Quote:
Originally Posted by milkman
That all has the sound of pure utter bullshit to me.
But then that's how all your bullshit arguments ever are.
I've said a number of times that I like Tannehill's upside more than I like Barkley's.
I think the kid has the tools to be special, from arm strength, to athletic ability, to intelligenc.
You just keep making long winded bullshit arguments, because you're trying bait everyone into thinking just like you.
You're a bullshit artist.
|
You and Boss have been touting that he can be special but that's not everybody's sentiment. Most people are endorsing Tannehill because we need to take a chance on a first round QB and because he's not Cassel. No mention of whether he can be special. It's not risk averse if there are some, like myself, who want to be aggressive about getting a QB... only if it's the right QB. To me, it's risk averse that so many people want to take a QB simply because he's there, not because they're excited about him.
And that's why I'm okay with the Poe pick. That's a risky pick if there ever was one. I think most people agree that this is a pure boom/bust pick. He's probably going to either play extremely well or he's going to crash really badly. The Tannehill pick... yes, my personal opinion that Tannehill in relation to NFL QBs has an average skill set --his floor isn't bad, but his ceiling isn't impressive. Just a personal opinion. I'm not risk averse. I'm picky.
Either way, talking can's insistence that Poe was a needs based pick and not one made on a risky dare... just silly. Claiming those who support the Poe pick because it was risky are Pioli shills, then saying those who don't support risky moves for QBs are Pioli shills... contradictory.