Lucky Luciano

one comment: SF did not get young as a replacement for montana. he was brought in as a trade from tampa to back up montana. he just excelled there in that system along with having someone able to coach and teach him. young had a horrendous career in tampa until going to the 9ers. i don't know what you read but i certainly did not bash our first pick. in fact it brought our draft up from F to D+. my comment on williams not making it was in regards to having NO depth at RT with miller gone and st. clair at G. that's not a bash but reality. sorry but 100% pure hindsight? lets look at the board: st. louis - need OT but went WR skins - this was our trade deal - skins needed picks as they traded them all away. this was their first of the draft. kc - got their guard - no problem from them to speak of unless they planned on albert going OLT. packers - probably wouldn't trade with us falcons - NEED a guard seattle - NEED a guard 49ers - NEED a guard there is NO way the 2nd best guard makes it to us in a sane draft room. greco: a trade up to the bottom of the 2nd or top of 3rd if considered a worthy pick. i don't know enough about him other than he WAS picked at the top of the 3rd and he plays out to be a LG according to draft reports and a pretty good one with the possibility to play RT which is another depth position we NEED. as far as falling like the past, the price they are getting for guards (faneca for instance) means they no longer are an afterthought in the draft if you want to stay out of cap hell. i got no problems with your 3rd round picks either. but for X's sake get one with potential to start. quote: I disagree RB is not a need. I agree Wolfe was a mistake, but also believe accepting your mistakes is better than not, and he seemed this year to accept mistakes made at RB. When you combine Benson's injury w/ Wolfe's inability to be a starter, it did create a need at RB. Not a 1st round need, IMHO, but a high enough need that I see nothing wrong w/ Forte. IMHO, you would have likely been fine w/ taking Forte in the 2nd if we added Cousins or McGlynn in the 3rd, would you not. /quote i never said it was not a need. i DID say not a need in the freakin 2nd round. we could have picked one up in the later rounds or EVEN in free agency after the cuts. we need to build a line to run behind NOW not in 5 years. quote: some say we need a receiver.... hmmmm, angie drafts yet ANOTHER #2 receiver. it's NOT a need at all. we have, not counting our draft picks, SEVEN receivers on our roster. booker, bradley, davis and hass are projected as #2 or #3 receivers. in other words we drafted again into our only strength at that position!!! where is our #1 guy? hester? are you kidding me? Who are you kidding. We have a bunch of bodies at OG. That doesn't mean we have anyone good at the position. I like Booker, but he is not a long term solution, but a temporary fix. Bradley has shown nothing but his ability to get injured. Davis is nice depth, but that is all. Hass? Come on. Fan favorite, but whether due to Hass or the coaches, I think it is obvious he is not in the plans. WR was w/o question a need. And like Forte in the 2nd, I have a feeling you would not be screaming about this pick if we took Cousins or McGlynn later in the 3rd. /quote puleeaaaase!!! if you don't consider any of our WR's as #2's or 3's then drafting one now is meaningless for this season. i don't know what you are looking at but booker is a solid gold #2 receiver who we will probably use as our #1. now are you saying davis and bradley are not even #2 or #3 receivers??? if thats the case angie should be fired NOW for even considering davis's new contract. the LAST thing we need at this point in time ahead of qb and OL is another #2 receiver which is what bennet is PROJECTED to be!!!!! quote: what about our 3rd round DT pick? we drafted another DT when we already have five and if you consider idoniji (which i do) we have SIX. is that our priority over OL? Short answer. No. I did call it though. I said, at least to those I watched the draft w/, we would take Harrison there and then. I expected us to go DT in the 3rd or 4th, and when I saw Harrison as Kiper's best available, I just felt Angelo couldn't resist. That is his way. I agree OL was a far greater need. I would even say a backup OT would have been a better pick than a DT. I do actually believe DT was a need, as Harris is entering his final year, Dusty has two years of nothing but injury, and none of the rest are proven either. But for me, w/o a DT, our defense is still loaded w/ talent, but on offense, far from it. /quote and that is a recomendation on angelo's prowess at drafting players? cause he can't resist? maybe he should start up a heroin habit instead. quote: I do not agree w/ this pick either. If a FS we loved were there, I could better see that, but I simply do not believe another in-the-box safety was a need. I like Steltz, and he may well end up a starter, but I question just how big of an upgrade he is to the in-the-box safeties we already