penchief |
04-27-2010 02:29 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58
(Post 6719236)
That's fine, but people need to be consistent.
Your stance is that the comment in question doesn't prove that Pioli overruled Weis.
Fine.
Then you (not personally you, I'm generalizing the board) can't go back and say, "well, we passed on him, Weis must not have wanted him."
You can't have it both ways.
This is a perfect example:
That doesn't shed any conclusive light on the situation.
Weis could have been standing on the table arguing for Clausen and was overruled by the man making the final decison.
We'll never know.
|
I have never said that Weis must not have wanted him. I've simply said that the draft proved he wasn't worth the fifth overall pick and the fact that we passed over him twice does suggest that (as a franchise) we liked other players better. The fact that he lasted until the 48th pick validates that position. And who knows how far he would have dropped had Carolina (a quarterback hungry team) not taken him.
Now, my only beef is not with the report but with the attempt to present it as evidence that Weis jumped up and down screaming for Clausen and the ONLY reason we didn't draft him was because Pioli is incompetent and overruled him. To me, that's bullshit. That's making a lot of assumptions without any proof.
Clausen went to a team that drafted three quarterbacks in the same draft. They drafted Armanti Edwards in the 3rd and Tony Pike in the 6th. Sounds to me like they were going to take whatever they could get their hands on moreso than they thought Clausen was a sure-fire franchise quarterback. Because if you thought that you'd nailed it in the second round why would you throw two more draft choices at such a high risk position?
Listen, I hope Clausen succeeds. I don't wish ill-will on anyone. But on the flip-side, I also think it is completely unfair to the chiefs front office to keep casting aspersions based on nothing more than speculation.
|