Rumblings Authors Mock, V2.0: Round One Picks

by Brian Galliford on Apr 20, 2008 7:34 AM EDT in NFL Draft Comment 41 comments

Just a hair over a month ago, the authors of Buffalo Rumblings brought you the first version of our Authors Mock Draft. In that exercise - the first installment viewable here - each author predicted the Buffalo Bills' picks in all seven rounds of the upcoming draft. Since that time, several things have changed, most importantly of all that the Bills now have more picks.

So, in the week leading up to the draft, we are now going to publish Version 2 of our Authors Mock Draft. Once again, we are not going to predict trades, and we will make picks based on selections the Bills currently have. All seven rounds will air this week; it will be a chance for us to discuss prospects and strategies one last time leading into the draft. Without further ado, here are the Round One picks:

Brian Galliford's Pick

1-11: Devin Thomas, WR, Michigan State
- Buffalo needs a starting wide receiver, Thomas is the consensus #1 receiver in the draft, he fits Buffalo's offense and has outstanding potential, and he's no longer considered a huge reach at #11. Case closed. To lay it all out on the line: I would advocate a trade down for Thomas first and foremost, as it seems plausible and would best serve Buffalo's needs. In fact, I'd advocate a trade down in almost any scenario. But it's an exercise in futility to predict trades in mock drafts, so we're stuck at 11. I also seriously considered two cornerbacks here - Antoine Cason and Mike Jenkins - with the idea of drafting Malcolm Kelly in the second round, but Kelly's post-Pro Day remarks really rubbed me the wrong way. Thomas is the #1 player on my pre-draft Bills board, so this was a relatively easy pick to make.

Sireric's Pick

1-11: Mike Jenkins, CB, South Florida
- I wanted to do something other than Derrick Harvey; I think you all know where I stand there. I just wanted to make it clear, I think Harvey would be a solid pick but I'm not married to the idea. As for Jenkins, I know he's not the consensus pick for a corner here, but honestly, from where I sit, Jenkins, Leodis McKelvin, and Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie are all solid picks. DRC is the only one I'm a little skeptical about, but I could deal with any of those three. I took Jenkins because I saw a blurb about Monte Kiffen being blown away by Jenkins at his pro-day and saying that he would love to add him, and Brian confirmed that the other day. If he's good enough for Kiffen, Fewell should love him too.

Jri111's Pick

1-11: Antoine Cason, CB, Arizona
- I don't think I can remember a year where a trade down was so clearly the best choice for this team. However, having to take a player at 11, here was my thought process: I think what it's going to come down to is who do they think has a better chance of being there in the second, Malcolm Kelly or Brandon Flowers/Cason? I honestly don't know the answer to that. If I had to pick one I would pick Kelly, but does that mean they go with Flowers or Cason at 11? That would be a little high for both of them. However, would Cason and/or Flowers be rated higher then Devin Thomas on the Bills' board? I'm not sure, but if I had to guess I would say no. So based on value, Thomas would be the pick. However, I don't think one 40-time would cool their interest with Kelly altogether and I think they will warm to the idea of getting him in the second. So although Thomas may be the better value pick, I going with Cason. Two notes: 1) I love Flowers, but Cason gets the nod only because of his size, otherwise, it's a coin flip. 2) I am assuming McKelvin is off the board, because if he was there, I think he would hands down be the pick.

Kurupt's Pick

1-11: Derrick Harvey, DE, Florida
- In doing this mock, I had originally changed to Devin Thomas here (along with having a few other different picks later on that I've now re-done). After thinking it over, I've decided to stick to my guns and go with the guy I've been touting since December. I've said my piece on Harvey plenty of times before, but I'll continue to believe he provides the best combination of immediate impact and future potential at #11. We tend to overlook the fact that our defense is predicated on getting pressure on the QB, which I hope is something the front office isn't doing. Until our D proves capable of providing consistent pressure and disruption, I will continue to believe adding to the pass rush is a major need. I really can't see us going anywhere else with this pick outside of McKelvin, Thomas or a trade down.

