The Draft and its awful coverage

Finally I have some NFL related news I can talk about. If only the season were here again. Since it is still 5 long months away lets talk about the draft and ESPN's horrible coverage.

First off ESPN, as usual, pronounced the Chiefs draft kings because they had a lot of picks. The Chiefs got a lot of high rated players with their high picks, gee, really? Wow. Did the Chiefs make good use of those 2 top 15 picks, certainly. Did they do Earth shattering things, not quite. Not to mention the fact that these pronouncements came after the 2nd round. What did people think they were going to do select round 7 players? Again, don't get me wrong, the Chiefs had an excellent draft, but it was more a product of their picks than any tremendous drafting on their part. If all ESPN does is reiterate who has how many picks (as they also dubbed Cleveland a loser who only had 5 picks all of which were in the last 4 rounds) then what good are they? Of course, the alternative would be a complete flame out by KC. Basically, as I could have predicted before the draft, KC was either going to be the goat or superman. Unfortunately ESPN is totally useless as a result.

Secondly, ESPN basically rated the Giants draft over and over as being excellent. Every pick went well. Yet they state the Giants are a "draft loser" for not trading Shockey. The logic being they could have gotten the Saints 2nd round pick and used it for just about any TE in the draft. So, wait, let me get this straight. The Giants should have traded their Pro Bowl TE who is in his prime for an unproven rookie? C'mon guys. This is the same network that for the past month has been talking about how ridiculous it is that unproven rookies get giant contracts as big or bigger than established Pro Bowlers. Umm guys, which is it. Are they worth more or less. Pick a stance and run with it please. I vote less. Why...because you would hope that one of those TEs would become Shockey. In other words you would have to be an idiot to give up Shockey in return for receiving only a chance of finding another Shockey. I would love to gamble with the guys from ESPN. You give me a 100 bucks and then we can flip this coin and if you win I'll give it back to you in 3 years. If I win I keep the 100 bucks. Sound fair?

Thirdly, they rate the Giants selection of Mario Manningham as the riskiest pick in the NFC East. Sorry, but I disagree. Most people would expect me to offer a more risky pick at this point. I feel no need, simply b\c they didn't take a risk here at all...they simply got incredible value. Manningham is universally regarded as a first round talent. The Giants got him essentially in the 4th round (last pick of the 3rd round). He fell b\c of off field issues and lack of focus. Well he's got years to learn focus learning behind Toomer and Burress with Steve Smith to step in before he does. The Giants also have quite a bit of success dealing with Manningham style off field issues. See Burress (lazy player lacking in focus who has become one of the hardest studying most consistent players in the league), see Bradshaw (7th round pick last year who was branded for similar issues and similar problems who kicked ass and took names when he filled in for Ward), see Shockey (do I really need to explain this one?). Coughlin will whip him into shape with help from solid veterans. Getting the most talented receiver for basically a 4th round pick is an incredible steal...ask the Pats how Randy Moss has worked out. OK, I apologize for comparing him to Moss, but you get the point, this isn't a risk its all upside. Put differently, at worst without focus and intelligence he will still play as a 3rd\4th rounder ought to...as the 3rd or 4th WR who can other teams have to cover and can make a huge play out of no where. At best he becomes a super star.

Fourthly, why are the Pats not getting absolutely slammed for their draft? They used 5 picks on CBs and LBs. I realize they lost Samuels and their LBs are old but thats ridiculous. Did they suddenly decide to cut their whole backfield and start over? Not to mention who they picked. Jerrod Mayo is a good player, but there are serious concerns about his wrist. This was a guy projected to go at the bottom of the first round. There was serious talk he would fall out of the 1st b\c the Giants would pass on him despite need at LB...but no need to worry because the Pats took him TENTH. If nothing else its stupid b\c you should trade back further and get him when he is available later. ESPN and I quote says they "get the benefit of the doubt." Why? You grade them well b\c they are the Pats so they MUST know something we don't? Again, if all you are going to tell me is that which I already know please stop holding yourself to be anything other than complete and total wastes of time.

Lastly, though I hate to say it, the Skins and Cowboys deserve more credit. For once Schneider and Jerry Jones didn't force their teams to take flashy chances and instead made solid picks and choices. The Cowboys filled two needs well at the end of the 1st round and the Skins made a great trade down to get 2 of the top 3 WRs on their board. Basically, they did what the Pats should have done in trading back to take the guy they would have taken at the higher pick.

Quick end grading of the best and worst drafts (based upon how they did with what they had)

Top 5 drafts (in no order)
Chiefs
Giants
Skins
Cowboys
Miami (solid top to bottom and good choice with Long first)

Worst 5 drafts
Pats
Packers (why pick Brohm? To scare the crap out of Rodgers before he starts a game?)
Lions (Matt Millen special. Cherilus of Otah, just plain idiotic. As is Dizon over Dan Connor)
Oakland (they have excellent RBs already but absolutely no D-Line and passed on Dorsey...with only 1 pick before the 4th round they blew it here)