View Single Post
Old 11-22-2004, 06:00 PM   #26
itvnetop
Playmaker
 
itvnetop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Age: 49
Posts: 3,007
I could think of a lot of teams who would benefit with our receiving corps... that being said, I wouldn't be mad at the FO for drafting a stud. The only other guy that was seriously being considered over Sean Taylor was KWII last year- and our needs were just as strong (if not stronger) before last year's draft.

Our D-line still could use an end, but last year we didn't know how our tackles were going to pan out (Griffin was not a sure thing, as he's prone to inconsistency). We could still use a young end, but at least we know we've got guys who can play in Williams' system. The point is, I think we still have the same needs we had last year, but at least we know we're stronger at some of the positions in question.

Meaning, if we get a high draft pick, I wouldn't waste it on a center or guard just because we need one (you can draft solid non-tackle O-linemen in the later rounds). Williams has proven we can stick in non-superstars and still play like a top-3 defense. Even though our wideouts are solid, our offense could use a playmaker. If KWII was being considered to change the complexion of the offense, Mike Williams would totally give D-coordinators more to think about. A strong, tall, fast receiver (that runs precise routes and doesn't drop balls) would make defenses crowd the box a little less, opening things up for Portis next year.

If the problem on O is much bigger than any one position, we can't draft just because of a major need at one position. We should draft someone that has a huge impact on the overall scheme.
itvnetop is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
 
Page generated in 0.67265 seconds with 10 queries