adam, I can understand the reach for Gostkowski. You don't want to be left without a decent kicker and it isn't like he has dissapointed. Mills... yeah, I didn't like that pick either given the number of TEs we already had at that point.

Your complaint about the lower round picks is again unwaranted. You have to be realistic about the odds of those picks actually panning out based on ACTUAL draft history, not the fact that we have been extremely lucky in some of our past drafts at finding diamonds in the rough. Those are exceptions, not the norm.

And don't forget the 2004 draft.

Well, Hill died so it is hard to rate that draft. I agree that Scott, Reid, and Cobbs were all misses. I thought Scott had potential in his first couple of years, so I can see why they made that choice. I don't have any defense of the other 2 picks though. The rest of the draft picks were too low to count. Wilfork and Watson were good picks... I don't care what anyone says.

You also cherry picked by bring up 2004. How about 2003 and 2005 where we netted 5 solid players in both drafts?

The reasons for our iffy depth at DB, and our non-existent depth at LB (which, BTW, is by far the worst in the NFL - and it's not even close) can be directly attributed to the last four drafts. If Sanders and Meriweather prove to be Safeties worthy of starting on a SB contender, and if Pierre Woods can contribute during meaningful snaps from the LOS, then I won't feel as bad as I do now. I won't be holding my breath until that happens, though.

Sanders has ALREADY proven to be a great safety IMO. It is too early to tell about Meriweather. You are forgetting about Eric Alexander being in the mix. You left out that Tully Banta-Cain left for a big payday and that Justin Rodgers was spirited away by Dallas. We've picked up 4 good LBs via FA over the last few years (Vrabel, Colvin, Thomas, and Seau). I do agree that the LB depth could be better though. I don't have a problem with our DB depth though. Perhaps you could explain why you think it is bad.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

A very realistic scenerio for the Pats is that Moss, Samuel, Gaffney, and
Gay leave for more money, Bruschi and Seau retire, and the Pats do not
pay the excessive bonuses that are due to Stallworth and Washington.
Who are the young players the Pats have drafted the past two years to
to replace them? Poor drafts converted the Pats from a very good team
to a lousy team after Bill Parcells left.

No, that is not a "very realistic" scenario: if they think Moss is going to leave--and I would think they should have a pretty decent idea before the FA period starts--then they will keep Stallworth and/or Washington. And remember, they can franchise Moss if necessary.

 

[DaBruinz]

People will point to this year's draft and say that their 2nd-rounder netted Wes Welker, and SF's 4th netted Randy Moss. Two terrific moves. However, the rest of this draft is historically putrid. I was dumbfounded that weekend; I am disgusted this weekend. Just look at the names on that '07 list. Was it arrogance or ignorance, or both, which emanated from Foxborough? And I don't completely buy the argument that this was a very weak draft. There were still decent players available at the end of the 4th round, and beyond. Bottom line: there is a serious hole in the scouting department that needs to be filled, ASAP.

Regarding the 2006 draft, I had no problem with the first day's picks. Dillon was in decline; we needed a RB. Givens was gone; we needed a WR. I may have taken S Ko Simpson in the 3rd round, but Dave Thomas wasn't getting past Houston at the top of the 4th round. The rest of that draft left a lot to be desired, however. Gostkowski and Mills were both taken 2 rounds too early; Jeremy Mincey was the first defensive player drafted, and he wasn't even the best available at his own position. Is that a record: waiting until the 6th round, with your 7th selection, before drafting a defensive player?

And don't forget the 2004 draft. Wilfork was the right choice. I wanted to take LB Karlos Dansby at the end of the 1st round, and I feel that way now more than ever; and this has been Watson's best season so far, too. The rest of that draft was ******ed, from the Booby Grier/**** Steinberg school of drafting ath-a-letes instead of football players. Guss Scott and Dexter Reid were taken at least 3 rounds too early; and Cedric Cobbs instead of Michael Turner? Just terrible.

The reasons for our iffy depth at DB, and our non-existent depth at LB (which, BTW, is by far the worst in the NFL - and it's not even close) can be directly attributed to the last four drafts. If Sanders and Meriweather prove to be Safeties worthy of starting on a SB contender, and if Pierre Woods can contribute during meaningful snaps from the LOS, then I won't feel as bad as I do now. I won't be holding my breath until that happens, though.

For all you people who think you know more than BB, Who would YOU have taken last year and how the hell do you know they would have produced in the Pats system? This was a pathetically WEAK draft and many teams don't have their draft picks on their team.

Why do you feel bad? You didn't make the picks. You're nothing but a fan who has NO SAY in what happens.

All your what-ifs are garbage, honestly.