PETER KING FROM SI-"THE FIRST ROUNDS GOOD,BAD, AND UGLY

[Bretsky]

I agree with Scott, Lurker, etc. that there was a need at Defensive Tackle. I would add that the need was at least as much as the need at Wide Receiver. Yes, I know ... but hear me out.

We have Pickett---who is solid but not a star---and then a bunch of former late round picks/undrafted free agents who put in great effort but leave us vulnerable against the run. The position is deep but not very talented.

Compare that to Wide Receiver, where we have a Pro Bowl veteran in Driver, one of the top receivers from last year's draft in Jennings, and a bunch of former late round picks/ undrafted free agents who put in great effort but don't get it done in the red zone. (I don't count Fergie or KoRo, because I don't think either will contribute much, if anything, in 2007.)

I agree that there is a need at receiver, because you really need 3 or even 4 who can contribute. But #1 and #2 are set with Driver and Jennings. Perhaps Jennings is no sure thing yet, but then do you honestly think any rookie receiver outside of CJ was going to come in and give us more right away in 2007? More than Jennings, who has a year of experience under his belt? Very doubtful. So we need a draft pick---or more likely one of those young guys already on the roster---to develop enough to contribute as a #3 receiver. I don't see that as a tall order at all.

At Defensive Tackle, you need 3 or 4 who can contribute in the rotation. Pickett is a good starter, but not a star. Williams contributes pash rush on third down, but he can't stop the run. Everyone else is just a guy. (I don't count Cullen Jenkins, because he will play Defensive End.) There was huge hole there. If Harrell is indeed a "top ten talent," he could fill that hole, and as a Defensive Tackle he shouldn't need a year or two of seasoning to be ready to contribute to the rotation.

Filling the talent hole in the middle of the defensive line could go a long way towards keeping blockers off of Hawk and Barnett, allowing them to flourish. If that happens, we could be looking at a dominant defense. How does a dominant defense NOT help Favre right away---far more than a rookie receiver who will probably not contribute much until 2008 or 2009?

Jenkins moves in to DT on some pass downs; Pickett and Williams are solid. Allen, when healthy, is not bad at all and wanted to come back. The other tackles in the DL rotation show just as much promise as the rest of the WR's on our roster. Many in here were high on Jolly, who was hurt much of last year. Montgomery and Cole are probably bodies, but just as good as our WR leftovers in comparison after our top two.

Argue need or no need, but DL was the deepest position on this team. That IMO is tough to argue.

[the_idle_threat]

It may be tough, but I'm arguing ... because all that depth we're so enamored with at DT is---after Pickett---a bunch of one-dimensional guys who were drafted low and don't have good talent.

I don't agree that Williams is solid ... I guess we'll have to agree to disagree there. He's a good pass rusher but is marginal at best against the run. Same can be said of Jenkins when he plays as at tackle. Allen is not even under contract, and when he was, he showed nothing except that he knows where the training room is.

My point is that if we're gonna call a position "deep" with this low level of talent, then why don't we consider the WR position "deep"? There are tons of guys on the roster who were drafted late or not at all, but have promise.

WR is every bit as deep as DT, if not more so because KoRo is a wildcard.

The idea that DT is the deepest position on the team is simply ludicrous: what about quarterback, or linebacker or offensive line?

[BooHoo]

It could be argued that we do not have any "deep" positions on the team. That is why our record is as it is over the past two years.

Another arguement could be made that very few teams have multiple "deep" positions (FA/salary cap issues, etc.).

[the_idle_threat]

Bretsky, I have taken a step back, and I realize I have assumed "the tone" that indicates I'm arguing for the sake of arguing. That's not cool on my part. Sorry about that.

All I'm really saying is that either the defensive tackles on the roster seem to be overrated by many on this board or the wide receivers are underrated. We have a lot of bodies at both positions, but bodies don't equal good depth if the quality drops off after the first or second guy.

IMO.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I agree with that assessment, idle.

I think your point is valid. Bottom line: if Harrell is a stud, it will help the team as much as if Meachem would have helped the team if he turned out to be a stud.

[swede]

I agreed with Idle also.

Should Harrell prove to be a disruptive DL the impact will be quite positive on the defense. D backs need to do their jobs for 4 seconds instead of six. Linebackers can play a little more aggressively. Defensive ends can sack QBs trying to escape from interior pressure of a collapsing pocket.

[4and12to12and4]

I just can't wait to see the defense. I'm a defense guy. As I've watched football over the years I've slowly moved toward defense as the #1 priority.

I know you guys wanted a WR but I think Driver and Jennings can do a good job and the #3, 4 and 5 of Krob, Jones and Hollidy/Martin don't bother me at all. Nobody has 5 starters. We have 2 starters and some guys who can play behind them. If a top notch player was there I would have been extatic but as it stands Thompson felt the DT was the most impactfull football player on the board.

DT's can be difference makers. Saving 7 points is just as good as scoring 7.

I think RG has the best arguement against the Packers right now. He believes it's the Oline and I completely agree. That is the unit taht will make or break the offense right now.

