OK lets see it

**OnTheWarpath15** · 04-07-2009, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saccogoo

Okay Confucius, nice work with that abacus. What is your point anyway?

Dear God.

Seriously?

Urlacher went 9th in a bad class. Lewis was the 4th LB taken in his class. Willis was taken 11th in a bad class.

And we're supposed to just drop our pants and take Curry at 3, crossing our fingers and hoping like hell he is better than all of them?

Because he HAS to be better than all of them to justify taking a goddamn INSIDE LINEBACKER with the THIRD overall pick in the draft.

Name the last ILB that was taken in the Top 3. I think there's been ONE in the past TWENTY years.

philfree · 04-07-2009, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Dear God.

Seriously?

Urlacher went 9th in a bad class. Lewis was the 4th LB taken in his class. Willis was taken 11th in a bad class.

And we're supposed to just drop our pants and take Curry at 3, crossing our fingers and hoping like hell he is better than all of them?
Because he HAS to be better than all of them to justify taking a goddamn INSIDE LINEBACKER with the THIRD overall pick in the draft.

Name the last ILB that was taken in the Top 3.

And that's different then reaching for a player because his position is considered more valuable even though he isn't good enough to be picked that high? Eh---yeah he sucks but the position he plays holds a high value so he's our pick.

PhilFree

RustShack · 04-07-2009, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

And that's different then reaching for a player because his position is considered more valuable even though he isn't good enough to be picked that high? Eh---yeah he sucks but the position he plays holds a high value so he's our pick.

PhilFree

Interesting, I've read multiple articles saying Everette Brown could be a top 5 pick, but I guess thats too much of a reach. Orakpo who I don't want, is ranked at #4 on Scouts Inc, but thats probably too much of a reach too.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 04-07-2009, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

And that's different then reaching for a player because his position is considered more valuable even though he isn't good enough to be picked that high? Eh---yeah he sucks but the position he plays holds a high value so he's our pick.

PhilFree

I'm not sure how many times this has to be said...

You have NO IDEA what Pioli's draft board looks like. How are you determining who would be a "reach?"

Oh yeah, piggybacking off of Kiper or Mayock.

For all you know, Pioli has Rey Maualuga rated higher than Jesus Curry.

philfree · 04-07-2009, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

I'm not sure how many times this has to be said...

You have NO IDEA what Pioli's draft board looks like. How are you determining who would be a "reach?"

Oh yeah, piggybacking off of Kiper or Mayock.

For all you know, Pioli has Rey Maualuga rated higher than Jesus Curry.

I believe the same applies to you so what's your point. Pioli & Co. could also have Curry rated as the top player on their board for all you know.

PhilFree

RustShack · 04-07-2009, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

I believe the same applies to you so what's your point. Pioli & Co. could also have Curry rated as the top player on their board for all you know.

PhilFree

Yeah a position that wasn't highly regarded by Pioli in NE and usually filled by Veterans is #1 on Pioli's list, thats a safe assumption.

philfree · 04-07-2009, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RustShack

Yeah a position that wasn't highly regarded by Pioli in NE and usually filled by Veterans is #1 on Pioli's list, thats a safe assumption.

I'm not assuming anything.

PhilFree

htismaqe · 04-07-2009, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

I believe the same applies to you so what's your point. Pioli & Co. could also have Curry rated as the top player on their board for all you know.

PhilFree

Of course, none of us have EVER said that the Chiefs WILL take Sanchez, or anybody else for that matter.

The same can't be said for the people on the Curry side of the argument.

philfree · 04-07-2009, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Of course, none of us have EVER said that the Chiefs WILL take Sanchez, or anybody else for that matter.

The same can't be said for the people on the Curry side of the argument.

That should probably read "some of the people on the Curry side of the argument. I have no idea who the Chiefs will pick.

PhilFree

**OnTheWarpath15** · 04-07-2009, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Of course, none of us have EVER said that the Chiefs WILL take Sanchez, or anybody else for that matter.

The same can't be said for the people on the Curry side of the argument.

Exactly.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 04-07-2009, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

I believe the same applies to you so what's your point. Pioli & Co. could also have Curry rated as the top player on their board for all you know.

PhilFree

No, Phil - it doesn't apply to me.

I'm not the one spouting off all over this board that the Chiefs HAVE to take a particular player.

I'm also not the one that is incapable of watching games and forming my own opinion.

Everyone wants to turn this into Curry v. Sanchez, when in all reality, the Curry backers are the only folks who see it this way.

To them, it's Curry or nothing.

To the Sanchez backers, they'll be thrilled if we take him, but will also accept other players. Curry just doesn't happen to be one of those players, and it chaps the ass of you guys that think Curry walks on ****ing water.

philfree · 04-07-2009, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

No, Phil - it doesn't apply to me.

