Jump to content

2008 draft class


Connorbear

Recommended Posts

2002

Marc Colombo T Boston College

Roosevelt Williams DB Tuskegee

Terrence Metcalf G Mississippi

Alex Brown DE Florida

Bobby Gray DB Louisiana Tech

Bryan Knight LB Pittsburgh

Adrian Peterson RB Georgia Southern

Jamin Elliott WR Delaware

Bryan Fletcher TE UCLA

 

One starter in Brown. One long term depth player in AP. That's it.

 

2003

Michael Haynes DE Penn State

Rex Grossman QB Florida

Charles Tillman DB Louisiana-Lafayette

Lance Briggs LB Arizona

Todd Johnson DB Florida

Ian Scott DT Florida

Bobby Wade WR Arizona

Justin Gage WR Missouri

Tron Lafavor DT Florida

Joe Odom LB Purdue

Brock Forsey RB Boise State

Bryan Anderson G Pittsburgh

 

Actually one of his better drafts. Haynes was a bust. Rex? Who knows how to grade him. Some will say he led the team to the SB. Other will call him a bust. But he got a very solid CB in Tillman and a pro bowl LB in Briggs. Scott, Wade and Gage were all starters at one point. Just pains me to this day how much I wanted to draft Polamalu, and what a difference he could have made.

 

2004

Tommie Harris DT Oklahoma

Tank Johnson DT Washington

Bernard Berrian WR Fresno State

Nathan Vasher DB Texas

Leon Joe LB Maryland

Claude Harriott DE Pittsburgh

Craig Krenzel QB Ohio State

Alfonso Marshall DB Miami (FL)

 

There was a time this looked good. Harris was one of the best DTs in the game. Tanks was a solid #2 DT. Berrian was our best WR. Vasher was an interception machine and starting CB. Joe was actually a very good special teams player. Oh how things have changed. Harris sort of lived up to pre-draft questions as he was a rotation guy in Oklahoma, and many questioned if he could handle full time duties in the NFL. Tank also lived up to pre-draft character questions, and after many chances, was bounced from chicago. Vasher went down faster than a hooker on saturday night. Not going to knock the Berrian pick. He developed into a good WR but was simply too expensive to keep. What seemed like such a great draft now looks pretty weak.

 

2005

Cedric Benson RB Texas

Mark Bradley WR Oklahoma

Kyle Orton QB Purdue

Airese Currie WR Clemson

Chris Harris DB Louisiana-Monroe

Rodriques Wilson DB South Carolina

 

Not a bad draft. For other teams that is. Benson turned out to be a solid starter for Cincy. Orton for Denver. Harris for Carolina. Bradley was as much a tease in KC as in Chicago. Other teams may have been happy, but this was a totally worthless draft.

 

2006

Danieal Manning DB Abilene Christian

Devin Hester WR Miami (FL)

Dusty Dvoracek DT Oklahoma

Jamar Williams LB Arizona State

Mark Anderson DE Alabama

J.D. Runnels RB Oklahoma

Tyler Reed G Penn State

 

Two great return guys in DM and Hester who have not been able to live up to expectations on offense or defense. Dusty couldn't stay healthy and is gone. Jamar looks nice when you see him, but all we can call him is a backup. Anderson teased rookie year. That is not very impressive.

 

07

Greg Olsen TE Miami (FL)

Dan Bazuin DE Central Michigan

Garrett Wolfe RB Northern Illinois

Michael Okwo LB Stanford

Josh Beekman G Boston College

Kevin Payne DB Louisiana-Monroe

Corey Graham DB New Hampshire

Trumaine McBride DB Mississippi

Aaron Brant T Iowa State

 

You know. Looking over this group, did Angelo tell Lovie to F off in the war room? Olsen was the sort expected to leap onto the scene as a rookie, but was held back and never utilized very well. Wolfe has never been given much of a chance, and when he does get on the field, is told to run up the gut? Beekman plays only when no one healthy is available, plays well when he is in, but soon after pushed to the bench. Graham plays very well at the end of last year, than this year is not given so much as a 2nd look. McBride plays well as a rookie when forced into action, but quickly pushed to the back of the depth chart the following season. Not saying all these players are great, but when you think about who seems to always been in the staff's doghouse, don't a lot of those names seem to be from this draft?

