NFL Draft Neither Stafford or Sanchez belong in top 10 - Page 53

**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.

**SAUTO** · 02-23-2009, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kstater

Freeman won't be there in round 2.

good

Mecca · 02-23-2009, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

is that actually what they were thinking?

Considering they started seasons with Neil O'Donnell, Kordell Stewart, Mike Tomczak and Tommy Maddox I'm going to go with yea.

**SAUTO** · 02-23-2009, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

Josh Freeman isn't lasting till round 2...

You know you'd get better value taking a QB first and taking a LB like Marcus Freeman in the 3rd round...

or cushing or sintim

blueballs · 02-23-2009, 07:05 PM

kstater · 02-23-2009, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

good

Oh, he's totally the wrong fit for the Chiefs. I think he'll do well in the league. But not until after holding a clipboard for a while.

Just Passin' By · 02-23-2009, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

It only took Bill Cowher 15 years to realize he needed a real QB to win, any coach of any other team would have been fired years before for that kind of stupidity.

You see, this is exactly the kind of poor argument I'm talking about...

In 2004, the Steelers were 15-1, and the mighty Ben Roethlisberger was the quarterback. They didn't win the Super Bowl because they were beaten by a 14-2 team. That team went on to win the Super Bowl.

In 2001, the Steelers were 13-3, without the Mighty Ben Roethlisberger. They didn't win the Super Bowl because they were beaten by an 11-5 Patriots team that had gone 7-1 in the second half of the season, with its only loss a close one to the team many thought was the best in the league. That Patriots team went on to avenge that loss by beating the Rams in the Super Bowl.

In other words, when the Steelers have faced the Patriots in the playoffs this decade, they've lost, even as favorites and no matter who's been the Steelers quarterback. Had the Patriots not been in the way, the Steelers might have 2 more Super Bowl wins this decade, one without the mighty Ben Roethlisberger.

Mecca · 02-23-2009, 07:06 PM

He always had alot of say to begin with even when Donahoe was there...Donahoe took off to Buffalo I believe in 98 or 99.

missinDThomas · 02-23-2009, 07:06 PM

when stafford and sanchez slip freeman will be there

Brock · 02-23-2009, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

is that actually what they were thinking?

Well, when you go from Neil O Donnell to Mike Tomczak to Kordell Stewart to Tommy Maddox, it sort of drives the point home.

Mecca · 02-23-2009, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by missinDThomas

when stafford and sanchez slip freeman will be there

Please stop living in fantasy land.

kstater · 02-23-2009, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by missinDThomas

when stafford and sanchez slip freeman will be there

There's more of a chance of all 3 being gone by #20 than Freeman being there at 34.

orange · 02-23-2009, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the Talking Can

wasted years believing you don't need a QB....but hey they "built their team first"....so i guess wasting all those years is ok...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

He had complete say by then....

But the fact still remains he wasted years on a guy like Kordell Stewart.

Who'd they pass up?

**SAUTO** · 02-23-2009, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

Considering they started seasons with Neil O'Donnell, Kordell Stewart, Mike Tomczak and Tommy Maddox I'm going to go with yea.

so you have a 3 a 2 an udfa and a 1, they spent some higher picks there

missinDThomas · 02-23-2009, 07:08 PM

Singletary already said he likes his young guys to battle it out. Rex Ryan said the same.

Just Passin' By · 02-23-2009, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

Oh jesus, yes it's a poor argument as you went to..

Tom Brady!

Brady's not a poor argument, as you well know. You don't like it as an example because the he tends to kill all your weak arguments.

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

02-23-2009, 07:05 PM	#784
blueballs Banned Join Date: Feb 2006 Casino cash: $10004900	. Attached Thumbnails
Posts: 14,233

02-23-2009, 07:06 PM	#787
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $-692950	He always had alot of say to begin with even when Donahoe was there...Donahoe took off to Buffalo I believe in 98 or 99.
Posts: 115,369

02-23-2009, 07:06 PM	#788
missinDThomas Nobody fucks with the Jesus! Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Wichita Falls, TX Casino cash: $10004900	when stafford and sanchez slip freeman will be there
Posts: 348

02-23-2009, 07:08 PM	#794
missinDThomas Nobody fucks with the Jesus! Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Wichita Falls, TX Casino cash: $10004900	Singletary already said he likes his young guys to battle it out. Rex Ryan said the same.
Posts: 348