Kiper's Latest Mock Draft

[PhillyGirl]

Yes, I did...because I wasn't sure how many people would realize it was sarcasm.

[Mad-Lad]

the O-line may not have played all that great last year, but they played much better than the entire defense.

[Rome]

Drafting a college kid at 14 and expecting him to step in and start and be productive is wishful thinking at best.

Is the line in great shape?  Ummm... no.   Is drafting a kid in the first round the best way to shore it up?  No.

The O-Line can be addressed via free agency and by re-signing guys that are already there (namely Runyan).

[SunMo]

Its just fine the way it is. I sure enjoyed seeing McNabb have about .2 seconds to get rid of the ball this past season. 

he didn't have a lot of time, you're right, but that wasn't entirely on the OL.  teams blitzed the hell out of McNabb because they know that is the best way to rattle him.  so while the OL wasn't playing great, they were also having to block 5 and 6 guys a lot of the time.

[SunMo]

Drafting a college kid at 14 and expecting him to step in and start and be productive is wishful thinking at best.

Shawn Andrews?

[ice grillin you]

the line did not play that bad...in the opener atlanta formulated the blueprint for how to defense the eagles and thats to blitz the crap outta mcnabb...once it was obvious he couldnt run the heat was turned up ten fold...but even at that when they had TO the passing game was pretty succesful...add in the refusal to run the ball....the absence of a pass blocking running back...the loss of TO and you had disaster...in straight up no blitz situations it performed well

now im not saying the offensive line doesnt need tweaking but i dont believe that it was terrible last year...and i dont believe they need to take a OL high in the draft this year 

[Rome]

Defenses blitzed McNabb because he was hurt and because the Eagles running game was a laughingstock.

[SunMo]

now im not saying the offensive line doesnt need tweaking but i dont believe that it was terrible last year...and i dont believe they need to take a OL high in the draft this year 

normally, i would agree with you, but they need a long-term solution for the tackle positions, it's too important.  if you can get a big-time player (even if he won't be a big-time contributor this year) you need to do it.

[Rome]

Drafting a college kid at 14 and expecting him to step in and start and be productive is wishful thinking at best.

Shawn Andrews?

Holla!   

[Zanshin]

Well, all the talk about last year's line is sort of moot if they're not planning on bringing one or more of the starting tackles back.

[ice grillin you]

winning the superbowl this year>developing a tackle that might pan out two years down the road

[SunMo]

ok, they're going to have plenty of cap room right?  of course, what can be solved better through FA?  the defensive front 7 or the OL?  i say the defensive front 7.

[Zanshin]

winning the superbowl this year>developing a tackle that might pan out two years down the road

Wow, what insight.  Isn't that statement true every year?  The two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.

[Rome]

ok, they're going to have plenty of cap room right?  of course, what can be solved better through FA?  the defensive front 7 or the OL?  i say the defensive front 7.

It depends on who's available.  We'll know more in March, obviously.

Speculating is fun but it's pointless to assume players which will be available via free agency.

But it's even more pointless to assume that a rookie will be able to step in and anchor an offensive line on a team that is supposed to be challenging for the Super Bowl next year.

It simply isn't going to happen, Mo.

[Rome]

winning the superbowl this year>developing a tackle that might pan out two years down the road

Wow, what insight.  Isn't that statement true every year?  The two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.

It depends.  If you're the GM of the 49ers or Texans, it's a hell of a lot more accurate than if you're Andy Reid.