Just out of curiosity - would most people still be OK with trading one of the first rounders as they usually do? In the most uncharitable scenario, lets say they're offered the Packers 2013 first rounder, and their 2012 second rounder for #27, does anyone turn that down?
Having a much better understanding of precisely
how the Pats approach the draft after reading Holley's most recent book, I will no longer be surprised -- or upset -- by anything they do on draft day, within reason. The only thing that is likely to ruffle my feathers from this point forward is the drafting of people with checkered injury histories -- especially D-backs.
If you read that book, you'll come away understanding that the Pats view very, very few players as suitable for them -- even in the first round.
The most interesting aspect, to me, is that BB views the second round as perhaps the most risky from a bust standpoint. These are, in the main, players with first-round talent, who for whatever reason have never been able to translate it into results on the field in college. (I'm not paraphrasing -- there is a direct quote of BB saying this). So when he trades into the second round -- BB is knowingly undertaking greater risk. According to him.
I am concerned about Brady's ticking clock. When he leaves, there is no reason to believe now that we're looking at anything but NFL average at the position. Which will be a dramatic change for all of us. But if he does not believe first rounders will help us, who am I to say, in real time, that he is wrong?