I'm not the one spouting off all over this board that the Chiefs HAVE to take a particular player.

I'm also not the one that is incapable of watching games and forming my own opinion.

Everyone wants to turn this into Curry v. Sanchez, when in all reality, the Curry backers are the only folks who see it this way.

To them, it's Curry or nothing.

To the Sanchez backers, they'll be thrilled if we take him, but will also accept other players. Curry just doesn't happen to be one of those players, and it chaps the ass of you guys that think Curry walks on ****ing water.

Obviuosly you haven't comprehended everything I've posted on the subject. I have no problem taking Curry or Sanchez or any other player who is worth our pick but the arguments against Curry are not very sound IMO so I've refuted them. Got it?

PhilFree

**OnTheWarpath15** · 04-07-2009, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

Obviuosly you haven't comprehended everything I've posted on the subject. I have no problem taking Curry or Sanchez or any other player who is worth our pick but the arguments against Curry are not very sound IMO so I've refuted them. Got it?

PhilFree

The arguments against Curry aren't sound?

You mean THESE arguments?

There has been ONE MLB/ILB taken in the Top 3 in the past TWENTY years, and he was a monumental bust?

There is no value at the #3 slot for a LB that would have to learn how to rush the passer?

He won't have the impact of a player like Patrick Willis, who was taken 11th overall in a bad class, Brian Urlacher who was taken 9th in a bad class, or Ray Lewis who was taken 26th, the 4th LB taken in his class?

MLB is one ofthe least important positions on the front 7?

Should I go on?

Saccopoo · 04-07-2009, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

Obviuosly you haven't comprehended everything I've posted on the subject. I have no problem taking Curry or Sanchez or any other player who is worth our pick but the arguments against Curry are not very sound IMO so I've refuted them. Got it?

PhilFree

It's the same thing with people around here saying that the Chiefs would be stupid to draft Brian Orakpo because he's from Texas.

A generalization that has nothing to do with the player himself. There have been plenty of players from Texas who have gone on to quality careers, and there have been plenty who have been what people considered "busts." A perfect example is the 2001 draft, when Leonard Davis was selected #2 and Casey Hampton was selected #19......although, Davis did go to the Pro Bowl in 2007 and Dallas thought well enough of him to pay him 7 million a year on a seven year contract...perhaps that's a bad example. A better one might be the 2002 draft with Mike Williams and Quentin Jammer. Jammer has had a pretty decent career, but Williams is now out of the league.

Anyway, people around here are so quick to discount the opinions of those interested in the Chiefs possibly drafting Curry, but are refuted by others saying that you don't draft a ILB that high even if he's the best player in the draft. They'd rather it be a DE or OLB, but just as long as it's not Brian Orakpo - the guy who was the Big 12 Defensive freshman of the year, on AP's first team Freshman All-American team, and by the time he was a senior ended up being an unanimous First Team All-American while winning the Bill Willis award, the Lombardi Award, the Ted Hendricks Award and the Bronco Nagurski Trophy. Guy must suck something fierce...wait...I don't think that they had those things out to people who suck. Maybe these CP insiders have super secret knowledge and while bagging on people who want Curry, because these CP Insiders know that Curry will have no impact on a game because the ILB is worthless and that the defense should be really only played with 10 guys because the ILB is such a meaningless position, they also bag on a guy like Orakpo, who, while playing a meaningful position such as ROLB/RDE and winning such accolades as the Lombardi, Nagurski and Hendricks Trophies for being the best RDE/ROLB in college, sucks bags of doggie poo because he played at Texas. So the best ROLB/RDE sucks balls, the ILB position in general sucks dog balls and so does Curry.

At least to me, from analyzing the CP Insiders opinions, we will be drafting Mark Sanchez, because we need our QBOTF because Matt Cassel, while going to the same school as Sanchez and learning under Brady and going 11-5 his first season on the field, is not an acceptable alternative to the quarterback position. Only Sanchez can fill that void. Cassel will be his understudy, and the Chiefs will finally go to the Superbowl because we have drafted Sanchez and Cassel will be his backup. The Chiefs using their first two draft picks now have that depth at quarterback that finally gets them over the hump and into the annals of NFL football history! I smell dynasty with that awesome 1-2 punch at quarterback!!!!

That or Michael Crabtree.

I'm glad I've finally found the light. Thanks CP Insiders!

milkman · 04-08-2009, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

Obviuosly you haven't comprehended everything I've posted on the subject. I have no problem taking Curry or Sanchez or any other player who is worth our pick but the arguments against Curry are not very sound IMO so I've refuted them. Got it?

PhilFree

No, the arguments aganst Curry have been solid and practical.

All you have done essentially is go "La, la, la, la, la, I can't hear you".