PFF's view of every team's draft for 2008-2010

The only problem is your post doesn't factor in coaching, the terribly poor hires made, choice of outdated schemes, and their inability to coach up college players at the next level. Parcells hired a dinosaur of an offensive coordinator who is no longer in the league and whom Ireland & his STAFF were tasked with finding players for, a head coach who couldn't even cut it as an offensive coordinator who Ireland & his STAFF had to find players for (not sure why you believe Ireland comprised our entire scouting department when in fact MANY minds were involved in the player finding process), and a terrible special teams coach, which I don't take lightly b/c he's often hands on with much of the young guys still in need of developing. Making matters worse was Parcells running the top of each draft and instilling his will when needed like the picks of White & Nalbone, making sure Pat Turner was taken in the 3rd round no matter what, the philosophy of doubling down on draft picks even if it meant reaching for players at the expense of value, and the coaching staffs' unsuccessful involvement in the draft process like Henning's boner for Henne and our Senior Bowl coaching staffs' desire for John Jerry even though we were reportedly quite high on Jimmy Graham. It was Parcells' show, Parcells' philosophy, Parcells' blueprint, and Ireland didn't have veto power, and the entire draft process was muddled with everyone getting in on the action- Parcells, Sparano, Henning, Ireland, Gaine, and our entire scouting tree, so to stick any lack of success on Ireland is myopic thinking at its finest.

Only now is Ireland finally at the point where he absorbs the full brunt of any blame or credit. The staff & coaching hires are now all his, as are the team's philosophy, vision, and blueprint for drafting players. MB, Ireland has never been a Parcellian disciple; that's been factually stated as such. Plus the team is nothing like that of Parcells'; the vision is entirely different; the philosophy is different; the types of players being brought in are different; the drafting style is different. Not sure why you're trying to hold onto that outdated view that Ireland is Parcellian disciple when things couldn't be more different. Parcells wouldn't have brought in Mike Wallace; Parcells wouldn't have switched out Dansby & Burnett for smaller, faster, younger linebackers (6'01 & 6'01.5 and both 240); Parcells wouldn't have drafted Tannehill at 8 in a million years; Parcells wouldn't have made a switch to a smaller, more-athletic, zone blocking Oline; Parcells wouldn't have transitioned our tight ends into being better pass catchers than blockers, and Parcells seems to have a different preference for type of running back than what Ireland has brought in. Not to mention, Ireland & Philbin share a similar mindset for their vision of the team and types of players wanted, so if his vision is similar to Philbin's which seems quite different than that of Sparano & Hennings, then that most likely means Ireland's vision wasn't consistent with that of Sparano, Henning, and Parcells.

All Ireland did was accept a promotion from Parcells knowing in the near future it would become his team that he could run his way. There's nothing incriminating about that, nor is there anything weak about his character for accepting a promotion as GM "on paper" in order to leave Dallas despite knowing full control of the team would still lay in the hands of his boss, Parcells. There's not a damn person on this board who'd turn down such an opportunity to one day run an NFL team regardless of who the heck calls the shots the first few years while learning the job.

BTW, anyone criticizing the pick of Odrick is just acting foolish for no reason. The guy was rated highly, represented good value, and along with Patrick Robinson is the best player out of picks 28-41. Plus he missed his rookie reason so last year was essentially year two, of which he performed quite admirably in.

 

Risk is risk. Makes no difference if it is talent risk or character risk. That said, it is pretty stupid to be taking a "talent risk" in the first round, or even the second round. If you have any question as to whether a player is capable of being a good player you shouldn't take him in the first two rounds. That doesn't mean you have to be sure he will be a good player, but you should at least feel he has the talent to be one.


Almost every player that is taken in the first 2 rounds is a "pretty good college player." And neither Smith nor Vontae were much more than that. Both had potential to be great players and but both also had some bust potential based on character, work ethic, intelligence or experience at the position. Generally speaking, a WTF pick is a high risk, high reward pick. Jerry was absolutely a risky pick. Any guy whose weight periodically approaches 400 lbs is a very high risk pick.

