cumulative numbers the past two years, including '01 bowl games: rogers: 24 G, 246/ 2,821 yards, 20.9 avg., 27 TDs williams: 25 G, 138/1,970 yards, 14.3 avg., 19 TDs do you still need me to explain how rogers' numbers are different? it tells you whatever you need it to tell you, but still has no bearing on charles rogers. are you actually suggesting he won't be any good because there's never been a dominant WR taken in the top 5? puh-lease... maybe, just maybe, it should be telling you that talents like rogers don't come around every year.
RIET, I think the point Ric is making, and I agree, is that regardless of what history says, or how good Woods or Johnson might be, we feel that Rogers is going to be something VERY special. The debate on who is better between Rogers and Williams is one I won't get into. Even though Rogers seems more durable.
Regardless of 3rd or 4th pick, if Rogers is not available, then I agree with you RIET, we should trade down.
I don't remember UT even attempting anything play action this year. That was how atm and OSU beat OU. That, I blame on coaching. I've always thought, "hey, maybe we're not that talented." But, then I look at the fact that Stoops has offered virtually half our players a scholarship at one point and realize that our players were studs when they got here. Either the staff isn't preparing the proper game plan or they're regressing.
Our staff sucks. Even the season when we had Leonard Davis and Mike Williams together, we still had trouble running the ball against good teams. The OL is thoroughly inconsistent. Once again I foresee another senior going in the 1st round (Derrick Dockery). The Offensive Coordinator, Greg Davis is a buffoon and so is Tim Nunez our OL coach. None of our players have gotten better due to coaching. Our best players have gotten by based on sheer talent alone. Coaches make bad players average, average players goo, good players great. There has not been one overacheiver on this squad. As we talk about the NFL draft, it must frustrate scouts to no end on what to do with UT players. On the one hand, their combine skills are off the charts. On the other, why don't they see this in game action? Chris Simms - Gem or Bust? Cory Redding - Gem or Bust? Two USA TODAY players of the year with unlimited ceilings never having recahed their true potential. Next year Roy Williams - Top 5, and Nathan Vasher also a Top 20 player. What about BJ Johnson, etc etc.... And don't even get me started about Derrick Johnson getting sucked up into a vacuum of defensive lineman. He will be a Top 10 player drafted as a junior and possibly even top 2 or 3 if he stays until his senior year. Unless you're just mind boggling gifted, expect no improvement with our current regime of coaches.
if, if, if... notice rogers' numbers, and his game, are decidedly "if" free. and again, i ask: what does this have to do with charles rogers? there's no correlation between a player's success in the NFL and where they were drafted. none whatsoever. moss, owens, et al, aren't playmakers because they were late first round picks. it's irrelevant. if a playmaker's there at 3 and he has the potential to be really special, why are you better off getting a guy not as special? because you get an extra third round pick? and what're the odds that that guy's gonna even stick with the team? i believe you termed third round picks "hit or miss." so you've settled for a lesser player on a chance you'll hit and not miss on a third round pick? that makes sense to you? all because randy moss wasn't a top 5 pick? further, there's no guarantee the guy you want is even going to be available when you pick later in the round -- why would allowing another team to control your destiny be preferrable?
crap -- is the edit function off? well, here's an add: continuing my thought, moving into the middle to late first round does not guarantee you'll hit on a playmaker just because moss, et al, were drafted there. that's ludicrous. totally not relevant.
Further, if people COULD do drafts again, you'd probably see a lot of those star wr's drafted higher. Moss, for example, might go top 5 (although his baggage might keep people away). Perhaps the only reason they weren't chosen that high is because of the stigma that you don't draft wr's that high and can get them in the middle of the first round. Granted, if you can guarantee you can still get Rodgers with trading down, then do it, as you wil probably pick up another draft choice. But if everyone has the kid ranked so high that trading down even two spots would be dumb, and, further, if your scouts think he truly is that special player, than you pick him. On a side note, this is eerily similar to some of the coversations had about Yao Ming on this board pre-draft.
damnit! is the edit function not working? sorry -- that post turned out to be a cluster f (you need to learn to reply with a quote, reit!! makes responding to your posts inherently difficult!!) here's how it SHOULD read: REIT: "If you compare this season..." (ie his other season aren't worth comparing) REIT: "His stats could be a lot better if it wasnt for the injury REIT: "If Roy Williams was healthy this year..." all these "ifs" plus you blame simms, the coaching staff... and notice, never, not once, did i, or anyone else, have to qualify rogers' season. could have: if duckett had stayed in school, if smoker hadn't entered rehab, if coach williams hadn't been fired... but unlike williams, rogers doesn't need ample excuses -- he delivered. simple economics -- there're two WRs (and CBs, and Ss and even LBs, for that matter) to every 1 QB, LT or RB in college football, thus the pool of good QBs, LTs and RBs is much smaller, making them far more valuable at the top of the draft. the result is that WRs fall -- it's why so many are drafted in the later half of the first round, early part of the second round, and that's why it seems good ones can be found in those spots. no team would EVER pass on a franchise QB, LT or RB to take a WR unless they already had a stud QB, LT or RB... and let's face it, they wouldn't be picking near the top of the draft if they had those things. having said ALLLLLLL that, it's still not relevant. you don't draft based on trends or history or set-in-stone rules... and charles rogers isn't falling to the later part of the first round; he likely isn't falling beyond detroit at #2.