have. I would have rather we gave Payne/McGowan a shot. Again, if this was a FS that fell, I would be more okay w/ this pick, but he isn't. Further, I would add that, as said before, I could better deal w/ this pick, even being Steltz, if we had drafted different in front. If we added an OG instead of a DT, I could better deal w/ grabbing a defensive player you liked here. /quote absolutely agree. if we got at least one (preferably two) quality guard along with williams i would have been reasonably happy and willing to stretch our needs a bit. quote: Here is my opinion. I believe Angelo basically locked in on OL, RB and WR w/ the first three picks. After that, he went BPA, and for Angelo, the BPA is always going to be a defensive player, thus the DT, SS and CB w/ the next three picks. This is a pick I hate as well. We are very solid and deep at CB, and yet St. Clair is still our starting LG. No way we should have been looking to draft a CB here. But at this area, Angelo is looking at upside and not need, and Bowman has tons of upside, though it comes w/ JUCO experience and major injury concerns. /quote absolutely. this is also where my main bitch with this guy starts. he drafts the same players every year. the only difference is where. we MUST beef up our OL. if our D line looked this bad i could see it but it's not even a close 5th. his drafting players that we will have to cut is ridiculous. who do we release to keep these guys? and another FB? how many we need of these guys? it's like drafting tackling dummies that you pay. seriously it's time to get his mind right or dump him. we can't survive as half a team anymore. quote: other than our first pick it is a disaster for the future of this franchise. we keep drafting the SAME positions over and over every year and still leave the weak points the same. I disagree w/ the disaster statement. I do believe it is a massive mistake to have passed on Brohm, but the players we did take are likely going to contribute and or start, or at least most of them. Williams will likely start at LT. Forte will start by some point this year, if not out of the gate. Ditto for Bennett. Harrison I think will be playing in the rotation. Steltz could be starting this year too. So while I think we blew it by passing on a QB, if you look at the players we did add, they are likely starters/contributors (minus Bowman and Davis). So while what we did not get hurts, what we did get definitely should help. /quote start WHERE? how many cb's can we start at once? how many RB's? how many # FREAKIN 2 wideouts can we get on the field? where is our new DT going to play? do we dump idoniji now after his new contract? quote: this year we drafted rounds 1-5 a RB, WR, DL, SS, CB and TE You missed OT. last year we draft rounds 1-5 a TE, DL, RB, SS, LB and CB (and another one in the 7th) You missed OG in the 4th last year. 2006 we draft rounds 1-5 CB/WR?, two DL, and LB You forgot DM, a CB/FS/SS? 2005 we draft rounds 1-5 RB, and two WR's You missed a 4th round QB (Orton) 2004 we draft rounds 1-5 three DL, WR, CB and LB You missed a 5th round QB (Krenzel) 2003 we draft rounds 1-5 three DL, CB, LB, SS, and two WR's You missed QB in the 1st. 2002 we draft rounds 1-5 CB, SS, DL, and LB You missed OT in the 1st and OG in the 3rd. /quote the point was of drafting the SAME type players year after year. do you feel we do that on the OL?? or at QB?? you feel we drafted too many krenzel was a knucklehead and should be held against ANYONE stupid enough to draft him. also, in fact lower in my previous post, i pointed out specifically how many and where we drafted OL. so what's the point? quote: Look, I hate we passed on QB and OG, but it is simply wrong to say it doesn't matter how the picks turn out. If we added a bunch of starters, then the draft is not a D. Far from it. I would also add that if the RB, WR, DT, SS start, then maybe it means the positions were not the strength you think, and were in fact greater needs than you want to believe. /quote where do we add these starters? isn't that the crux of this entire MESS?? there are only so many guys can play. do you cut last years safeties? do you cut the previously drafted WR's? which DE's do you cut? anderson?? which DT's? dusty?? the new ones we get who look like the old ones we cut or the old ones that made the cut last year? how deep do you go for depth? one utility offensive lineman and 10 defensive linemen? do we just keep drafting these type of guys so we can replace them when their contracts come up??? we need QUARTERBACKS, free safeties, GUARDS, offensive tackles (YES for backup or to replace the ones who are aging or get injured). that's basically it. yet every year we draft the strongest positions we have and leave these to fend for themselves. he is an IDIOT!!! quote: But even w/ that said, if the players we did draft turn into solid starters, then while it hurts to have missed on this player or that, it would still be considered a good draft. /quote and get us no closer to winning a superbowl than we are now!!

