And if he doesn't play up to a big payday would you want him back even at a reduced price?


Perhaps the reluctance of some people to label them busts is because they think it is an irrevocable label. How can you call them busts if they are still playing and could become all pros?

My question for uffda is this. Can a player who is a bust become a non bust. You are calling Perry and Jones busts and to be honest I can't really argue with you. For first round picks they have not performed at the level one would hope. On the other hand if they were to turn the corner (disregard your opinion as to whether you think they can or not) and turn in several years of play worthy of a first round pick would you still call them busts. I'm guessing the answer is no. In that case would you be wrong to call them busts now. Is the answer to qualify the comment "they are busts" with "up to this point." I don't think that is necessary and I think it should be understood since it all we have to go on and we can't label a player based on what they may or may not do in the future.

So maybe some are reluctant to call them busts because they are still holding out hope for improvement. That does not change the fact that they have not lived up to their first round status. I also think that a lot of people people want to allow players three years or so before they start throwing the label around. I don't have a problem with that either but if you say things like if they continue at the level they have been then yeah they are busts doesn't that sort of mean they are busts now? Maybe they are just busts in waiting.

I think we've had a "what is a bust" debate a time or two before and I think the consensus was no one has a damn clue lol

---

After draft weekend a guys draft position pretty much becomes insignificant to me. It's fun to see who we take where and we get all excited, or pissed off, about our #1 pick but once Monday and Tuesday roll around and we start signing free agents they all become rookies trying to make he team. Some just have a better shot at it.

I get that a #1 pick not making it may be more of a disappointment than a 7th rounder or UDFA not making it because we have such higher expectations for the first rounder but in the end does it really matter where the stars come from. I don't care if our all pro QB was the first over all pick or the 199th (or 24th) all I care about is that he is our all pro QB and we got him.

Yeah, I want our 1st rounders to become all stars but I want our 7th rounders to do that as well. In the end when we grade the our draft of 7 players and we get 2 pro bowlers, 1 starter, 2 contributors and 2 gone after 2 years I don't really care if the 2 gone were our first and second rounders and our pro bowlers were our 6th and 7th.

If the guy is producing he is producing and if he is not he is not. You can say "Yeah but if we had drafted that guy, who turned out to be a pro bowler, in the first round instead of this guy who busted..." to which I would reply " Yeah, but if we had drafted that guy, who turned out to be a bust, in the seventh round instead of this guy who who turned out to be a pro bowler ..."

Now don't take this to mean I am advocating trading all our 1st round picks for dozens of 7th rounders. The odds of finding better players increase the higher you go up the draft board. Once the picks are made and you have chosen the ones you think are the best however, it doesn't really matter to me.

I'm glad this was unlocked. Anyway, excellent post, sschind.

Obviously there are some financial ramifications for your 1st rounders not performing, but those are appreciably reduced with the new CBA rookie pay scale. How many 1st round "busts" did the Pats, Seattle, or Baltimore have over the past decade? Beats the hell out of me, and it doesn't matter. I agree that the Packers 1st rounders have been relatively underwhelming since AR, but they've overcome that to build a team that was fully capable of making a SB last year.

As far as Sherrod goes (from earlier discussions, not sschind's post), I have a hard time calling him a "bust." Harrell had a known injury history, but Sherrod was dumb luck. If he was t-boned in a car accident and sustained this injury would we refer to him as a bust?