As I suggested a few weeks ago, Dorsey may slide in the draft...Gil Brandt believes so.. (1 Viewer)

[REALCHRISM]

Name a DT that was worth a high pick since 03'? I can't think of any.

Tommie Harris.

 

[REALCHRISM]

Wait, the Lions are contemplating dropping Shaun Rogers? Why?

They feel that he is overweight and not as motivated as he used to be. If you remember, last year the Lions kind of spent the early part of the off-season getting rid of a lot of players and there's scuttlebutt that they could do the same thing this year with Rogers being the big name that gets the axe.

This was an article written before training camp: http://blog.mlive.com/lionsinsider/2007/03/will_lions_trade_shaun_rogers.html

This was a blog written during training camp: http://blog.mlive.com/lionsinsider/2007/07/scouting_report_shaun_rogers.html

Here is an article late in the season: http://www.mlive.com/lions/stories/index.ssf?/base/sports-0/119734590348590.xml&coll=6

Here is another late season blog:

Posted by Mike OHara on Mon, Dec 24, 2007 at 11:43 AM
Monday Mojo: Rogers, Anderson, Roy Williams, Kevin Jones, Ford, Drummond, Vikings, Running Game

1. That was a great, dominating game by Shaun Rogers against the Chiefs Sunday -- two sacks, strong job against the run. It was a long time coming, and it raises some questions. First in the mind of Rod Marinelli has to be -- where was he when he was really needed? Specifically, where was Rogers against Dallas?

When the Lions make their plans in the offseason, they have to consider that if they get rid of Rogers -- trade him or release him - there aren't going to get anyone with as much talent. But can they count on him for 16 games? Can they count on him in the clutch?

http://info.detnews.com/redesign/blogs/lionsblog/index.cfm?CFID=6548189&CFTOKEN=12918075

There are other similar articles and blogs calling for the Lions to get rid of Rogers. And the belief is that Marinelli will do just that.

 

[REALCHRISM]

At least four teams ahead of the Saints need a DT. Not to mention other teams that may be able to trade into the top 10. Glenn Dorsey isn't falling to 10 unless he gets caught in bed with a dead girl or live boy.

First, I did not say he's falling to #10. Secondly, I acknowledge the teams in the top 10 ahead of us that need a DT. I simply said that 9 teams--as in the nine ahead of us--do not all need a DT. Thus, the notion that if Dorsey somehow fell to #10 meant that 9 teams had red-flagged him is simply not true. Some teams could pass on him simply because he does not fit a need, not because of a belief that he has bad knees.

 

[birdog]

First, I did not say he's falling to #10. Secondly, I acknowledge the teams in the top 10 ahead of us that need a DT. I simply said that 9 teams--as in the nine ahead of us--do not all need a DT. Thus, the notion that if Dorsey somehow fell to #10 meant that 9 teams had red-flagged him is simply not true. Some teams could pass on him simply because he does not fit a need, not because of a belief that he has bad knees.

But aren't you stipulating that teams draft for need only??? That would explain the fact that Dorsey MIGHT FALL to #10.....

Well, the reality is, the top 5 teams draft the BPA, and not for need....in which case Dorsey will be long gone by the time we draft at #10

 

[REALCHRISM]

But aren't you stipulating that teams draft for need only??? That would explain the fact that Dorsey MIGHT FALL to #10.....

Well, the reality is, the top 5 teams draft the BPA, and not for need....in which case Dorsey will be long gone by the time we draft at #10

I guess you can say that but here's the probelm with drafting BPA in the case of Dorsey. Miami runs a 3-4. You can go BPA but you are adding a player that would not play to the strengths of your defense. Dorsey's too small to play nose and would end up at DE, which takes away from his strengths.

New England and the Jets also run a 3-4 defense. NE could take him as they have found a way to use DTs at the end spots in their defense and make it work. But given other needs, I think BPA would not be the most ideal situation for them.

Baltimore is another team running a 3-4, which means that you are, again, taking Dorsey and placing him inside a defense that does not necessarily play to his strengths as an under tackle.

So, it's not that I am suggesting that these teams cannot go BPA. It just does not seem logical that they would go BPA since Dorsey does not fit into their particular defensive schemes. So that means that only the Rams, Falcons, Raiders, Chiefs, and Bengals 'should' have an interest in Dorsey.

 

[Neekie2212]

I guess you can say that but here's the probelm with drafting BPA in the case of Dorsey. Miami runs a 3-4. You can go BPA but you are adding a player that would not play to the strengths of your defense. Dorsey's too small to play nose and would end up at DE, which takes away from his strengths.

New England and the Jets also run a 3-4 defense. NE could take him as they have found a way to use DTs at the end spots in their defense and make it work. But given other needs, I think BPA would not be the most ideal situation for them.

Baltimore is another team running a 3-4, which means that you are, again, taking Dorsey and placing him inside a defense that does not necessarily play to his strengths as an under tackle.

So, it's not that I am suggesting that these teams cannot go BPA. It just does not seem logical that they would go BPA since Dorsey does not fit into their particular defensive schemes. So that means that only the Rams, Falcons, Raiders, Chiefs, and Bengals 'should' have an interest in Dorsey.