getting to a SB is meaningless without winning it. are you really ready to say that this coming season looks like we are superbowl bound? or last? in seven years during angelo's tenure in chicago our offense has set records for BAD and i don't see much relief in the near future. do you? i gave him more than a chance to rebuild this team into a contender but building half a team won't get you any props from me from now on. it's time to look for a better solution and move on.

nothing like a well thought out intelligent reply. good job.

agree about the coaching and you are preaching to the quire on that subject, but.... if you look at every qb except the finks pick, what qb when they left chicago had any career at all (except hard head's one year flash in indy)? not a single one. that tells volumes about the quality we chose in the draft. 1999 - agree on mcnabb being the pick. where i wanted to go and we should have. smith was too iffy after having moved up that fast on the board before draft day. couch just too plain of a wrapping to pick #1. picking culpepper would also have been an excellent pick for us where we were slotted to pick if we couldn't have traded up for mcnabb. if not pepper than champ bailey was the pick. 2000 - url was a good pick with or without hindsight. iguana guy sold me on url a month before the draft. even at projected safety he would have been a phenominal pick. props to him. i will say that if we picked lower pennington would have been a good pick but not an earth shattering pick for us. 2001 - agree about vick. not a guy who looked exceptional. i wouldn't have gone up much to get him. if he went in the middle of the top ten and i was there i would have taken him and hope for a cunningham type qb in chicago. as it turns out now i wouldn't give the time of day to a dog killer. 2002 - agree it would have been outrageous to move that far up to pick carr or harrington. i will say if we had had a top 10 pick i would have tried for carr without a doubt. how's that for honest hindsight. 2003 - i will repeat what i have posted in the past WITHOUT using 20-20 hindsight: this was the year to bet the farm on a real qb prospect, the BEST since payton manning, and move up to the #1 spot no matter what it took and get carson palmer. it was the perfect year to go-for-broke. we had a high pick, were rebuilding and i would have given up our next years #1 to do it. it was the perfect time for us to get there. anyone that says grossman was who they really wanted is fooling themselves. you don't trade down twice if you think your franchise qb is on the board. 2004 - agree couldn't draft another #1 without seeing what we had unless it looked a lead pipe cinch that dropped to us which it didn't. 2005 - same situation 2006 - too far to go for iffy talent. if i could have traded up would have looked at LOT talent. 2007 - too far to go for iffy talent 2008 - no qb talent that high but would have talked to miami about long. two in the last 8 years should be enough. i don't feel like going back through the 80's and 90's at this time. there are good times to make your move and not good times. the palmer move was the best. we had a high pick and could probably have moved if we gave up a following years first with it. next was the mcnabb move. again i would have traded a lot to get to him on the board including the next years first. those looked like real quality qb's at the time and proved out to be good enough to have put us in a different echelon.