 

So, that doesn't mean anything, nor does it make it correct. Secondly, perception by whom? I certainly don't perceive drafting Tannehill at 8 as an aversion to high risk nor choosing to take low-risk, high-floor players, nor is that my perceptions based on the drafted players I mention below.

No it doesn't. If PFF's list supports any perception from 2008-2010 it's how Parcells ran the team. Why do you act like there weren't a large number of people involved in our drafting process during that period when in fact we had Parcells at the top with Gaine, Ireland, Sparano, Henning, and an entire scouting department under him involved in the process that was established on Parcells' blueprint for drafting players, Parcells & Sparano's vision for the team, and for the offensive players to fit Henning's boring ball-controlled, possession-based system where he seemed to care less about playmakers b/c of how much he seemed to want to have supreme control over the offense's success.

With Henning, success was always about execution rather than playmaking ability; if a play succeeded it was b/c the team executed the way he wanted; if the play failed it was b/c his talent-deprived players failed to execute it the way he drew it up. The guy was such an egoist it was ridiculous. He essentially made himself a puppet master and treated the entire offense as chess pieces and football was a game of chess. He entirely removed the raw aspect of the game where players themselves could impact the game on their own on any given play and instead made his offense play scared and afraid to improvise on their own w/o facing the wrath of the coaching staff, as we saw with Thigpen tossing a jump ball to one of the game's premier playmakers, Brandon Marshall. Seriously man, we had Brandon friggin' Marshall, and Henning & the fist-pumper refused to properly utilize him, instead choosing to downgrade Marshall into nothing more than a possession receiver, yet you think that group under Parcells was gonna draft exciting, high-risk, high-reward type players? Get real with all due respect. It wasn't happening.

Parcells, Henning, and Sparano were all about finding guys who could run their boring possession based offense, move the chains, eat up clock, power run the ball, and shut the offense down inside FG range as that's been Henning's MO for forever as his offenses combined over the years have ranked, on average, in the bottom third of the league, as well as have NEVER developed a quality starting QB. Since this team under Parcells was far from a risk-taking team I'm not sure why you or others think their draft approach would be any different, because what we did on draft day would obviously mirror the type of team we were on the field, which is entirely different to the type of team we are on the field now. Now, with Ireland running the show, what we see on the field is entirely different. He brought in a coaching staff that doesn't coach scared nor teach their players to play that way. It's no longer just about execution; it's also about letting players use their natural ability to make plays on their own above and beyond execution which didn't happen under Sparano & Henning, so now we're seeing Ireland & his staff bringing in players who fit this new philosophy and playing style.

No, there's no evidence to support it. Here's the overwhelming evidence against it besides the aforementioned Tannehill pick: Michael Egnew (who came from a spread offense and would need time adjusting), Olivier Vernon (who had minimal production in college), Clyde Gates (small school developmental guy), Lamar Miller (talented upside guy), Josh Kaddu (developmental kid with some good natural athleticism), Rishard Matthews (talented upside pick needing development), a Daniel Thomas (only 2 prior years at running back), Charles Clay (whom analysts weren't sure where he'd fit in in the NFL), Jimmy Wilson (spent time in prison for murder), and signing Reggie Bush to be a feature back. That's TWO THIRDS of Ireland's two drafts being the complete opposite of this "perception" you speak of.

IMO there's a great deal of ignorance associated in this so called perception by people who simply refuse to disassociate Ireland from Parcells and this current team from the one of the past, which blows my mind b/c Ireland's two years in charge and the new direction of this team lend zero perception of prioritizing low-risk, high-floor players and being averse to high-risk high-reward ones.

 

I don't really feel like arguing semantics. You clearly want to argue my point, and that's fine. I said it was a perceived tendency of his, not that it was an actual trend. Articles like these gives ammo to fuel this perceived tendency, and even then I said it still did not mean the tendency was a reality. That was my point.

 

Hold on because you're changing the game here.

