QFT. Good post.

From what I saw Mallet was in a league of his own when it comes to throwing the ball.

They were talking about this during the combine as well. Gabbert is still a project of sorts and not considered to be in the class of Stafford, Bradford, or Ryan coming out. He will be the first QB taken regardless, but he still could have improved his draft position and made some money. Instead of being taken #10 or possibly later depending on FA and trades in the off season, he could have moved up into the top 3 if he threw as well as Mallett did today. I understand his agent advised against it, but if you have the goods bring it and improve that postion.

Like I said this isn't Bradford, Stafford, or Ryan guaranteed to be a top 5 pick. It just turned out to be a weak draft and I wouldn't be suprised to see only 1 QB taken in the 1st unless you see some teams in need trade up into the back of the 1st, but some idiot took Tebow in the 1st last year so you never know.

Glad to see you on the bandwagon this year.

Why doesn't anyone like Gabbert's deep ball then?

Newton didn't throw real well today. At all. He's really not a QB and if he can become one, it's going to take a lot of work. In his spread option, he threw off of his back foot ALL the time, almost always. Now that he's learned his drops, they need a LOT of work. B/c he isn't smooth on them, his throws were pretty erratic today. He CAN make all the throws, it's whether or not he can be consistent and accurate.

Mallett looked damned good today.

Locker looked okay. Not overly accurate. Especially on his 10yd. outs and post-corner routes. Threw them low and late consistently. Don't know if he didn't get through his drop quickly enough, or if he was throwing to the receiver and not a spot, didn't pay enough attention.

I agree and disagree with a lot of this.

First off, I agree that Gabbert is nowhere near Bradford, Stafford or Ryan, and that he will be the #1 QB by default. I agree that he could have shown he wasn't afraid to throw.

I disagree with you calling this a weak draft, at least at the QB position. It's weak at the top. That and guys who are top QB talented have off the field question marks. I think this is a pretty good QB class, a lot of consistent, smart, talented guys out there. I grew a lot more comfortable with a lot of different guys today that I wouldn't have considered earlier. They just aren't wow guys.

If we got guys where I thought they were good value, I'd be happy with: Mallett, Kaepernick, Stanzi, Dalton, Enderle, Devlin, or Ponder. At good value of course. Meaning Mallett and his ?'s at our 2nd. Kaepernick and Stanzi I'd be fine with 2nd or 3rd, and the rest anywhere from 3rd or 4th on...

Yeah, that's what I meant weak at the top. I think it was Mayock saying Locker was probably a 3rd round pick. I did like what I saw from Kaepernick at the combine as well. I wouldn't be suprised to see him taken ahead of Newton at this point.

Yeah, if I remember right, Lockers ten yd. outs were low and didn't lead enough. I think his post-corners were short, and I know 2 of 3 verticals were inside and not where you want to put the ball. His last one was pretty though.

Rodgers wised up like an adult...

I want nothing to do with Gabbert. He is going to suck. Ponder is where it is at.

I want Ponder or nothing.

I believe he's planning to donate to Locks of Love once it's long enough. At least based on things he has said on twitter.

As for the hype factor and what he could have built for himself at the combine... Gabbert will throw at pro day on the 17th and show everything he needs to show as far as throwing. If I were him, I'd take my chances throwing at pro day (to receivers he has thrown to before) and letting the Condons build the hype. It's worked pretty well before...

This locks it. Gabbert's where it's at.

we have no shot at Gabbert anyways

just saying he will suck

that.

If they draft a QB at all, it probably won't be before the 5th round. Some sack of shit like McElroy or Stanzi if he somehow lasts past the third.

There are quite a few solid QB's in this draft in rounds 2-4 IMO. Probably 10 that would excite the fan base to take. So that gives us about a 33% chance of getting one of them. Factor in Brodie sucked it up and probably won't be back then ups the chances to 50% we take a QB before the 5th in this draft. Could be Dalton, Stanzi, Ponder, I have no idea, but I there is a good chance we come away with one.

QB won't be a priority pick. Keep on living the dream, though.

I can see one taken in the 3rd similar to what New England did when they took O'Connell to back up Brady.

I can see one taken in the 3rd similar to what New England did when they took O'Connell to back up Brady.

Brodie won't be back so they either need to pay for a Vet in FA or pickup one fairly high in the draft.

