View Full Version : Process of Elimination: Eliminate 2 #9 Overall Candidates

03-31-2007, 04:54 PM
The premise is that, as draft day approaches, we are finding that there probably won't be a guy available that we all will be enamored with.

Instead of voting for who you want us to pick, vote for who you really don't want us to pick.

In the end, hopefully we'll be left with a guy that we at least, as a whole, are not deadset against.

We pick at #9; no trade up, no trade down
Russell, Thomas, CJ, Adams, and Quinn are all gone - there's a small chance that Quinn would be available, but for the purposes of this vote we are assuming he's gone.
The 9 guys that I selected are the 9 guys that are the only 9 possible guys we would consider drafting at #9 - for the purposes of this vote, just assume these are the only guys we are considering. I think I listed everyone I've heard us being associated with, my apologies if someone is missing....Note: The heading reads "eliminate 2...," but I could not figure out how to allow users to vote twice. Just vote once and hopefully there will be enough votes to have a meaningful result.

03-31-2007, 06:03 PM
The poll said pick two, but the post says pick one, lol. And since the poll only let me pick on, I picked Brown. However, it's really a tie between 3 players. Levi Brown, Alan Branch, and Adrian Peterson. I don't want Levi Brown (think we can get players at O-line in round 2 and on without using the #9 pick), Alan Branch is reported to be lazy and inconsistant in his effort, so I'm ot risking that at #9, and we already have Ronnie Brown, we don't need Adrian. He may be a great talent, but he runs upright exposing him to injury and I don't want to use the #9 overall on a RB after we already took one #2 the year before last. Plus, we could possibly get Nate Ilaoa in round 7 which would be a steal, as he is a BEAST (I believe he is like 5-9, 245lbs with a 4.7 40) and would be great for goal line and short yardage situations and the defenses wouldn't get a break if he came in since him and Ronnie are BOTH physical players.

03-31-2007, 06:10 PM
Yeah sorry, as mentioned in the first post I couldn't figure out how to allow 2 votes. I think it would have been better if we could have eliminated two, but hopefully there is enough variation that we can narrow it down to two or three "least disliked" candidates for the 9th pick...

03-31-2007, 06:39 PM
i managed to vote for two ...

Olsen and Levi. Olsen has no business going in the top 10, and I dislike Levi as a LT prospect.

03-31-2007, 06:44 PM
I obviously voted for Olsen . . . not worthy of the 9 pick at all . . .the other pick would be AP, I like him and I think Cleveland takes him but we have our RB and we need other positions filled.

03-31-2007, 07:34 PM
these would be disasters...

03-31-2007, 07:45 PM
Yeah, I don't get the notion that we need to draft a TE because we lost McMichael. For the last year and a half, our TE has been a glorified offensive tackle...and it's relatively easy to find a blocking tight end.

I'm not saying Olsen is not good, I just don't see the value at all in drafting a tight end. It's only worth it if the tight end is a well rounded great athlete, and the team is willing to utilize him properly. A receiving TE is as limited as a blocking TE IMO...a truly 1st round TE is one that can do both at a high level. Once you find a prospect that can do both, you have to be committed on offense to utilize his abilities - as it's a position that can easily be lost in the shuffle if the OC doesn't gameplan properly. Too often, either the prospect is limited, or the OC can't utilize the position effectively enough to merit the high draft pick.