This is the kind of draft Jerry used to have back in the 90s

[cobra]

If he actually found a good every day starter in Day 2, we would probably try to put him up on Mt Rushmore.

I suppose you aren't going to give him credit for Romo, Austin, Hurd, or Ratliff. Because Parcells was here. So, fine. Let's just look at the last two drafts.

So how about Choice? He was a starter and clearly has the ability to be a starter. How is he not exactly the kind of player you are gagging for? A player with clear starting ability taken in the second day?

Same with Scandrick. He showed he could start. How could you possibly knock that pick?

What about Nick Folk from the year before? Is he not a "good every day starter in Day 2" considering he was taken in the 6th round and ended up in the Pro Bowl?

Ok. Well, what about Cricket? He is an every day starter from Day 2?

Geez. You are acting like Jerry has just crapped his pants since Parcells left.

I think the last two drafts have been very, very good. And I think this one has the potential of being a decent one.

 

[InmanRoshi]

I think the last two drafts have been very, very good. And I think this one has the potential of being a decent one.

And I think your definition of very, very good is pretty low when you look at the 2007 draft. The top 3 picks are all looking very questionable at this point, and one isnt even on the team any longer. I don't know why Spencer gets such a free pass when people were ready to bury Spears at the same point in his career. Spears was at least a day 1 starter as a rookie. Were still waiting for Spencer to claim that role coming into his 3rd year. James Marten didn't make it out of his 2nd year, and Free didn't look much better than Marten in the preseason. Its nice we found a kicker and a fullback in Day 2, but its not exactly a sterling accomplishment considering neither position is in high demand and most kickers and fullbacks in the league were undrafted free agents. Especially when I dont think Crickett is even particularly mediocre and we're already having to draft kickers in the 5th round to compensate for Folk's liabilities.

As I said, Scandrick and Choice are good, solid picks and will be good NFL backups ... but calling them "starters" because the people in front of them got hurt and they had to fill in ... well, that makes Corey Proctor a starting caliber NFL guard becuase the Cowboys were forced to play him when Kosier and Holland got hurt.

 

[Bach]

Remember those drafts? The ones where we did nothing but pick backups because Jerry said he didn't feel like we had any holes on the team and just needed to "add depth".

I've never seen a 9-7, non-playoff team that had no holes,

And even if we had won the Super Bowl and really didn't have any real needs, we should still target the best players possible. Some teams do that. Look at Pittsburgh and the Giants and the Patriots. They usually draft late and end up taking good players.

The difference is some of these teams don't go into the draft thinking they are so talented they don't need players and then target guys to be special teamers and backups. They just proceed like normal and take good football players at the time they pick.

But for some reason, our front office constantly seems compelled to take major risks and draft for special teams and projects when we don't have high draft picks. That type of philosophy is convoluted anytime, but especially for a 9-7 team that does have several major needs.

You are right that it's similar to some of those later 90's drafts and the thought process is insane.

 

[cobra]

Inman Roshi,

If you are unimpressed with our drafting the last two years, will you please direct me to a complete draft that you think is a "good" one?

I'm honestly wondering what the heck you are demanding. You seem to be calling for a draft that yields 7 pro bowl starters, and I am struggling to identify which team/drafting strategy you think is actually doing that.