Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Is 'BPA, or be damned' a flaw with Gettleman's draft philosophy?


top dawg

Recommended Posts

Anyone who has listened to Dave Gettleman discuss his draft philosophy, and has seen him in action, knows that he is adamant about drafting the best player available---without deviation---every single pick. He has said it many times before, even in his latest presser at the NFL Combine. He not only repeated it, he repeated it with emphasis. He basically said that he doesn't care if there is a perceived strength at a certain position, or if he ended up with five studs at a position, he is going to draft the BPA. And...he said it's not going to change. G-man said that this breeds competition, which is a good thing.

I wonder if his philosophy works to the detriment of having a balanced team. Moreover, does it facilitate striking while the iron is hot? I mean, the window of opportunity doesn't necessarily stay open too long. Winning championships seems sometimes like Whack-A-Mole (if you know what I'm saying). Being imbalanced at the critical moment(s), and you miss out.

Now, I sometimes think that he is still basically a new GM, "Does he have a good handle on what he's doing?" Then, I remember, he played a key role in helping the Giants bring home multiple pieces of hardware, so "Maybe he is absolutely right." It's hard to argue with success. But then I think, "Was it really his success? I mean, what part did he really play? Perhaps he was just lucky." But then I must admit to myself that so far G-man has been pretty successful here, all things considered. He also has plenty of experience and outstanding football acumen as it relates to personnel matters. I just don't believe that he came up with such a rigid philosophy on an island, but that it comes from his own experience, the lessons of others, and success on a fundamental level.

I guess I have to believe that his draft philosophy is sound.

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He can say it as many times as he wants. He has yet to back it up on draft day. Not that there is any problem with that of course.

He very clearly wants to be a guy who is a routine active player in FA. Once we're able to do that and our needs arent as significant come draft day then I'm sure he will be full minded of that philosophy. But it isnt something we've seen from him so far, nor should it have been.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just look at the last 2 drafts.

That's great, but what about the balance of the team as it relates to always drafting the BPA, irrespective of perceived or real strengths and/or needs?

It's going to take more than a couple of drafts to answer that question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may be taking the BPA thing a bit too literally.

I'm fine with his approach. We've seen what drafting for need and being desperate to fill a position has done to a franchise.

Perhaps, but I have always thought that taking the BPA is sound through round 4, but I sometimes think that in rounds 5 through 7, it may be prudent to give the need part of the equation a bit more deference

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As is the case every year, going BPA isn't some random fortune cookie sliver of ancient football wisdom that most of this board seems to think it is. It's a reference to picking the best player available *on your board* A board that is assembled through a variety a of factors-one of those factors being gasp! Need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Beck is likely to be a Day 2 or 3 guy.
    • Schlereth calling us back to back....somebody call up Morgan!  Schlereth got that dawg in him!
    • I was just thinking — if Bryce had been the #1 overall pick without the massive trade-up, there wouldn’t be nearly this much anger and resentment toward him. The problem isn’t Bryce himself; it’s what Scott Fitterer gave up to get him and how the front office completely mismanaged the assets that followed. The picks from the Christian McCaffrey trade — one of our few major opportunities to rebuild with young talent — were essentially wasted. The second-rounder was used on Jonathan Mingo,  The third and fourth-round picks were packaged to move up for DJ Johnson, a 25-year-old rookie  who looked like a miss from day 1.  That’s brutal roster management. And when you add in other misses like Trevon Wallace and Xavier Legette—guys who were supposed to be athletic difference-makers but haven’t moved the needle—it just compounds the issue. Combine that with a string of awful free-agent signings (Hurst, Chark, Bozeman regressing, etc.), and it’s no wonder the offense looks like a mess. And this goes beyond Fitterer — it’s a scouting department problem too. For years, the Panthers’ evaluations have been inconsistent and reactive. They’ve chased traits and combine numbers over production and football IQ. The same front office that identified DJ Johnson as a third-round target somehow passed on multiple plug-and-play starters at positions of need. When your scouting process keeps missing on mid-round talent — the backbone of good teams — no quarterback can save you. The lack of depth and development across this roster is the real indictment. None of these failures are Bryce’s fault directly. But when the entire team looks lifeless, the narrative circles back to him. He was supposed to be the “force multiplier,” the “point guard” who elevates everyone else. Problem is, there’s not much “force” around him to multiply, and that style of quarterback play only works when the infrastructure is solid — coaching, protection, and playmakers. Look at the 49ers for comparison. If San Francisco didn’t have elite coaching, culture, and roster talent, that Trey Lance trade would be seen as one of the biggest front-office blunders ever. The difference is they had the organization to survive it. At least Bryce is serviceable — Lance isn’t even on their roster anymore. Put Bryce in the 49ers’ system and he’s probably putting up Brock Purdy-like numbers. The bottom line is this: the dysfunction in Carolina didn’t start with Bryce Young, and it sure hasn’t ended with him. This is a franchise problem — years of poor drafting, weak scouting, short-sighted trades, and constant turnover. The common denominator through all of it? David Tepper. Until the culture, patience, and football operations at the top change, it won’t matter who the quarterback is.  
×
×
  • Create New...