Other than the word "impactfull" I agree completely. I still have the final game of the season TVO'd and have watched it at least ten times, and cannot get away from realizing that we DO have good talent at wide receiver, AS LONG AS BRETT HAS TIME TO THROW TO THEM. Holiday looked like a probowl receiver in that game and ended up with over 100 yards gained. By the way, for those who haven't rewatched the game and have short memorys, he made a Javon Walker-like catch coming back for a ball thrown five yards too short and caught it over the top of great coverage. Yes, it was one game, but the young guys didn't have a consistant chance to prove themselves last year. How many balls went their way that they simply dropped last year? I would wager that Jennings had more drops than anyone. He isn't considered a bust. The receiver lsft on the board at 16 WERE NO BETTER than these young guys that we don't have to pay millions of dollars a year to at this point.

My point is that GJ is right. We need a TO or Moss less than most here think. A probowl receiver isn't the last piece of the puzzle for us. When the Cowboys were great, yes, they had Irvin, but the biggest reason they won was that Aikman had all f'n day to throw the ball, and Emmitt had meteoric-sized holes to run through. Yes, they had playmakers, but playmakers don't do shit without o-lines and d-lines making them look good.
Our playmakers on defense in that final game got five interceptions, most if not all of them were because of d-line pressuring Grossman and Griese into bad throws.
Look at Edgerrin James. He was NOBODY last year, because of the line he had to work with, whether or not he has to learn their tendencies, or they simply suck, or a little of both. Yet, both Rhodes and the rookie for Indy stepped in and were successful. Why? Are the colts just lucky or good at drafting backs? No. The line is good and of course having payton back there will always make it easier on the running attack in Indy.

This is now an official rant, but I hold to the belief that you can't have enough good lineman on both sides of the ball. To be honest, I'm suprised we didn't pick up two o-lineman in the draft, we still desperately need DEPTH there, even if EVERY pick that played last year pans out and continues improvement. Give Brett time to throw and the backs holes to run through and we will have stars on our offense this year. Just like when our defense changed when we sat KGB on 1st and 2nd down near the end of the season and it completely changed our defense, allowing our playmakers on D to make plays.

I have no problem (yet) with the Harrell pick, if he ends up being even as good as Corey and co.. These big guys need breathers throughout the game and real good defenses have GOOD backups to rotate in and out so that there are fresh legs out there in the fourth quarter, when most games are decided.

Our offense will be above average if Brett plays as well as last year, and the o-line continues improvement. The more defensive studs you have the better.

If the Bears would've had Brett last year, they would have won the SB because of their defense, and Brett would've taken the opportunities the DEFENSE gave him and scored. That's how you win in this league.

[3irty1]

If we were going to draft a receiver in the first round it would have been Lynch. But da Bills crapped in our coffee so I'm happy with our pick. We don't need WR's that bad. They are a nice luxury but I'm not entirely ready to give up on good ol Bubba or even Ferggy. I think this year is a good opportunity for our guys to step up and show off a little or at least earn Brett's trust again. It doesn't bother me that pretty much the same guys from last year dropped the most passes in the league. We threw a TON of balls.

I think we'll have a better running game this year but not because of our new RB's. Let's not kid ourselves that our pile of RB's can be as good as Ahman Green. He might be old and full of asthma but he still could pinch off some huge runs and fall forward through traffic for 1st downs. He was the man. Our running game this year will have to come from our zone blocking OL who have one more year under their belt. Remember that we were the youngest team in the NFL last year. They're better and will continue to get better this season.

[MJZiggy]

Nice first post 3irty1. Welcome to the forum. I agree with you that it's not a WR crisis at this point. Some of these guys have barely had a shot at showing what they can do.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Welcome! I think some say/think/feel we have shitty receivers to explain why Favre isn't an MVP anymore. Sure, our TEs sucked, but our WRs weren't horrible and our RBs weren't horrible catching either. Some of Favre's struggles are just from the fact he has gotten older and just isn't as good as he used to be. I do think the fact we had to max protect hurt his stats, certainly the TEs after Martin was injured didn't help, and even the WR depth hurt after Jennings got hurt. However, there's some talent there. It would be nice to have a field stretching WR (maybe that is Clowner), but it's far from the worst group in the league. I think they will surprise. I think the RBs can catch the ball good enough. I think it will help that the OL should be better. If Jones and Clowney are good enough to make the team, they should have more depth than last year. If Jennings stays healthy and one of the backups really emerges, then we have the chance to have a good WR corps.

[Bretsky]

Bretsky, I have taken a step back, and I realize I have assumed "the tone" that indicates I'm arguing for the sake of arguing. That's not cool on my part. Sorry about that.

All I'm really saying is that either the defensive tackles on the roster seem to be overrated by many on this board or the wide receivers are underrated. We have a lot of bodies at both positions, but bodies don't equal good depth if the quality drops off after the first or second guy.

IMO.

Don't worry about it; people often argue for the sake of arguing

We do agree to disagree on Corey Williams; I see him as a average starting DT, and one who could develop to be better than that. I think he'll get a solid deal from somebody when he becomes unrestricted.

Cheers,
B