So there it is - round one of version two of the Buffalo Rumblings Authors Mock. Rounds 2-7 will all be posted by Thursday, giving us Friday for final pre-draft recap discussions and analysis. So let's hear it, Bills fans - thoughts on our first round selections?

0 recs | Comment 41 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Bust

In a couple of years when you redo that top 10 bust list Devin Thomas and J.P. Losman will be 1 and 2.I'll be crossingmy fingers that we take Sweed.

by ThatGuy2 on Apr 20, 2008 9:04 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Ha, OK...

... Sweed has just as large a chance at being a first-round as Thomas or any other receiver. Provided he's taken in the first round, that is.

For the record, I'm not married to the idea of taking a WR in the first round (though I clearly prefer it), nor am I completely, totally and utterly enamored with any of this year's draft prospects (I loved Patrick Willis last off-season). I just picked the guy who filled the biggest hole and wasn't a huge reach.

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Apr 20, 2008 9:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Busts

I think it's a might bit early to either be calling Thomas a bust or working on his bust for Canton. To me he's more of an unknown quantity. I had a posting on April 4th where I looked at Kelly, Sweed and Thomas against ranked teams only. After all, who cares if you can put up 150+ yards and 3+ TDs against Saint Ed's School of Elfin Magic? It just doesn't translate into NFL success.

Thomas: "Against 4 ranked teams in 2007 Thomas went a combined 19-287-1. Divide those numbers by the games played and you get averages of 4.75 completions, 72 yards and .25 TDs."

Sweed: "He went a combined 19-245-2 in those 5 games. That breaks down to 3.8 receptions, 49 yards and .4 TDs."

Kelly: "He was a combined 34-521-4 in those 8 games. That averages out to 4.25 receptions, 65 yards, and .5 TDs per game"

None of the three really covered themselves with glory against the best competition at the college level. Thomas put up 23 more yards per game on average than Sweed and Sweed scored more TDs (on average and total).

I like Sweed and I hope Buffalo gets him somewhere in the teens this Saturday. However, I don't know that you can make the case at this point that he's any more or less likely than Thomas to be a bust. Sweed is more of a known quantity. Thomas scares me a little because he only had the one good year kind of like DRC scares me because he really only had one good game (Senior Bowl--he didn't play with the big boys during his collegiate career) against the guys he'll face in the NFL.

by Ron From NM on Apr 20, 2008 9:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Don't discount St. Ed's

I'm a master of elvin magic. Head master Elminster taught me a lot, that program is on the rise.

Man do I miss #78

by sireric on Apr 20, 2008 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Lets see

If I'm the only nerd who knows who Elminster is.

Man do I miss #78

by sireric on Apr 20, 2008 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Methinks

you will be.

by RabidBuffalo on Apr 20, 2008 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Know him? Of course!

Elminster is the Supreme Mugwump, the holder of Narya and the Orb of Aldur, wears a hat that says "Wizzard", and sits on a cactus. Right?

by Krenn on Apr 20, 2008 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What

the hell did you just say?!

by RabidBuffalo on Apr 20, 2008 6:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

ummm...

no.

Although if you said the chosen of Mystra,(which sounds almost as bad) you would have been right.

Man do I miss #78

by sireric on Apr 20, 2008 8:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well...

He does look pretty much the same as Gandalf. And Dumbledore. And Belgarath. And Rincewind. And Busdolf Gandeldorf. So it's easy to see how they could be confused. Oh, and Merlin, too. I knew I forgot a reference to one of the fictional wizards with a long white/grey beard and a crooked nose...

by Krenn on Apr 20, 2008 9:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

One more reciever

Against 3 ranked teams in 2007, Jordy Nelson went 30-347-3. That's an average of 10 receptions, 116 yards, and 1 TD per game. Yikes!

