Strong or stronger?

[NIPS]

Now that Russell is starting and we have the potential #1 WR in Walker, along with Curry and Madsen and in my opinion a real good TE in Zach Miller and the signing of Harris and Fargas and Rhodes I got to thinking

We saw Rhodes bust off a couple nice 100+ yards towards the end of the year. Neither broke off highlight reel runs.

We all know the blocking scheme is what enabled these guys to get the yards they did.

We were 3rd in the AFC and $6 in the NFL in rushing.

What could we really expect to see DMC do under the same circumstances?

A whole helluva alot...

I like the idea of going 4 RB's DMC, Fargas, Rhodes and Bush.

With McFadden & Bush being our future backfield

Should we just be strong at offense or should we just be kickass strong and draft McFadden?

I'm beginning to get back on his bandwagon

If Fargas and Rhodes can pop off them yards... DMC would just go nuts!

With a serious weapon in the backfield will take alot of pressure off of Russell

I like the idea of having weapons of:

QB - Russell
RB - McFadden
FB - Griffith
WR - J. Walker
WR - R. Curry
TE - Miller

Thats a very exciting very young corp of some damn fine weapons. Scary in fact.

DL ?

Get Pat Sims or Dre Moore in rd 2

I think I'm the only one that actually thought Gerrad Warren played pretty damn good when he was in there

Our run support has already improved with Gibril Wilson

I'm okay with a rotation of Warren, Sims/Moore, Kelly and Sands

So as a Raider fan.. Do you go balls out and get crazy strong on offense and take McFadden?

I'm seeing more film of this guy and he is a badass. This is a guy that could take it to the house everytime he touches the ball

And the cool thing?

We dont have to feed him the ball 25-30 times

Raiders can sub in Fargass, Bush and Rhodes and keep DMC healthy

I say lets create a fuckin monster on offense

[YodasBeast]

I gotta pass on this idea, Nippsy. With another year in the system, both our RBs and our Oline are going to get better, which will allow for more chances at breaking off big runs. That, coupled with the fact that we need help along the Dline a lot more than at skill positions make me have to veto your idea.

[Jack's sore libido]

Unless we plan on running the ball 45 times a game, I'll pass.

As good as the Raiders' running game was last year, there still weren't enough carries to go around for even Rhodes and Fargas until Fargas got hurt, or Jordan and Fargas until Jordan got hurt.

This team isn't likely to rotate those RBs every third play and manage to keep them all happy.

[Raider Nation]

I like McFadden, but have to say I'd go defense or Jake Long over Run DMC at this point. Don't get me wrong, McFadden is a game-breaker and we can always use one or more of those. But I'm a strong proponent of the "build from the trenches" philosophy and happen to think we're a DT and a DE away from a very stout defense this season.

Hell, as President of the Vernon Gholston jihad, I'm about to start printing "Gholston's Gang" t-shirts to sell as part of the Willistine's Insider service package that Bones is letting me start up.

[hawaiianboy]

Like I said before, I think it's important that we look past this coming year when making this decision...

Is Fargas an answer 2-3 years down the road with his injury history and rockem sockem robot style of running?... He has yet to show the ability to handle a workload in back to back seasons...

Rhodes is almost 30 so how many eggs do we want to place in his basket?...

The wild card of course is Michael Bush... How much faith do we want to put into him returning to pre-injury form?...

What happens if we change away from the user friendly Alex Gibbs style of blocking, like we already have in the past?... We should not lose sight of just how quick we dumped this cut block scheme the last time around when we dropped Shanahan... This is not the preferred scheme of our owner... With Cable's contract up after the year, just how committed long term are we to the scheme?...


I go back and forth with this... I hear people say that we can always get so and so later on in the draft or we can get by with what we have, then I ask myself just how long has it been since we've had the kind of franchise back that defensive coordinators stayed up nights worrying about?... The kind of back that can make the LB's and DE's hold for an extra count or two on play fakes...

I'm honestly conflicted... McFadden's probably the most dynamic player in this draft and has the kind of skill set that makes teams look really stupid for passing on when you look back on the draft 2-3 years down the road... Then again some days I really want Jake Long because I miss the days of having an O-line that can physically beat you down...

With the coaching situation as shaky as it is, I take McFadden if he's the best player available when we're up rather than rely on the blocking scheme to make average backs look better than they really are...

