NFL Draft Neither Stafford or Sanchez belong in top 10 - Page 11

**chiefforlife** · 02-21-2009, 09:39 AM

SOME DON’T VIEW STAFFORD, SANCHEZ AS TOP TEN PICKS
Posted by Mike Florio on February 21, 2009, 8:21 a.m.

Our initial mock draft of the year created plenty of consternation among folks who regard such matters even more importantly that some of our other readers regard their chosen religion.

And, yes, we were trying to make a point with the thing. At this stage, none of the draft experts (i.e., guys who couldn’t get or hold a scouting job with an NFL team and who instead tried to create a niche in the media for the stuff no NFL team would pay them to do) know with any degree of certainty what will occur on draft day.

Apart from the premature nature of prognosticating the events of late April is the fact that every NFL team makes its own decisions for its own reasons, especially in round one. Some draft based on need. Others take the best available player. And when 32 teams have different views on how those available players are ranked from best to worst, the stage is set for all sorts of screwy stuff.

We could have created even more consternation by dropping Georgia quarterback Matt Stafford and USC quarterback Mark Sanchez out of the top ten. In some war rooms, it’s an accurate view of the two players.

Said one source, “In other years those guys aren’t first-round picks. Stafford played well in 2007 but was horrible in 2008. He stunk in all their big games.”

The source specifically pointed to the contests against Alabama, Florida, and Tennessee. Based on the numbers, Stafford was bad against Florida, mediocre against Alabama, and decent against Tennessee.

“He is an average leader at best,” the source opined. “When you put a lot of pressure on him, he pees his pants. Detroit has a new front office, but if they take him then it’s the same old stuff. I guarantee that if he goes in the top 20 he will never play to the level he was drafted.

“What he has is physical skills,” the source added. “He has a strong arm and is athletic but he also has poor instincts and poor decision-making.”

Some might disagree with that assessment. But the point is that, when you’ve got a bunch of different folks assessing the same players, there will be significant variations from person to person.

“As far as Sanchez,” the source said, “he is a more solid choice. He played in a pro style offense. He’s accurate and has a good arm. He’s smart and a leader.

“The negative is he was a one-year starter. Tell me the last time a quarterback who was a one-year starter in college made it big in the NFL? Game time is huge with quarterbacks. Granted, from a money standpoint he made the right decision, but from the standpoint of having a top career, his decision has to be questioned.”

(And, no, our source isn’t Pete Carroll.)

So there you have it. Evidence of how the viewpoints on supposedly top players can diverge dramatically. It makes the process of predicting draft picks even more precarious. So, in the end, we think the final tally of players taken two months from now would presently seem every bit as goofy and unrealistic as some viewed our initial Pre-Combine Mock Draft.

**the Talking Can** · 02-21-2009, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

can, i like sanchez, rated by most as the #2 qb in the draft, stafford i have watched freeman too, freeman DOES NOT impress me, stafford's physical attributes do, his mental makeup doesnt, it's the way he carries himself, the way he acts when he gets sacked, throws an int, or the WR drops a pass, i dont like it. i could give 2 shits how that makes YOU feel

what games are you talking about?

one of the things i like best about him is the ability to bounce back, he never gets gun shy....look at the bowl game...terrible first half, almost perfect second half...that's clutch, that's mental toughness.....

he had to carry his team, he had the pressure of scoring every time, with 3 freshman starting on his OL, because their defense was so bad...christ Kentucky put up 38 on them...so he had to put up 42...no one ever put 30 on USC....

he had to force things - unlike Sanchez who had the best defense in college, which I point out not to criticize, just to compare - and when he made a mistake he came right back and kept slinging it....and yet, he had the same number of ints as Sanchez, 10....but he gets criticized for poor judgment and Sanchez doesn't....this why context matters, and no one ever wants to discuss it...

frankly listening to you i have no idea what you watched, or if you were actually paying attention...i haven't seen any evidence from you, yet, that you know anything about the team he played on or why they played the way they did....

the guy was a 3 year starter in the SEC, won 3 bowl games, and beat a dozen ranked teams in 3 years....don't tell me "pees his pants" in big games...that is ****ing reeruned, and flat out ignorant...