 

2008 discussed.

 

2009

Gilbert DE San Jose State

Juaquin Iglesias WR Oklahoma

Henry Melton DE Texas

D.J. Moore DB Vanderbilt

Johnny Knox WR Abilene Christian

Marcus Freeman LB Ohio State

Al Afalava DB Oregon State

Lance Louis G San Diego State

Derek Kinder WR Pittsburgh

 

Early to tell, but doesn't look very good. Gilbert showed nothing. Iglesias was not allowed to move the grass, much less play on it. Melton done in camp. Moore played cards w/ Iglesias on game day. Freeman cut in camp. Louis deep, deep depth. Kinder cut. Knox looked great, and Afalava showed signs, though his play went downhill IMHO as the season went on. I realize it is way early to declar jack, but this is a pretty unimpressive group thus far, minus maybe Knox.

 

One key that has always stood out to me about our drafts was the lack of top tier players. Angelo seems able to draft a lot of depth chart guys. He finds plenty of #2 - #5 WRs, but no #1s. He finds plenty of backups, and average starters, but simply doesn't have a great track record of finding the big stars. He got Briggs. Harris too, but that was a very short lived star.

 

Angelo has worked 8 drafts. Should we not expect more long term impact players?

 

Look for a moment at the 4 years Hatley ran our drafts. Yea, there were busts, but consider also:

 

Kreutz - Perennial pro bowler still a captain of the team today.

Parrish - Have we had a better SS since?

Mannelly - I know not a star, but I love to give this long snapper credit, and he deserves it still being on the team after more than a decade.

Booker - We have not had a WR better than Booker was for the Bears (first time around obviously)

Colvin - Have we had a better pass rusher since?

Urlacher - Face of the team for years.

Mike Brown - Best FS and leader of the defense.

 

There were other solid players and plenty of depth chart guys, but the point is in 1/2 the time, I think Hatley drafted a much higher top tier of talent. I know Booker is not some long term pro bowler or anything, but have we drafted better since?

 

If you wanted to pare this down, I would put Kreutz, Urlacher and Brown who Hatley drafted in 4 years. Angelo might counter w/ Briggs and maybe Harris, but who else, and Angelo had 8 years.

 

Angelo can draft NFL level players who can make 53 man rosters, and some develop into starters, but his inability to find upper tier, pro bowl players has really crippled this team.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agreed. I was just talking about 2008. Most of his other drafts are below average to crap.

 

Peace :dabears

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Ick...too much wasted opportunity and just plain badness.

 

2002

Marc Colombo T Boston College

Roosevelt Williams DB Tuskegee

Terrence Metcalf G Mississippi

Alex Brown DE Florida

Bobby Gray DB Louisiana Tech

Bryan Knight LB Pittsburgh

Adrian Peterson RB Georgia Southern

Jamin Elliott WR Delaware

Bryan Fletcher TE UCLA

 

One starter in Brown. One long term depth player in AP. That's it.

 

2003

Michael Haynes DE Penn State

Rex Grossman QB Florida

Charles Tillman DB Louisiana-Lafayette

Lance Briggs LB Arizona

Todd Johnson DB Florida

Ian Scott DT Florida

Bobby Wade WR Arizona

Justin Gage WR Missouri

Tron Lafavor DT Florida

Joe Odom LB Purdue

Brock Forsey RB Boise State

Bryan Anderson G Pittsburgh

 

Actually one of his better drafts. Haynes was a bust. Rex? Who knows how to grade him. Some will say he led the team to the SB. Other will call him a bust. But he got a very solid CB in Tillman and a pro bowl LB in Briggs. Scott, Wade and Gage were all starters at one point. Just pains me to this day how much I wanted to draft Polamalu, and what a difference he could have made.

