|
Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
05-01-2006, 04:48 PM | #16 | |
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Virginia Beach
Age: 50
Posts: 5,311
|
Re: 2004: The draft we should be grading
Quote:
But if you're grading drafts based on the information that's available, certainly you can gauge how well each team did collecting players according to their prospective status coming out of college. If this weren't true, then there would be no player rankings; which is something every front office, coaching staff and scouting department in the NFL has. Grading drafts is fine. You've just got to define what your basing the grade on. |
|
Advertisements |
05-01-2006, 04:55 PM | #17 | |
\m/
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NY
Age: 52
Posts: 99,518
|
Re: 2004: The draft we should be grading
Quote:
|
|
05-01-2006, 06:08 PM | #18 | |
The Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,674
|
Re: 2004: The draft we should be grading
Quote:
|
|
05-01-2006, 06:16 PM | #19 | |
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Virginia Beach
Age: 50
Posts: 5,311
|
Re: 2004: The draft we should be grading
Quote:
Yeah, but he's right. Many tackles get playing time at guard. Coaches sometimes prefer it that way with younger, inexperienced tackles. There could be a future still for Molinaro, Gibbs said so anyway. But if Raymer was the best option after Ray Brown went down -- that doesn't speak well for Molinaro. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|