Re: 2010 Draft Philosophy - Immediate impact
Originally Posted by beerlover
understand your meaning & people make this mistake all the time especially when the record doesn't measure up to the sum of its parts. The only thing we set ourselves up for in the disapointment department is not becoming a legitimate playoff contender SOONER (this year) than LATER (years after next).
Maybe I'm wrong but I don't have confidence in this organization to have the mentality to run it successfully with this type of RB. Dennison hasn't excatly set the league on fire in Denver with a pounding running game? another thing that bothers me is the similarity between Broncos & Texans injury history, none of their backs can make it even one full season healthy, not to mention our own. Is this a function of ZBS? Can both OL's be the problem? Or is it the physcial make-up of the backs they aquire?
This is a prime reason when I did my first Texans mock http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68968
I took a RB in both 1st & 3rd rds. One lightening (Spiller) one thunder (Dixon). I've since elevated Ben Tate to the Texans lone selection @ RB via the draft in the 3rd rd. because he does not have the injury history, he's flourished in the SEC, excellent blocking back (to replace Brown) & is the physical specimen 5-10 215 to fit scheme & play through the contact he will surely be expoused to.
You think Tate will be a possession type back for us and power the ball in to end zone from 6 or less yards out?
I want to be able to recognize the difference between a "want" and a "need" and then I want to be satisfied with getting a need