SpearSrai

So if my math is correct here, they're saying he ran a 4.20?

Any NFL receiver can run a crossing route or a slant. Some are better than others, but I refuse to believe that we employ 5-6 guys who can't run a basic NFL route. And pass-rushers can take a few years to develop as well, especially when you're talking about DE's.

I didn't avoid your point. My point is that the QB's development, while important, isn't necessarily more valuable than a game-changing pass-rusher in the Lawrence Taylor mold. And it's not like there aren't plenty of good QB's without All-pro receivers to throw to. A good QB will make his receivers look good, no matter who they are, as long as he's protected, and that's something we already have going for us.

It's a QB's league in-so-much as Brees and Manning made headlines in the Super Bowl, but make no mistake: New Orleans won this year, in the playoffs, and in the Super Bowl because of their turnover-forcing defense just as much as because of their offense. Dallas and Minnesota also both relied heavily on their defense to get pressure on the opposing QB's and to set the tempo. No matter how well Brees played, Minnesota still would have won that game if New Orleans' defense didn't step it up and disrupt Favre's timing. Remember how much they hit him that game? Remember how Peyton Manning looked when the Jets came out with pressure? If they could have kept up that pressure all game (and without blitzing 6-7 guys) they would have had a chance to win. The Saints won this year because of their defense. Last year, without a defense (Sharper, Vilma, Jenkins, etc.), they missed the playoffs. Same offense almost to-the-player, only without Shockey. The Steelers definitely won last year in large part because of their defense. The Giants definitely won because of their defense. The Colts only won in 2006 because their defense came on in the playoffs. The Steelers got another one the year before that, with a second-year QB (who played absolutely horrendous in that game.) Then you can keep going back... Patriots, Patriots, Bucs (definitely defense), Patriots (disrupted the Rams with their scrappy defense), and our 2000 Ravens. If I had to name a theme for the 2000-2009 Super Bowl winners, it would definitely be "You can't win a Super Bowl without a good or great defense." And to your other point about our corners... while we certainly don't have a bunch of Pro Bowlers lining up back there, I contend that they would look like Pro Bowlers if you threw Jared Allen next to Ngata, Edwards, and Kelly. And that's even before Webb gets back next year.

An uninjured Freeney was certainly as valuable to the Colts defense as Asomugha is to the Raiders. (Ask Jonathan Ogden.) And it's not like the Raiders are setting the world on fire WITH their shutdown corner. The Chargers WITH a juiced-up Shawne Merriman were much stronger than when they lost him...their defense actually became one of the most porous, even with all of the first-rounders they've spent on corners. Remember how huge Jevon Kearse and Julius Peppers were? How about a pass-rusher like Mario Williams? (Seriously, how about him? Because I never get to watch Texans games.) Then you have a guy you could consider a pass-rusher like Albert Haynesworth. The Titans defense looked absolutely terrible when they took the field at the beginning of the year without their star pass-rusher. And let's not forget how dominating Osi Umenyiora was just a few years ago. The guy was unstoppable. Make no mistake... I realize how great it is to have a superstar receiver, but he's just one piece of the puzzle too. Without a competent QB, it means nothing. Plenty of highly-touted receivers have been mediocre in bad systems and with bad QB's. So you could make an argument that the pass-rusher can affect a game, by himself, easier than the receiver can. And if you DO want to talk about supporting players (like a good quarterback), then give me a competent pass-rusher on the other side (Robert Mathis?) and my pass-rush will be even more dominant. (And to your other points, the Cardinals with Breaston, Boldin, and Warner would not be terrible. The Texans still ARE pretty bad, even with Andre, but I do think Schaub is a good quarterback, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say he'd find another weapon. And the Jets defense would still be good because of the scheme they use. Rex's blitzing scheme will always have them in the top 10 just because most quarterbacks aren't good enough to react to it, but a top QB will always pick it apart.)

Can't you say the same about a pass-rusher like (pre-steroid) Shawn Merriman, and (going back a few years) Bruce Smith and Lawrence Taylor? Those guys can shut down not only half of a field, but essentially the entire 5 and 7-second drop. An entire offense was constructed specifically to counter this type of player, and a position (left tackle) became 10 times more valuable because of it.

