Originally Posted by Just Passin' By (Post 5771084)

You're not an NFL scout. You're some guy on a message board, like pretty much everyone else who's posting. You can look at every single college game ever played, break down film on everyone who's even thought of playing football, and write novels full of data files on everyone who's ever sniffed a football, and it doesn't make your opinion inherently worth anything more than some schmuck who's college knowledge consists of watching 5 minutes of highlight tapes. Your current opinion is generally worth the weight of past success, and it's generally not going to matter what that success was based upon.

Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 5771090)

So basically, in your view, if you don't work in the NFL you can take no time out of your day to do any studying and your opinion should hold as much weight as someone who does.

Frankly, I find that reeruned.

Originally Posted by Reaper16 (Post 5771091)

Allow me to draw up an analog to demonstrate how much you're off:

*said to a poster who studies astrophysics as a hobby*

''You're not an astrophysicist. You're some guy on a message board, like pretty much everyone else who is posting. You can read every new academic journal, break down mathematics from published studies, and write dissertations of comparative thought in the field and it doesn't make your opinion inherently worth anything more that some schmuck who's common knowledge consists of 5 minutes of reading a wikipedia article on Stephen Hawking."

Originally Posted by doomy3 (Post 5770752)

I'm not sure how anyone can't understand this. There is a world of difference between trading a number 3 overall and trading a second rounder for Cassel. It absolutely changes the question.

Just like a conversation DeezNutz and I had about Sanchez a while back. I was totally against drafting him at #3 overall simply because of the overwhelming history against him due to his experience, plus his arm strength, size, etc. However, if we would have traded back anywhere past 15 and he was still around, I would have been OK with drafting him because of the value. The value in getting Cassel at #34 and still being able to draft an elite talent at #3 is a million times a better option than trading Cassel for a #3 pick.

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO (Post 5770758)

I WILL say this: i have NEVER called someone a name here unprovoked, i have been called a reerun, idiot, told i cant read, been threatened MULTIPLE times, slap me choke me with a dictionary(which was the funniest being who it came from) told i was an ignorant grease monkey etc. they put you down while you arent even online then act as though they are a victim when you read through the thread and defend yourself. Maybe thats why you think it's unprovoked

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By (Post 5771102)

Your analogy fails: no offense intended. In theory, astrophysics is a semi-certain discipline: or an 'exact science' as it were. It's not quite as definitive as mathematics, but it's much farther down that path than scouting players to project their future success in an entirely different league. Drafting is not an exact science.

Do you take advice about mothering from a woman who's 5 kids have all ended up on drugs or in prison just because she's been a mother? That analogy sucks, too, but it's no worse than yours. For areas that have no definitive answers, you look to past success as a means of weighing possible current and future accuracy.

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By (Post 5771102)

Your analogy fails: no offense intended. In theory, astrophysics is a semi-certain discipline: or an 'exact science' as it were. It's not quite as definitive as mathematics, but it's much farther down that path than scouting players to project their future success in an entirely different league. Drafting is not an exact science.

Do you take advice about mothering from a woman who's 5 kids have all ended up on drugs or in prison just because she's been a mother? That analogy sucks, too, but it's no worse than yours. For areas that have no definitive answers, you look to past success as a means of weighing possible current and future accuracy.

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 5771109)

If he's YOUR GUY, you get him.

Whether it's a #3 or #15.

What about that do you NOT get?

That's the same mentality that Pioli used for Jackson.

Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 5771072)

Hootie is a good example, he flat admitted he doesn't watch college football then spent the entire draft weekend telling everyone they were stupid, Pioli, yadda yadda.

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 5771112)

If the only qualification for posting on a message board is "You MUST work for an NFL Franchise", go ahead and shut this ****er DOWN.

Originally Posted by Reaper16 (Post 5771076)

The moment that it isn't allowed on CP to tell an idiot that they are an idiot is the moment I leave. Condescending? Sure. But when someone's take is idiotic its really obvious. And Mecca is right -- those posters opinions don't have equal value to someone's who has really watched a player/studied up on their point.

Originally Posted by Reaper16 (Post 5771119)

Nice twist, but its not correct. A proper corollary would be: would you take advice about mothering from a man who has studied mothering and parenting to some degree over advice from a mother of 5 drug-using, prison-living kids? I would take the guy's advice.

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 5771109)

If he's YOUR GUY, you get him.

Whether it's a #3 or #15.

What about that do you NOT get?

That's the same mentality that Pioli used for Jackson.

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By (Post 5771138)

You have the analogy wrong again, this time in my favor. The way you've framed it, you've now got evidence of failure on the part of the mother. In other words, you did precisely what I'm saying people do, and, if you're taking Mecca's side, you're trying to say that doing it that way is not correct.

Originally Posted by THISmaqe (Post 5771139)

What if he's NOT your guy? What if you think he MIGHT be your guy, but you're not sure so you'd rather play it safe?

I swear to God some of you think in binary.