i gave not only this draft a D+ but angelo's history of drafting in chicago as a GM a D as a whole. here is the one of the biggest problems our franchise faces... short sightedness. if the qb's you have a chance to draft project as being starters you make the pick even if you have a franchise qb on the team (which we don't). you don't want perrenial backups drafted EVER! you groom them to be #1's. this gives you leverage in actually having valuable players you can trade in the future if it warrants or at the least a future starter/star if your qb goes down. it doesn't mean jack if he is going to push the guys ahead of him. that is what you WANT. this now leaves us in the same boat we have been bailing for SIX YEARS! TWO unknown qb's with no option if either or both fail. if we picked brohm in the 2nd (or some other) and missed out on a rb, so what. which do we need more? which is more valuable in todays nfl due to rule changes? it's the qb and a passing game. where is the potential starter in the following rounds we could have drafted? our stated needs: qb and OL. yet again watched this boat sail. what of williams filling 2 needs by moving tait over to RT? what if williams can't cut it at LOT? what if tait or williams gets injured during the season? we now have our RT backup filling in our starting LG position. who fills in his spot if he has to move? we have not a single guard that this team considers better than a one armed dinosaur. if we do then we have the most inept coaching staff even in our pathetic history of offense. i would also like to ask, how good is st. clair compared to a real guard prospect? this is one reason we should have drafted guard at a high priority after the 1st round. to groom him to be our future starter. yet we could have 'possibly' gotten chilo rachel if we would have moved up in the 2nd with seattle or atlanta and sat on our hands. if not then why not john greco in the 2nd and move him inside as a guard? in the 3rd we pick at positions with no serious need and bypass zuttah, rinehart and cousins. in the 4th we again get someone we don't need and bypass mcglynn, murphy and hale. and finally the 5th we pass on schuening. angelo fails year after year to find a guard which is the easiest position to fill in the draft. i have to ask what do we need more than qb or guards at this point? we even have a need for a backup RT so why not draft that prospect? again, we have picked RB's in the first 3 rounds for 3 of the past 4 years!!! this only amplifies angies huge mistake by taking wolf last season. i say our other problems at OL and QB are far more important to fill-in than any rb in this round. we could have gotten one later in the draft or in realites sake this IS the place for a free agent at this point in bensons career. it's not an immediate critical need. some say we need a receiver.... hmmmm, angie drafts yet ANOTHER #2 receiver. it's NOT a need at all. we have, not counting our draft picks, SEVEN receivers on our roster. booker, bradley, davis and hass are projected as #2 or #3 receivers. in other words we drafted again into our only strength at that position!!! where is our #1 guy? hester? are you kidding me? what about our 3rd round DT pick? we drafted another DT when we already have five and if you consider idoniji (which i do) we have SIX. is that our priority over OL? in the 4th round we drafted another strong safety. we have THREE on the roster not even counting arch (free safety might be a need angie). in the 5th we drafted a CB while we have at least four on our roster. we don't need more depth at this position we need starters at other key positions. and finally we draft a TE in the 5th round. this is the most insane pick of the entire draft. we drafted round 1 last year a TE and we just signed our starting TE for this season. What in gods name do we need a 5th round TE for??? bulky blocking TE's are a dime a dozen!!! other than our first pick it is a disaster for the future of this franchise. we keep drafting the SAME positions over and over every year and still leave the weak points the same. this year we drafted rounds 1-5 a RB, WR, DL, SS, CB and TE last year we draft rounds 1-5 a TE, DL, RB, SS, LB and CB (and another one in the 7th) 2006 we draft rounds 1-5 CB/WR?, two DL, and LB 2005 we draft rounds 1-5 RB, and two WR's 2004 we draft rounds 1-5 three DL, WR, CB and LB 2003 we draft rounds 1-5 three DL, CB, LB, SS, and two WR's 2002 we draft rounds 1-5 CB, SS, DL, and LB so far angie has drafted TEN defensive linemen, three running backs, four SS, six WR's, six CB's, two TE's (in two years), two QB's, and five LB's all in the first 5 rounds. compare that to four OL in rounds 1-5 over the last 6 years... 2008 - #1 OT williams; 2007 - #4 G/C beekman; 2002 - #1 OT columbo, #4 G metcalf. other than the first pick, it doesn't matter as much how these draft picks turn out quality wise. what matters is we drafted the wrong type of players yet again with nothing on the horizon for filling our real needs. we are always 2 years behind the learning curve for the players we need most. what a mess this clown has put our franchise in.