 

2004

Tommie Harris DT Oklahoma

Tank Johnson DT Washington

Bernard Berrian WR Fresno State

Nathan Vasher DB Texas

Leon Joe LB Maryland

Claude Harriott DE Pittsburgh

Craig Krenzel QB Ohio State

Alfonso Marshall DB Miami (FL)

 

There was a time this looked good. Harris was one of the best DTs in the game. Tanks was a solid #2 DT. Berrian was our best WR. Vasher was an interception machine and starting CB. Joe was actually a very good special teams player. Oh how things have changed. Harris sort of lived up to pre-draft questions as he was a rotation guy in Oklahoma, and many questioned if he could handle full time duties in the NFL. Tank also lived up to pre-draft character questions, and after many chances, was bounced from chicago. Vasher went down faster than a hooker on saturday night. Not going to knock the Berrian pick. He developed into a good WR but was simply too expensive to keep. What seemed like such a great draft now looks pretty weak.

 

2005

Cedric Benson RB Texas

Mark Bradley WR Oklahoma

Kyle Orton QB Purdue

Airese Currie WR Clemson

Chris Harris DB Louisiana-Monroe

Rodriques Wilson DB South Carolina

 

Not a bad draft. For other teams that is. Benson turned out to be a solid starter for Cincy. Orton for Denver. Harris for Carolina. Bradley was as much a tease in KC as in Chicago. Other teams may have been happy, but this was a totally worthless draft.

 

2006

Danieal Manning DB Abilene Christian

Devin Hester WR Miami (FL)

Dusty Dvoracek DT Oklahoma

Jamar Williams LB Arizona State

Mark Anderson DE Alabama

J.D. Runnels RB Oklahoma

Tyler Reed G Penn State

 

Two great return guys in DM and Hester who have not been able to live up to expectations on offense or defense. Dusty couldn't stay healthy and is gone. Jamar looks nice when you see him, but all we can call him is a backup. Anderson teased rookie year. That is not very impressive.

 

07

Greg Olsen TE Miami (FL)

Dan Bazuin DE Central Michigan

Garrett Wolfe RB Northern Illinois

Michael Okwo LB Stanford

Josh Beekman G Boston College

Kevin Payne DB Louisiana-Monroe

Corey Graham DB New Hampshire

Trumaine McBride DB Mississippi

Aaron Brant T Iowa State

 

You know. Looking over this group, did Angelo tell Lovie to F off in the war room? Olsen was the sort expected to leap onto the scene as a rookie, but was held back and never utilized very well. Wolfe has never been given much of a chance, and when he does get on the field, is told to run up the gut? Beekman plays only when no one healthy is available, plays well when he is in, but soon after pushed to the bench. Graham plays very well at the end of last year, than this year is not given so much as a 2nd look. McBride plays well as a rookie when forced into action, but quickly pushed to the back of the depth chart the following season. Not saying all these players are great, but when you think about who seems to always been in the staff's doghouse, don't a lot of those names seem to be from this draft?

 

2008 discussed.

 

2009

Gilbert DE San Jose State

Juaquin Iglesias WR Oklahoma

Henry Melton DE Texas

D.J. Moore DB Vanderbilt

Johnny Knox WR Abilene Christian

Marcus Freeman LB Ohio State

Al Afalava DB Oregon State

Lance Louis G San Diego State

Derek Kinder WR Pittsburgh

 

Early to tell, but doesn't look very good. Gilbert showed nothing. Iglesias was not allowed to move the grass, much less play on it. Melton done in camp. Moore played cards w/ Iglesias on game day. Freeman cut in camp. Louis deep, deep depth. Kinder cut. Knox looked great, and Afalava showed signs, though his play went downhill IMHO as the season went on. I realize it is way early to declar jack, but this is a pretty unimpressive group thus far, minus maybe Knox.

 

One key that has always stood out to me about our drafts was the lack of top tier players. Angelo seems able to draft a lot of depth chart guys. He finds plenty of #2 - #5 WRs, but no #1s. He finds plenty of backups, and average starters, but simply doesn't have a great track record of finding the big stars. He got Briggs. Harris too, but that was a very short lived star.