More likely they'll just pick up some waiver wire garbage.

Did you watch him take a single snap in college?

I'm pretty confident that Gabbert will throw at the MU pro day.

Yep.

not from center! ROFL

meh

maybe he was a victim of circumstance (bad supporting cast)

but, and this is just from my stupid little eye test, all I see is bust

I could be wrong, I don't know...I'm not basing it off of anything other than first impression and his stupid hair (and a less than impressive college career which resulted in many MU fans turning on the guy even)...

that's it

I'm no expert...just watched the combine and watched the strut in some steps...

I liked Ponder...I went from liking Newton to stating today that "I guess I still wouldn't take a black QB after all"...Stanzi looked terrible...no interest in Kaepernick...

so yeah

if we go QB I want Ponder or that red head Dalton...but Ponder reminds me most of a Pioli guy and his media session had me thinking he conducts himself like Brady and Rodgers kind of do

So you've

1) Never seen Gabbert play, yet you know he'll suck

and

2) Your evaluation of Ponder is based upon an interview, of which, only snippets were shown.

Congratulations on replacing PhilFree for the reigning ****tard of this subforum.

I agree that Gabbert is the #1 by default... but I also think he has a pretty damn high ceiling... Gabbert and Mallett are the only 1st round guys I like AT ALL and Mallett only because of his outrageous physical talent... and because I DO think he can be coached.

Of course, I am also the guy hoping we draft Dalton or Stanzi in the 3rd or 4th round. Neither is worth a 2nd rounder but both are solid picks in the 3rd and GREAT value in the 4th.

Gabbert isn't #1 by default, he's #1 because he has a tremendous set of physical tools and elite intangibles.

Please tell me how Stanzi looked terrible.

Meh, in any of the last 2 drafts he doesn't sniff #1 talk. He may have gotten picked ahead of Clausen, but b/c people didn't like Clausen, many b/c of personality/attitude/character type things.

I agree that his upside is fantastic... but he is still "default" due to things beyond his control... like a lack of talent around him ... he hasn't really been given a chance to showcase his talents like other clear cut #1 QBs have...

I am a Gabbert fan, but let's not get carried away.

Compare him to Sam Bradford:

Bradford was more accurate.

Gabbert gets the edge in height, weight, durability, and arm strength. The system is a wash.

From an intangibles standpoint, it would be a wash, and Bradford would get the edge for winning more (although having vastly superior talent) at the college level.

Gabbert is a much better prospect than Sanchez was, and he went (deservedly) in the top 5.

You also have to consider that a lot of this is driven by the needs of the teams at the top:

This isn't like 2009 or 2010:

Carolina just spent a 2nd on a QB
Denver just spent a 1st on a QB
Buffalo claims they like their QB
Cincy has millions invest in Palmer
Whisenhunt is coaching for his job and can't afford to develop a QB


If these teams were saying that they needed a QB at the top, the QBs themselves would be viewed quite a bit differently. Perception helps create the reality of the prospect.

Also, the ridiculous Luck hype, like claiming he was the best QB prospect EVAR, helped to downplay the ability of the other QBs.

This isn't as simple as you postulate.

If Gabbert has better arm strength than Bradford, why can't he throw the deep ball?

Some people have good arm strength they just aren't accurate with passes down the field. A lot of it is a function of footwork and mechanics. Watch his throwing motion, there is a slight rocking hitch before he throws. Even then he has a lightning quick release.

And you have to be some kind of dumbass to think that Sam Bradford's arm is in the same league as Gabbert's.

If you can't look good throwing to a receiver in shorts, its a mechanics problem not your receivers being scrubs. Case and point, Newton looked bad because his release point was all over the goddamn place and he would just put his plant foot wherever.

Nothing you say here is wrong... but admit that Gabbert's stock has benefited by a lack of comparable talent AND his stock has been hurt by the lack of talent and wins in college...

The people who actually WATCHED him play know better, but that doesn't change public perception.

I think we agree here, I am just stating the obvious perception biases he has going against him... hell, I had a bar argument with a guy that said no WAY Gabbert was a 1st round QB... and then he came back 3 days later and apologized after he had a chance to actually do some research.

3 yrs? How about just one?

I don't doubt any of that. Kornheiser said on PTI that Gabbert is "The best QB in the history of the world that no one has ever seen throw."