[BigTron]

If C.Long and J.Long are both gone, I wouldnt be upset with DMC at all. Fargas is nice, but Bush is a unknown and Rhodes wont be here to much longer. DMC is in a class with AP,LT etc. No disrespect to any of our guys but he would be a major upgrade. Fargas and Bush have trouble staying healthy also. And i just wouldnt let those two or Rhodes stop me from taking a superstar RB. If we want to take pressure off our 60 million dollar QB we need a LT or a game changing gameplan against type baller like DMC in the backfield.


My top 5 change every day but here it is:

1. C.Long - the type of guy you want on your team. Fills a need.
2. J.Long - Run blocking god who can play LT in the NFL.
3. DMC - Playmaker who will develop into a healthier AP with less pop.
4. Dorsey - Health concerns me alot and he isnt a huge guy/run stopper. Disruptive as hell tho
5. Gohlston - OLB who could be the next Merriman.
6. Ellis - Little monster who can disrupt but isntin the mold of DT's we need.

[RZ]

I was on the AP bandwagon last year and now I am on the McFadden bandwagon this year..

[Madturk]

Unless the Raiders have given up on Mike Bush, I don't see DMac in the cards. If Bush ever returns to the player he was before his leg injury, we'll have gotten a steal in the 4th. All indications is the leg is 100%. If there was a dominant receiver in this draft, then I could see Al pulling the trigger on the skill position.

It will be nice to have DMac there at 4 and weigh our options though. Maybe play the Yets against the Patsies or vice versa.

[hawaiianboy]

It will be nice to have DMac there at 4 and weigh our options though. Maybe play the Yets against the Patsies or vice versa.



I don't know about anybody else, but I have no desire to see McFadden end up playing in that Pats spread offense... If people thought Kevin Faulk was hard to deal with on those dump offs after Moss and Welker clear out the coverage, wait till they try and have to come up and tackle this kid in the open field... :shakehead:

[Madturk]

I don't know about anybody else, but I have no desire to see McFadden end up playing in that Pats spread offense... If people thought Kevin Faulk was hard to deal with on those dump offs after Moss and Welker clear out the coverage, wait till they try and have to come up and tackle this kid in the open field... :shakehead:

I have no intention of handing them another skill position guy who's going to blow up. I don't think Al is either. Just want to tease them and see them grovel a little then trade the pick to the Jets:D

[Stanny]

I don't know about anybody else, but I have no desire to see McFadden end up playing in that Pats spread offense... If people thought Kevin Faulk was hard to deal with on those dump offs after Moss and Welker clear out the coverage, wait till they try and have to come up and tackle this kid in the open field... :shakehead:

I head mentioned in my thread earlier, that with the Pats picking 7th, they may just say fugg it and take McFads to put them in the elite club. As you mentioned, they could line up Maroney in a single back and split DMC out...they can line them both up in the backfield...They would be one hell of a one two punch. I hope they make the pull and trade up to our spot and we land Dorsey or Ellis at the 7 spot and stock pile the picks.

But it would not hurt my feelings if they took DMC. Rhodes has a year left I believe after this, Huggy's contract was for three years I believe and Mr. Louisville can't be counted on yet. Ron Dayne looked like a stud in college too althought I think Bush has better feet and vision rather than a product of the system but the point is he's unproven. Our current RB crop, I'm content with but they are not elite, offer no threat or game planning.

We could put the money into the franchise RB, along with the franchise QB and TE as what SF did, Dallas did and at one time what Greenbay did.

Shannahan finds backs to put up 1000 every year in this system, but he hasn't won without his Terrell Davis.

[NIPS]

HB makes a good point

30 year old Rhodes and Fargas has shown he can only get it done in a ZBS

And Bush is still unproven

I'd sure hate to be 2 years from now watching every defense basically blitz us and rack Russell with no concern about our running game

We could possibly see the end of this franchise if we dont get some insurance

I'd rather be strong in one area as oppossed to average on both

[Rupert]

So there are no running backs coming out in the next two years? Holy Shit! That's news to me.

[Jack's sore libido]

McFadden will not make it to 7. The Jets will take him at 6.

[Freakshow]

No way I pass on McFadden. There's clearly something special about this kid and I for one do not want to see headlines of him as the greatest Jets tailback ever.

