Pioli Zombie |
02-25-2009 09:29 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.
|
I agree totally ( i know that will probably worry you)
Im more concerned with leadership, poise, maturity, work habits,competitiveness, and rising up to the occassion in big moments than i am in raw physical talent.
before anyone says it, yes, you need physical skills, but the Montanas and Bradys and Roethlisburgers have that certain intangible that Jeff George didnt, you know?
Bledsoe was tall, had the strong arm, but Brady walked in and you just saw his poise in the pocket and could see he was better.
so ive determined that if they go for the Qb id much rather have Sanchez.
|