 

Angelo has worked 8 drafts. Should we not expect more long term impact players?

 

Look for a moment at the 4 years Hatley ran our drafts. Yea, there were busts, but consider also:

 

Kreutz - Perennial pro bowler still a captain of the team today.

Parrish - Have we had a better SS since?

Mannelly - I know not a star, but I love to give this long snapper credit, and he deserves it still being on the team after more than a decade.

Booker - We have not had a WR better than Booker was for the Bears (first time around obviously)

Colvin - Have we had a better pass rusher since?

Urlacher - Face of the team for years.

Mike Brown - Best FS and leader of the defense.

 

There were other solid players and plenty of depth chart guys, but the point is in 1/2 the time, I think Hatley drafted a much higher top tier of talent. I know Booker is not some long term pro bowler or anything, but have we drafted better since?

 

If you wanted to pare this down, I would put Kreutz, Urlacher and Brown who Hatley drafted in 4 years. Angelo might counter w/ Briggs and maybe Harris, but who else, and Angelo had 8 years.

 

Angelo can draft NFL level players who can make 53 man rosters, and some develop into starters, but his inability to find upper tier, pro bowl players has really crippled this team.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem IMHO is the lack of blue chip players. You say he has a few pro bowlers. If you take out special teams, I only count 2 pro bowlers (Briggs/Harris). Sorry, but in 8 years of drafting, 2 pro bowlers isn't that impressive. Zero pro bowls for the offensive side of the ball too.

 

It is great to draft players who are worthy of the 53 man roster. Some didn't pan out in Chicago, but made another teams 53 man roster. IMHO, that reflects more on the coaches than the GM. Thus I have given Angelo credit for finding NFL quality. At the same time though, you have got to find more star caliber players. 2 stars in 8 drafts is frankly, bad.

 

 

 

I'd say that is a pretty good track-record of drafting. Now some of the players didn't become starters on the Bears but that is a whole lot of guys who have gotten significant playing time in the NFL as starters and a few pro-bowlers.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you referring to nfo's list of Bears' drafts over the years?

 

Keep in mind part of good drafting is retianing your guys and seeing that they deliver for you...otherwise you've just done the dirty work for another franchise.

 

I'd say that is a pretty good track-record of drafting. Now some of the players didn't become starters on the Bears but that is a whole lot of guys who have gotten significant playing time in the NFL as starters and a few pro-bowlers.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you stated what my neanderthalish brain was trying to say...

 

The problem IMHO is the lack of blue chip players. You say he has a few pro bowlers. If you take out special teams, I only count 2 pro bowlers (Briggs/Harris). Sorry, but in 8 years of drafting, 2 pro bowlers isn't that impressive. Zero pro bowls for the offensive side of the ball too.

 

It is great to draft players who are worthy of the 53 man roster. Some didn't pan out in Chicago, but made another teams 53 man roster. IMHO, that reflects more on the coaches than the GM. Thus I have given Angelo credit for finding NFL quality. At the same time though, you have got to find more star caliber players. 2 stars in 8 drafts is frankly, bad.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keep in mind part of good drafting is retianing your guys and seeing that they deliver for you...otherwise you've just done the dirty work for another franchise.

 

Agree and disagree with that.

 

You have some players, like Berrian for example, who you can point the finger at Angelo. He choose to let Berrian go in FA. Personally, I still agree to this day with that one, but the point is, Angelo had more control over that move.

 

There are other situations though where I think either (a) the coach is more to blame or (B) no one is really to blame.

 

If Angelo drafts a player that doesn't get much of a chance on the team, moves on, and plays well for another, then I think you fault the coach. Angelo's job is to fill the roster with talent. It is then up to the coach. If the coach doesn't properly evaluate a player through mini's, camps and practices, and doesn't give a player much of a chance, is the GM at fault?

 

If Jamar Williams moves on and becomes a very good starter for another team, is that Angelo's fault?