Our team must be built around Russell. Plain and simple. I'm talking about a solid line, good receivers and tight end, and a seriously bad ass running back (sorry, Fargas, Bush, and Rhodes are not bad-ass running backs). Now that's a formula JaMarcus can work with. A great running game is a quarterbacks best friend. Surrounding him with a bunch of average dudes will most definitely limit our ceiling for another 5 years. Besides, good trench guys can be had in later rounds on but potential like DmC is gone top-10.

[Byron2112]

I'm not opposed to the idea, particularly since the chefs and donks have piss-poor defenses, we could just go off on them.

[NIPS]

Couple of good DT's to be had early in rd 2 ladies

[Jack's sore libido]

Bunch of good RBs to be had as late as Round 4, ma'am.

[NIPS]

Bunch of good RBs to be had as late as Round 4, ma'am.

Not near the talent

[Jack's sore libido]

Kinda like the DTs available in Round 2 aren't near the talent of Dorsey/Ellis.

[massraider]

Raiders desperately need D-line. I mean, desperately.

Al Davis loves D-linemen. Takes them in the 1st as often as possible.

This draft has 4 stud D-line prospects. What's the problem here, that it makes too much sense??


The one position this team has some depth at, if not a superstar, is RB.

When doing mock drafts, the Raiders should be among the easiest teams to slot.



If I actually thought DMC was a possibility, I'd be worried, because he has a lot of questions, IMO. I don't think he's even a remote possibility, so I ain't worried.

[007]

I think anyone who runs a 4.3 is on Al's radar. ;)

That being said, I'm starting to think our Chris Long/Vernon Gholston jihads are being heard by the Raider front office.

We havent brought in a single DE to even talk contract (From what we've heard) and I really think both those guys have the pedigree, athleticism, and size to make Al look hard at either one.

I'm really hoping Matt Ryan has the greatest Pro Day by any human being on earth, because he'd look good in Miami, and Jake Long would be a likely target to St.Louis

I wonder who Atlanta would take though? Not McFadden. I doubt they go Ellis/Dorsey?

More than likely, Long-Long-Ryan will be the first three picks, ATM...

[Jack's sore libido]

My fear is that it goes Long-Gholston-Ryan, which is very possible.

But even then, taking Jake Long wouldn't make me gag. Hell, I could even get behind taking McFadden as long as C. Long and Gholston weren't available.

[s.dot88]

Kinda like the DTs available in Round 2 aren't near the talent of Dorsey/Ellis.

i've always seen both of those guys as pure UTs, wherease I feel we need a straight up nose tackle

a guy like Dre Moore would be awesome

especially if we can trade back a bit in the 2nd to grab him while stockpiling some picks for later rounds

the signing of Walker kind of erases the whole "WR in round 2" idea, making round 2 available for the O or D lineman that we would miss out on in round 1

right now it wouldnt be my ideal situation, but i could definitely live with DMc (although his personal/life issues concern me) plus Dre Moore/Pat Sims/Quentin Groves/Sam Baker/Calais Campbell

all that said, if Chris Long is on the board, its a no brainer

[BigTron]

Man if you watch some McFadden video's he really goes from 0 to 60. He really is the definition of a " Big play threat." He is way to big to be that fast. My only negative on him other than personal issue's, is that he does break alot of tackles. Its as if he runs so damn fast when he gets touched it throws of his balance. He runs like Justin Fargas but away form defender's!

[Raider Bill]

Raiders desperately need D-line. I mean, desperately.

Al Davis loves D-linemen. Takes them in the 1st as often as possible.

This draft has 4 stud D-line prospects. What's the problem here, that it makes too much sense??


The one position this team has some depth at, if not a superstar, is RB.

When doing mock drafts, the Raiders should be among the easiest teams to slot.



If I actually thought DMC was a possibility, I'd be worried, because he has a lot of questions, IMO. I don't think he's even a remote possibility, so I ain't worried.


Exactly.. just in terms of roster spots, you're down 2 DL from last year (Sapp Clemmons)

I wouldn't be supprised if we went DE/DT or DT/DE, depending on how it shakes out.

[BigPoppaPump]

If there is one thing we in the AFC West should know, it is this: a running game is all about your OL. KC and Denver are perfect examples how a great OL can make average backs look great. So if we want to make our running game click, do it the right way. You don't do it by picking a back and ignoring the OL. Does anyone here really think Emmitt was that good? Or was it that OL?

Our rushing stats got blown up because of one game last year. We were a solid rushing team, but the day we dropped on Miami makes us look better than we are.