Firstly, my point was exactly that. The perception. I did not say i particularly shared that perception. Nor did i say the perception was correct or incorrect. The perception exists and you, who are a regular member of these forums, cannot tell me this perception is completely unknown to you. Come on.

Secondly, this articles does definitely give support to this perception. Again, not saying it validates it, or makes it definitive, but if someone thinks this perception is reality, then this articles gives support, you cannot deny this.

Thirdly, the majority of the players you mentioned to make your point, are players taken in the last draft, or players taken with late picks. If those taken in the last draft, one can argue there is a change in the way Ireland operates because of the change in the teams philosophy. If those taken with late picks, one can argue those offer little risk because of the nature of the draft.

 

No they don't. This article deals with 2008-2010. This is akin to crediting a president with issues that occurred during the previous term when he was merely a vice president with a man above him running the show.
When the 2011-2013 article comes out we can speak toward any tendencies Ireland may or may not be perceived to have.

 

Ok so we're going to operate under the premise that Ireland is completely exempt of any and all personnel decisions prior to 2011? I just want to get this part clear.

 

You are the one that started arguing semantics. I said I didn't get the "aversion to high risk, high reward players" and gave reasons and examples. I didn't say that you were insisting that it was true or an actual trend. You then responded with the supposed semantical difference between "talent risk" and "character risk." I said "risk is risk," i.e, there is no meaningful difference between "talent risk" and "character risk."

 

I was merely clarifying your use of "perception" b/c it certainly wasn't an accepted perception b/c there were plenty of fans who believed there wasn't any perception at all. It was more of a group false belief than a perception b/c there was nothing concrete about the situation to lend credence to any type of actual perception.

No it doesn't. It wasn't Ireland's team; he didn't run the show; he didn't pick the coaching staff; he didn't set the vision for the team; he didn't set the blueprint for drafting players; he didn't create the team's philosophy; and he certainly wasn't the only one nor the top one in charge of scouting & finding players and drafting them, so there CAN.NOT.EXIST any perception about how Ireland would or wouldn't have run the team had he been in charge instead of Parcells. You could maybe infer that Ireland's beliefs from 2008-10 were consistent with Parcells' since he worked for Tuna, but that is quickly debunked by the way the team currently is being run and built, which is quite different than Parcells', so that pretty much squashes that inference of holding any truth.

Why would I mention players drafted during Parcells' tenure when it was his show? No matter how you try to excuse it, 3/4 of our draft picks the past two years is 3/4 of our picks.

Yeah, no kidding, that's b/c it's now finally HIS team, so obviously if the philosophy changed from the old it's b/c Ireland himself changed it, which means he's now free to bring in HIS type of players to fit the new philosophy, which will obviously be different than the types of players Parcells brought in for his. This isn't complicated stuff here WADR.

Just stop it. Again, 10 of his past two drafts 15 picks have been opposite of this so-called perception you speak of. And of course they're players taken recently b/c that's the ONLY TIME Ireland has had the opportunity to run the draft HIS way, based on HIS philosophy, HIS vision, and HIS blueprint, and with input from HIS hired coaching staff.

 

There is a difference though. Character risk denotes someone who is talented but you have questions whether his character flaws can be a detriment to the talent. Talent risks denotes someone who has shown he has the talent, but is either inconsistent, inexperienced or has only a short sample size of displaying the talent.
Tannehill is a clear example of a talent risk. His risk stemming from showing talent, but lack of experience and short sample size.

2012 draft showed an Ireland that was very much willing to take calculated risks.

 

Ok so, for future reference, Ireland has absolutely nothing to do with personnel decisions prior to 2011. All the misses, and certainly all the hits are not to be attributed to him, but to Parcells. For the effects of this and future discussions, Ireland has been then GM of the Dolphins for only 2 years, this being his 3rd.

 

Having established that, only the 2012 draft gives credence to your argument. The 2011 draft doesn't really give any indication that Ireland was any different than the person making the decisions in prior drafts.

