- Apr 17, 2003
- Reaction score
When we drafted Long some people were saying that if he couldn't play LT he'd at least be a good RT and hence it was safe to pick him. Like you said Long was a very good LT.......what good did that do for us as a whole? No need to answer that. I know your mind is made up and that's fine. All we can do is talk about all this stuff as none of us gets to make any decisions anyway.I want to respond to one thing here, because it is a narrative that I have heard before and I think the narrative is completely wrong.
I remember the 2008 draft, and there was no thought that taking Jake Long was the 'safe' pick. Rather it was thought that NONE of the QBs in that draft were very good. Matt Ryan was considered a meh prospect from a second tier school, and the others were all considered to be career back-up types. Yes Matt Ryan ended up being an average sort of QB... maybe a bit above that, but the others were all bad except Flacco... who ended up being another Meh... sort of QB. ...and Flacco came from Delaware of all places.
...and you have to give Jake his props, he was an All Pro tackle almost immediately. Injuries ruined that man, we was THAT good.
In 2005, we DESPERATELY tried to trade down, but in those days, it was next to impossible because of the rookie signing contracts that those guys got in that era. It was also still in the end of the RB era, 3 RBs went in the first 5 picks... so this was not a 'safe' pick either. One, we had to make a choice there, and two RBs were well worth that choice... then.
This idea that those picks were made to be 'safe' just isn't accurate. It's a sort of sloppy reasoning that applies the trends of today's game and drafts to an earlier time. ...and blaming the current GM/Coach for what a team did in 2005 or 2008 and implying a trend is... a real stretch.
btw, I'm not blaming Grier for what we did 10 years ago so I don't know why you mention that.