here is the crux of drafting williams... first of all, and i don't have the knowledge to say one way or other as i have not watched either player in college, if clady IS a better prospect at the LOT spot then in my opinion we screwed up again by not moving up and trading with buffalo to get him. if that IS the case it's another failure by our gm to put the best player in the second most important position on offense - offensive left tackle. even giving up our 2nd 3rd round pick and any junk in the 7th round would have been a huge bargain if clady projects as the franchise player at that position.

that you draft or pick up personnel in FA is a moot point if you don't have anyone who knows what they are looking at. even so over the last 20+ years we have bypassed the best talent to try and get the cheapest draft pick, which they call VALUE picks, we could find. a perfect example is cade mcnuthing and rex grossman. so instead of hiring good management personnel that DOES understand what they are looking and aggressively going after the best talent in the draft, we use a shotgun approach and pick up players that won't hurt the franchise TOO much financially if they bust out.

yet again we look for other teams sweepings as our best hope to fill our qb roster, guys that can't even cut it as a #2 on other teams. if not that we are betting the future of the franchise on a walk-on qb to be our savior. one caution i might add... gruden is not a bad evaluator of qb's and can actually coach them. if we are hoping to pick up his garbage it may just be that... garbage. this is what they should have done 3 decades ago and i have been screaming for this for 2.5 of them. if you don't have scouts and personnel to evaluate the college players you fail. if you have a gm who knows less than nothing about qb's and doesn't hire good scouts and personnel to evaluate these players to give him a clue, you fail. if you don't hire coaches and advisers that can push the talent you draft you will fail. but then it comes down to priorities doesn't it? ever wonder why we can draft good running backs in our history yet don't have any idea what to do at the most important position in football? because it's an afterthought!!! we are so concerned with defense or on offense who contributes the season we draft them that we are always on the edge of the cliff when it comes to getting IMPORTANT personnel that needs a year or two before he is going to contribute. this includes your quarterbacks AND offensive linemen. they should build a thousand foot high statue of jim finks in front of halas hall just to remind everyone how it is done.

disagree it's not that we have bad qb luck, bad qb karma or anything else. the truth is we, as a franchise, make extremely poor management decisions. this franchise has not had anyone with a clue (INCLUDING angelo) in modern football history, with the exception of jim finks and jerry vaniesi (sp), who knows not only what player personnel they are looking at in this position, but don't give two $&!%$ whether they find/found one at all!!! certainly the mccaskey family could care less or it wouldn't have been run this way for over TWENTY YEARS! so yea, that's why we pick reach players we are already overburdened with instead of qb's with potential, even when they are in desperate need of one, and look at the walk-ons or someone else's trash to run our offenses.

ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH another case in POINT... we just drafted ANOTHER TE!!!!!!!! for WHAT??? angelo is nuts!! edit: i would like to add he has major character issues and would be eliminated by teams that value character. i guess the main targets are for angie is to draft injured players... i give up.

apparently i would be happy if we stop drafting the same positions year after freakin YEAR while we ignore the offensive line and quarterback position!!!! you name FIVE true guards taken so far. which ones could we have drafted already? all of them except albert? do any of them project as starters in the NFL? hmmmm. another question... who is our backup RT if tate moves over there? sinclair? beekman? oakley? metcalf? tate is getting old. who do we replace him with if he moves to RT? how long does it take to groom offensive linemen? 2 years? 3 years? where is this guy on our roster? oh yea thats right, we will pay a lot of money for an average one who can play out the last string in his career and change him out again later. who really needs continuity on your offensive line or YOUNG studs on your roster. not us that's for sure. who is our #3 qb? who is our qb if the ones we have fail? oh yea... we will be a running team with anyway with all the running backs we now have so why worry about the passing game? do we REALLY need yet another fricken #2 or #3 receiver? well we just drafted another one. so that leaves us with how many WR's? 5? 6? more? any of this sound familiar? jerry angelo has been here since 2001 and yet we don't even have a freakin backup guard that can play better than an ancient one armed brown. that is truly a milestone for a franchise. unfreakin believable!! we don't need to draft and cut players in camp... we need to draft players who can START!!!!!! now on to the chicago bears biggest afterthought... we have been living on POTENTIAL at the qb position for SIX YEARS now and yet angie keeps trading down for crap extra picks we already are glutted with and we cut anyway. just for curiosities sake, where are we going to put this sixth safety? do you know how many safeties we have drafted since that idiot angelo has BEEN here??? are we are now going to be carrying 4 running backs? how many DT's we gonna keep on the roster? how many defensive ends? how many corners since we just drafted ANOTHER one again ahead of a real NEED on this team!! yea i'm getting real sick of six years of GARBAGE out of our draft.

