ChiefsPlanet
Page 3 of 20 12 3 456713 Last »
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   NFL Draft Treatise from the "Gang of 14" (Long Read) (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=203071)

milkman 02-25-2009 09:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 5525212)
It's a play on words from Pioli Zombie, because only 14 of us in a poll said we'd be pissed if Pioli passed on both QBs because we aren't giving him the benefit of the doubt.
I never vote in these polls, so I guess that leaves me out.

:banghead:

RINGLEADER 02-25-2009 09:10 AM
The more I see of Stafford the more I'm convinced in your excellent analysis. The more I see of Sanchez, however, the less convinced I am that he can succeed at the next level. But, just as your comment that Aaron Curry can't change games is complete speculation, the general consensus forming in some circles that Stafford will succeed and Sanchez won't could be just as wrong.

'Hamas' Jenkins 02-25-2009 09:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Passin' By (Post 5525223)
Yes, and it was misleading then, as now. It changes absolutely nothing, as you full well know.
So, the fact that we could draft a QB in every other round other than the first, and still have a lower rate of winning a Super Bowl than simply drafting first round QBs is somehow "misleading" and "changes nothing", and you wonder why we feel the need to insult you?

keg in kc 02-25-2009 09:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by milkman (Post 5525229)
I never vote in these polls, so I guess that leaves me out.
You exceed the maximum age requirement.

big nasty kcnut 02-25-2009 09:11 AM
It's a well placed arguement. I still say thigpen will do good. We do need ol help and a good de.
Posted via Mobile Device

dirk digler 02-25-2009 09:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by milkman (Post 5525226)
Just a couple of thoughts here.
Both are things that I've said before.

First, when it appeared that the QBs who would be declaring for the draft were Matt Stafford and Sam Bradford, those of us who were arguing that Stafford was the better prospect were met by arguments that he wasn't ready, and that we shouldn't draft him.

Now that it has played out that Stafford and Sanchez, who no one expected to declare, are the QBs, and that sanchez will be the one available, those of us that are supporting Sanchez are met with the "Sanchez isn't ready, but we'd love to have Stafford" argument.

It just appears that there are people who simply are afraid to risk taking a QB.

Second thought here, I would argue that Stafford's physical ability makes him look like the kid with higher upside, but Sanchez's leadership and maturity, and the way he shows up in the biggest games against the better teams gives him as much upside.

I posted it elswhere, but it's worth repeating, Sanchez best games were against the best teams the Trojans faced, OSU, Oregon and Penn St., throwing for 11 Tds and only 1 pick combined.
Those are fair points. For the record I have liked Stafford and wanted no part of Bradford.

And I really don't dislike Sanchez in fact I was giddy after watching him play in the Rose Bowl but have concerns over his lack of experience.

Mecca 02-25-2009 09:17 AM
Sanchez doesn't look nor handle himself like a guy with no experience....the lack of starts would bother me if he did alot of stupid things and was very sloppy but he's not.

dirk digler 02-25-2009 09:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 5525227)
Again, misinformed.

Every USC offensive coach told Carroll after practices in '07 that Sanchez>Booty. He overruled them.

He was going to start for them as a RS Frosh before the bogus rape allegations.
Excluding the bogus rape charge how does that change anything in 07? Carroll is the head coach he makes the final decision and thought Booty was better or maybe thought Sanchez just wasn't fully ready.

Just Passin' By 02-25-2009 09:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dirk digler (Post 5525222)
My biggest problem with Sanchez is his 16 starts and he wasn't able to beat out Booty last year and only played because Booty was injured.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 5525227)
Again, misinformed.

Every USC offensive coach told Carroll after practices in '07 that Sanchez>Booty. He overruled them.

He was going to start for them as a RS Frosh before the bogus rape allegations.
Here is another perfect example of the problem. Dirk is not misinformed at all. He's absolutely correct. Your response is an attempted explanation of WHY it happened, not proof that it didn't.

Mecca 02-25-2009 09:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dirk digler (Post 5525246)
Excluding the bogus rape charge how does that change anything in 07? Carroll is the head coach he makes the final decision and thought Booty was better or maybe thought Sanchez just wasn't fully ready.
Because Pete Carroll was always loyal to Booty to a fault, you can go pull up any message board dedicated to SC at that time and see a huge number of posts dedicated to Carrolls man love of Booty and how it cost the Trojans national titles.