That's true for most. But a lot of people here HAVE seen him play, and that's why some of the objections tossed out, like claiming his arm isn't that good, are completely specious. And I know aturnis has seen him play because he's an Iowa fan.

Kinda hard for Gabbert to prove he can throw the deep ball when there isn't an open WR deep to throw to.

Let's also remember that Gabbert won 18 games in two years with mediocre DI offensive talent.

Start at about :35, watch the next three throws, and say that Gabbert can't throw a deep ball. He completes a bomb and two post corner routes that require both tremendous arm strength and touch

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/QfO3XOv0oEw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Actually just getting a feel for your barometer of arm strength. I keep hearing a lot of guys on here knock on my boy Stanzi for his arm strength. I don't see it. The only route he has trouble throwing is the same one Gabbert has trouble with, and thats the seam pattern. IMO it's more of a combo of strength, and touch than anything and shouldn't be a barometer of arm strength.

Outside of that, I like a guy with a good mix of arm strength and accuracy more than anything. Newton can throw it a mile, but he won't be as accurate as you are looking for, at least not until his dropback becomes second nature.

I think Stanzi can throw the ball on a rope, and was more consistently accurate than most of the QB's in his group yesterday, save Mallet. I don't understand why people don't want to see that?

Gabbert can fit the ball into windows that very few QBs in the NFL can.

Your guys with top tier arm strength are:

Cutler
Stafford
Rodgers
Roethlisberger
Vick
Flacco


He's got an arm like those guys. His arm strength is actually being underrated because of the freakish nature of this QB class.

When was the last time a QB class had guys with arms like Mallet, Kaepernick, Gabbert, and Newton? Ever? I don't think so. In almost any year, any one of those guys would have the top arm in their class or for a few years. What this class lacks in polish it more than makes up for in physical traits. You won't see another QB class with such raw physical talent, albeit largely unharnessed, for a long, long time.

Hey man, I don't doubt that Gabbert is the best guy in this draft, but if it weren't for Mallett's questions, it'd be a close race.

Also, the only knocks I have on him are that he played in the spread which is obviously a QB friendly system, and that's really it. He's accurate enough, just think there are many others who are just as accurate who, for one reason or another, don't get the credit. Whether that be previous seasons, the program they played in, or idiot mistakes they made on or off the field. I just don't think the talent from #1 to say #8-10 is that great in this draft.

I'm also VERY sick of seeing guys like Newton and Locker get the top billing. Especially Locker when he's never completed 60% of his passes. Never really thrown 2/1 TD/INT ratio('08 was 1/0 if you want to count it). Never had a Rating of over 130. Potential is usually just that. Potential. Most don't become what they have the potential to be.

Other than that, I only really knock him on the fact that his clear cut #1 status is mostly b/c of other guys character flaws. That and his choice not to throw. Be real, it's not b/c "this agents guys never run". It's b/c this agent reps #1 QB types and encourages them not to throw at the combine so they don't hurt their stock, and let other guys hurt theirs(ala Newton). In the meantime, we are buying time for you to work on your dropback and new throwing mechanics, so that you will have that advantage as well as a familiar environment. Some may not think that is scared, but I do. If you've got it, show me. If your scared to hurt your stock, fine. Not saying it's not smart, it just shows me that his confidence in his pro style throwing mechanics isn't as high as he'd like it to be. Therefore, neither is mine. Work away though. We'll see his pro day, which I'm sure he'll nail. He's had plenty of time to practice.

Matt Ryan played 4 years in a pro-style system and didn't throw
Matt Stafford played 3 years in a pro-style system and didn't throw

They also happen to be repped by CAA.

point taken on the spread vs. pro system argument. You win that one. Still doesn't discount the strategy of, let the other guys hurt themselves, work on your game and thrown in a comfortable environment. It makes sense that even if you're the best, just being at the combine triggers a lot of nerves.

I don't feel like getting into any pissing matches this year...

I bet you watched a ton of Clausen last year, Hamas, to pick him #1 overall over Bradford.

ANYWAYS

My gut tells me Gabbert will flop, and Ponder will flourish. Just the eye test, baby.

Ponder conducts himself like a franchise kind of guy...Gabbert has a ridiculous hair cut. If that's how I want to judge my QB's, then I guess that's my prerogative.

