In hindsight those were bad decisions, but you have to remember the draft is fluid. They were drafting by need and who's to say the scouts had other players in mind but they were picked by the time our turn came around. I suppose this just makes a stronger case for picking the best available athlete. How can you justify missing three years in a row, maybe worse because the jury still out on James, on the offense of line? That I agree is hard to defend.
Agreed. At some point, every team is going to have to load up on average players, players with specialty (e.g., ST), and keep some who show potential AND improvement. That's the real world. Getting rid of players because they aren't 'top' players is not realistic. I'm on the other side of that number. I'd identify 15 players who should be gone.