 

Typical straw man response. We're done here if you wanna take the immature teenager approach.

Here, let's get things squared away. Fill in the blanks below:
a) Who was hired and paid the big bucks to run the team in 2008? _________
b) Whose philosophy was employed starting 2008? __________
c) Whose vision was utilized when starting the makeover in 2008? _________
d) Who hired the coaching staff to execute this vision and maintain the philosophy? _______
e) Was this coaching staff fired, yes or no? _______
f) Yes or no, Parcells, Gaine, Henning, Sparano, and a large scouting department were all involved with the drafting process? ____
g) Yes or no, Parcells & our coaching staff had direct influence in numerous picks? ______
h) Yes or no, their numerous picks failed? ______
i) Whose player blueprint was used for drafting players?____
j) Yes or no, you find players to fit the offensive coordinator's system? _____
k) Yes or no, that offensive system under Henning was terrible and wasn't based on the type of exciting players we wish Miami had drafted? _____
l) Yes or no, regardless of what Ireland did from 2008-2010 it was still based on Parcells, Sparano, and Henning's vision, blueprint, and philosophy for the team so that even though he performed a job it wasn't necessarily how he, himself, would've performed it if he had full autonomy? _____
m) Now that Ireland has had 2 years to set the team up the way HE wants it, after an unfortunate year of lame duck coaching, does this team seem quite different in philosophy, approach, vision, etc from when Parcells ran it? ____

 

I wouldn't say "all" simply b/c he did have control over UDFA signings. Everything else prior to 2011 was under Parcells' say so.

 

Don't get upset, we're just chatting.

I don't necessarily disagree with you, i'm just playing devil's advocate here. I just wanted it to get it straight that you're opinion is that Ireland was merely an advisory GM under Parcells, so that in the future no bust from this era can be attributed to him, but more to the point, no hit either.

 

That is acceptable. I'm just saying, under this premise, yes we can strike the Pat Whites of the world off Ireland records. However, we must also then strike the Reshad Jones and Brian Hartlines.

 

For the people who wanna complain about our drafting during 2008-2010, it would behoove them to rethink where their actual criticism lies because we weren't drafting anyone who didn't fit the schemes we employed, the philosophy behind them, nor the coaches who ran them. With that in mind, tell me what kind of players would fit the tentative Sparano's coaching style and vision of the team? What mold of players would Miami draft for Henning's ball-controlled, possession-oriented, smash-mouth, play-to-not-make-mistakes offense that prefers a game manager at QB?

Would we draft high-risk, high-reward guys.... or, based on what we know in hindsight, would the coaches & system prefer less risky "safer" players, especially when the previous staff didn't like its players taking risks on the field which pretty much goes against the concept of "playmakers"? Why would the old regime draft exciting, high-ceiling type players when the old coaching staff & system chose not to utilize them, including Brandon Marshall? Seriously, if our coaching staff coached scared, treated Marshall as nothing more than a possession receiver, and preferred John Jerry over Jimmy Graham, then why would we go into a draft looking for high-ceiling lower-floor type players rather than possession guys Pat Turner & Hartline, game-managing QBs like the 4 year starter Henne, a safe first pick like Long, and bigger & less game-breaking backs like Hilliard & Parmale? Not to mention Parcells had an affinity for building the trenches and switched us to a 3-4 in 2008, so it's no surprise he made our first draft all about finding ends to play his 3-4, offensive linemen to establish his smash-mouth ball-controlled philosophy, running backs to fit that philosophy, and a game-managing QB to operate it.

That 2008 draft & FA told us all we need to know about Parcells' philosophy & vision for the team from day one and what would likely ensue the following years until Ireland would finally be handed the reigns. Parcells prioritized the trenches and a strong power run game, hence the signing of Smiley & Ferguson and the drafting of 6 linemen, 2 big backs, and a QB with 45 starts under his belt to train as the game-manager of the future, and that's likely why he brought in Sparano to coach the team, so it makes little sense to me why people think we would've drafted anything other than players who fit that type of mold & philosophy.

