Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiefnj2
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.
|
Fair point
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiefnj2
- 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.
|
It's shrugged off because it's bullshit, and anyone that knows anything about college football or watched USC in more than the Rose Bowl knows this.
All of their talent is on the defensive side of the ball. I'd be curious to see what Mecca thinks of this, but I don't see a single 1st round talent on that offense other than Sanchez, and I'm not sure I see any 2nd round guys either. Patrick Turner is a late round guy, Scott Wright thinks he could go undrafted. There's no one on the OL that would warrant a pick before the 4th.
Fact is, he had very little talent around him. People assume because it's USC that they were stocked at every position - far from it on offense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiefnj2
- 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.
|
QB is the most important position on the field, and is subject to different rules, and you know it. As someone else pointed out recently, if you have the opportunity to draft what you think is a franchise QB at 3, and know that he won't be available at your next pick, you take him, even if it's considered a reach by fans and draft experts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiefnj2
- 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.
|
That's not dishonest at all, and your comparison is completely flawed.
Regarding Curry: If the kid was a phenomenal pass rusher, wouldn't it be stupid of the coaches to make the kids play in coverage? Do the Colts ask Peyton Manning to not throw the ball downfield? Hell no. Players are asked to do things that fit what they do best.
As for what you said about Sanchez, there are completely different factors that go into getting that opportunity. No one has any control over that situation, where the WF coaching staff has all the control when it comes to putting Curry in a position to succeed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiefnj2
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.
|
I don't see people being close minded, I see people that stick to their beliefs, and the way this draft is shaking out, in concert with our needs, it makes it look like people are being closed minded.
Positional value hasn't changed since last year
There are 3 positions that are generally worth a Top 5 pick: QB, LT, DE
There is 1 QB that is consistently getting a Top 5 grade, and one that is getting a grade anywhere from 1-10.
There are 3 LT's that are getting a Top 10 grade. We already have our LTOTF.
There are no DE's getting a Top 10 grade.
That's what is putting the clamps on people.