ravensdfan

You keep changing the argument every time I prove your argument invalid. First, there are none available. I prove there are then it's trading up and out of round for them. I prove that wouldn't have been the case so then it's well it's hindsight you don't know. Well you don't know at any position.

What is the difference taking a high WR as opposed to a high DL? The draft is a crap shoot any way you look at it. Unless, you are finally admitting that for whatever reason, we do not feel comfortable taking that same risk for the WR position. Thus, it gets ignored.

Oh and as for Ozzie knowing what a good WR looks like - eh name one top WR we've drafted. Torrey was decent but was drafted to be our long term #1 and is not even close to that talent. I can't name another that Ozzie has drafted. It might be a weakness. Everyone has one.

Now you want to change the argument? Those guys, like I said just a quick peek not really delving into it, were available with our pick and/or would not have required much to move up and get. You said reaching out of round, they would not be reaching out of round. I even gave you the added bonus of showing you the one year what we picked INSTEAD. Useless picks in the long run. You're wrong. They are available and for whatever reason, they ignore the position until round 4, sometimes, but...

I'm sorry but just to put even more emphasis on how much we ignore the position, in our entire history, all the way back to 1996 we've only drafted 6 WRs with our first 3 picks. Ever. That's just insane.

In 2010, both Demetrius Thomas & Dez Bryant were there. We traded out of the first round and our first pick in rd 2? Sergio Kindle.Next? Cody. Next? Dickson. We could have traded up for either of them since our first 3 picks were not that great were they? Not to mention that draft also saw Graham & Gronk available. TY Hilton was there in 2012. That's just perusing pro bowl receivers & TEs that were available to us. A quick look. Not really fair with hindsight being 20/20 and a...

I like Jennings as well and am not adverse to signing him in addition to drafting a higher caliber WR. Just not in lieu of doing so.

Not back to back? Stallworth, Evans, TJ, Boldin, Smith Sr. They were all pretty much back to back. Not saying they're all mistakes, but just that you can't be efficient that way when the roster is continually changing cuz the guys are old.

No you're claiming no WR talent is available when we pick. There have been WRs picked one or two picks below us so that is not reaching into another round. My point is that we do not even attempt to hit at WR. We are too content to plug in fill ins for one or two years and then we wonder why the offense doesn't work like some well oiled machine. As for the Patriots, they had Gronk, a top notch talent. Last time we had a TE even anywhere in his vicinity, we won a SB. You can't igno...

"hes 31 and on decline. Last time he hit 1,000 yards was in 2010" But historically, that is what we give the offense. Just this type of guy.

I said nothing about trading up for a WR at all. You're the one saying none are available at our picks and that is hogwash. WRs have been taken (talented ones) after our first pick but before our 2nd pick, after our 2nd pick but before our 3rd pick and after our 3rd pick but before our 4th pick. That there is not one talented WR available with our first 3 picks is simply not a fact.

We no longer, in case you haven't noticed, have a defense that can carry the offense. My personal...

Not short sighted when an argument can be made that a lack of talent at that position ended our playoff run three times. I'm not even counting Torrey's failure because he was a 2nd rounder that simply did not progress like expected. That is going to happen.

I'm not looking up the numbers again, when I've already done so and proven that the teams that hit on WRs draft them at a rate of 2 to 1 versus the Ravens and that is regardless of what round they're drafted in. Ag...

And "sub par" for our depth is actually being nice some of those seasons.

lol@ "something Joe has had". Joe has had new pieces every single year with perhaps one exception. Then he had old sure hands Dickson and turtle slow Clark. Hardly "decent". Sure part of that is due to injuries, but, when you get into having to use depth our receiving corps is sub par.

Nevermind lol I see you were referring to the Patriots and not the Jets. Whew! Feel better now than when I thought someone was actually saying the Jets were a "dynasty" lol

The Patriots had top notch TEs and/or top notch WRs. Let's not act like it was otherwise.

Don't really need to argue...one WR in the first three rounds in a decade of the draft pretty much says we blatantly ignore the position at a high level. Sure we draft WRs in the 5th and 6th, but we absolutely have ignored the position at any high level in the last decade.

The Jets have made the post season exactly three times since 2005. I hardly call that a dynasty of any kind.

Jets. There's one. Now, do we want to be the Jets? Name a successful one.

It is simply not true that every WR worth anything is gone in the first round, which is what would have to happen for no WRs worth anything to be available when we pick in the first 3 rounds.

Clayton was 11 drafts ago counting this one and it is you who are missing the bigger picture. You can't hit on WRs if you don't draft them. Find another team who has ignored the position for a decade. It is high time we gave Flacco the luxury even scrub starting QBs get, and that is a truly talented WR that will be here more than a yr or two and isn't on the tail end of his career.

@JoeyFlex & et al: We have drafted a WR in the first 3 rounds once in the last decade. That is not something to celebrate and certainly speaks to an actual ignoring the position. While it may not be the case, it certainly does follow the pattern that we draft an aging vet and then think that fixes everything.

I'm great with signing Jennings as long as we still take a WR early in the draft. If we treat it like it completes our WR corps like our history shows when we sign a FA, then, no.