ChiefsPlanet - Draft '09: The Quarterbacks

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)

- Saccopoo Memorial Draft Forum (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=29)

- - Draft '09: The Quarterbacks (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=201897)

Quote:

Originally Posted by melbar (Post 5487505)

I'm in the same boat, but I keep getting dragged into the arguments against him because there is a croud that doesnt seem to acknowledge that there are some serious questions about him.

Question. Singular.

There's ONE question about Sanchez. His limited starts in college.

Please, enlighten us as to what these other concerns are.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz (Post 5487491)

That only took about 30 minutes b/c Sanchez only started 2 games. lolallarlarrazz.

It's not that I'm AGAINST the selection, it's just that it's risky. Risk makes me piss myself. This organization could regress (how, I have no ****ing clue) if it blows (not sexually, I think) the #3 overall pick.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz (Post 5487507)

No, no. Risk, regression. Ruin reward.

Rhut, row.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz (Post 5487524)

Even when I type the phrase "draft a QB," a little bit or urine leeks from my hanglow.

If the prospect is a "can't miss lock," we should maybe consider him (or her). Maybe. It would be tougher to blow a "her."

LMAO.

You're almost more Penz than Penz is...

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 5487539)

LMAO.

You're almost more Penz than Penz is...

I almost feel guilty when I type "risk makes me piss myself" in the middle of a post, and then I get agreement.

Almost takes the fun out of it and makes me feel like a jerk.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz (Post 5487549)

I almost feel guilty when I type "risk makes me piss myself" in the middle of a post, and then I get agreement.

Almost takes the fun out of it and makes me feel like a jerk.

LMAO

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefRon (Post 5487521)

Every prospect has questions. Peyton Manning had questions surrounding him.

**** that, I want a franchise QB, someone that wants to be the best and can will his team, our team, to victory.

His name is Sanchez.

But really, as long as I don't have to see another play being run by Thigpen or Croyle, at least that will be progress.

Comparing Manning to Sanchez is ridiculous. Do I really have to explain that, or were you just going way over the line to prove a weak point?

Quote:

Originally Posted by melbar (Post 5487562)

Comparing Manning to Sanchez is rediculous. Do I really have to explain that, or were you just going way over the line to prove a weak point?

How do you know?

Quote:

Originally Posted by melbar (Post 5487562)

Comparing Manning to Sanchez is rediculous. Do I really have to explain that, or were you just going way over the line to prove a weak point?

BTW, I wasn't really comparing the two, although one reason I really prefer Sanchez is his relentless drive to be the best (reminds me of Manning).

My point was, even the best QB in the league right now (arguably) had questions about him when he was coming out.

Every prospect has questions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 5487466)

I'm not butt hurt over it at all, it makes you look like a fool.

If Sanchez and Smith had anywhere NEAR the same level of talent, I'd be willing to at least listen.

But I have a hard time respecting someone's opinion who thinks the two are comparable. The ONLY thing they have in common is the college starts stat.

Even if they WERE comparable in talent, your argument is flawed.

History has no bearing on what will happen. You can't assume that just because past QB's have failed with limited college starts does not guarantee, or even should suggest that someone else will fail.

Different levels of talent, different sets of circumstances.

But please, keep up the good work. We enjoy hearing the same argument daily against him - it's the only one you have.

And FWIW, I'd be perfectly content with Stafford as well. Sanchez is just my preference.

Not necessarily you, but what I've seen in general from the Sanchez backers the last month and a half:

- "History has no bearing on what will happen." People say that when trying to argue Sanchez's number of starts don't have a good bearing on whether he should be drafted at 3 or not. However, they will then say "history shows us spread quarterbacks suck" when trying to discredit a different QB. In other words, history matters when it supports my position.

- Before Sanchez declared it was Bradford has tons of talent around him. His receivers are always wide open. When someone says that about Sanchez it is shrugged off.