**SAUTO** · 02-21-2009, 06:33 PM

who did he play for again?

come on man i dont like him, i said why its a feeling. now i see that im not the only one that feels that way we CAN disagree

**the Talking Can** · 02-21-2009, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

who did he play for again?

come on man i dont like him, i said why its a feeling. now i see that im not the only one that feels that way we CAN disagree

i don't give a shit about your feelings....feelings are for morons

we have facts....

Sweet Daddy Hate · 02-21-2009, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pioli Zombie

Well, then you are calling mecca unelievably stupid because he said that. When describing the sainted sanchez the terms big and strong armed were used. I compared that to what they used to say about bledsoe and mecca said hed be happy to be able to get a qb as good as bledsoe with the third pick since the words franchise qb are being used to describe stafford and sanchez and the need out of any qb the chiefs may draft to be a "franchise qb" then mecca feels bledsoe fits this model

The draft is "his thing". Then he's got the nerve to call others morons.
Posted via Mobile Device

Do you have an actual TAKE to broadcast here, or are you going to just keep going back and forth with your Superiors like the butt hurt hobbit-bitch that you clearly are?
I anxiously await your Football Knowledge!

Sweet Daddy Hate · 02-21-2009, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pioli Zombie

If you draft a guy thinking he's a franchise player, an elway, a manning, an Aikman, and he turns into a Bledsoe, believe me, a fanbase is not happy with that.

If PIoli thinks stafford is an elway he will and should pick him. If he feels he's getting Bledsoe I doubt he will.
Posted via Mobile Device

Who gives a flying **** what this 60% window-licking fanbase thinks?!

milkman · 02-21-2009, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikey23545

Oh, great, we've gone from the BPA philosophy of drafting to the WBAGPANY (Won't Be Any Good Players Available Next Year) philosophy....

There are a lot of factors that have to weigh into draft decisions.

Best player and positional value are important, and when you're a team with as many holes as the Chiefs you have to have an eye on the next draft.

Ultra Peanut · 02-21-2009, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

I ****ing love dipshit true fans.

They offer dumbass takes like "We should take Crabtree or Curry at 3" or "We should trade down and take Sanchez at 10" when the only teams willing to trade up with us would be the very teams that would take Sanchez.

If we just keep trading down, we can grab all of the sixth- and seventh-round picks and take the players we want while everyone else reaches!

Coach · 02-21-2009, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

...Coming from the person that just says "Scott Pioli yadda yadda" that means alot...

Anyone and I mean anyone that thinks you take a right tackle with a top 5 pick is a moron there is no way around that.

Totally agree. Makes no economical sense to pick a top 5 for a RT, where you can find some solid ones out there in the FA market.

soundmind · 02-21-2009, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach

Totally agree. Makes no economical sense to pick a top 5 for a RT, where you can find some solid ones out there in the FA market.

This take assumes a little that we address a couple players in FA on DEF: DL and LB specifically

I'm assuming from statements much like this one, which I agree with, that you've settled on Albert as your LT for the long haul? Because, for the sake of debate, I can't say I'd have a problem with them taking Monroe with the #3 (play him @ LT), and moving Brandon across the pile to RT...unless that's not something he can do of course...

I realize and sympathize with the need for the QB, and to be honest, if either of these kids have "it" - take them...but presuming they don't, for the sake of debate...I have ZERO problem with a dominant LT.

Pioli Zombie · 02-21-2009, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth CarlSatan

Who gives a flying **** what this 60% window-licking fanbase thinks?!

Who gives a flying **** what YOU think?
Posted via Mobile Device

Reerun_KC · 02-21-2009, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pioli Zombie

Who gives a flying **** what YOU think?
Posted via Mobile Device

Hey look its a mirror!

Sweet Daddy Hate · 02-21-2009, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pioli Zombie

Who gives a flying **** what YOU think?
Posted via Mobile Device

Again, still waiting for your Gridiron Brilliance, Professor Asshat!

Pioli Zombie · 02-21-2009, 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by soundmind

This take assumes a little that we address a couple players in FA on DEF: DL and LB specifically

I'm assuming from statements much like this one, which I agree with, that you've settled on Albert as your LT for the long haul? Because, for the sake of debate, I can't say I'd have a problem with them taking Monroe with the #3 (play him @ LT), and moving Brandon across the pile to RT...unless that's not something he can do of course...

