MCKELVINvsCROMARTIE=WHITNERvsHUFF...we may the right choice both times!

[JBK2]

WHITNER=MCKELVIN
Consistent, smart, fast but noone knew till they were drafted and then researched, played against better competition compared to rookies playing the same positon, and will end up being a better overall player.

CROMARTIE=HUFF
Flashy college career with highlight real material, lower 40-time, tall-slender bodies, not tough enough to take on blockers, too small to tackle larger backs, on the overall were not solid all-around players, will be easily exploited in the NFL due to their shortcummings, and were projected to go higher.

Player TKL INT PD SCK FR FF
Whitner 195 2 5 0 1 0
Huff 165 1 12 1 1 0

I think we made the right choice twice by choosing MCKELVIN/WHITNER over CROMARTIE/HUFF.

Player Popular Rank 40-time Drafted
McKelvin 12th 4.38 11th
Cromartie 8th 4.33 16th

[Notorious HEB]

Cromartie a flashy college career with highlights? *** are you talking about, that is nothing like DRC. He was a pure combine and senior bowl workout warrior.

[CenCalBillsFan]

I have to disagree. McKelvin was consistently rated as the best or second best CB in the draft and also had the more distinguished college career. DRC on the other hand seemed to be rated anywhere from 1-5 on a lot of teams CB board. Also, as mentioned his collegiate career was par at best, while he dominated the senior bowl and combine.

And we never had the opportunity to draft Huff. Had the Raiders not taken him before our pick that year, who knows we may have taken him. Also, a lot of people on this board over rate Whitner IMO. Don't get me wrong though, he is a solid player for us at safety, but he still has a lot of room to improve. Huff really isn't that far behind him IMO.

[TwentyThree]

We didn't really have a choice with Huff, considering he was taken at 7 and we took Whitner at 8.