If you add in a sub-par 2006 (3 games for 11-135) and a decent 2005 (2 games for 6-205-2), you get a total of 8 games, with averages of 5.9 receptions, 86 yards, and 0.6 TDs per game.

by Krenn on Apr 20, 2008 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nelson

but he was a slot reciver in college

by The Buffalonian on Apr 20, 2008 5:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nelson

Was a slot WR in college but he was constantly matched up with the best CB from the opposing team. Also Nelson will be moved outside in the NFL because of his size.

Playoff Bound in '08!

by SP on Apr 20, 2008 6:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

re:

I like Kurupt's pick. I wouldn't touch Devin Thomas with a 10 ft pole at #11. What job will pay you $13 million guaranteed off of one year of productive work on your resume? I just am too scared of the value with Thomas. Plus he is a YAC guy, and we have Roscoe and Lee that are quick guys. I want a big physical, go up and get it WR. Not some guy that ran by College WR's after the catch.

Sweed is more and more appealing. At #11 though its McKelvin, Harvey, or the proverbial "trade down."

MARVelous

by MARVelous on Apr 20, 2008 9:55 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

YAC

I think that's what our offense actually needs. If we're going to be using a short passing game with quick throws and dumpoffs, then we need a guy who can pick up yards after making the catch. We know that Evans and Parrish certainly aren't those guys.

You can't really deny Thomas because he "ran by college" DB's. Isn't that what he was supposed to do? I'd rather have a guy who produced in college.

I like Thomas, just not at #11. And a guy like Sweed, Kelly or Hardy would make me just as happy later in the draft.

by Kurupt on Apr 20, 2008 10:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

parrish

parrish is a good yac reciver he is a punt returner he just uses his quickness

by The Buffalonian on Apr 20, 2008 5:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sweed

Hasn't Sweed only had one good year too?

Thomas was a Juco transfer, so his sophomore year at Michigan St. was like a freshman season and he didn't do anything (6 catches - 90 yards - 1 TD). John L. Smith gets fired and leaves behind a legacy as one of the worst coaches in Mich. St. history. Mark Dantonio is hired, realizes that Devin Thomas has loads of talent and puts him in the lineup. In his second season, Thomas explodes for 79 catches, 1,260 yards and 8 TDs.

Thomas' 79 catches were a school record. He had over 100 yards receiving in 7 games which was also a Michingan St. record. He averaged 29.1 yards per kick return and his 1,135 KR yards are a Big Ten record.

Sweed on the other hand had a solid but unspectacular career.
1st season - 23 catches - 263 yards
2nd season - 36 catches - 545 yards - 5 TDs

In his Junior year Sweed showed signs that he was ready to break out and become one of the best WRs in the country.
3rd season - 46 catches - 801 yards - 12 TDs

His senior year was cut short by injury. He started 6 games.
4th season - 19 catches - 306 yards - 3 TDs

So what if Thomas only had one great year?
He only played two years. Sweed played four years at UT and still only had one great year. Also I think Thomas' big season was BETTER than any season Sweed ever had.

I would understand an argument that Thomas is a one-year wonder if he lacked the physical tools to remain dominant, but he might have the best size-speed combo in the draft. His ten (1.47) and twenty (2.50) yard splits are amazing for a 215 pound player.

by kaisertown on Apr 20, 2008 11:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re:

Experience. Sweed has played in a National title game and more of a Pro-style offense. I think he is more "pro-ready." He has more of a polished resume. Plus I want a guy that can streak down the sideline and get a jump ball. Really, we need both Sweed and Thomas. Sweed to run outside and get balls and Thomas to be that tough underneath WR. I think Thomas will be between the hashes guy and hard-nosed getting 3rd downs, but I want an explosive guy, that can win jump balls and can win a 1:on:1 matchup if they are afraid of Lee on the other side.

MARVelous

by MARVelous on Apr 20, 2008 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think you have it flipped around.

I do think that we need a guy to be our intermediate, tough, over the middle guy, but I think that Sweed is that guy rather than DT. DT is the explosive one who can burn you on the screen, reverse, or fly while Sweed is a long strider and while he can get by the defense, he's much more prolific at sideline grabs and making plays over the middle. We already have explosiveness: long in Evans, short in Parrish. We need a guy who can be open when he is not open and that's why I'd take Sweed first.