- Last year if someone dared to express the opinion that KC should draft someone that Scott Wright or Mayock had listed as the #8-10 player on their boards, people whined about what a huge reach it would be. Last I looked Wright had Sanchez at 7 or 8, which would mean it is a 4-5 space reach, but those same people no longer think it is a reach.

- A general dishonest analysis of any other player mentioned. I'll see Curry only has X sacks, he can't get to the QB. Maybe, or maybe he wasn't asked to. That would be like me saying Sanchez can't win when coming from behind. Well he wasn't in a position to play from behind on a great USC team. It doesn't mean he can't.

A majority of people who think they know so much about the draft are being the most closed minded people. It's like Voyager took possession of their soul and replaced Trevor Laws with Mark Sanchez.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 5487531)

Question. Singular.

There's ONE question about Sanchez. His limited starts in college.

Please, enlighten us as to what these other concerns are.

Assault charge ...dropped but hey thats a concern.

Going against the better advise of everyone around him and coming into the NFL with so little experience is a concern also.

Quote:

Originally Posted by melbar (Post 5487562)

Comparing Manning to Sanchez is ridiculous. Do I really have to explain that, or were you just going way over the line to prove a weak point?

He's not.

He's comparing the two as prospects, when both were coming out of college.

There's no such thing as a "lock." Every single college player will have strengths and weaknesses. Unless we're friends with Doc Brown, we're going to have to jump into the pool eventually.

Either Sanchez or Stafford might suck an enormous dick in the pros. Might happen. Hell, both might be terrible. But the same could be said of Curry, or Crabtree, or any of the LT (RT on this team) prospects.

All of these players are going to command huge $ based on the draft position, so missing on any of these players will be equally damaging to the franchise.

There are 2 top QB's coming out. Both have enormous upside, and this team lacks a real option at the most important position on the field.

It's not a tough decision at this point.

Nationwide poll just posted on esnp

Best option for your team if you need a QB

Sanchez 9%

Stafford 28.5%

Cassel 62.4%

I mention this only to say those of us with questions are not the minority...

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz (Post 5487605)

He's not.

He's comparing the two as prospects, when both were coming out of college.

There's no such thing as a "lock." Every single college player will have strengths and weaknesses. Unless we're friends with Doc Brown, we're going to have to jump into the pool eventually.

Either Sanchez or Stafford might suck an enormous dick in the pros. Might happen. Hell, both might be terrible. But the same could be said of Curry, or Crabtree, or any of the LT (RT on this team) prospects.

All of these players are going to command huge $ based on the draft position, so missing on any of these players will be equally damaging to franchise.

There are 2 top QB's coming out. Both have enormous upside, and this team lacks a real option at the most important position on the field.

It's not a tough decision at this point.

Why did the NFL advisory committee give Sanchez a 2nd round grade?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2 (Post 5487611)

Why did the NFL advisory committee give Sanchez a 2nd round grade?

Link?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz (Post 5487605)

He's not.

He's comparing the two as prospects, when both were coming out of college.

There's no such thing as a "lock." Every single college player will have strengths and weaknesses. Unless we're friends with Doc Brown, we're going to have to jump into the pool eventually.

Either Sanchez or Stafford might suck an enormous dick in the pros. Might happen. Hell, both might be terrible. But the same could be said of Curry, or Crabtree, or any of the LT (RT on this team) prospects.

All of these players are going to command huge $ based on the draft position, so missing on any of these players will be equally damaging to franchise.

There are 2 top QB's coming out. Both have enormous upside, and this team lacks a real option at the most important position on the field.

It's not a tough decision at this point.

Ya, I got that. Manning was a far better prospect with much more experience.

Quote:

Originally Posted by melbar (Post 5487616)

Ya, I got that. Manning was a far better prospect with much more experience.

The first response was posted while I was still writing.

You didn't get it at first, or you never would have said that comparing the two is ridiculous.