 

Hartline wouldn't fall under Ireland's draft record, but is now an Ireland player as he was signed to a new contract. Ireland gets credit for UDFAs like Wake and Bess. I actually believe that Ireland did make some of the picks in the previous years particularly late in the draft, but it's impossible to know which ones they were. We know that Parcells took players off his board. And we know Parcells had project players even late in the draft each year. We'll probably never know if Jones was a guy that Ireland picked or not. I have heard things over the years (when I had more local contacts) on a few picks which lead me to assign certain players to Ireland or Parcells, but that's too complicated for those trying to blame Ireland for everything. It's easier to just use a definite line like 2011 and UDFAs.

 

I think there must be those definite lines, or no lines at all. Otherwise people can pick and choose to serve their argument. Ireland supporters can give him all the successful picks, and none of the unsuccessful; while Ireland haters can chose to do the complete opposite.
I for one, think the waters are definitely very muddied when it comes to the Parcels/Ireland era and it is very likely we will never find out with certainty.

I think it would be the most fair approach to begin evaluating Ireland from 2011 and on.

 

Yeah, that's a valid point and a good insight on how things might have transpired in those drafts.

But that works into what i was saying the perception of Ireland is. Granted you have said that during those drafts Parcells was the decision-maker so Ireland wasn't in control; and even further, they were drafting to fit a blue-print that called for those specific type of players. All that still gives support to the existence of this perception. Perhaps not support to its validity or its accuracy, but certainly to its existence.

 

I don't pick and choose to fit an argument. I formed my opinions based on the info I have. I am neither a supporter nor a hater. I lauded some of his selections and criticized others. My opinion is that Ireland is a pretty good scout. I don't care for his people skills and I don't agree with all of his philosophies on position importance. But I do believe that he is in the top half of GMs in finding talent. I want to see if he'll make the right decisions on when to take a risk. I believe that RT was a good risk. I didn't care for the lack of risks taken prior to 2011 with the early picks, but that falls into the Parcells era, so I don't feel I can gauge Ireland's risk taking yet.

 

It was Parcells' team, period. No matter what involvement Ireland, Gaine, or the scouting department had in those drafts, the players had to fit Parcells' vision of the team, Parcells' blueprint for drafting players, Parcells' philosophy, and the offensive & defensive schemes run by the coaching staff Parcells chose. You and others want to criticize Ireland for Miami not drafting high-ceiling type players during that time, but that's unfounded b/c that's clearly not what fit the blueprint, philosophy, and scheme at that time.

Basically, what you and others wished we had done during those drafts would simply NOT have happened while Parcells was running the show, Sparano as HC, and Henning as OC no matter who the heck we had scouting players, so Ireland's involvement is somewhat of a moot point, especially when he's clearly displayed a different vision & blueprint for the team now that he's in charge, one that employs different offensive/defensive schemes & philosophies.

Now that the team is Ireland's, he and his scouting team are clearly looking for and drafting higher ceiling type players, but in order to draft those types when Parcells was in charge they'd first have to be scouting for them, which means those players would've first had to fit Parcells' blueprint, and since they didn't, we most likely were spending much time scouting them, which means we probably wouldn't be drafting them either. If Ireland was in charge and culpable back then like you're trying to allude, then the type of team we now see being built wouldn't have waited until AFTER Parcells left to rear its head up. What I'm saying is you're operating off assumptions that defy logic, which starts up front with the common knowledge it was Parcells, not Ireland, who was paid big money to take over the team and bear the responsibility of turning it around while Ireland operated as a GM in training.

Ireland obviously was one of MANY who helped find players for Parcells' blue print, but like I said, there were MANY involved in that process, so I'm kinda shocked anyone would seem to treat this as if it was a one man Jeff Ireland operation when we in fact it involved a whole team of scouts and Brian Gaine mostly in charge of directing the scouting efforts; meanwhile Parcells crunched hours upon hours of film studying players in preparation for the draft just as he's always done, and according to Ireland he didn't run a single draft while Parcells was here.