I think this just about sums it up right here. lus-un2:

 

[SuperQuincy]

I tend to disagree with that philosophy. 9 teams ahead of us do not need a DT. The teams who could be in the market of taking Dorsey are Miami (although I do not think he makes much sense in their 3-4 scheme), St. Louis, Oakland, Kansas City and Cinncinatti. But all those teams also have other needs. St. Louis needs O-line help. Oakland needs O-line help and could be in the market for McFadden. Atlanta could also look at McFadden but will be in the market for a QB to build the franchise around. Kansas City needs help on the O-line and at CB. Cincy would definitely give Dorsey a long look if there but could also look at a LB. I think the DT would be a priority for Cincy.

So, it's not necessarily true that Dorsey is being red flagged by 9 teams ahead of us. All it takes is one or two teams who decide that they would much rather take a player who comes with an entirely clean bill of health than to take one who is said to have gimpy knees. Again, I saw Tommie Harris go through the same thing. But all the Saints can rely upon is their own medical report. It worked in the case of Drew Brees.

It not my philosophy at all, but when a guy is projected as the best player in the draft and he starts to drop and drop and drop, there is a reason. I didn't even say don't pick him, I just said take a long long hard look. Find out what the reason may be, if any. If he just falls because he is not a need (judging by the teams I see picking in front of us) I think he would be a need for many teams. No way he falls and if he does, gotta be a good reason and I want us to take an extra long look at him.

 

[Pure Energy]

First, I did not say he's falling to #10. Secondly, I acknowledge the teams in the top 10 ahead of us that need a DT. I simply said that 9 teams--as in the nine ahead of us--do not all need a DT. Thus, the notion that if Dorsey somehow fell to #10 meant that 9 teams had red-flagged him is simply not true. Some teams could pass on him simply because he does not fit a need, not because of a belief that he has bad knees.

One item you failed to consider (or maybe you did and I missed it)....that no other team wants to make a jump to move up and grab him. If he's 100% and teams are only drafting on need and not BPA someone is very likely to make that jump and draft him.

 

[scsouth]

When is the deadline for juniors to declare for the NFL draft or not?

January 15.

 

[DeuceMVP]

Correct me if I'm wrong... but wasn't Dorsey hurt before the chop block in the Auburn game?

 

[MLU]

Correct me if I'm wrong... but wasn't Dorsey hurt before the chop block in the Auburn game?

No.

 

[Lee Newell]

At least four teams ahead of the Saints need a DT. Not to mention other teams that may be able to trade into the top 10. Glenn Dorsey isn't falling to 10 unless he gets caught in bed with a dead girl or live boy.

Funny stuff man! We know that Dorsey will not slide to ten. Here's the question though. If he's not picked 1st or 2nd, do we consider trading up to snatch him at three? We may have to give up the rest of our day one picks to get him, but he'd be an instant impact player on our D-line, making everyone better!

I've did the number's crunch for us to trade up to three from 10th. The points would add up if the Saints: A. Trade from 10 to 3, draft Dorsey.
We lose our 2nd, 3rd rounders and a 2009 2nd rounder.

B. trade from 10 to 3, draft Dorsey.
We give up this year's 3rd, 4th, and next year's 1st.

A lot would have to happen of course for the Saints to consider this. Could we surrender these many picks to aquire Dorsey if he slides to three? Will he make that big of an impact to make up for losing your 09' first rounder if we chose option B? A lot to consider I know, but I feel that he's worth it. We just need to get our other positions addressed in FA. You are not going to find a stud like Dorsey in FA.

 

[Pure Energy]

If he's not picked 1st or 2nd, do we consider trading up to snatch him at three? We may have to give up the rest of our day one picks to get him, but he'd be an instant impact player on our D-line, making everyone better!

I've did the number's crunch for us to trade up to three from 10th. The points would add up if the Saints: A. Trade from 10 to 3, draft Dorsey.
We lose our 2nd, 3rd rounders and a 2009 2nd rounder.

B. trade from 10 to 3, draft Dorsey.
We give up this year's 3rd, 4th, and next year's 1st.

A lot would have to happen of course for the Saints to consider this. Could we surrender these many picks to aquire Dorsey if he slides to three? Will he make that big of an impact to make up for losing your 09' first rounder if we chose option B? A lot to consider I know, but I feel that he's worth it. We just need to get our other positions addressed in FA. You are not going to find a stud like Dorsey in FA.

We went through this already and drafted a cannot miss player in Ricky Williams. Do we really want to roll the dice again for any Player?

btw...I never did the math but assumed we grossly over paid for Ricky in terms of draft picks...If you have the time and the chart, can you check please?

New Orleans switched first-round picks with the Redskins, moving from 12th overall to No. 5, and gave them their other five selections this year in rounds 3-7, and a No. 1 and No. 3 next year to get Williams.

 

[BoNcHiE]

I might shoot Loomis if he gives up our entire first day and a 2nd next year for one stinkin player. Dorsey is good, but hes not worth that, certainly not worth that considering Ellis is probably just as good and can be had by us at 10 or only trading up a spot or two most likely (if DT's you just have to have a DT, I'd rather stay at 10 and pick up Phillips or Jenkins).

 

[BoNcHiE]

New Orleans switched first-round picks with the Redskins, moving from 12th overall to No. 5, and gave them their other five selections this year in rounds 3-7, and a No. 1 and No. 3 next year to get Williams.

What a nightmare. We literrally gave up 2 firsts, 2 thirds, and a 4/5/6/7 just to move up 7 spots to get one player.

That had to be the most ridiculous draft day trade in the history of the NFL.