this is why we wanted to keep our 2006 #1 pick...

[thaiphoon]

huh? you mean we used 2 first rounders, one we picked Rogers with and one we picked Campbell with? we only used one 1st rounder on campbell...

I've been meaning to say something about this for awhile. We did not use two first rounders on Campbell. We used a 3rd this year, a 1st next year and a 4th next year to move into this years 25th spot. That is using 3 picks to get him and in no way can it be construed any other way. 3 picks, that's it.

I'll concede the point ... but 3 picks is still to much to USE on a developmental QB that will ride the pine for years.

and we would definitely not have gotten Campbell in the 3rd round.

Unless he turns into Joe Montana or Peyton Manning missing him would not have caused me to weep. I think we might've gotten him with our 3rd or at least gotten him in the second round. Either way, I'm not the only guy saying we paid too much to get this guy and its stupid to trade that much to trade up in a weak draft for a guy who isn't goign to start for years. This ain't the days before Free agency anymore where you can give Mark Rypien a clipboard to hold for 4 years and then start him.

I also understand a bit more of why we chose a QB (thanks to another poster) since Ramsey is coming to the end of his contract (this year and the next are his last 2 years). But again, we gave up too much for Campbell. I'm NEVER in favor of giving up a first rounder unless its for a guy who will start NOW. Work the deal anyway you want to to trade up to the 2nd round to pick him up this year (since most thought he'd be a 2nd round or 3rd round pick), but leave the 1rst rounder for next year alone.

Hell we would've had our 2nd rounder this year if we hadn't have been stupid and traded it to Denver + Champ for Portis. Portis was a pain in the neck for Denver and Champ didn't want to be here. We needed a RB they needed a CB. A straight trade would've sufficed by giving each team what they wanted (a need filled and the troublemaker gone). But nope ... we got taken like a bunch of "rubes" by the Bronocs and gave up a 2nd. rounder as well.

We give away too many draft picks.

[sch1977]

We used our #1 Draft pick this year as our #1 Draft Pick Nexr Year. How many Rookie Quarterbacks start in their first year. Think of Campbell as money in the bank, next years draft Gibbs will start to build around him. Because WR and Tight Ends usually start their Rookie seasons. Just watch and learn as the Posse is rebuilt.

Actually we used 2 first rounders (one we picked with and the other we traded away)...a third rounder and a fourth rounder for a developmental QB we could've gotten with our 3rd round pick this year ... but hey ... who's counting ??

If we could have gotten him in the 3rd round, we would have. Is it possible that Gibbs and Co. may know just a bit more than we do about grading draft choices?

[sch1977]

I'm curious what comp. Picks we'll get next year with the loss of Smoot, Coles, and Pierce.

We wont get one for Coles because he was traded

[air_hog]

That said, next year's draft does look to be loaded. USC could have 3 players in the top ten!

Like Auburn.

When i said that Kiawanuka was the only prospect that I was interested in, I was talking about what we needed. There are some sick ILB prospects and OLB prospects, but the one position we need more than anything is a pass rushing powerhouse DE, that's why Kiawanuka interests me. I watch a lot of College Football which is why I think Mike Williams was overrated, he was easily replaced at USC.

Yeah, by Mike Williams JR. aka Dwayne Jarret. USC just has a bomb recruiting crop (they're getting like another #1 WR prospect again this year). I like Kiwi as well, but I bet he would have been top 20 this year, so next year he should be top 10.

Overall, giving up next years #1 is good because if we have another losing season and we need a new face, we will already have one. And a good one at that.
_________