Two years ago spread QB's were dead to the drafturbators...now you want to defend Gabbert to the death even though he's a spread QB with a very unimpressive college career?

Haha, ok.

Spread QBs with marginal talent sets (Tebow) are entirely different than Spread guys who are huge, have big arms, and play in multiple read systems (Gabbert).

And it's actually easy to see a lot of ND when they play a nationally televised game every week. If you ever watched a college football game, you might know that.

I know that they have a contract with NBC and have it for years and years and years...

that doesn't mean that you drop everything you're doing and watch shitty Notre Dame play a full game every week...

and pretending that you did is hilarious...

Just like pretending like you watched a lot of Bruce Campbell at Maryland...

and Gholston at Ohio State...

you just regurgitate what you "hear" from your favorite draftniks and then try and pass it off as your own...JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE

but then you preach it like you know more than everyone else and it makes you look like a ... reerun

it happens every year

Ponder looked like he had tons of swagger...that is something I want in a QB...

Gabbert looks like a ****ing clown...that is something I don't want in a QB...

Ponder spoke the part...he graduated in 2.5 years with a very impressive degree and GPA...and he played in a pro system that, from what I hear, was very lacking in talent (opposed to what FSU used to be)...

Gabbert is all hype. Is it deserving? Maybe...but the dude did jack shit in college and a lot of Missouri fans were very happy to see him leave. That doesn't pass my gut check very well.

Ponder didn't have a great college career by any means (injuries seemed to deter him a bit)...but I'm enamored with him...and that's my right as a fan.

Ponder to the Chiefs or wait until 2012!

Stanzi doesn't have much on youtube, people seem to like to hear him talk more than anything.


Stanzi to DJK. Quite a few deep to intermediate routes that require arm strength. Also, a lot of throwing on the move.
<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZNSMgaOYqCU?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZNSMgaOYqCU?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>

Here are some with him and McNutt, plenty of deep balls, well placed, and some touch passes thrown in. Pay attention to how well he throws on the run under pressure. Might not always be pretty, but effective often.

<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZNSMgaOYqCU?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZNSMgaOYqCU?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>

Dumbass.

I watched all of the Notre Dame-Stanford Game and the Notre Dame-USC game in '09, as well as chunks of the Michigan game. Clausen had a hell of a second half.

I watched a lot of OSU during Gholston's sophomore year (8 sacks), because they were the local team where I lived.

I didn't watch Campbell play and never claimed that I did, other than some clips. I selected him where I did in the draft because I felt like it was a good value pick for a team like the Pats, who could allow him to develop at a slower pace with a huge payoff down the line. If that's a bad evaluation, then so be it, but it's not based on his haircut, or 8 seconds of an interview.

Meat_Dragon. Still want to know what you didn't like about Stanzi...

He won 18 games in two years at a previously mediocre DI school
He beat the #1 team in the country in a nationally televised game, in arguably, the second biggest regular season game in the history of the school.

The only MU fan I know that was happy to see him go was frazod.

You are so bad at reading and arguing it's almost inconceivable. You just make shit up and (terribly) try to go from there.

So is it the haircut like you hate Broadway Joe and Tom Brady too? Or is it that he looks like a total frat-boy?

Hey Hootie, who did you want us to take at 5 last year?

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/poll....ts&pollid=9024

Same with Stanzi. 17 W's plus two Bowl wins. Not including his 2008 season where he and Christensen split time and Stanzi ultimately won out. All with mediocre talent around him as well.

The difference is that Stanzi was basically asked to manage the game for most of his college career. Gabbert was slinging it as the primary playmaker from day one.

just watched the combine this weekend

he couldn't freaking complete a 7 yard out...

maybe he was nervous, I don't know...but he was so eratic it was insane

Oh you mean those very same throws that Mayock and Faulk were SLOBBING his knob over? As he walked back to the group they said:

"he might not be feeling real good about that, but up here we're really impressed(or something to that effect). He's throwing to a spot, where the receiver should be, just like he's supposed to, not one of those throws get intercepted at the next level"

Not verbatim, but pretty goddamned closed to what the two of them said.

