[CBFF] I rest my case

[Tom Shannon]

Jim Ferolie wrote:
> This doesn't make any sense, I'm sorry. What is a developmental pick, then? 
> Someone whose scouting report says is talented but raw, like Mark Bradley? 
> Or a fifth-round tight end with talent but character questions who probably 
> won't get much PT now but might when Clark gets older? Or a fifth-round 
> cornerback when we have starters at both sides plus a nickel and dime guy?
>
> Why wouldn't you try to draft starters? If Angelo could have drafted 12 
> starters, he would have been all over it. We've all agreed Steltz is the 
> Mike Brown understudy. Bowman is likely to be one of those dreaded 
> "redshirts," like Okwo, Bazuin and Dvoracek (or for those with longer 
> memories, Marcus Robinson).
>   
It make perfect sense.

A developmental pick is one that you make knowing he won't contribute 
much this year but that he has the potential, with seasoning and 
training, to develop into something better. Few if any of the Bears 
picks fall into that category. IMO Steltz and Bowman are not redshirts 
like Okwo and Bazuin (Dvoracek never was. It just turned out that way). 
IMO they were drafted to rotate in and play this year.

There's nothing wrong with trying to draft starters. But the guys the 
Bears took were high risk and I think they compromised so that they 
could get picks that would make an immediate, if in some cases short 
term, impact.

And (getting back to where the conversation started) needless to say, 
you can't take a QB with that philosophy. If you are drafting for 2008, 
you don't draft a QB who is going to sit the bench for at least a year 
watching. I'm pretty sure that's one reason why Angelo didn't do it. If 
you are trying to win now, developmental QBs are way, way down the list 
of priorities.

Tom S.

-- 
Life... is like a grapefruit. It's orange and squishy, and has a few pips in it, and some folks have half a one for breakfast.
  - Douglas Adams