So who still likes BPA

[BigDFan5]

I seen hundreds of posts about taking best player avaliable and now we did take BPA and hundreds of posts are complaining. Just wondering what everyone thinks of BPA now?

 

[aznhalf]

I would like it if we took the Best Player that I thought was available

But really, I'm all for BPA but I think you have to throw in some common sense. Time will tell.

 

[big dog cowboy]

It isn't sexy or flashy. Just produced solid football players.

 

[Hiero]

they didnt take bpa imo. I would personally have different choices. I guess they rated them as bpa.

 

[Portland Fanatic]

If taking BPA means they sit on the bench....why???

You need to address needs, unless there is a huge difference between the BPA and need player.

If we are indeed moving to a full time two TE set, then fine I'm ok with that pick. I can't believe we left a player like Eric Wiston on the board??? ***???

 

[twa]

I'm happy ,shocked a bit but a good day overall.

 

[mr.jameswoods]

I'm not a fan of this draft in general however I think his first round selection was money. In my opinion. if you can acquire at least two quality starters in a draft then that is a good draft.

 

[BigDFan5]

they didnt take bpa imo. I would personally have different choices. I guess they rated them as bpa.

See BPA is the guy they think is best not what fans think is best

 

[big dog cowboy]

If taking BPA means they sit on the bench....why???

You need to address needs, unless there is a huge difference between the BPA and need player.

If we are indeed moving to a full time two TE set, then fine I'm ok with that pick. I can't believe we left a player like Eric Wiston on the board??? ***???

We are going to have a full time 2 TE set. That explains that pick. Ireland said you can never have enough DE's. That explains that pick. (Huge upside BTW). Wiston had flaws that is why he slipped so far. We got good football players. Drafting for the future isn't sexy or flashy.

 

[JackMagist]

I think today is a perfect example of why I always argue against going BPA. You pick up guys at your deepest positions and leave your team hung out to dry with their needs unfilled.

 

[Eddie]

BPA doesn't mean absolute BPA. Other than the top 5-8 talents, the next batch grades out very closely. So the #9-20 players are very evenly matched.

If you pick #9 and the #9 BPA is a spot where you have two Pro Bowlers, and #10 BPA is a point of weakness. Common sense tells you to take #10.

Same goes for the lower rounds. Heck, players #50-100 are almost identically rated. Take the BPA which fits your needs. If the absolute BPA fills a need, great.

If the next BPA would sit on the bench behind a Pro Bowler, look down the line a few spots and see which player is the BPA which can make the biggest impact.

Jerry Jones used to pick based solely on need. He took 3rd round players in the 1st to fill a need, and 5th rounders in the 2nd for the same purpose. We know what happened after 10 years of Jerry Jones drafting ...

BPA is not absolute ... let's call it BPA with common sense.

 

[fortdick]

I'm not a fan of this draft in general however I think his first round selection was money. In my opinion. if you can acquire at least two quality starters in a draft then that is a good draft.

Carpenter and Fasano. There is two starters right there!

 

[BigDFan5]

I think today is a perfect example of why I always argue against going BPA. You pick up guys at your deepest positions and leave your team hung out to dry with their needs unfilled.

Thats another thing their needs are unfilled in our minds, but it is their mind that counts.


Someone says we have to have OLine rd 2, they say why we have our starter set already. People had KO simpson as a rd 1 pick yet here he sits tonight wondering what happened. the scouts and Coaches have earned the right to make their picks. I mean They didnt suddenly get stupid after last years great draft

 

[Eddie]

Carpenter and Fasano. There is two starters right there!

Two starters who will have little impact on this team.

Unless Carpenter can rush the passer ... the pick was a waste.

 

[Eskimo]

If you really believe a player is a special talent and is ranked way higher than any other prospect left on your board, then by all means draft him.

However, if two players are closely matched and one player fills a huge need while the other player would be #5 on the depth chart, pick the player that fills the need.

 

[BigDFan5]

BPA doesn't mean absolute BPA. Other than the top 5-8 talents, the next batch grades out very closely. So the #9-20 players are very evenly matched.

If you pick #9 and the #9 BPA is a spot where you have two Pro Bowlers, and #10 BPA is a point of weakness. Common sense tells you to take #10.

Same goes for the lower rounds. Heck, players #50-100 are almost identically rated. Take the BPA which fits your needs. If the absolute BPA fills a need, great.

If the next BPA would sit on the bench behind a Pro Bowler, look down the line a few spots and see which player is the BPA which can make the biggest impact.

Jerry Jones used to pick based solely on need. He took 3rd round players in the 1st to fill a need, and 5th rounders in the 2nd for the same purpose. We know what happened after 10 years of Jerry Jones drafting ...

BPA is not absolute ... let's call it BPA with common sense.

The only player we took who won't start is Hatcher, is he siting behind pro bowlers?

 

[braw]

If taking BPA means they sit on the bench....why???

You need to address needs, unless there is a huge difference between the BPA and need player.

If we are indeed moving to a full time two TE set, then fine I'm ok with that pick. I can't believe we left a player like Eric Wiston on the board??? ***???

What do you expect was going to happen that Winston comes in and starts over Adams or Fabini. The offense and defense was made to win already and you want to draft a OT that needs 2 or 3 yrs to start. When Bledsoe and the WR are old enough not to compete. I think we took guys that will play right now. Not even Woodson came in as a rookie I think it took 2 or 3 yrs before he started.

 

[BigDFan5]

Two starters who will have little impact on this team.

Unless Carpenter can rush the passer ... the pick was a waste.

Luckily he CAN rush the passer

 

[Hiero]

Two starters who will have little impact on this team.

Unless Carpenter can rush the passer ... the pick was a waste.

have you ever seen the guy play? I mean he isnt a dominant pass rusher but he had like 9 sacks last year.

 

[Eskimo]

Thats another thing their needs are unfilled in our minds, but it is their mind that counts.


Someone says we have to have OLine rd 2, they say why we have our starter set already. People had KO simpson as a rd 1 pick yet here he sits tonight wondering what happened. the scouts and Coaches have earned the right to make their picks. I mean They didnt suddenly get stupid after last years great draft

History suggests our draft management has been poor for several years. I would argue we have had only two good drafts since 1993 - those were 2003 and 2005. Now the upside of that is they have been two of the last three years.

I guess we'll see what kind of dividends we reap over the next three years - I am not overly optimistic. I am upset that there were good players available with similar draft grades who would have filled huge positions of need who were not chosen.

We still have gaping holes at NT, FS and OL. Let's see what the second day brings us.