Also slobbed his knob on his post-corner routes. Think he might have completed one if he was lucky. Again though, the ball was exactly where it was supposed to be, where only the receiver could get it. While other QB's were concerned about completing the pass and wound throwing bad balls. About that they said something to the affect of "wow. He is really throwing the ball where it is supposed to be.(get out the pen and draw on screen to show that the cone on the sideline is the real target)

They went on to reiterate many a time about how it does not matter one bit whether or not you complete passes at the combine. The scouts, coaches and gms know you have zero timing with these receivers. Mentioned plenty of times how impressed they were with Stanzi and his accuracy and ability to throw to a spot, or to the window he is supposed to hit. Kind of like how Warner made his living with St. Louis, minus the deep ball.

The only throwing drill Stanzi had trouble with was the seam route, just like a stud like Gabbert probably will have. Timing/touch/arm strength throw he just hasn't been able to kill yet. He's a 50/50 guy in that area.

Silly bitch. :D Were you watching at a bar with no sound? You really could learn a lot if you listened. Cam Newton struggled, b/c he complete passes to receivers, he doesn't make reads and throw to spots/windows. He was complete ass except his deep ball.

Oh and after they were done oooing and awwwing at his perfectly thrown incompletions, they also said something to the effect of, "perfectly thrown balls, these receivers aren't getting to them, but if the receiver doesn't get to that spot in the NFL, they will find someone who will, that's a well placed ball."

I guess you see what you want to see...

I saw a guy making terrible throws...I watched the QB/RB/WO portion with about 80% attentiveness...so it's not like I'm some expert.

This is a quote I saw from Rotoworld though...
Iowa QB Ricky Stanzi reportedly "struggled big-time" with his accuracy in throwing drills at the Combine.
This report comes from Mark Gaughan of the Buffalo News, and it's not the first time we've heard it. According to Gaughan, Stanzi "missed receivers high, low, and wide." A possible third-round pick, Stanzi was unable to build on a strong Senior Bowl. There have been mixed opinions about him all winter.

They were not slobbering all over him. Not even close. They said those were balls thrown to a spot. That said, those post corner routes and deep balls needed to be de-iced they were lofted up so high.

the reason why I like Ponder is because of the swagger...

he reminds me of Aaron Rodgers...

not physically...I don't know enough about him yet...but the clips I saw and the way they said he OWNED the media part is something all great QB's do...and then when I saw him making throws...he was accurate as hell...and he just LOOKS the part.

and he graduated in 2.5 years with an impressive degree and seems to have a real good head on his shoulders

it's a pipe dream, and he probably will never amount to anything...

but right now he seems like a Pioli guy and that would be ok with me...even if #21 is a "reach"

Yes, reported by the guys who bring you the local fish wrap, and know nothing about evaluating a QB. Not saying I do, but I fully trust Kiper and Mayocks opinions that he grades out as a solid 2nd round pick.

"missed receivers high, low, and wide."

Missed them high on the post-corner routes that were perfectly thrown.

Missed them low on the seam, when he really wasn't getting the ball where it needed to be, then again, he's used to 3 star recruit receivers, so he may not be used to leading that much. Who knows, hope he gets that deep ball going. We'll see at his pro day.

Missed them wide on the out routes to the sideline, where he threw the ball to the perfect spot where only the receiver could get it.

Also, his drops were perfect as the commentators stated "now that's what we want to see". He was consistent and accurate. The biggest reason I'm big on him, besides being and Iowa fan, is that if he could run the Chiefs current offense perfectly. Especially since he's been so good at leading receivers giving them a chance to run. Bowe would benefit, and Moeaki already knows him well. Until he were ready to play, he would be a great, trustworthy backup to Cassel.

Hootie might be right on this Ponder is a good QB infact look at how FSU performed when he wasn't playing. As far as Gabbert he has Elvis Grbac written all over him.

Ponder reminds me of Tom Brady and I didn't want to say that because it is going to open up the flood gates but that's what I kind of saw/was thinking this weekend.

are you surprised by this? We're talking about a guy whose background is academia.

I just don't like his attitude during draft time...

he has a terrible track record...yet every year you can't say anything or have any opinion that differs from his or you're an idiot

makes no sense

I think Gabbert will suck because he did nothing great in college and he has a horrible haircut. God forbid I have an opinion. I think being a douche CAN be a red flag that you are going to suck in the NFL. I think (and I believe Hamas mentioned this) having a dip (a douche move) and being spotted with it on camera during the biggest time of your life is another red flag that leads me to believe he's going to be a huge bust.

