Why do you care what Pete Carroll thinks?

I've posted quotes from big time USC Boosters that have told me that Pete was pissed because he was virtually eliminated from Title Contention the minute Sanchez declared.

LMAO That's the hand shake that gets you dropped through Porky's trap-door!

Hell yes he was pissed!
It kills me that no matter how painfully obvious it is that Mark is one very talented young man who will be such a dynamic leader for a team, TF's in KC just have a really inbred mental block from 30 years of overall shite that will NOT let them see the forest for the trees!

Winner. That's what this kid is, plain and simple.

I think it's definitely devolved to the point where all the QB lovers cut down Curry, Crabtree, and pretty much every one else who isn't a QB. And the people who are afraid of a QB cut them down while propping up the other guy.

In the end, most people get so caught up in wanting to be right that their opinion becomes way too emotional. Some of the hyperbole both ways about these guys is flat insane. People saying Sanchez is some God like leader of men or Stafford doesn't have "it"... I don't know about that. And I'm probably being kind.

It's a huge risk, this is probably the time to take it. There doesn't appear to be too many insane prospects out there. I'm not sure Curry's really worth it at 3, but I'm not sure he sucks quite as bad as some people think he does. All the other top 15-20 picks besides Stafford and Sanchez aren't going to bust, and there are guys we're propping up now who are going to fail, and guys who people think are overrated who will succeed.

The reality is that you're more likely to find a Super Bowl winning guy in the 1st round. The other reality is that picking a 1st round QB that flops will set your franchise back 4 or 5 years. So it's not a pick to be made lightly. It's not a mistake you can just fix, you have to ride it out and be patient. That is not a poor argument to make. That doesn't mean you should be afraid to take the risk, but you have to be right, and sometimes that comes down to luck, injuries, the team that's built around them, etc.. The amount of confidence people on both sides of this argument make is probably way too excessive. But that's life on a message board.

The other thing is, we're not going to be a Super Bowl team next year, but we've got high draft picks, a ridiculous amount of cap space, with a horribly weak division that's being turned over with the Raiders, a younger coach than Mangini, and Norv Turner. I think turning in a record much better than 2-14 is not far-fetched. This team could look totally different come June, Pioli really has the freedom to do whatever he wants.

I don't think Aaron Curry sucks, I just don't think OLB's are worth top 3 picks.

And Michael Crabtree has red flags popping up everywhere he's cutting himself down.

But it is different now with Pioli. It's not like Carl. Regardless of whether he succeeds in KC or not, the dude was a HUGE part in the evaluation and decision making process of the greatest dynasty of the salary cap era. It's very hard to second guess his decisions, or to act like you're smarter than him. Because you're not. And he will make some poor decisions, I don't doubt that one bit.

Which is funny, because people bash someone for wanting a certain player, Saying they arent smarter than NFL GM's. Then turn right around and say we wont pass on a sure fire HOF OLB... Because they are smarter than the GM...

How do you figure that?

Because the argument is "Pioli agrees with me" which I don't really understand but there are posters that seem to really think that.

How do they know that Pioli agrees with them? Can they post a link or evidence to support those claims?

They don't it just sounds good so they can call everyone else stupid or "you think you know more than Pioli does!"

Three is probably a bit high. Although I think OLB is an impact position if you are a 3-4 team. But that said, there doesn't appear to be a Mario Williams in this draft, no Glenn Dorsey's... if you're not looking for a QB or LT then Curry looks about as good as anyone else. What do you do?

You take the QB?

There's a ton of defenders next year and reality is we'll be picking high again.

There's a lot of folks who think the chiefs are going to do exactly what they want for some reason, this attitude like 'when the chiefs take curry, i'll be vindicated, and it'll prove that sanchez sucks!'. Like they somehow know better than the rest of us what the chiefs are going to do. It's interesting.

No one knows, which is why those arguments do get on my nerves. Just like the "you don't work in the NFL" arguments are lazy.

What should we all do sit around going "they'll make the right decision" like little sheep with no opinions that'd be a real fun forum.

What I'd like to see is some statistic that shows the relationship of success to the quality of their offensive line. I'd say that most of those qb's you listed didn't spend a lot of time on their asses or have to hurry the majority of their throws. I still think the most important position on the team is the entire offensive line. BTW, I am not a former Big Ugly nor am I related to one whatsoever.

"The Ballad Of Fix The O-Line And Everything Will Fall In To Place"

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dt1fBjCm49g&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dt1fBjCm49g&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>