Can't say I'd be TOO disappointed with Thomas, especially if Harvey is gone, but he still has not shown me ability to emulate Andre Reed in our offense at all which is precisely what we need.

Limas would be a Sweed pick at 11. :) So would Harvey.

by Kumario! on Apr 21, 2008 1:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

LOL jeez

You're looking for emulation of Andre Reed in a rookie? Man... tough expectations!

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Apr 21, 2008 7:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I have to agree with Jri111

"I don't think I can remember a year where a trade down was so clearly the best choice for this team."

Seriously, all the players mentioned, except for Harvey, could probably be had in the late first round. Trading down and grapping another teams first, and possibly second or third only gives us more flexibilty to move up in round two to snag a reciever like Kelly but also grapping a guy like Jenkins in the first. Id be happy.

Do you BILLieve?

by NYTXFAN on Apr 20, 2008 12:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Sireric

I understand that you are open to selecting some different players at #11. But if you really believe that Derrick Harvey will be the best player for the Bills at #11, then you should take Harvey.

How good do you want the Bills to be?

by Fort Worth on Apr 20, 2008 1:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I understand your point but...

It is a possiblity that Harvey will be gone by the time #11 comes around, so while I would love to see him as the pick, it is also possible that they won't have the option of taking him. I was trying to do a mock contingency if you will. I've done a few mocks with him as the top pick, so I wanted to do something different.

Man do I miss #78

by sireric on Apr 20, 2008 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

YAC

Yeah, but YAC in college is different than YAC in the NFL. Anquan Boldin is a great YAC guy cuz he is so damn physical. But we don't need YAC, don't we need a red-zone threat???? We are terrible in the red-zone and that is what we need. Not some guy that catches a 5 yard pass short of the 1st down and we hope that he can get the 1st down. I'm sick of seeing that.

I would take Sweed, Hardy, or Kelly in front of Thomas

MARVelous

by MARVelous on Apr 20, 2008 1:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Bills need red zone and YAC improvement.

They really do need both. If pressed, I would say red zone more than YAC.

"Not some guy that catches a 5 yard pass short of the 1st down and we hope that he can get the 1st down. I'm sick of seeing that."

Unfortunately, we all may have to get used to this. It's about maximizing Trent Edwards' strengths and minimizing his weaknesses.

Bigger question: Is our WR interest limited to only YAC WR's because Trent cannot have consistent success throwing downfield?

How good do you want the Bills to be?

by Fort Worth on Apr 20, 2008 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Answering your question

Bigger question: Is our WR interest limited to only YAC WR's because Trent cannot have consistent success throwing downfield?

I don't want this to devolve into yet another Trent Edwards/QB thread. But no, we need YAC wideouts and red zone wideouts to complete the skill set of our receiving corps. That's what our interest stems from, at least it does from me.

How many long passes did Tom Brady throw when he first started? Being a superb long-ball quarterback is, by and large, something you have to grow into. Especially if you're a guy like Edwards, who hails from a WCO system in Stanford. Give it time - if our front office/coaching staff sticks with him, he's got the tools to make all the throws.

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Apr 20, 2008 1:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I hope that I am wrong.

If I am wrong, I will be very happily wrong because that will likely mean that Edwards will eventually be one of the elite and one of the most feared quarterbacks in the game.

How good do you want the Bills to be?

by Fort Worth on Apr 20, 2008 2:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

RE:

Yeah, I think the point here is not what Trent can or can't do, but what kind of WR we need. I mean, first off the WR we draft probably won't do much until year 3 if he is like most early round WR in years past. But, if Evans is re-signed, then a complement to him is what we want. What that complement is?

