Offense in the first round?

[Tasher]

So I have a very general question, and based on the reasoning of ALL the pundits recommending that Houston, regardless of need, MUST take Reggie bush, IF Reggie Bush, for some UNKNOWN, UNIMAGINEABLE and UNFORESEEN reason should fall to #24, would you draft him?

[ArmyBengal]

So I have a very general question, and based on the reasoning of ALL the pundits recommending that Houston, regardless of need, MUST take Reggie bush, IF Reggie Bush, for some UNKNOWN, UNIMAGINEABLE and UNFORESEEN reason should fall to #24, would you draft him?

Well, I recommend Houston trades out of the first with the Jets and take Ferguson if the Jets were willing to deal... If Bush were to fall, I'm sure there would be plenty of trade offers coming our way. Take him though ?? I'm not sure about that...

WHODEY !!!

[Stripes]

So I have a very general question, and based on the reasoning of ALL the pundits recommending that Houston, regardless of need, MUST take Reggie bush, IF Reggie Bush, for some UNKNOWN, UNIMAGINEABLE and UNFORESEEN reason should fall to #24, would you draft him?

No. That unimaginable, unforseen reason would have to be a damned good one for this to take place, as you know. I'd have to follow suit with the rest of the league.

[turningpoint]

we'd tale him in a 2nd and probably trade, chris Perry.

Keep rudi until bush shows he can handle a fulltime load.

[Whur CHad At?]

So if Vince Young happens to drop to us, are we going to take him because he is the BPA?

Did any of you see our defense this year??! I mean I did and I what I saw hurt my eyes.

We should focus on our glaring needs 1st round, something that could contributed to help his rookie year. Thats why we take SS or a DT. They could help out right away. What is the purpose of drafting someone we dont need, and wont start for 2 years. Just one big wasted pick.

[DesperateDerelict]

So if Vince Young happens to drop to us, are we going to take him because he is the BPA?

Did any of you see our defense this year??! I mean I did and I what I saw hurt my eyes.

We should focus on our glaring needs 1st round, something that could contributed to help his rookie year. Thats why we take SS or a DT. They could help out right away. What is the purpose of drafting someone we dont need, and wont start for 2 years. Just one big wasted pick.

BPA DOES NOT MEAN THE BEST ATHLETE, NOR THE BEST FOOTBALL PLAYER. The major objective of the BPA philosophy is to take the Best Player Available . . . that will help our team. You also consider the scarcity of talent for the positions. The draft board will reflect this. Therefore, if DL is a glaring need, and other Defensive positions are a non-critical need, and there is no need at QB and RB, the top of your board might look like this:

1) Ngata DT

2) M.Williams DE

3) R. Bush RB

4) M Huff DB

5) D'Brick OT

6) Lionheart QB

7) Kiwanuka DE

8) AJ Hawk LB

9) V. Young QB

etc.

Your board is rearranged to suit your needs and style of play, but top 10 talent is still top ten talent - otherwise you screw yourself out of potential trade value. Why do you think Cream-well and the Cleveland Turds almost took David Pollack with pick #3 last year . . . . their needs dictated that he and Edwards (the overall BPA in the draft) were equivalent!!

[Whur CHad At?]

Can I get some evidence that the Clowns were gonna take Pollack at #3? Cuz I never heard anything about that....please provide evidence.

[DesperateDerelict]

Can I get some evidence that the Clowns were gonna take Pollack at #3? Cuz I never heard anything about that....please provide evidence.

Sorry, I didn't find it in my alotted 5 minutes - the story was that the DC and Crennel were enamored with Pollack, but Savage thought the horse laughs would be acute if they picked DP up at #3, and they couldn't find a partner to let them trade down . . . maybe one of the more efficient surfers can run it to ground. It was in a couple of different draft grade stories.