And then we'll do the hokie pokie, aaaaand turn ourselves around...

It's not a terrible example. It is a perfect example.

The Chargers drafted Eli Manning knowing full well he had zero desire to play or sign for that team weeks before the draft. He was drafted by the Chargers only because they were unable to work out a deal with the Giants for regular draft compensation. Why? Because the Chargers were asking for reeruned draft chart compensation and the Giants thought those demands were absolutely outrageous (keep in mind... that Giants thought those demands were outrageous in spite of the fact that Eli Manning was a consensus #1 pick and as close to a surefire franchise QB as we've seen in 5-10 years).

So if the trade chart says that the trade to move up two spots for a close-to-surefire franchise QB is 200 points off value, what does that say about #1 picks who walk in with a lot less hype? I don't understand why people continue to rally around a draft chart that says that the Chargers got ripped off big time for the Eli Manning trade. The trade only happened because the Chargers were forced to move away from the draft chart because it was dealt with as a free agent swap, not a draft swap. I don't understand the logic--free agent trades are made by negotiating deals between two teams, and those trade values change every single year. Draft trades are made by a standard chart. Why?

We could even name it, like a chess move.

The Chiefs make the Fetal Draft move.

With carrots up our asses!:doh!:

Free agent trades are a great example to use. Dipshit.

Because they knew Manning wasn't going to play for SD under any circumstances, thus effectively eliminating any leverage to negotiate.

Again, Manning essentially orchestrated the entire process, not the "archaic" nature of the draft chart.

LMAO

Ok I went back through this thread and I will say this, anyone and I mean anyone who thinks much of what a QB should be judged on happens at the combine they are out of their mind.

Drew Henson looked like a god throwing in his shorts, guys like JaMarcus Russell look great in those situations.

The combine means in my view very little to QB's as long as they show they don't have girly arms.

To me the only things I want to see at the combine are WR's and DB's and the intelligence tests.

You're not listening. I don't support a trade-down if the Chiefs truly believe that Sanchez should get a top 5 grade. But there seems to be at least some doubt about whether he deserves it. And the question is, if the Chiefs are concerned about Sanchez, then what's your next move?

Since people agree on a standard draft procedure that involves a standard draft chart, let me use standard terminology. Drafting a player at #3 that you graded over 5 spots lower is what they call a "reach."

But...but...it's the only chance True Fans get to talk a lot of ignorant and useless smack because Sanchez didn't win the "Combine Bow"l!!!

Anyone that says that should then be forced to say "I would have drafted Jamarcus Russell #1" because if you're saying the combine is very important then that's where you're at.

The fact that the Giants traded for Manning and gave up significant draft value and, arguably, reached for a QB (Rivers) that was expected to go in the bottom of the top 10 as "trade bait" suggests that the Giants very badly wanted Eli Manning. Very badly. The fact that the Chargers aggressively sought a trade before the draft and that drafted a QB they knew would never sign with the team means the Chargers really wanted to trade down at all costs.

This is a clear, clear, clear story of a team at #3 that badly wanted the top QB in the draft and a #1 pick team that didn't want that QB. It's a situation where the player in question was a close-to-surefire franchise QB was also evaluated much higher than the second pick in the draft and the second highest QB in that draft. And yet, the compensation was STILL considered too high.

If even a player as hyped up as Eli Manning isn't worth the ridiculously stupidly high trade value on the draft value chart, then why is that the same value the 49ers use to trade Alex Smith? Or that the Dolphins use to trade Jake Long?

(And for the record, I have never said that the draft chart is completely worthless or that they should take any pick they can get to trade down. Trade compensation should be based on how badly they want the best player on their board AND how confident they are that that guy will still be there when they are drafting--the confidence level increases significantly if the top 3 or 4 on your board are fairly equally valued).

If course the Giants very badly wanted Manning they were coming off an awful year needed a QB and the Manning name was going to help them significantly in the NY market.

From what I saw sanchez is quite capable of matching Drew Bledsoes 59 career playoff qb rating
Posted via Mobile Device

I think it's funny to see anyone who supposedly followed New England rip the player that turned their franchise around.

All the down talk of Bledsoe is nothing more than the remembering of recent history and not an entire history.