here's the deal... we DON'T need a lot of bodies to fill up special teams we need QUALITY players. yet angie continues the same old same, old CRAP. we trade down again and again until we hit the lowest rounds where he feels comfortable drafting players that if they are busts it's no surprise. it's CHICKEN S$!& drafting. we get in the first round guys that most idiots could pick and from then on we reach or trade down because he doesn't have a freakin clue. the TOP need in this draft was quality offensive linemen. so what do we do? draft one in the first round and it's mission accomplished. in case angie didn't realize it we need freakin GUARDS!! some guards in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th round would have been nice. so what do we get? drafting a RB probably a round ahead of where a good GM would pick him, iffy receivers, slow safeties (which we neeeeed fast ones in our cover 2 crap), and frickin defensive tackles. not to mention we get a DT who has a serious problem with his knees AND he has drug arrest problems. why in the hell not just keep tank johnson if we draft his clone? i've about had it with this guy. he has no grasp of the reality on this team. we keep drafting the same people over and over and over and ignore the quality players in the draft we really have a need for to get cannon fodder.

ok i'm starting to believe this guy is a real running back and not another variation of wolf. just to let you know where this is coming from, one of the reasons i questioned this guys value is in the same pro football weekly 2008 draft guide that said he lacked speed they posted his 40 time as 4.63. some tight ends have better speeds than what they had posted so thus the major concern on my part. as some others posted i would rather have gone after another need if the quality player was there but if not this guy sounds like he can compete for the starting job which in my opinion is a must for a pick that high so i can live with the pick.

i'm NOT saying what quality forte is or is NOT because i have never seen him play in my life. i am only going on what i read. i am also NOT saying these rags know JACK about anything. if they are wrong that is what i want to know and why they are wrong. if they project him in their rag as being only a FB possibility and it's true then the pick was nuts. if they were wrong then THATS what i want to know. that he is a HALFBACK that is projected as a starter when we drafted him. if for some reason he is a specialty back, if for some reason he is REALLY a fullback then angelo has brain damage drafting him in the 2nd round!!!!!!!

look, the pro football weekly guide is a magazine that cost seven bucks and is on the news stands. if you have some special edition of this magazine that i don't let me know and i will demand my money back. as far as the items you asked about... the PFW guide on page 38 in the RB section forte is listed RB #7. at the bottom of the page is listed "ROUND" and has numbers 1-7 next to it. the highligted numbers in white are rounds 3 to 4 at where he is projected to be drafted. the other guide has a RB section at which forte is the #15 listed back. i assume that is quality of player and if not the magazine is run by cretins. here is what it boils down to... no i have not seen this guy play and am not questioning anyone who has other than to ask relevant questions. i can ONLY judge him at THIS POINT by what i have read in these draft guides. if you disagree with what these writers say then explain it in detail why they are wrong. in fact if forte is NOT and will NOT become a fullback to stay in the nfl and is projected to be a full time half back i will be at least ready to see what happens before i label him. if he IS at best a glorified FB then this pick is horrendous and nobody will convince me any different. FB's just are not this valuable that you waste mid 2nd round picks on them.

