As I watch the Colts select a kicker, less than a round after I watched the Pats take a long-snapper and after both team drafted situational rushers and defenders with no immediate capacity to compete for starting time, I am a little less concerned with the comparisons to the 90s drafts.
Look, drafts fail because teams pick players that don't work for the team or system, players that the team isn't in a position to develop or, sometimes, players that lack the athletic ability to succeed. The idea that our search for players who can help us in very specific ways, in addition to players who will provide immediate depth, is somehow going to fail because that's what we did 15 years ago is just giving way too much credence to only one similarity between them.
Every player is different, every coaching staff is different, every team is different. Give it some time.
Right now, the only thing we can do is assess, loosely, whether we made the picks we made at good points.
Popular opinion would say we reached on Butler, perhaps. The rest we seemed to get good value on...so the position selection seems to be rankling people, and maybe the specific players selected...but the rancor seems a little surprising.
For me, the only thing that bothered me was not trading up for Maualuga, but maybe the price was too high or we liked Williams fit at WILB for our first pick.