We have so many glaring needs and holes and I just see RB as an area where things actually seem ok. We need help on both lines first and foremost. That is how champions are made. Build from the inside out.

[RZ]

Kinda like the DTs available in Round 2 aren't near the talent of Dorsey/Ellis.

Thought I would post this here since it falls within the subject.. this is a post from another board by a fellow Raider Fan ...

3-technique vs. 2-gap in 4-3 - Yesterday, 11:37 PM
Nation,

For what it's worth, I gotta vent a little bit about people arguing for drafting Glenn Dorsey or Sedrick Ellis. This might have made some sense before we re-signed Tommy Kelly, but it makes zero sense now.

To make sense of this, for those for whom the terminology is not clear, put six Os to represent the O-line and the TE (on the right side of the formation).

TE RT RG C LG LT
O O O O O O

Lining up right over the C is the zero position or zero gap. Lining up between C & G is the one-gap, over the G is the two-gap, between G and T is the three gap, over the T is the four gap, outside the T (or between T and TE) is the five gap, over the TE is the six gap (pretty much never done in a 4-man line), outside the TE is the seven gap.

If the line call is 73-52, the LDE lines up outside the TE, LDT lines up between RG and RT, the RDT lines up over the LG and the RDE lines up outside the LT. This is what the Raiders ran much of last year, the only major change being the RDT playing either the two or three gap, though most of the time even in a 3-gap look Warren or Sands was usually shading toward the two gap. In this formation, the jobs of the two DTs are different, and require different skill sets, almost never can the same player play both well at the NFL level.

The LDT in the 3-gap is supposed to shoot that gap and penetrate, which requires an explosive quickness to beat the G and T off the snap, forcing one or both to not be square relative to the line, which makes it harder to block the guy trying to get past you upfield. This guy then has to have the strength and/or technique(s) to not get grabbed and stopped (it's called holding, but if the O-lineman's hands are inside the body of the DT, it's statistically never called) and a good enough nose for the ball to not run himself out of the play. This is a guy who makes tackles and gets sacks.

The RDT in the two gap has the job of blowing up the G, which requires the combination of quickness and technique to get under the G, and then the strength to just roll him backwards quickly. Since a good two-gap guy cannot be blocked one-on-one even half the time, the O-line will plan to double-team him. The top two-gap guys, like Albert Haynesworth, can do to a double-team what a mediocre two-gapper can do to just a single blocker. This is a guy who primarily helps other people get tackles and sacks.

The two-gap DT who does his job not only helps his linemates but, because he occupies two O-linemen keeping them from getting to the second level), he helps out his middle linebacker a whole lot. Given some of the problems Kirk Morrison had in shedding blocks last year, this is an issue for the Raiders. Add in serious penetration by the three-technique, and one of the RBs should be a step slow on pass patterns. When both DTs are doing their jobs, there is no cutback for a guy headed outside, and no place to run inside; the Mike LB has a great chance to shoot his gap clean.

Wanna know what a really good two-gap DT can do? Last year, for the SEASON, the Titans gave up an average of 18.3 points per game. In the three games Haynesworth missed, they gave up an average of 31.7. There's nobody like that for us to pick up, but a legitimate two-gap helps us against the run in ways it is impossible to describe, because it will vary from play to play. In short, a good two-gap, playing next to Kelly, would make life hell for a running back. (Grady Jackson is available.)

We have on our roster the following D-linemen: Derrick Burgess, Tommy Kelly, Terdell Sands, Josh Shaw, Jay Richardson, Gerard Warren. Burgess is a DE only, Richardson can play DE and has the strength to play inside if the need arose. Kelly played okay at DE, but is a very good three-technique DT (his numbers at DT in '06 and '05 were primarily at the two-gap spot, where he is much less effective). Warren has the size to play the two-gap, but neither the technqiue nor the strength. Sands got the contract because of flashes he showed at the two-gap, but has played too tall and gets blown up himself far too often. We signed Shaw late to shore up the two-gap position, don't know what he is, just depth.

In other words, we have Kelly and Warren to play the three technique, and Sands to play the two-gap.

Glenn Dorsey is a three-technique in the NFL, though he could play some two-gap. Ellis is a pure three technique, and also tends to play too high (hard for a guy who's only 6'0". WE DON'T NEED EITHER OF THOSE GUYS, and it almost certain that neither one is better than Kelly. (After a few replies to this already lengthy post, I'll post what Sapp said about Kelly.)

