Walter Football Mailbag: True Fan Edition - Page 2

**OnTheWarpath15** · 02-20-2009, 06:53 PM

# From Chris D.:

I'm a KC homer, so I'm sure I can't look at this board as objectively as you guys can. That said (and I may be buying in to the Pioli hype a bit too much), but I can't see KC reaching this far for a 1 yr. starting junior. No doubt you both have made excellent points on why him and why not some others. I can't disagree with you that Sanchez has some raw talent, and is no doubt the 2nd best QB. I also think finding a franchise QB is/should be the #1 priority for any team.

That said, I say Pioli drafts the best player here... period. I don't know who that is, but in the 1% chance that Stafford falls here...yeah, we take a QB. I don't think the 3rd best player on the board is Sanchez, and is a BIG reach at #3.

I tend to think that Crabtree (if here), Curry, or the best OT (we're BAD on the right) goes here. I know, I know, nobody takes a LB at #3. That said, Pioli and Belichick have found a way to come up w/ really good QB's in later rounds. Taking a QB this high that turns out to be a bust can have long-term consequences to a franchise. I think that will be a consideration. Anyway, I don't see it, but it's certainly possible.

My Response:

I disagree with your assessment that Sanchez is a reach at No. 3. Why is he a reach? He's a Pro-style QB with all the attributes you could want out of an NFL quarterback. If I thought Sanchez was a reach, I wouldn't have the Chiefs taking him at No. 3.

But since you brought up reaching, Aaron Curry and a right tackle would be reaching at No.3. No 4-3 linebacker or right tackle is worth third-overall money. That's why only one linebacker has been chosen in the top three in 11 years, and that picked ultimately failed. Meanwhile, right tackles can be found in the later rounds.

Michael Crabtree is interesting at No. 3 and if Brian Orakpo has a great Combine, he could be considered... but right now, the pick looks like it's going to be Sanchez.

philfree · 02-21-2009, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

No, no no.

True Fan is a label for people who believe that rebuilding the 90's Chiefs is the proper way to construct a franchise, people who believe that OLBs and RTs are worth top 3 picks. People who would never spend a first round pick on a QB, even though they say they will, because every first round QB has just enough warts to make them too risky.

They are penny wise and pound foolish.

Who ever you say. LOL

PhilFree

bdeg · 02-21-2009, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

Who ever you say. LOL

PhilFree

Another attribute of the truefan... Ignoring all logical arguments. I think Hamas explained it pretty well. They won't dispute the bigger point, like a RT isn't worth #3, instead reverting back to their original argument that Sanchez is a junior.

**DeezNutz** · 02-21-2009, 10:49 AM

Who was the originator of the term, True Fan?

I know it was 'Hamas' that authored the article of secession that many, like myself, have signed, but who came up with the scarlet letter?

milkman · 02-21-2009, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Who was the originator of the term, True Fan?

I know it was 'Hamas' that authored the article of secession that many, like myself, have signed, but who came up with the scarlet letter?

I think it started with Carl calling the fans that pay for season tickets and attend games "True Fans".

philfree · 02-21-2009, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Who was the originator of the term, True Fan?

I know it was 'Hamas' that authored the article of secession that many, like myself, have signed, but who came up with the scarlet letter?

Article of secession? I guess I missed that. You guys have a secret password to get in the clubhouse too?

PhilFree

**DeezNutz** · 02-21-2009, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

I think it started with Carl calling the fans that pay for season tickets and attend games "True Fans".

Yes, of course. How could I have forgotten that...

Naturally, the phrase has evolved and taken on its own meaning here, to reflect the Peterson swallowers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

Article of secession? I guess I missed that. You guys have a secret password to get in the clubhouse too?

PhilFree

I often write in allegory, so you might want to be a little less literal with your interpretative skills.

But to get into the club, one need only have testicles, metaphorically speaking.

Search Hamas's threads, and you'll find his appeal for True Fans to sign up for counseling. Your initial confusion about the nature of the definition suggests that this would be beneficial reading.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 02-21-2009, 11:39 AM

Post 7 of this thread.

**DeezNutz** · 02-21-2009, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Post 7 of this thread.

Yes.

Phil, the info. was right at your fingertips, and you refused to see the light...

'Hamas' Jenkins · 02-21-2009, 11:45 AM

First instance of what became "true fans"

http://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthrea...ight=true+fans

philfree · 02-21-2009, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Yes, of course. How could I have forgotten that...

Naturally, the phrase has evolved and taken on its own meaning here, to reflect the Peterson swallowers.

I often write in allegory, so you might want to be a little less literal with your interpretative skills.

But to get into the club, one need only have testicles, metaphorically speaking.

Search Hamas's threads, and you'll find his appeal for True Fans to sign up for counseling. Your initial confusion about the nature of the definition suggests that this would be beneficial reading.

Yeah well thanks but I think I'll be o.k.