I realize and sympathize with the need for the QB, and to be honest, if either of these kids have "it" - take them...but presuming they don't, for the sake of debate...I have ZERO problem with a dominant LT.

Excellant post. This is exactly what I'm saying. Prepare to be attacked for it.

Posted via Mobile Device

**the Talking Can** · 02-21-2009, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by soundmind

This take assumes a little that we address a couple players in FA on DEF: DL and LB specifically

I'm assuming from statements much like this one, which I agree with, that you've settled on Albert as your LT for the long haul? Because, for the sake of debate, I can't say I'd have a problem with them taking Monroe with the #3 (play him @ LT), and moving Brandon across the pile to RT...unless that's not something he can do of course...

I realize and sympathize with the need for the QB, and to be honest, if either of these kids have "it" - take them...but presuming they don't, for the sake of debate...I have ZERO problem with a dominant LT.

we already have a dominant LT

Pioli Zombie · 02-21-2009, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth CarlSatan

Again, still waiting for your Gridiron Brilliance, Professor Asshat!

About what? Do you have a question, ass hole?
Posted via Mobile Device

02-21-2009, 09:39 AM
chiefforlife Colorado Chief Fan Join Date: Feb 2006 Casino cash: $5493147	Neither Stafford or Sanchez belong in top 10 SOME DON’T VIEW STAFFORD, SANCHEZ AS TOP TEN PICKS Posted by Mike Florio on February 21, 2009, 8:21 a.m. Our initial mock draft of the year created plenty of consternation among folks who regard such matters even more importantly that some of our other readers regard their chosen religion. And, yes, we were trying to make a point with the thing. At this stage, none of the draft experts (i.e., guys who couldn’t get or hold a scouting job with an NFL team and who instead tried to create a niche in the media for the stuff no NFL team would pay them to do) know with any degree of certainty what will occur on draft day. Apart from the premature nature of prognosticating the events of late April is the fact that every NFL team makes its own decisions for its own reasons, especially in round one. Some draft based on need. Others take the best available player. And when 32 teams have different views on how those available players are ranked from best to worst, the stage is set for all sorts of screwy stuff. We could have created even more consternation by dropping Georgia quarterback Matt Stafford and USC quarterback Mark Sanchez out of the top ten. In some war rooms, it’s an accurate view of the two players. Said one source, “In other years those guys aren’t first-round picks. Stafford played well in 2007 but was horrible in 2008. He stunk in all their big games.” The source specifically pointed to the contests against Alabama, Florida, and Tennessee. Based on the numbers, Stafford was bad against Florida, mediocre against Alabama, and decent against Tennessee. “He is an average leader at best,” the source opined. “When you put a lot of pressure on him, he pees his pants. Detroit has a new front office, but if they take him then it’s the same old stuff. I guarantee that if he goes in the top 20 he will never play to the level he was drafted. “What he has is physical skills,” the source added. “He has a strong arm and is athletic but he also has poor instincts and poor decision-making.” Some might disagree with that assessment. But the point is that, when you’ve got a bunch of different folks assessing the same players, there will be significant variations from person to person. “As far as Sanchez,” the source said, “he is a more solid choice. He played in a pro style offense. He’s accurate and has a good arm. He’s smart and a leader. “The negative is he was a one-year starter. Tell me the last time a quarterback who was a one-year starter in college made it big in the NFL? Game time is huge with quarterbacks. Granted, from a money standpoint he made the right decision, but from the standpoint of having a top career, his decision has to be questioned.” (And, no, our source isn’t Pete Carroll.) So there you have it. Evidence of how the viewpoints on supposedly top players can diverge dramatically. It makes the process of predicting draft picks even more precarious. So, in the end, we think the final tally of players taken two months from now would presently seem every bit as goofy and unrealistic as some viewed our initial Pre-Combine Mock Draft.
Posts: 5,717

02-21-2009, 06:33 PM	#152
SAUTO Shit Join Date: Jun 2008 Casino cash: $10039067	who did he play for again? come on man i dont like him, i said why its a feeling. now i see that im not the only one that feels that way we CAN disagree
Posts: 55,715