The Guy No One is Talking about @ 4

His point makes sense. The Chiefs did reach for jackson but they were switching to the 3-4 and they wanted to revamp the D-line. Jackson did help immediately but neither did mario williams when he was drafted at #1. I think Jackson will be grow into a decent starter but a rookies first year doesn’t always show what he’s going to do in later years.

The other problem with the post is that dt3 overlooked Kemoeatu when he made this post so I think his point might have been different. None-the-less, we could use another NT. The #4 spot and williams is not where it needs to be addressed though.

If this was a warning not to reach for Dan Williams it might have made some sense.

I dont understand this line of thinking… you cant say one type of move will/wont work for us because it did/didnt work for them… Trading into the late first round to get a QB that was falling didnt work for the skins (Patrick Ramsey), but how did it work out for Green Bay (Aaron Rodgers).

As negatively as this post has been received by some it has been agreed with by others and (IMO) started some good discussion other than the eternal bradford/okung debate (which was all I wanted to do).

whatever… Im not denying that I need to work on my writing skills but I think you are nitpicking my post because it doesnt agree with your line of thinking.

but you never said that you thought it was a bad pick.

again… never claimed it to be a good/bad pick. Just said this is what they did

If you’re using that pick as your reference for this post, you can’t get mad that we read that as you thinking the Chiefs made the right pick.

im not mad… but you cant get mad at me either because you picked up on an implication that wasnt there.

Otherwise, what’s the connection you’re trying to make?

2 teams switching to the 34

Then you went on to explain why the Redskins so badly need a NT, therefore implying that this, to you, is something very important. And yes, you said this is what you think the Redskins would do, not what they should do, but you gave a lot of reasons why it makes sense to make this move (to you), including the fact that you think that they don’t have any opportunity to get a valuable nose tackle in the draft.

are you just recapping the rest of my post or what do you disagree with here? Do you disagree that a 34 defense needs a strong nose? Do you disagree that other than Haynesworth it would be very hard to depend on anyone else on this roster to play a key position like that? Do you think New England and Pittsburgh are (IMO) overpaying Hampton and Wilfork because there are plenty of potential nosetackles available in the middle rounds?

You don’t have to explicitly say "I think this is a good idea" to show readers that you think something is a good idea

So I dont have to explicitly say that but you cant imply from the 2nd paragraph that I thought the pick was a reach? (I have since edited that part. Changing choosing to reaching to make it more clear). Again I admittedly should have written this differently but I think this is an example of you picking/choosing.

If that wasn’t your intention, then maybe you should consider your style of writing and rhetorical strategies.

If Shannahan hadnt made some statements that makes most of the point of this article baseless I probably would rewrite it so my points are more clear. But arguing with me about “you dont care what I meant, this is how I read it” is pointless. Either way (believe it or not) I appreciate the time/critiques.