I only go by my gut...and I admit it...I have a gut feeling Gabbert is going to suck.

I had a gut feeling a week ago Newton was going to go #1 and that gut feeling is going to be wrong so what the **** do I know...at least I can admit when I'm doing guess work

Bullshit, the post-corners were perfectly thrown. Led the receivers to the outside shoulder and just like the commentators said, if a receiver doesn't get that ball, they will find someone who will.

QB's air again tomorrow, I'll DVR it and try to transcribe the Stanzi shit by Friday.

location: Iowa

we get it, brah

sorry I bashed your mancrush

he didn't pass my eye test

I'm no expert, so what do I know...don't be offended

The balls were thrown to the right spot, but that doesn't mean they were perfectly thrown.

You might have a point if Gabbert was actually a douche. He was universally loved by his teammates, and everyone raves about how he is both down to earth, treats everybody well, and has a great work ethic.

You are, literally, judging a guy based on his haircut.

Gabbert did "nothing great" in comparison to a traditional power school. That's also because Missouri isn't on that level of school. He had them on the cusp of a BCS bid, and he beat the BCS #1, something no one at the school had ever done.

He always stares into the blitz and makes dumbass decisions (see the Iowa game)

Yeah, I remember him staring at the blitz while he was looking downfield the entire play.

I also remember Mayock bitching about him not looking down the field. It must have been opposite day when he talked about his advanced ability to keep his eyes focused on his receivers when the play breaks down.

You are now quoting Mayock a man who you denounce whenever someone else mentions him. Lets talk about Gabbert doing his best Grbac impersonation against a 4 man rush with a freshmen CB and a Redshirt Freshmen safety owning his ass in the Nebraska game. That game says alot about Gabbert.

What the hell are you talking about?

If Hitler says 2+2=4, he's not wrong because he's Hitler. If Mayock points out Gabbert's ability to look down the field, and then shows evidence of him doing it, that claim has merit. If he says Robert Ayers is the best defender in the draft and offers little evidence to support that claim, it's baseless.

There is a difference.

As far as being owned in the Nebraska game, yeah, he played like shit. That will happen when you stay in after getting a concussion from a H2H hit.

He wasn't doing a Grbac impersonation at all. He got Missouri back into that game, he wasn't the one who let Roy Helu run for 300 ****ing yards, was he?

You hate Gabbert because he didn't want to go to your school.

:rolleyes:


That Helmet hit came in the 4th quarter I guess that would explain him playing like shit the other 3 quarters too? How many times did did he lead his offense to either turning it over or 3 in outs to help build that 24-0 lead? He came back the next week and sucked too. I can't believe you defend that dipshit throw against Iowa that ended the game.

Um No. I'm pretty sure I listed why I think he's overrated did you even read what was said?

Mayock did say Gabbert impressived him even in his worst game because he was always making throws that gave his receivers a chance etc. etc. etc.

I admit, I have no idea...

If I listened to one Cutler interview and looked at him one time I'd be like "holy shit that guy is going to suck" but he is pretty good, so who knows...

Just have a gut feeling about Gabbert...and yes, I base that off of his gay haircut and Hamas telling me about his huge dip...I don't think NFL players need to be dipping, let alone potential franchise QB's...

of course, I think people who dip are huge douches as well so like I keep saying...I'm no expert

we have no shot at Gabbert anyways so it's not like it really matters

I didn't defend the throw, I rebutted your bullshit accusation that he stares at the blitz. He doesn't. He didn't then and he didn't before. And again, he played like shit against TTU because he was concussed. You think it's a coincidence they came out running?

also

when I watch the combine...

if I were a GM...anyone with dreads and an excessive amount of tattoos is frowned upon...and promptly moved off of my draft board pending a miracle interview

if they speak like intelligent adults during the interview process I disregard their dumbass decisions to have hair like girls and tattoos like morons

that applies for white people like Clay Mathews and his girly hair...I hate that Swain mother ****er on that team...he's my least favorite player in the NFL and he isn't even relevant...all because of his hair...and his pathetic attempt to tackle a Patriot after Flynn threw a pick and had it returned for 6 because Swain is an ugly, girly suckass piece of shit.