i don't know which edition you have of ProFootball Weekly Draft Guide you have but my ProFootball Weekly 2008 Draft Guide says this for his downside: "Runs upright. Takes time to build speed and can be slow to reach the perimeter. Struggles to make defenders miss in the open field. Loses his base and could do a better job sustaining blocks in pass protection. Does not naturally adjust his body and struggles to catch anything thrown behind him. Lacks top-end speed and is not a home-run threat. Production is inflated having faced marginal Conference USA competition." he was ranked to go in the 3rd or 4th round. listed as the 7th best rb in this magazine. here is what is in Pro Football Draft Guide '08: Downside - "Forte is anything but a burner, and his physical running style won't be nearly as effective in the NFL. He's also not very elusive. Forte is really more of a three-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust type whose best chance might be to bulk up and play fullback in the NFL. Bottom Line - Forte will likely have a spot in the NFL if he can add fullback skills and become more versatile. He'll likely be a situational hybrid back who could see planty of action on third down and in single-back sets. He could also be an asset on the goal line." as far as trading up at around the 20-25 spot in the first there WERE trades happening. i think the skins? actually traded out and the cost was similar if not smaller than what i stated. Edit: he was also ranked in this magazine as the 15th best running back in the draft.

as i stated i haven't seen any college ball and am going on draft rags but.... IF if forte isn't a potential FULL TIME every down halfback it sucks as a pick!!!

i'm on dial up and could only watch a very limited amount of these video's but although it seemed sped up a bit this forte guy doesn't look like any fullback type runner to me. so those on the know... is this forte guy a real fulltime runningback or another change of pace guy? if it's not a potential fulltime back we got screwed blue and tattooed.

like i said i havent watched either player. i can only go buy what these good/crappy draft books project. but if forte doesn't project in quality as close to the 3rd RB picked in the draft (mendy), and it doesn't seem close, then it was a complete waste of a pick. so you basically wasted a 2nd round pick on an average or poor RB to save an extra 3rd round pick. that's stupid logic if angelo and the other bricks sitting in our war room figure this is how you build a franchise.

ok then tell me why it would have "sucked just as much." you would have basically traded an EXTRA 3rd round pick we had for mendy. the 7th rounder we could have sweetened the deal with doesn't mean jack S$#!& because we have THREE OTHERS in the same round!!!! as i didn't watch college ball this year i assume you did. so tell me how much better or worse mendy is compared to forte and why that pick would have sucked. hey if they picked another OL i'm with that. if they thought a QB warranted that pick, fine i'm ok with that. but if these D!%$# just wanted a RB then why in the holy C$%!#@ didn't they pick one who COULD be an every down back and one who COULD be good???????????????????????????????/

are you seriously comparing forte to tomlinson? really???? if they say tomlinson "looks to make the home run play" doesn't that mean he has the speed and capability to actually physically DO IT???? forte is supposed to beef up just to be a freakin FULL BACK?? what team but us draft >>>potential if these ass clowns running our draft had balls larger than a bee bee they could have moved up into the bottom of the 1st round and gotten MENDENHAL by giving up our 2nd, one of our thirds and a seventh to at least 2 different teams!!! would anyone here want mendy and only have given up our 2nd rounder plus one of our 2 third rounders and one of our million 7th rounders to get him??

i have to admit i have not watched much college ball this year but... if the people who write these draft mags know their arse from a hole in the ground can anyone tell me why we picked forte in the 2nd round?? i quote: Pro Football Draft Ranked #7 - "Runs upright. Takes time to build speed... struggles to make defenders miss in open field. Lacks top end speed. Production is inflated having faced marginal Conference USA competition. Could best fit as a one-back or utility back..." AND he is coming back from a serious injury????? Pro Football Draft Guide Ranked #15 - "More of a three-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust type... will likely have a spot in the NFL if he can add fullback skills... Likely a situational hybrid back who could see plenty of action on third down." sounds like a slower version of cedric benson or a MUCH slower version of A-train. so yet again we waste a first day pick on a tweener situational back. it's freakin NUTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

YES absolutely a good idea. the way it is now is way to small. another idea would be to delete the first group/section of permanent posts (Important Topics) and put a link just below the banner to a separate page with all this info on it. 30-40 posts in this type of format would be awsome.

ask your doctor about the possibility of meniers disease. in the mean time stay away from caffeine and nicotine and a lot of salt till you get a diagnosis. good luck

hahahahahaha this is the bill wrigley recipe on how to build a team. good job.