 

Other times I am not sure anyone is at fault. Sometimes it is more about the situation. I am an long term Angelo basher, but I could not fault him for Columbo. Columbo not only continually was injured, but it was the sort of injury which was deemed chronic, and at the time, it was questioned whether he would even play football again. Columbo obviously did come back and is a very solid starting RT for Dallas now, but I just can't fault Angelo for that. At the time, all signs pointed to Columbo's career being done.

 

Similar, Dusty is gone, right? Another injury and it was over. If Dusty moves to another team and suddenly finds a well of health and plays up to his draft potential, is that Angelo's fault?

 

I give Angelo credit for finding a boat load of players talented enough to play in the NFL. Even many of his later round picks find jobs in the NFL. That deserves credit. The problem IMHO is Angelo's very weak record in finding blue chip talent. Heck, he doesn't even have that many red chip players to his credit. He has 8 drafts for the Bears under his belt, and a shockingly weak group of upper tier talent. He has plenty of middle of the road players you need on a team, but who do not make a difference. Even most of his better picks would be called nice or good, but are far from great. Alex Brown, for example, was a good pick (especially for the 4th round) and is a good player, but is far from a difference maker. Ditto Tillman.

 

Every team needs difference makers. Potentially our top difference maker was on the team before Angelo (Urlacher).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I look at is as an overall failing of the franchise. Between LS and JA, there aren't enough finser to point in their directions for our situation.

 

I can't argue with yourassessment, but as it seems to be...JA and LS are joined at the hip and I think both deserve flack for our lack os success in the draft.

 

I agree, that I don't fault the Berrian and Columbo picks and releases. Bad luck or good business is just that. But, everything else pretty much reeks.

 

Your assessment is spot on. It's nice to have starters and contributors. But I feel every draft season, you shold at least have found one virtual stud or pro-bowler in it.

 

Keep in mind part of good drafting is retianing your guys and seeing that they deliver for you...otherwise you've just done the dirty work for another franchise.

 

Agree and disagree with that.

 

You have some players, like Berrian for example, who you can point the finger at Angelo. He choose to let Berrian go in FA. Personally, I still agree to this day with that one, but the point is, Angelo had more control over that move.

 

There are other situations though where I think either (a) the coach is more to blame or (B) no one is really to blame.

 

If Angelo drafts a player that doesn't get much of a chance on the team, moves on, and plays well for another, then I think you fault the coach. Angelo's job is to fill the roster with talent. It is then up to the coach. If the coach doesn't properly evaluate a player through mini's, camps and practices, and doesn't give a player much of a chance, is the GM at fault?

 

If Jamar Williams moves on and becomes a very good starter for another team, is that Angelo's fault?

 

Other times I am not sure anyone is at fault. Sometimes it is more about the situation. I am an long term Angelo basher, but I could not fault him for Columbo. Columbo not only continually was injured, but it was the sort of injury which was deemed chronic, and at the time, it was questioned whether he would even play football again. Columbo obviously did come back and is a very solid starting RT for Dallas now, but I just can't fault Angelo for that. At the time, all signs pointed to Columbo's career being done.

 

Similar, Dusty is gone, right? Another injury and it was over. If Dusty moves to another team and suddenly finds a well of health and plays up to his draft potential, is that Angelo's fault?

 

I give Angelo credit for finding a boat load of players talented enough to play in the NFL. Even many of his later round picks find jobs in the NFL. That deserves credit. The problem IMHO is Angelo's very weak record in finding blue chip talent. Heck, he doesn't even have that many red chip players to his credit. He has 8 drafts for the Bears under his belt, and a shockingly weak group of upper tier talent. He has plenty of middle of the road players you need on a team, but who do not make a difference. Even most of his better picks would be called nice or good, but are far from great. Alex Brown, for example, was a good pick (especially for the 4th round) and is a good player, but is far from a difference maker. Ditto Tillman.

 

Every team needs difference makers. Potentially our top difference maker was on the team before Angelo (Urlacher).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought he was a pro bowl alternate. Okay, either way. It doesn't really change my point. The point was not about finding a guy who once made a pro bowl, but finding blue chip players who see multiple pro bowls.