Just Passin' By 02-25-2009 09:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 5525233)
So, the fact that we could draft a QB in every other round other than the first, and still have a lower rate of winning a Super Bowl than simply drafting first round QBs is somehow "misleading" and "changes nothing", and you wonder why we feel the need to insult you?
No, I don't wonder why at all. I understand that you can't deal successfully with someone who presents the arguments logically, so you insult them in an attempt to shout down the opposition. Since I don't give a damn who the Chiefs pick in any round this year, I don't have any emotional investment in Sanchez/Not Sanchez. Your arguments are all based upon looking at numbers from a myopic point of view, which is why you have gotten so much of it wrong.

Tchoupitoulas 02-25-2009 09:21 AM
Really disagree about Stafford. I don't post often, so consider this an important enough point for me to step out of anonymity and make a point:

Although not a huge Georgia fan, I have lived in Atlanta the past 5 years and have watched a lot of Georgia football with Georgia alums. Stafford is soft physically and soft in the head. He is a doughy primadonna. If there is an "it" factor he has the opposite of that.

And the amazing thing is that every Georgia fan I know, agrees with this. He is not a winner, he is not a team guy, he does not inspire fellow players or fans, he feels that he is entitled to greatness, he is not tough, and he is not very smart. Can he throw a deep ball - yes, but that's it. How this guy is perceived as a top pick is way beyond me. Any person who touts this guy as special either has not watched him play more than just casually or has fallen in love with his arm strength. That includes all the so called draft gurus at the major media outlets. This guy will set back any team that drafts him with a top pick for years. Do not want.

Franchise quarterbacks are great, unfortunately this guy is not one of them.

Pioli Zombie 02-25-2009 09:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Passin' By (Post 5525188)
Here's the problem with your post:

Nothing, and I mean NOTHING, in it justifies the sort of attacks that have made on those who come to the conclusion that this is not a year to draft a QB in the top 5. Here's a simple example of why



This means that, even before you look into the individual situations involved, over 40% of all Super Bowls have been won by NON-first round quarterbacks. Clearly, then, it it not imperative that your quarterback be a first round pick in order to win a Super Bowl.

The problem with the "Gang of 14" is not that they favor taking the quarterback, it's that they're such a bunch of pricks to anyone who dares to disagree, when there is clearly no 'right' answer to the discussion. There is no magical formula for drafting a quarterback which guarantees a Super Bowl victory. Some of the greatest quarterbacks in league history played long careers without ever winning one. There are legitimate reasons to think that the particular quarterbacks in question are not the picks to make in the top 5 of the draft this year, just as there are legitimate reasons to think that the quarterbacks in question are the picks to make in the top 5 this year.

Sometimes you draft a quarterback before you solidify the rest of the team and it works out (Aikman). Sometimes you draft a quarterback before you solidify the rest of the team and it doesn't (Carr, Harrington). This is all situational, and disagreement based upon that does not make someone a "****ing reerun".

thats all i was trying say :clap::clap::clap: until i got into it too and...sorta.....started swearin too :cuss:

then i started to think about it :hmmm:

I wish i hadnt done it.

and i wish I had put it as eloquently as you just did it. :banghead:


kudos to you!!! :clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

Just Passin' By 02-25-2009 09:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 5525251)
Because Pete Carroll was always loyal to Booty to a fault, you can go pull up any message board dedicated to SC at that time and see a huge number of posts dedicated to Carrolls man love of Booty and how it cost the Trojans national titles.
Again.... opinion, not fact. Now, pull out the quote where Carroll says "Sanchez is definitely the better quarterback, and he gives us the best chance to win, but I'm going with Booty because of my loyalty." and you've got a case. It won't change the "experience" argument, but it will at least strengthen the pointless "why so little experience" argument.

dirk digler 02-25-2009 09:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 5525251)
Because Pete Carroll was always loyal to Booty to a fault, you can go pull up any message board dedicated to SC at that time and see a huge number of posts dedicated to Carrolls man love of Booty and how it cost the Trojans national titles.
Are you suggesting that Pete Carroll cared more about starting Booty then winning?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:52 PM.
Page 3 of 20 12 3 456713 Last »
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.