Let's say, for grins and giggles, that we can come out of this draft with one star and a bunch of role players. Rather than go through the list of available players and their potential, I think we can narrow down the positions we're targeting to receiver, tight end, pass-rusher, and corner. So if you could have one, and ONLY one, guaranteed, bona-fide star from this draft, would you rather it be a: *A big-play, physical wideout like a Brandon Marshall/Andre Johnson, *A big, fast tight-end with good hands like Antonio Gates/Dallas Clark, *A high-motor pass-rusher like Dwight Freeney/DaMarcus Ware, or *A man-to-man shutdown corner like a Revis/Asomugha? ************************************************************* Round and value doesn't come into play here. You just get one star, and average-or-worse players at the other positions. All are tempting options, but I personally would take the pass-rusher. A star pass-rusher can disrupt an entire offense.

His ankle, perhaps, but he was hampered with a groin injury during the season as well. For some reason, it seems like he is injured more than other receivers.

And while a healthy Boldin is certainly worth a 2nd rounder (and probably a 1st), what is the value of an injury-ridden, 30-year-old receiver? Is it higher than that of a young, highly-regarded 2nd-round receiver like Demaryius Thomas/Gilyard/LaFell/whoever? And if so, is it a lot higher, or closer to even? Because we're looking for guys who will actually be available for playoff games, and that's not something you know with Boldin.

Oh, okay. I get that. I just think it's too easy to hurt epithets like "bona fide killer" around when discussing complete strangers doing things you haven't personally experienced. And I'm not talking about you here. "People" would probably be more sensitive to these issues if it were, say, a close friend who found himself in the same situation. And that goes for both sides of the debate.

What exactly are you saying that I'm saying? And what exactly is it that you disagree with? Specifics would be helpful.

And what exactly are we supposedly giving up for Boldin, in the event of a trade? Not a 1st-rounder?

So let me jump the gun here... Would we be satisfied with a WR corp of Boldin, Mason, Stallworth, and Clayton/Washington/someone else?

This isn't the debate at all. Everybody feels that way about drinking excuses. And I don't mean everyone here; I mean everyone in the world. Excuses because of drinking are never valid (except for in some courts, where contracts are void if one or both parties are intoxicated.) The debate mostly stems from the ignorance of non-drinkers in the commonness of impaired-driving (be it alcohol, fatigue, distraction, poor driving ability, or something else) and the hostility that arises because of it. I'm in no way saying any of it is acceptable. All I'm saying is that you shouldn't make the guy into a scapegoat for making a decision that many of your friends and relatives make on a daily basis. Either demonize everyone, or no one.

Huh? Schaub has played there for 3 seasons... do you not know how long a decade is? That's like giving Kyle Boller credit for our #6 ranking. Not to mention that Houston didn't even exist as a franchise when we won our Super Bowl.

Here.

Do you know this from first-hand experience, or are you relying on the information of others to make this claim? Exactly how impaired is someone with a .1 BAL? Since you've claimed to not drink, I have to question the credibility and insightfulness of your opinion.

Our ground game and o-line is much, much better than Houston's.

Schaub is not the reason that the Texans have missed the playoffs, and Flacco is not the reason the Ravens have won in the playoffs. And for the record, Schaub's playoff stats are still better than Flacco's.

This brings a certain Queen song to mind...

It's ironic that the day Mel Kiper finally puts Thomas on his big board, he gets hurt.

I don't know what Todd Heap's problem with Irsay is... he was only 4 when the team moved to Indy.

Since this isn't a list of the "Top 32 QB's with-respect-to-how-long-they-have-been-in-the-NFL", what's your point? Schaub is one of the best quarterbacks in the NFL right now. Flacco isn't even close.

Well that's awesome. Maybe now we'll have a shot at him in the second. That may be a stretch, though.

I've been consistently entertained by Dexter. Hard to say if it's gotten worse or not, but either way it's still really good. Unlike most shows, I haven't reached a point of boredom with any of the seasons, so as long as that's still true, it's the top dog.