 

I honestly, I don't even want to get too hung up on the whole "pro bowl" thing itself. Mike Brown was a blue chip stud, IMHO, but I do not believe he ever went to the pro bowl. That seemed to always go to Brian Dawkins, who was also very deserving. But Mike Brown was a difference making stud for the team.

 

Frankly, pro bowl bid aside, I would put tillman above Vasher (as I think most would) despite Vasher having a pro bowl on his resume and Tillman not. But Tillman, IMHO, is not even a red chip player, much less a blue chip.

 

Not that it will change your point a lot but Vasher has been a Pro Bowler as well. So 3 players in 8 years.

 

--clnr (who is in a mood to point out facts today, not just here...)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. Especially about Brown. I made mention of "bonafide stud" in a different thread...he qualified as that.

 

I thought he was a pro bowl alternate. Okay, either way. It doesn't really change my point. The point was not about finding a guy who once made a pro bowl, but finding blue chip players who see multiple pro bowls.

 

I honestly, I don't even want to get too hung up on the whole "pro bowl" thing itself. Mike Brown was a blue chip stud, IMHO, but I do not believe he ever went to the pro bowl. That seemed to always go to Brian Dawkins, who was also very deserving. But Mike Brown was a difference making stud for the team.

 

Frankly, pro bowl bid aside, I would put tillman above Vasher (as I think most would) despite Vasher having a pro bowl on his resume and Tillman not. But Tillman, IMHO, is not even a red chip player, much less a blue chip.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem IMHO is the lack of blue chip players. You say he has a few pro bowlers. If you take out special teams, I only count 2 pro bowlers (Briggs/Harris). Sorry, but in 8 years of drafting, 2 pro bowlers isn't that impressive. Zero pro bowls for the offensive side of the ball too.

 

It is great to draft players who are worthy of the 53 man roster. Some didn't pan out in Chicago, but made another teams 53 man roster. IMHO, that reflects more on the coaches than the GM. Thus I have given Angelo credit for finding NFL quality. At the same time though, you have got to find more star caliber players. 2 stars in 8 drafts is frankly, bad.

Very few high end draft picks though. And I'd go by the number of pro-bowls as opposed to anything else. Plus, didn't Tillman/Vasher make a pro-bowl or am I mistaken. Both have been near pro-bowl caliber players at different points in time of there careers.

 

I swear Vasher made the pro-bowl. So all things considering I'd say he's done pretty bell. Berrian was a borderline pro-bowler too, but at a position where it is very difficult to make the pro-bowl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, didn't Chris Harris make the pro-bowl. So I'd say he's found 4 pro-bowlers in his tenure while never having top picks. And when you look down the list of position pro-bowlers they are typically 1st rounders from what I recall so I'd say Angelo is on the better end of things as a talent evaluator.

 

In fact, I feel he is an elite talent evaluator on the defensive side of the ball. Sometimes he gets a little too caught up in things and doesn't go based upon need and we get burned ocassionally but as a whole he's done a real freakin good job drafting NFL talented players and in various rounds to boot.

 

That is impressive, imo. He also is the guy given a lot of credit for finding the talent in Tampa so I'd say he has a long track record of being an exceptional talent evaluator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I look at is as an overall failing of the franchise. Between LS and JA, there aren't enough finser to point in their directions for our situation.

 

I can't argue with yourassessment, but as it seems to be...JA and LS are joined at the hip and I think both deserve flack for our lack os success in the draft.

 

I agree, that I don't fault the Berrian and Columbo picks and releases. Bad luck or good business is just that. But, everything else pretty much reeks.

 

Your assessment is spot on. It's nice to have starters and contributors. But I feel every draft season, you shold at least have found one virtual stud or pro-bowler in it.

If you found a probowler per draft, you would be the best franchise in football by a long-shot. It just doesn't work out that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought he was a pro bowl alternate. Okay, either way. It doesn't really change my point. The point was not about finding a guy who once made a pro bowl, but finding blue chip players who see multiple pro bowls.