 

I wasn't implying that you pick and choose to fit an argument. I was just saying that in general, those definite lines must be clear so people cannot use them to fit their argument. I agree with the rest.

 

Phinsational, how are you getting that I'm criticizing Ireland. I have been very clear in talking about the perception of his draft preference, and have been very clear that i don't necessarily support it nor do i think it is necessarily accurate. I am merely speaking of the existence of this perception and the fact that there is a foundation to support its existence.

I never allude to him being culpable of the past drafts, i just wanted to make clear that your opinion was the Parcells was completely in charge. Some people do not entirely subscribe to this. I am on the fence on this subject.

Again that is not what I'm saying. You are reading what you want to read.

 

I don't see that being true at all. Most of the 2011 draft was quite different from prior drafts.

1. Pouncey- mobile, athletic lineman rather than than Parcells' mauler preference. Also was the most talented player on the board at 15 which squashes any "settling for the safe pick" argument. Also squashing the "safe pick" argument is the fact Pouncey was selected during a thirteen pick stretch where twelve of them were ALL guys who played in the trenches. The only exceptions was cornerback, Amukamara at 19, and Pouncey seems proven to be the best of the bunch.
2. Thomas- somewhat of a risk-reward pick; previously a QB with just 2 years of RB experience and in need of developing. Doesn't seem to fit Parcells' blueprint.
4. Gates- high risk, small school, developmental pick that would've never happened in prior drafts.
6. Clay- undersized TE/Hback without a specific position when drafted; risk-reward type who doesn't fit Parells' blueprint for TEs.
7. Wilson- small school guy who previously spent a few years incarcerated.

Frank Kearse is really the only guy I can say could've fit the MO of prior drafts, but then again a big, small school defensive tackle with some upside could fit just about any team's MO late in the draft.

 

That seems like a made up argument b/c I haven't really seen that happening. The bulk of the Ireland supporters simply supported the NON-FIRING of him b/c we felt there wasn't sufficient information available to us about the inner workings of the organization & decision making for us to form a proper decision from. Basically we supported taking a wait and see approach, but because we didn't emotionally support the hasty firing of Ireland, the anti Ireland crowd immaturely labeled us as "supporters" simply b/c we chose to not share the same harsh viewpoint even though we weren't necessarily supporters per say.

 

Well i think we have different perspectives here. I think this draft suffered from lack of pics so reaching a definite conclusion might be difficult.

However, Pouncy is a really good player. That he is mobile and athletic is a plus fit into the style now, but that does not mean it was necessarily the reason he was chosen. He is just a very good lineman and would probably fit well in any style.
You say Thomas was somewhat risky, and it may be. However Thomas was a 4 year college player who had 2 very productive final years and was rated as the 4th or 5th best RB in the draft. He was picked after better RB were already picked. You can say that the spot he was picked increased his risk, and i tend to agree with that, but he wasn't an overly risky player.
Gates i grant you. However we are entering the realm of late picks here. These late picks have an inherit lower risk just by virtue of the statistical chance being much lower to succeed the deeper you go into the draft.
Rest of the pick suffer from the same late pick inherit lower risk factor.

2012 is where your argument gets the strongest support. In that draft you can clearly see the change in drafting philosophy and not just in the Tannehill pick.

 

It is not a made up argument. I am not saying Ireland supporters are guilty of that. I was just saying that clearly defining the lines makes it harder for each side of the fence to mold details to fit their arguments.

 

I'm just generalizing, just like you're generalizing.

People can subscribe to whatever they want but the entire football world outside of Miami fans who want to lay blame on Ireland knows that Parcells was hired as the czar in charge, was given total authority, and he then turned around and hired Ireland away from Dallas to groom as his eventual replacement but had to carefully word the contract in such a way the NFL would allow the move, which obviously meant labeling him GM with authority even though everyone knew it was a crock of ****.