What we don't have is anyone to play the two-gap (unless Sands has as speed calls it, a Helen Keller at the water pump moment).

The guys in the draft who fit that bill are Pat Sims from Auburn, Trevor Laws of Notre Dame, Red Bryant of Texas A&M, and Ahtyba Rubin of Iowa State -- all of whom will be off the board on Day One. Day Two shows us Frank Okam of Texas (a reach at the bottom of round three, but might happen), Henry Smith of Texas A&M, Frank Morton of Tulane, and round seven compensatory pick or UFA Jason Shirley (formerly of Fresno State). Gotta be some other guys like that out there, off the radar screen and raw.

With the signing of Gibril Wilson, we're a two-gap DT and outside contain short of being a vey good D.

That is why we don't need and should not draft Dorsey or Ellis.

[massraider]

That was an interesting read, RZ. Do you have a link? I'd like to read what Sapp said. I am very interested to hear the explanation of how Kelly is a better UT than Dorsey or Ellis. Made me choke on my Special K.


Yeah, that's right, I eat Special K. You fat bastards. :finger:

[RZ]

That was an interesting read, RZ. Do you have a link? I'd like to read what Sapp said. I am very interested to hear the explanation of how Kelly is a better UT than Dorsey or Ellis. Made me choke on my Special K.


Yeah, that's right, I eat Special K. You fat bastards. :finger:

He hasn't posted the rest yet ... been waiting for him too as I am interested as well ...

This is the thread over at Mecks site ... you can view it as guest
http://www.thenflforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=42375

[RHC]

Man if you watch some McFadden video's he really goes from 0 to 60. He really is the definition of a " Big play threat." He is way to big to be that fast. My only negative on him other than personal issue's, is that he does break alot of tackles. Its as if he runs so damn fast when he gets touched it throws of his balance. He runs like Justin Fargas but away form defender's!Mayock says he has "dead legs on contact."

That can be corrected with strength training and good coaching. And opening up big holes, of course. ;)

[Byron2112]

I don't think our RB depth is quite as good as advertised.

Bush and Fargas are both medical questions to make it through a full season, and even if lamont is still here(very doubtfull) he can't carry the rock more than 2-3 times without laying on the ground catching his wind.

The fact that Dmac has so much talent just kinda highlights our lack of genuine quality at the position.

I do agree that a stud passrushing DE is a priority over Dmac, but I'm not sure Ellis or Dorsey are the kinda DT's we need over what will be there in round 2.

[RHC]

Here's my feeling on this:

I agree that Chris Long is a no-brainer if he's there. He won't be.

Jake Long will be a strong player in this league but I hate taking OLs in the first round, much less the top 5.

We have Kelly and Warren, we don't need Ellis.

Dorsey is an intriguing prospect but I'll wait for his workout and his physical before I back him. He's not exactly the 2-gap "anchor" type we need either.

McFadden would be extremely difficult to pass up if he's there and I'm certain he WILL fall to us. IMO this is a classic BPA situation. I think it woul be a strong move to pick McFadden here.

Because of my personal belief that a strong pass rush is absolutely critical to winning these days, my preference would be to stick with what we have at RB, take Gholston and Doucet or something with the 2nd.

[Byron2112]

What if we could get merling or campbell in the second?

[NIPS]

I aint buying Mayocks take on him

Mayocks only been around a couple years on NFLN, this is his 1st real "going out on a limb"gamble

How can you look at DMC play and think he's not in the top 10 or 20?

Dude is a tremendous threat out of the backfield.. He so fast when he hits the hole.. He's a fantastic blocker and can pickup the blitz..

He can catch out of the backfield, and he can even throw the football

He'll be such a weapon in the redzone

Word is, Dorsey spent some time in the hospital in Indy

Now you all know I pimped the King Kong MF'er early on...

And I love Ellis...

But looking at the DT's in rd 2... Man there's a couple good ones if'n ya ask me.

McFadden & Pat Sims and I'm shittin' smiley faces

I would love to see us take a flyer on Barry Richardson in rd 4

Getting a RB, DT & OT in day 1 and things are coming together

[CrossBones]

What if Al Davis rapes Jerry Jones for his whole draft? That is what this team needs -- more good football players.