You could certainly argue, having Devin Thomas, a guy that will work between the hashes is what we need cuz then that allows Lee to go deep and do his thing.
You could argue as Dick Jauron stated at the combine that a Big, physical WR is what we need to be a threat in the Red zone and get those 50/50 balls that Trent throws up when he needs someone to make a play

My point is, I can argue either way for these guys. Lee is a great fly pattern guy just cuz of his speed. I think no matter who we bring in, it will hopefully take some pressure and focus of off Lee, and allow Lee to get free more. I just don't think Teyo Johnson/Courtney Anderson/Rober Royal/Derek Schouman can open up the middle. Thats why I hope a TE is drafted high.

MARVelous

by MARVelous on Apr 20, 2008 2:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

In general

The quarterback is the single most important position on a team. The quarterback's ability largely dictates what you can do and how you build around him, including the wide receivers.

How good do you want the Bills to be?

by Fort Worth on Apr 20, 2008 2:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Edwards 'limitations'

We don't know what Edwards' limitations are at this poing. Yes, he loves the checkdown. All that means is that he's smart enough to be the kind of QB Jauron wants. Hmmmm....doing what the boss wants...isn't that what employees who want to remain employed generally do? There are some questions that remain unanswered:

Arm strength: Does Edwards have the arm strength to throw the ball all over the field? He threw some deep balls during the season. I seem to recall him hitting on a 40ish yard throw in one of the later games. He didn't throw deep often enough for us to know if he can do it consistently.
Accuracy: Can Edwards throw every route accurately? His 56% completion percentage suggests that he has work to do in this area at least on some routes. I didn't keep stats on it but I don't remember him hitting on 20+ yard routes very often.
Bad weater: Will Edwards be able to maintain his accuracy on all routes in the high winds common to Orchard Park? The Cleveland game wasn't an auspicious beginning. Edwards will hopefully get better with experience when it comes to dealing with the weather.

Some of Edwards' struggles can be attributed to his supporting cast. Royal isn't a great receiving TE and, as has been said repeatedly, the team lacked a true #2 receiver. Whether or not fans are sold on Edwards the guy at least deserves a couple more legitimate receiving threats before final judgement is passed. I'm hoping that WR and TE are addressed in rounds 1 and 2 so Edwards (and the team as a whole) can have a better chance of success.

by Ron From NM on Apr 20, 2008 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Completion percentage

I think those second two are closely related. Edwards was extremely accurate early in the year (Dallas and NY Jets was 74% and 78%) and much poorer in December - weeks 14-16 (two in Buffalo and the mess in Cleveland) were all under 50% completion. Of course, his three opponents - a Pro Bowl QB, the Super Bowl MVP, and Cleo Lemon - were not much better; they were a combined 38-81, with 0 TDs and 4 INTs. Edwards was 32-82 with 6 TDs and 3 INTs in those three games.

by Krenn on Apr 20, 2008 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Week 17

Edwards performance in Week 17 against Philly was also far from stellar. Completion percentage of 53% against McNabbs 71%.

4 games is alot of the football season.

BTW, for those games you did mention, Edwards completion percentage is 8% lower then the opponents (Edwards 39%, Opp 47%). Thats pretty big.

by Thronsen on Apr 21, 2008 2:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

trent 40

throwing that ball 40 yards is nothing thats how far penington throws it and i can even throw it 40 yards

by The Buffalonian on Apr 20, 2008 6:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

My Take

As I've stated before, out of all my pre-draft comments, there is one general prevailing thought that sticks out the most:

When you have the opportunity to get a special or a rare player, I think you should pull the trigger. You may never get the chance again. Good players are good, but they are also more common. You can always get good players next round or next year. It really shouldn't just be about 2008.

In my opinion, Devin Thomas, Mike Jenkins, Antoine Cason, and Derrick Harvey are good players. From that group, I would be happy with Thomas, Jenkins, or Harvey at #11. However, players like Thomas, Cason, and Harvey are available in almost every draft. They can be had next year. Conversely, I don't think that a player with DRC's rare talent is available in every draft. You may never have the chance again. On top of that, for the same reasons that I have stated previously, I would pick Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie at #11.

