lol Cofield can play nose tackle and is an anchor for the Giants front four (why the hell wouldn't you want a piece of that more than somebody who dominated for only one year in college and only plays one technique), which we'd need much more than a UT. What i mean is I'd rather have Cofield/Landri starting at DT than Fairley/Ed Johnson
first of all our receivers weren't that good last year, second of all AJ Green is a rare talent at WR and the best prospect since Calvin Johnson, third of all Nick Fairleys show up in the draft almost every single year
I don't agree at all with your claim that we need a NT more than a UT, but what's stopping us from signing Cofield and drafting Fairley? You offered two different starting groups of DT's as if those are our only two options. Also, why is it relevant that Fairley "only plays one technique?" We only need him to play one.
In regards to the WR's...I'm going to assume that you're not being serious in actually passing judgment on our WR's based on the hilariously abysmal offensive system they played in and the farce of a QB they had throwing them the ball.
It's hard for people to understand that... Two number one WR'S a top notch TE and two excellent rb's to help an average qb get the job done. You have to surround the qb with multiple weapons to be successful.
Guys, regardless of how bad our offense was this season, Defensive Tackle is BY FAR, WITHOUT A DOUBT, UNQUESTIONABLY our biggest need on this team. It's not even close. Yes, we could get better at WR, but we drafted three of those last year. We don't need to pick one #1 overall. Gettis, Lafell and Smitty are fine. The biggest problems with our offense were 1. Offensive Coordinator and 2. Quarterback, not receiver. We're going to hire a new OC and without Luck in the draft we will not be taking a QB #1. I'm sure Green will do well in the NFL but it's just not a smart pick for us.
Bowers will be good as well, but Johnson/Hardy/Brayton/Brown is a strong DE group and we don't need another one. Yes, it would be nice to get another dominating DE but if Hardy is what we think he is it would be a wasted pick.
No, Fairley is not Suh. But he's one of the best talents in the draft, he's the best DT in the draft, and he's a dominating force on the field. He also addresses our biggest need. Is he dirty? Sure. But so is Steve Smith, so is Tyler Brayton. Dirty play on the field does not equate to being a bad character guy off the field. Picking Fairley #1 just absolutely makes sense.
lol.. plenty of player's coaches who are successful.. Fox was too stubborn for his own good..
I know. I'm mocking the logic that most people on this board use. "We don't want a DC as our coach! We don't want someone conservative! We don't want someone who was once a part of the Giants organization!"
Everyone keeps saying "You don't take (insert position) at #1." Why? Are we only allowed to draft a QB, RB, WR, Tackle or DE at #1? Suh was nearly drafted first overall last year and would have been a great pick at that spot. For those who say you shouldn't draft a CB first overall...if you knew that you had the next Darelle Revis available, of course you would take him. We don't need to pigeon-hole ourselves into certain positions. We should take the BPA that also addresses a need. That would be Peterson or Fairley. Green or Bowers would just be a luxury pick. Sure it'd be nice to have a good rookie DE or WR, but those positions aren't high on our need list right now. CB and DT are.
And none of the QB's left in the draft are worth drafting in the first round picks.
I think we'll stick with Jimmy and bring in a veteran to help develop him, as we should have done in the first place. The kid's still some potential and, who knows, maybe with a decent OC he can excel.
Also, fans need to relax about the "no defensive coaches" thing. Just because you didn't like Fox doesn't mean every defensive coach is going to be like him. DC's are often very successful head coaches.