Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501
You're not reading correctly. I said that at #3, instead of taking Tyson Jackson, what was the alternative? Who would you have taken? Because the majority of people have recommended players that were taking much deeper into the first round.
|
Oher, Harvin, Moreno, Davis, Crabtree - hell even Cushing would have been better choices than Tyson Jackson.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501
And give me a ****ing break. Wallace Gilberry is a good alternative to Jackson? I have no idea who will be better between Jackson and Magee, but you're also suggesting the Chiefs should have passed on Jackson in favor of a rawer prospect who may or may not have been available in the third round? You list Gilberry and Magee as alternatives, and yet call me an idiot. Interesting.
|
It's not interesting. You're dumb. You clearly don't watch the games. Gilberry has better numbers and more sacks than Jackson.
Jackson is a TWO DOWN PLAYER.
Only YOU and Scott Pioli can justify taking a TWO DOWN PLAYER at #3 overall.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501
Just as the same as you being convinced that Jackson will never make any kind of an impact because of how he's played as a rookie.
|
I hope you're smarter than this in real life, i.e. your job, your relationships, etc. because you don't understand ANYTHING about a 3-4 defense.
For the last time, a 3-4, 5 tech defensive end is NOT AN IMPACT POSITION.
Tyson Jackson could be the greatest 5 tech of all time (which he won't) and no one would even notice.