 

I honestly, I don't even want to get too hung up on the whole "pro bowl" thing itself. Mike Brown was a blue chip stud, IMHO, but I do not believe he ever went to the pro bowl. That seemed to always go to Brian Dawkins, who was also very deserving. But Mike Brown was a difference making stud for the team.

 

Frankly, pro bowl bid aside, I would put tillman above Vasher (as I think most would) despite Vasher having a pro bowl on his resume and Tillman not. But Tillman, IMHO, is not even a red chip player, much less a blue chip.

For a few year stretch, Tillman was one of the best cover corners in the game. He is only good now as he's gotten older but lets not forget the way he would handle Randy Moss in his prime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again...or one virtual stud.

 

The good one do just that. Want me to list 'em?

 

Here's a few of the playoff teams:

 

AZ

2008 - Cromatrie

2007 - L. Brown

2006 - D. Letui

2005 - Rolle

2004 - Fitz, Dansby

 

GB

2008 - Finley

2007 - Harrell

2006 - Jenning, Hawk, Jolly

2005 - Rodgers

2004 - 0

 

Indy

2008 - Garcon

2007 - Ugoh

2006 - Addai

2005 - 0

2004 - Sanders

 

Balt

2008 - Flacco, Rice, Zbikowski

2007 - 0

2006 - Ngata

2005 - 0

2004 -0

 

Just to name a few...

 

 

If you found a probowler per draft, you would be the best franchise in football by a long-shot. It just doesn't work out that way.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not recall Harris making the pro bowl. If he did, it wasn't with Chicago.

 

Not sure what you mean that he didn't have any top picks. He had a top 10 pick in 2003, his 2nd draft, but traded down. He had a top 5 pick in 2005, and took Benson. Harris and Williams were both top 15 picks.

 

If you are doing a good job, you are not likely to have a bevy of top picks, and the bad teams get the top picks. Picking later in the 1st round is not usually an excuse for good GMs.

 

Sorry, but two position players making the pro bowl (3 if Vasher made it one year) is not that impressive when talking about 8 years. In fact, I would say it is pretty unimpressive. And pro bowls aside, there simply are not many difference makers. Beyond Harris and Briggs, who are really difference makers that Angelo drafted.

 

Also, didn't Chris Harris make the pro-bowl. So I'd say he's found 4 pro-bowlers in his tenure while never having top picks. And when you look down the list of position pro-bowlers they are typically 1st rounders from what I recall so I'd say Angelo is on the better end of things as a talent evaluator.

 

In fact, I feel he is an elite talent evaluator on the defensive side of the ball. Sometimes he gets a little too caught up in things and doesn't go based upon need and we get burned ocassionally but as a whole he's done a real freakin good job drafting NFL talented players and in various rounds to boot.

 

That is impressive, imo. He also is the guy given a lot of credit for finding the talent in Tampa so I'd say he has a long track record of being an exceptional talent evaluator.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously? For a few year stretch, he was a good corner is a cover two system, but I don't think he was ever considered an elite cover corner. Not even close. Even when he was at his best, was he ever even talked about for the pro bowl? Not that I recall.

 

For a few year stretch, Tillman was one of the best cover corners in the game. He is only good now as he's gotten older but lets not forget the way he would handle Randy Moss in his prime.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again...or one virtual stud.

 

The good one do just that. Want me to list 'em?

 

Here's a few of the playoff teams:

 

AZ

2008 - Cromatrie

2007 - L. Brown

2006 - D. Letui

2005 - Rolle

2004 - Fitz, Dansby

 

This is awesome, but lets continue and see if this is the rule or the exception.