I know...never happen. :cry:

[Byron2112]

I think we may be able to get Dmac in the first, Campbell in the 2nd, then we can take that fat bastard Frank Okham(classic Davis prospect) in the 4th or 5th.

[Raider Nation]

I think we may be able to get Dmac in the first, Campbell in the 2nd, then we can take that fat bastard Frank Okham(classic Davis prospect) in the 4th or 5th.

Frank Okam is this year's equivalent to Antaaj Hawthorne. Was a potential 1st round pick his junior year then sucked ass as a senior and will be picked late on Day 2.

[Jack's sore libido]

I'm not advocating Dorsey or Ellis in the first round. I'm advocating Long/Gholston.

Just pointing out that whatever Nips says about DT depth in this draft is even more of RB depth.

[Madturk]

Here's my feeling on this:

I agree that Chris Long is a no-brainer if he's there. He won't be.

Jake Long will be a strong player in this league but I hate taking OLs in the first round, much less the top 5.

We have Kelly and Warren, we don't need Ellis.

Dorsey is an intriguing prospect but I'll wait for his workout and his physical before I back him. He's not exactly the 2-gap "anchor" type we need either.

McFadden would be extremely difficult to pass up if he's there and I'm certain he WILL fall to us. IMO this is a classic BPA situation. I think it woul be a strong move to pick McFadden here.

Because of my personal belief that a strong pass rush is absolutely critical to winning these days, my preference would be to stick with what we have at RB, take Gholston and Doucet or something with the 2nd.

This is pretty much my thinking too. Ideally if DMac is there at 4, I trade down with the Jets since KC will undoubtedly take Jake Long assuming he's there. We then take Ghoulston with the Jets pick. In return the Jets give us Coles and their 2nd rounder.:D Our receiving core is now set with Walker, Coles and Curry. We use one of our 2nds on either Sims/Bryant and use the other second on an OL, most likely Sam Baker. We could also look to draft our center of the future in Mike Pollak. Maybe we;ll get it right this time.:p

So with one fell swoop, we address the DL, OL, and add the final piece to our receving corps. Genius I tell you:D

[Byron2112]

Okham's quite a bit larger and more talented than Hawthorn isn't he?

If he falls later all the better.

[Raider Nation]

Okham's quite a bit larger and more talented than Hawthorn isn't he?

If he falls later all the better.

Larger? Yes, most definitely, as evidenced by his appearance at the NFL Combine. More talented? Some would argue Hawthorne was more talented than Okam coming out of college. Hawthorne dropped because of a weed pinch, Okam's going to drop because of the ratio of his sinking performance and rising waistline.

[s.dot88]

okam also gets shit for leverage

[Madturk]

I had Okam going in the second in my 10 question thread. So much for that. The guy has completely fallen off the map. Man you think these guys would suck it up, hire the best trainers, get in the best shape of their fuggin lives. It's only the NFL Draft for chrissakes. Seems like once these widebodies go over the edge, you really don't see them making any huge turn arounds to salvage their careers. That's why I have major reservations about Terd. I think he's satisified getting the huge deal last year and that's the end of that. He'll never see another big pay day again.

I forgot where I read it but one of the NLF gurus like Gil Brandt or someone said that Red Bryant is clearly head and shoulders above any 2 gap DT in the draft. I'm ok reaching a bit for him in the 2nd, especially considering some of the stiffs we've reached for in recent years.

[Limee]

So with one fell swoop, we address the DL, OL, and add the final piece to our receving corps. Genius I tell you:D

I would classify that as almost ideal.

[RaiderIVlife]

I had Okam going in the second in my 10 question thread. So much for that. The guy has completely fallen off the map. Man you think these guys would suck it up, hire the best trainers, get in the best shape of their fuggin lives. It's only the NFL Draft for chrissakes. Seems like once these widebodies go over the edge, you really don't see them making any huge turn arounds to salvage their careers. That's why I have major reservations about Terd. I think he's satisified getting the huge deal last year and that's the end of that. He'll never see another big pay day again.

I forgot where I read it but one of the NLF gurus like Gil Brandt or someone said that Red Bryant is clearly head and shoulders above any 2 gap DT in the draft. I'm ok reaching a bit for him in the 2nd, especially considering some of the stiffs we've reached for in recent years.

Man, imagine a Long/Bryant draft.....or even a Gholston/Bryant draft......or a Dorsey/Bryant draft........