My "ifs" was in response to your assertion that he did not have a "down" year. My definition of a "down" year is that he did not achieve what he could have. In fact, its very similiar to your assertion on why you would classify Rogers having a "down" year despite having better stats than last season. Both receivers improved from their sophmore season. Roy Williams improved a lot. Compare the numbers and what you'll see is that they were very similiar. Many players have breakout seasons in their 2nd to 3rd year of college so comparing their junior campaign is not a stretch, especially considering we're talking about 19-20 year olds. Exactly. Unless you have a sure thing no team picking that high would take a WR over a franchise QB or RB. The question is how many "sure things" have there been? The closest comparison I would make would be Keyshawn Johnson. Great talent, all the physical tools in the world. 1st pick overall in 1996. Marvin Harrison, Terrell Owens, Joe Horn, Eric Moulds, etc etc.. all later. Johnson was supposed to be a sure thing . Good player. Certainly not better than Harrison and Owens. Since there are very few teams willing to risk a high pick on WR, Indianpolis took Harrison at 19th. Was there that much of a dropoff between the 2 players? 18 picks apart between the 1st and 2nd WR taken. Contrast that with 1st round Qb's - often clustered in a series of picks. During the draft, you'll see runs made to fill a certain position. If Rogers is taken at 2, will there be a surge of teams taking WR's taken in the next 10 picks? Highly doubtful. Essentially you can have the 2nd best prospect at WR (probably 8-10 picks later). I do believe that Rogers will be gone at 2 so all this may be moot. So now what do we do? Kennedy has been listed anywhere between 4-6 on most draft boards. If we take him at 3, is that not a reach? I say take the best player available. Unfortunately, there might not be a consensus of who that might be. If Byron Leftwich is there at 3 and we know Chicago wants him, can we not make a trade to move down? What if a team really wants Willis McGahee (who I would not take). Do we bypass him and still take Kennedy? We have a lot of leverage with this pick. I heard Charlie Casserly on Fox Sports tonight saying the pick is for sale and we would listen to all offers. For me personally that is great to hear. If we get an outstanding offer we should not pass it up. And like I said earlier, teams become obsessed with certain players. Especially good teams with down years that feel 1 difference maker will take them to the promised land. Keeping an open mind and an open ear should serve us well during draft day. This team needs depth. Extra picks in the2 nd and 3rd round will help fill holes and we could always trade up if we got extra selections if we feel a player has slipped way more than he should have. Classic Bill Walsh and Bobby Beatherd (before he went insane at San Diego).
I looked back at the 1996 draft. 1st pick Keyshawn Johnson 7th pick Terry Glenn 18th Eddie Kennison 19th Marvin Harrison My bad I thought Harrison was the 2nd WR taken when he was actually the 4th. Horn, Moulds, Owens etc.. all went later.
in other words, he's had 3 "down" years since coming to texas, considering this year's "down" year was far and away his best season. very impressive. that, that right there, is why you have to quantify his production with a slew of ifs. yeah, he did -- because his sophomore season was so disappointing; he had nowhere to go but up. it's much harder for rogers to "improve" when he's already at the top of his game. well, using hindsight, quite a few. but teams had greater, more pressing needs and players slid. it happens. all the time. and for the one billionth time, it has no bearing on charles rogers. you don't pass on the guy you want because of what's happened in previous drafts, or because of what might happen later in the draft. and you certainly don't presume, because terrell owens was the 17th pick, or whatever, that you, too, will find a terrell owens by trading down into the later part of the first round. the WR isn't the risk. the risk is in passing on the one and only true franchise QB. when the second round comes around, a franchise WR is far more likely to still be available than a franchise QB. but the thing with the texans is -- they have a franchise QB. they have a franchise LT, too. so it makes no sense for them to trade away the opportunity to draft their franchise WR, all because a not-quite-as-good one will still be there later. imo, the very nature of your suggesstion -- pass on the best player avilable to draft a lesser one later so you can take a risk on landing a gem in the third round -- is so obviously a bad idea... i'm stunned we're still discussing it. now, granted, if you don't think anyone's worthy of the 3 pick, you're smart to explore other options. but at this early stage, rogers and kennedy look worthy, and better, both would fill glaring needs. what draft boards? we're not even done with the bowl games yet -- underclassmen haven't declared; offseason workouts haven't started... if you're actually using a "draft board" at this early stage (and i'm guessing "kiper" is prominently involved), it's a bogus one. i don't disagree, but this team, as it stands now, has 15 picks in the 2003 nfl draft, so they will come away with depth. but bear in mind, the draft isn't the only means of securing it -- depth can be found in free agency, too. what's far more difficult to find in free agency, and something they're just as desperate for, is a playmaker.
i want to clarify that, because it reads much too dismissive and angry... i'm enjoying this discussion, REIT. i do think it's a bad idea, but, didn't mean for it to sound so.... high and mighty.... that kinda bugged me from the moment i clicked SUBMIT REPLY.
All valid points, Ric. Normally, I'd be in favor of trading down from the #3 spot if the player we wanted was not there. However, at our position, we're bound to get ONE playmaker, whether it's Rogers, Kennedy, McDougle, Leftwich/Palmer (trade bait), Roy Williams, etc. Since we already have 15 draft picks, I see no reason why we should trade down, unless the trade offer we received was just too good to pass up. I'd personally rather parlay those 15 draft picks into 7 GOOD ones (much easier said than done) and fill in depth with free agency.
His numbers were very repectable his sophmore year. Having a breakout year in your Junior season does that make him any less of a pro prospect than the guy who had the same good stats 2 years in a row. For some players, it takes longer to develop their talents. That has no bearing on who will be the better NFL player, especially when we're talking about Sophmore to Junior. Im glad Roy is coming back despite being a lock for a Top 10 pick. Speaks well of his character to try improve and be the best. Hopefully this will increase his draft status the same way it helped Quentin Jammer.