 

GB

2008 - Finley

2007 - Harrell

2006 - Jenning, Hawk, Jolly

2005 - Rodgers

2004 - 0

 

Here is the key point. We are talking studs, or virtual studs. Finley has shown to be a good looking TE, but he is no stud. We are not talking about solid or even good starters, but studs and/or virtual studs, as you like to say. Difference makers. Finley is a good looking, young TE, who is the #3 receiver on that team. Harrell? In his 3 years in the league, I think he has missed more games than played, and had minimal impact. In fact, would he not be closer to bust than not? Jolly may be solid, but he is hardly a stud or close. Hawk is solid, but again, is he really a stud? If you are going to use someone like Hawk, or Jolly, then Angelo is going to have a lot more names added to his list too. These are not studs or difference makers. Solid starters, okay, but we are talking blue chip players. So in 5 years, Jennings and Rodgers.

 

Indy

2008 - Garcon

2007 - Ugoh

2006 - Addai

2005 - 0

2004 - Sanders

 

Garcon? You have to be kidding me. Addai? On that incredible offense which rarely finds a stacked box, he has not cracked 1,000 yards or had a 4 yard per carry average in the last two years.

 

Sanders is a difference maker when on the field, and Ugoh is damn good, but this is not a great list of difference makers here by any stretch.

 

Balt

2008 - Flacco, Rice, Zbikowski

2007 - 0

2006 - Ngata

2005 - 0

2004 -0

 

Zbikowski? Hardly. Flacco, Rice and Ngata, fine, but that is 3 in 5 years.

 

Just to name a few...

 

Even your examples sort of reflect that teams simply don't usually find 1 stud per year (average) much less 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I specifically said I was not counting special teams players. Maybe that isn't fair, but my point is really more about finding players on offense and defense that are pro bowlers. I will say that Hester is more an exception to this rule. I think we have had a couple special teams pro bowlers (tacklers) who are great, but not really the point. Hester is an exception as he was a special teams player that was truly a difference makers for the games as a whole.

 

Still, even if I added Hester, that is simply still not a bevy of studs.

 

Don't forget Hester has made the probowl too. Not as a position player, but his return abilities really carried us a long way on the Superbowl run.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point I was trying to make is kind of what you said, these kinds of teams tend to find one blue chip guy per year. Or maybe 1.5... Something like that. We're not even close to that.

 

That's all...

 

Again...or one virtual stud.

 

The good one do just that. Want me to list 'em?

 

Here's a few of the playoff teams:

 

AZ

2008 - Cromatrie

2007 - L. Brown

2006 - D. Letui

2005 - Rolle

2004 - Fitz, Dansby

 

This is awesome, but lets continue and see if this is the rule or the exception.

 

GB

2008 - Finley

2007 - Harrell

2006 - Jenning, Hawk, Jolly

2005 - Rodgers

2004 - 0

 

Here is the key point. We are talking studs, or virtual studs. Finley has shown to be a good looking TE, but he is no stud. We are not talking about solid or even good starters, but studs and/or virtual studs, as you like to say. Difference makers. Finley is a good looking, young TE, who is the #3 receiver on that team. Harrell? In his 3 years in the league, I think he has missed more games than played, and had minimal impact. In fact, would he not be closer to bust than not? Jolly may be solid, but he is hardly a stud or close. Hawk is solid, but again, is he really a stud? If you are going to use someone like Hawk, or Jolly, then Angelo is going to have a lot more names added to his list too. These are not studs or difference makers. Solid starters, okay, but we are talking blue chip players. So in 5 years, Jennings and Rodgers.

 

Indy

2008 - Garcon

2007 - Ugoh

2006 - Addai

2005 - 0

2004 - Sanders

 

Garcon? You have to be kidding me. Addai? On that incredible offense which rarely finds a stacked box, he has not cracked 1,000 yards or had a 4 yard per carry average in the last two years.

 

Sanders is a difference maker when on the field, and Ugoh is damn good, but this is not a great list of difference makers here by any stretch.

 

Balt

2008 - Flacco, Rice, Zbikowski

2007 - 0

2006 - Ngata

2005 - 0

2004 -0

 

Zbikowski? Hardly. Flacco, Rice and Ngata, fine, but that is 3 in 5 years.

 

Just to name a few...

 

Even your examples sort of reflect that teams simply don't usually find 1 stud per year (average) much less 2.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...