You wont find an article in existence describing how Jeff Ireland was the one hired in 2008 as VP in charge of all things Miami Dolphins, but you'll find plenty in a quick google search about Parcells stepping down as Vice President of Football Operations and handing control of the Dolphins over to Jeff Ireland. You'll also see quotes about Joe Rose noticing a teacher-student relationship between Parcells & Ireland and that Parcells set the formula for drafting players and that Ireland pretty much followed it. You'll see quotes about Parcells spending hours and hours studying the players and then setting the agenda for drafting them, as you'll see quotes about Parcells stepping in and correcting what he felt were Ireland missteps. You'll see quotes by Jerry Jones (Parcells & Ireland's ex boss) about Ireland certainly not being a "Parcells guy", and I don't think you'll find a single quote by coaches, GMs, owners, team execs, etc with anything but good to say about him. In fact, in the NFL world he's praised for his evaluation ability, organizational skills, leadership ability, character, work ethic, approach to building a team, and that it basically was Ireland's work ethic and proficiency at organizing & scouting players that drew Parcells to him, not because he was a Parcellian disciple who shared the same philosophy as many anti-Irelanders like to profess, but you will find a quote by Channing Crowder about how, paraphrasing, Parcells tried to make Ireland into Parcells 2.0 but that Ireland just wasn't that guy. You'll also find a quote by Peter King about Ireland's respected days as a national scout and that when he spoke the room listened.

Restated, Parcells wasn't hired to let someone else make the decisions for him when at the end of the day it was his name and his reputation on the line. The guy had too much ego for that and invested entirely too much of himself into his job to not utilize as much authority as possible. Heck, even when he was only a head coach in Dallas, not like the czar he became Miami, he was much involved in the draft process and made his presence felt in their draft room, even striking up a debate over whom Dallas should take with their 2005 1st round pick. How involved do you honestly think he became when he no longer had to worry about coaching & preparing for the next team?

again, I was merely speaking generally, not actually at you.

 

Well, then suffering from a lack of picks should make the "safe" drafter even more inclined to make safe picks rather than a slew of risk-reward type ones, dont you think. That's what the logic tells me at least.

Thomas was a 4 year college player who spent 2 of those years at QB. His risk was higher b/c he still had developing to do before he was truly ready to make an impact b/c he didn't enter the draft as an NFL ready back. Being a productive runner didn't preclude him from having 7 fumbles in 2010 that needed addressing; an upright running style that might need some adjusting to limit big hits, fumbles, and injuries; and most importantly- was a liability in pass protection and as a blocker. BTW, not sure why you think a player being rated highly means there's little risk involved.

 

Hard to argue with that and i suspect what happened is very close to what you think, still, i find it hard to believe Ireland had no say whatsoever in any personnel decision. I mean i get that we're talking about Parcells here and the weight of the teacher/protege relationship between them when the teacher is someone like Parcells. But still...

In any case, the 2012 drafts shows a marked deviation from previous tendencies and we have the 2013 draft in less than 2 weeks to serve as further sample one way or another.

 

That's a good point.

I don't think that at all. In fact sometimes the opposite. Late risers due to strong finish of the year or good bowl and combines offer great risks. Plenty of people have been suckered by this.

I also get your points about Thomas, but i felt his risk factor wasn't above the average for his draft position. Perhaps that we traded up to get him was the riskiest factor of choosing Thomas, but where he was selected i don't think it was glaringly over risky.

I feel going for Martin in 2012 was a bit more bold.

 

The non anti-Ireland side of the fence has pretty much said from day 1 that what he does from 2011 on is what he should be measured by. I don't recall seeing that side of the fence trying to pick and choose positives to credit Ireland with and negatives to omit from his resume, and I haven't seen that b/c most of the non anti-Ireland crowd are comprised of fans who have tried to be objective about opinion formation rather than letting their emotions about losing records and boring field play rule their beliefs, which seems like what many of the anti-Ireland crowd have done.