How good do you want the Bills to be?

by Fort Worth on Apr 20, 2008 3:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Assuming...

... that he's available at #11. That's a rather difficult assumption to make at this point.

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Apr 20, 2008 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Even if DRC is available

something tells me that the Bills don't like him at all. You know what I'm saying? Please make my day and tell me why the Bills are even remotely interested in DRC (you guessed that DRC is one of the top 11 on the Bills' draft board). As much as I want to believe it, I don't. OBD and I rarely agree on player evaluations and decisions.

How good do you want the Bills to be?

by Fort Worth on Apr 20, 2008 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

A rare combination

of size and speed. And in "size" I mean height.

Those are two things that will catch the eyes of scouts every time.

by RabidBuffalo on Apr 20, 2008 6:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Size

Don't forget about DRC's long arms, too :)

Very useful when pressing wide receivers, in pass defense/coverage, and overall playmaking.

How good do you want the Bills to be?

by Fort Worth on Apr 20, 2008 6:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

DRC

Why is he so rare to you? Because he's tall and can run fast? He didn't dominate his level, so what makes you think he will do much in the NFL?

How is he different than a guy like Antwaun Molden? He's 6'1, 200 lbs and ran a sub 4.4 40, put up 6 more reps of 225 than DRC, and his 20 yard shuttle was better. He was right there in his vertical jump (1 inch less) and was just behind him in the 3 cone drill and the 10/20 yard splits. So, how is DRC such a rare talent, when there's a guy like this with very similar measurable who can be had in the 3rd/4th rounds?

Drafting a guy because he's got decent size and speed, but has never proven to be that great of a player is just suicide.

by Kurupt on Apr 20, 2008 8:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Beyond the workouts

Evaluating talent involves much more than just comparing workout numbers. Game film means so much more than workouts.

Unfortunately, I have never seen Molden play, so I can't say much about him. For all I know, he could be just as good as DRC, but I doubt it. Reports indicate that Modlen is not very instinctive, not mentally tough, and that he does not play up to his measureables. Evidently, he does not show closing burst or recovery quickness in games.

On the other hand, DRC shows a rare combination of elite closing speed, size, hip flexibility to transition, change of direction ability, quickness, instincts, leaping ability, ball skills, long arms, body control, overall fluidity, and competitiveness in games.

It's not just about being tall and running fast. That's actually relatively easy and common in the NFL. A lot of those guys play wide receiver. Cornerback is a much more difficult position to play than wide receiver. It's more difficult to run backward than forward, not knowing where you are going to run, and with the rules of the game stacked against you. DRC is tall, can run fast, and he can run backward (backpedal) better than many other defensive backs can run forward. Plus, he can flip his hips, transition smoothly, change directions, and close windows. That's rare for a player with his size.

While college production is one of many considerations, it does not always translate to the NFL. Otherwise, teams would just take the players with the most yards and touchdowns, or in this case, the most interceptions and pass breakups.

How good do you want the Bills to be?

by Fort Worth on Apr 20, 2008 10:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

DRC

I think some people think he will be just like Antonio Rogers-Cromartie. Which he isn't.

I will say the Bills need playmakers. Offensively and Defensively. McKelvin has those return skills to offer, however, he even admits his weakness is his ball skills on defensive. He only had 4 career INTs. DRC, on the other hand, had 11 career INTs and he blocked 8 Field Goals/Extra Points.

I think DRC is a very intriguing prospect, and I don't down-grade him much for playing at a small school. I think the Bills just don't think he fits there scheme because he isn't as sound a tackler as they would like. I think if the Bills did draft, even though I doubt they will, he would be a better fit at safety, where his speed and athletic ability could be used to run down balls down the field.

I wish Whitner would be more of a playmaker. I envisioned an Ed Reed or Troy Polamalu with Whitner being picked #8 overall. Hopefully year #3 brings the best out of Whitner yet. Adding a talented CB to the mix would only help him achieve that.

MARVelous

by MARVelous on Apr 20, 2008 9:20 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs