Chiefs ESPN gave us a B draft grade. Does that make the pessimist happier? - Page 11

Just Passin' By · 04-26-2009, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

I think his point is the best teams in the league have top of the line players, they aren't just a bunch of good hard workin guys that try hard.

Well, naturally, talent is important. It's just not the end all and be all. Shit, the situations with T.O. should have made this so abundantly clear that nobody even questions it.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 04-26-2009, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

I think his point is the best teams in the league have top of the line players, they aren't just a bunch of good hard workin guys that try hard.

Another instance where the underdog mentality raises its head. They latch on to the "right" guys quote, not realizing that those guys aren't right when they aren't surrounded by HOF talent.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 04-26-2009, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Well, naturally, talent is important. It's just not the end all and be all. Shit, the situations with T.O. should have made this so abundantly clear that nobody even questions it.

Lawrence Taylor was a world class one who sucks the penis, crackhead and generally a pure ****up that Grandpa Parcells, the disciplinarian of disciplinarians, wouldn't do anything to...why? Because he had world-class talent.

**HemiEd** · 04-26-2009, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

I know what you're saying, but it's a give and take.

Talent and winning go a long way to building "chemistry" and "team," yet there have essentially been all-star teams in sports history that haven't won crap.

There needs to be a middle ground, but the "not looking for Pro-Bowlers" line rings hollow to me.

I understand, they haven't given out a lot of info, but they did say that, didn't they? I don't think it was literal, and I was trying to convey the point they made, since it may apply here.

Maybe I did a poor job of trying to make my point, I am going to give them a shot and see what happens.

I must admit, I was more than a little shocked on most of the picks. But I don't know much. The Mizzou giant is the one I can least rationalize.

RippedmyFlesh · 04-26-2009, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

I think his point is the best teams in the league have top of the line players, they aren't just a bunch of good hard workin guys that try hard.

In a salary cap era you have to have the mix of both. No cap then you could just build great talent everywhere.
Because its really the cap that forces you to get the hard workers/cheap players.

Mecca · 04-26-2009, 08:39 PM

Ok but I don't wanna hear this argument that NE doesn't have stars and they have the right players...

Anyone who doesn't think NE is loaded with star power and top of the line players isn't playing with a full deck.

Just Passin' By · 04-26-2009, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Lawrence Taylor was a world class one who sucks the penis, crackhead and generally a pure ****up that Grandpa Parcells, the disciplinarian of disciplinarians, wouldn't do anything to...why? Because he had world-class talent.

Sure, and the Red Sox put up with Ramirez until he became more trouble than he was worth. Every team has to find its comfort level with the sort of crap it's willing to accept. Talent isn't all that matters. In the end, it's still about the team, and it has to function well enough together to win.

Just Passin' By · 04-26-2009, 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

Ok but I don't wanna hear this argument that NE doesn't have stars and they have the right players...

Anyone who doesn't think NE is loaded with star power and top of the line players isn't playing with a full deck.

How many teams have no stars at all? The Patriots won the 2001 Super Bowl with only 3 Pro Bowlers on the roster, as I recall.

**HemiEd** · 04-26-2009, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

Ok but I don't wanna hear this argument that NE doesn't have stars and they have the right players...

Anyone who doesn't think NE is loaded with star power and top of the line players isn't playing with a full deck.

I agree, no question. But were they ALL Stars, prior to being drafted? Or, did a lot of them thrive with the Patriots?

Believe me, I have more than a few reservatioons about this draft. I am just trying to understand why they did, what they did.

I don't think they are stupid, or uninformed, do you?

htismaqe · 04-26-2009, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HemiEd

I agree, no question. But were they ALL Stars, prior to being drafted? Or, did a lot of them thrive with the Patriots?

Believe me, I have more than a few reservatioons about this draft. I am just trying to understand why they did, what they did.

I don't think they are stupid, or uninformed, do you?

Pats fans talked about Seymour and Warren in the exact same way Jackson is being discussed here.

Pioli Zombie · 04-26-2009, 08:57 PM

What does ESPN know?. Mecca/Hamas/Dane et al feel otherwise so they must be right.
Posted via Mobile Device

Titty Meat · 04-26-2009, 09:00 PM

Like Whitlock said Jackson wouldn't lead the NFL in sacks but if he's a solid player its still a good pick. Thats more then most of the Chiefs first round picks.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 04-26-2009, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

How many teams have no stars at all? The Patriots won the 2001 Super Bowl with only 3 Pro Bowlers on the roster, as I recall.

And Brady, Light, Seymour, Vrabel, Bruschi, Milloy, and Woody would all go to Pro Bowls shortly thereafter.

It wasn't like they had 3 high quality players, and that's it.

Sweet Daddy Hate · 04-26-2009, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pioli Zombie

What does ESPN know?. Mecca/Hamas/Dane et al feel otherwise so they must be right.
Posted via Mobile Device

Question:

What IS the going salary for a quality shill these days?

'Hamas' Jenkins · 04-26-2009, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billay

Like Whitlock said Jackson wouldn't lead the NFL in sacks but if he's a solid player its still a good pick. Thats more then most of the Chiefs first round picks.

No, it's not. You don't give a solid player more money than James Harrison.

04-26-2009, 06:21 PM
googlegoogle Banned Join Date: Nov 2008 Casino cash: $10004900	ESPN gave us a B draft grade. Does that make the pessimist happier? Last edited by googlegoogle; 04-26-2009 at 06:32 PM..
Posts: 4,700

04-26-2009, 08:39 PM	#156
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $2567050	Ok but I don't wanna hear this argument that NE doesn't have stars and they have the right players... Anyone who doesn't think NE is loaded with star power and top of the line players isn't playing with a full deck.
Posts: 110,994

04-26-2009, 08:57 PM	#161
Pioli Zombie Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: olathe,kansas Casino cash: $10004900	What does ESPN know?. Mecca/Hamas/Dane et al feel otherwise so they must be right. Posted via Mobile Device
Posts: 11,077

04-26-2009, 09:00 PM	#162
Titty Meat Inmem 2.0 Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: My house Casino cash: $2227558	Like Whitlock said Jackson wouldn't lead the NFL in sacks but if he's a solid player its still a good pick. Thats more then most of the Chiefs first round picks.
Posts: 75,207