It seemed to me that anti-Irelanders acted on the beliefs that if Parcells hired Ireland he must be an Ireland disciple, that Ireland has to be guilty by association, that an organization with some consecutive losing seasons can't have anyone in it be worth a damn in his own right, and that our owner must be an idiot for not firing Ireland even though he was privy to information that we as fans are not. The first one is clearly false, and the last three are clearly assumptions.

 

Well to be fair the non anti-Ireland group is sometimes guilty of praising Ireland (or perhaps just alluding to something like "hey look this guy is not as bad as you paint him, he got us X, Y, or Z player) when speaking about the good players from before 2011.

 

Don't get me wrong, I get what you're saying, and it's obvious he wasn't hired to only sit around and learn how to run a team under Bill's tutelage, but we don't know what decisions were Ireland's or were at least instigated by him, but the point I've made in the past is- does it really matter? I mean, isn't what matters most is what the team does from this point on rather than bickering over what happened in the past? And the first thing that matters is not repeating the mistakes of the past, which Ireland seems not to be doing, and that started with us finally investing a 1st rounder in a QB. At the end of the day it was still Parcells' team, so even if Ireland did make mistakes there's no way of knowing if they would've likewise been made had the team been operating under Ireland's own blueprint for drafting players rather than Parcells', his own vision & philosophy rather than Parcells', and players that fit his offensive & defensive system of preference rather than Parcells' (and Sparano & Hennings).

I'm guessing that what we now see with the team is what Ireland, himself, wants. That makes significant sense because I doubt first and foremost he would run a team in a way he dislikes, and I'm also guessing the vision he has for this team, the way he's running and building it, and the players he's bringing in all fit into what he's best at assessing as far as player evaluations go b/c humans choose to do what we like the most, and we typically like what we're best at doing. With that in mind, considering our current team from top to bottom, coaches, players, schemes, and all seem night and day different from what Parcells preferred, it's possible Ireland might not have been the perfect fit for finding players to fit Parcells' blueprint, Sparano's team, and Henning's offense; granted I think the team under Parcells, Sparano, and Henning was doomed regardless due to an outdated approach and lack of qualification.

Parcells brought Ireland along for his ability to assess talent, but IMO the mistake was Parcells thinking he could take Ireland's ability and use it for something it wasn't best suited for while attempting to mold Jeff into a version himself, which was a mistake. I think Parcells' ego got the best of him this time around TBH. Maybe Ireland did make mistakes, but it's also possible Ireland simply wasn't as good at identifying players for Parcells' blueprint and Henning's cruddy scheme & offensive needs since they seem quite different from his preference. Ireland speaks about how he now has a shared vision etc with his new coaching staff and how important that is, but in hindsight that didn't seem to be the case in the past based on what we now know about Ireland. IMO Parcells made a lot of bad decisions from the start that left us destined for failure/mediocrity, and Ireland might've been one of them b/c they seem to share different visions, philosophies, and blueprints; however, I don't think Ireland should be regarded as part of the problem moving forward even though he may have been a part of the problem in the past, and I say that b/c if Parcells' vision etc was the main culprit then perhaps Ireland's differing vision may be the solution.

 

Interesting.

Couple of thoughts:

1 Not sure that adding up the scores shows a lot, because isn't it inherently flawed mathematically by teams having a different number of picks? Average grade might be better but:

2 Does not factor in trades either, for better or worse. A fatal flaw, IMO.

3 Any system that gives Jake Long and Austin Spitler the same grade is suspect.

 

I haven't seen that happening but I won't say that it's not if it in fact is. I agree though that it's not right. If I know for a fact he's brought in certain players, then I have no problem giving him credit or blame for it.

 

See that's an issue I have. Top half of finding talent? We need to be in the top 5 or we are sitting on the outside for many more years to come. I agree good coaches get the best of players but if you stock the cupboard enough even Barry Switzer can win a Super Bowl.

 

That makes sense to me and i can certainly get on board with the 2011 as the starting point of his evaluation. This coming draft will be yet another good barometer with which to measure and following what transpired in the last one, i think we can expect good things. At least i hope so.