frankeefrank

I don't see us taking a LB or DL in the first round.
reasons:
1. Our noted propensity for drafting the "best avaliable" at 16 can that possibly be anyone from the afor mentioned positions?
LB is deep in '05. There's a play maker from Nebraska no one is talking about. RUUD Why not take him in 2nd?
DL is overwhelmingly hyped... But we are stocked there.
Sully sucks yes, but he is still young and on our cap. Plus, with the passing game taking such a fron tseat in today's game, I feel the third DE is revolutionary.
And should be emphasized. So no Howard deal.

2. Look who's ahead of us...
CLEV - D-coordinator minded HC will go that route with a proven no. 2 (Holcombe to get him through the '05 season.)
OAK - now MIN - Need a rush DE... DT to add pressure
AZ - will get a QB in FA, so look DL too
DET is where Johnson goes
HOU and KC need D help as well....

WHO's behind us...
STL, BUF, GB and DEN plus BAL all have needs
I'd like us to pick up a no.2 and future no. 1

At that point we start to accumulate talent.
Sure I know, we need a playmaker.
But with another no.2 we've upgraded our depth and gained a no.1
No need in this draft to select in the first round, unless we go after a WR
Edwards, or Mike Williams.
They will be the jewels in this years draft.