Poll: Without hindsight, which draft (1st two rounds) was smartest? 2006-2008

[skpac1001]

Poll rejected because I put too many words in one option. Crap.
Anyways, you can certainly judge the approach used in the past drafts if you can judge the approach used in this draft. I don't see the difference.

For the first two rounds;
2006: 1st-Qb taken. Not a need, but BPA. Not expected to contribute until the next season.
2nd- TE taken. Big reach, most people had 2-3 TE rated higher that were still available.

2007: Aggressively traded up to ensure talent upgrade in pass rush/d line. Explosive boom or bust pass rusher in 1st, solid "safe" DE taken in second. Need based but value wasn't bad either.

2008: Clady is need and value, although some thought the run defense was more pressing need. Clady expected to be taken advantage of in rookie season, is really a pick for future impact. Royal is reach with 2-3 available WR's rated higher, also position was already filled by several vets in free agency. Basically for special teams.

[Taco John]

Without hindsight, there's no objective way to answer this question.

[skpac1001]

Without hindsight, there's no objective way to answer this question.

Don't be objective then. What were your subjective thoughts at the time?

[vancejohnson82]

is this a riddle?

[Northman]

I loved the draft in the first two rounds last year. Nothing has swayed me on that. I was one of the few who wanted Royal over the others.

[skpac1001]

is this a riddle?

Sort of. The riddle is, if you take most people's complaints about this draft, does it look more like the complaints (at the time of the drafts) for 2006 and 2008 or the complaints for 2007?

[gyldenlove]

At the time of each draft I liked the 2008 much better. Clady was a super fit for the Broncos in every way, he was BPA by a mile and a huge need.