PhilFree

**doomy3** · 02-21-2009, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bdeg

Another attribute of the truefan... Ignoring all logical arguments. I think Hamas explained it pretty well. They won't dispute the bigger point, like a RT isn't worth #3, instead reverting back to their original argument that Sanchez is a junior.

yeah, whereas the "non-true fans" accept it as perfectly fine to draft Jenkins at #3 if the QBs aren't there for some reason. Nevermind that it completely ignores the fact that ONE cornerback has been drafted that high in the history of the NFL or that ZERO have been drafted in the last decade. It is much more fun to just repeat the term true fan and use the draft history argument for positions like linebacker and oline besides LT, but that doesn't apply to a slow CB who doesn't come close to comparing to elite physical talents at the position who were drafted much lower. While we're at it, let's ignore all history that says it's reeruned to draft a QB with 16 starts that high, because they nearly ALWAYS bust.

**Tribal Warfare** · 02-21-2009, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Who was the originator of the term, True Fan?

I know it was 'Hamas' that authored the article of secession that many, like myself, have signed, but who came up with the scarlet letter?

It was me, originally it was taken off of Bob Gretz's Real Fan quote

Coach · 02-22-2009, 01:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

So how many teams need them again this year?

Deftinaly the Rams. Maybe the Bengals, but I'm not so sure on that. Possibly the Chargers and Oakland as well. Lions @ 20 may as well.

Mark M · 02-23-2009, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

'True Fan' is a label a few people around here conjured up to place on anyone who doesn't agree with their team building/draft ideals. Heretics! And as it's gone on it's developed to a point that if you try to discuss anything other then Sanchez as the Chiefs first pick you get the label.

PhilFree

No matter what anyone else tries to say, that's the reality of the label.

It's kind of funny watching a bunch of people on a BB act as if they have decades of scouting experience, or were the guys who convinced the Pats to take Brady, or the Rams to sign up Warner, or for Dallas to trade Hershel Walker, or anything else for that matter.

Methinks there is a reason they are posting here and not actually employed by an NFL team ...

MM
~~

**Tribal Warfare** · 02-23-2009, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark M

No matter what anyone else tries to say, that's the reality of the label.

It's kind of funny watching a bunch of people on a BB act as if they have decades of scouting experience, or were the guys who convinced the Pats to take Brady, or the Rams to sign up Warner, or for Dallas to trade Hershel Walker, or anything else for that matter.

Methinks there is a reason they are posting here and not actually employed by an NFL team ...

Are saying that we should be like Lemmings and not have opinions? I can see where people say they like Curry or whatever guy, but its the "good enough" or complacency with mediocrity at key positions of the football team is where I fail to see ones logic in their evaluations.

02-20-2009, 06:53 PM
OnTheWarpath15 MVP Join Date: Sep 2005 Casino cash: $2051115	Walter Football Mailbag: True Fan Edition # From Chris D.: I'm a KC homer, so I'm sure I can't look at this board as objectively as you guys can. That said (and I may be buying in to the Pioli hype a bit too much), but I can't see KC reaching this far for a 1 yr. starting junior. No doubt you both have made excellent points on why him and why not some others. I can't disagree with you that Sanchez has some raw talent, and is no doubt the 2nd best QB. I also think finding a franchise QB is/should be the #1 priority for any team. That said, I say Pioli drafts the best player here... period. I don't know who that is, but in the 1% chance that Stafford falls here...yeah, we take a QB. I don't think the 3rd best player on the board is Sanchez, and is a BIG reach at #3. I tend to think that Crabtree (if here), Curry, or the best OT (we're BAD on the right) goes here. I know, I know, nobody takes a LB at #3. That said, Pioli and Belichick have found a way to come up w/ really good QB's in later rounds. Taking a QB this high that turns out to be a bust can have long-term consequences to a franchise. I think that will be a consideration. Anyway, I don't see it, but it's certainly possible. My Response: I disagree with your assessment that Sanchez is a reach at No. 3. Why is he a reach? He's a Pro-style QB with all the attributes you could want out of an NFL quarterback. If I thought Sanchez was a reach, I wouldn't have the Chiefs taking him at No. 3. But since you brought up reaching, Aaron Curry and a right tackle would be reaching at No.3. No 4-3 linebacker or right tackle is worth third-overall money. That's why only one linebacker has been chosen in the top three in 11 years, and that picked ultimately failed. Meanwhile, right tackles can be found in the later rounds. Michael Crabtree is interesting at No. 3 and if Brian Orakpo has a great Combine, he could be considered... but right now, the pick looks like it's going to be Sanchez.
Posts: 60,758

02-21-2009, 11:39 AM	#22
'Hamas' Jenkins Now you've pissed me off! Join Date: Jan 2006 Casino cash: $7129572	Post 7 of this thread. __________________ "When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read 'all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics.' When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty – to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.”--Abraham Lincoln
Posts: 75,083

02-21-2009, 11:45 AM	#24
'Hamas' Jenkins Now you've pissed me off! Join Date: Jan 2006 Casino cash: $7129572	First instance of what became "true fans" http://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthrea...ight=true+fans __________________ "When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read 'all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics.' When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty – to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.”--Abraham Lincoln
Posts: 75,083