wbbigtymer
Whodie I'm a Saints fan
Offline
I can't think of one position, except S, that has a chance to come in and start from Day 1 on our entire roster if everyone we have now is healthy.
DT?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I can't think of one position, except S, that has a chance to come in and start from Day 1 on our entire roster if everyone we have now is healthy.
2006 - Tye Hill started 10 games for the Rams and Antonio Cromartie, in his 2nd year, is one of the top CB's in the league. Jonathan Joseph for the Bengals started 9 games as a rookie.
2007 - Revis for the Jets, Leon Hall for the Bengals, and Aaron Ross for the Giants all started and contributed last season to their teams.
I do agree that adding Gay, Young, and David in the last 2 off seasons has made a roster spot at that position hard to secure, but I don't think it's a lock to say a rookie could not contribute to our Defense.
Besides Dorsey or Ellis, I don't see any DT's we select playing fulltime (not that any DT's play fulltime anyway). Whoever we pick will be rotated with Thomas, Young, and Clancy.
I also concure. Safety and DT are the only real spots on D where someone could come in and start from day one. Even then, as stated, other that Dorsey or Ellis, no one else in this draft would unseat anyone at DT, LB, or even maybe safety unless there was an injury. If the FO is happy with Zach Strief, and I think they are, our one huge IMMEDIATLY FILLABLE hole on draft day would be left gaurd. Nesbit just isn't it. Then you can draft all the DT's and Safties and corners you want fot the next 2 years. Our QB, OL, and WR would all be set and one or two impact defenders would have us in the 2006 Colts mold.
I would love to see a safety come in and start over Bullocks but I dont see Payton taking him out.
Did anybody see Aaron Ross last year? He made some rookie mistakes, but also made some big plays. Just because every rookie doesn't start, doesn't mean we can't get lucky.
Who ever is picked at 10 should come in and start day 1..... IMO
How many times have we heard this? We need to get an "impact player" at CB in the 1st round. "We can't select so and so because he'd take longer to develop"....so on and so forth. But lets look at the current roster....
MM, Young, David, Gay, and Craft. Now lets assume said rookie CB, no matter who he is, can beat out Craft and make the 53 man roster. That would put him inactive on gamedays. Now lets say he beats out Young or David and is activated on gamedays and plays Dime back. Past that what rookie corner is going to come in and unseat Gay and MM as starters?
The point is, it sounds good to say "we need to get an immediate starter at CB"...but in reality regardless of who we pick, they will likely be the dime back or inactive their rookie year. So the moral is, pick the CB we think has the most potential and who is the best player available, not the CB whos most "NFL" ready but has a lower ceiling. Because that NFL readiness won't matter much anyway.
McKelvin or Cromartie have the most potential of all the CB's in this draft. The fact that they went to small schools and might need some coaching shouldn't be a factor b/c theres little chance any rookie corner is anything more then a dime back his rookie year anyway. Expecting any drafted corner to come in and start (on a team that has already signed a starter in FA no less) is unrealistic so don't base your grading of CB's on that.
Did you read the thread? At no point has anyone ever said rookie corners can't contribute or start. The whole point was that with our depth we do not have to pick a CB for "immediate impact" and can afford to take the CB with the highest ceiling and most potential even if they don't start in year one.
You can't waste the 10th overall pick on someone who will sit the bench.
To me that's wasting the pick. Settle for the best CB avaiable in the second round if that's the case.