Weiss told Fox to take Clausen - Page 12

Chiefnj2 · 04-27-2010, 10:27 AM

It's water under the bridge, but interesting nonetheless:

In doing pre-draft research, not that he thought he'd have a chance to get Clausen, Fox talked to Charlie Weis, his good friend and the former Irish coach. Weis and Fox are close. Fox is sure Weis wouldn't lie to him. "Charlie said he's probably the best he's ever had,'' Fox said. "He said, 'Take this guy. Trust me.' Everyone I talked to, including a couple of people at Notre Dame, said the character issue was b.s. So we picked him.''

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz0mJoaVIf1
Get a free NFL Team Jacket and Tee with SI Subscription

MoreLemonPledge · 04-27-2010, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pestilence

Didn't you also say that we were going to take an OT at #5?

Not once. I made a song as a joke, but I thought all along the pick would be Berry or a trade down.

**Mr. Flopnuts** · 04-27-2010, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoreLemonPledge

My argument all along has been that Weis' feelings had absolutely no bearing in how we drafted. Pioli would draft who he wanted. That seems to be the case.

Well you nailed that one. Because that's exactly what I think happened.

**Tribal Warfare** · 04-27-2010, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoreLemonPledge

You must not remember how you, OtWP, Dane, Mecca, etc. all gave me so much shit leading up to the draft because I said there was no way we'd draft Clausen. Nobody knew at that point that we'd actually pass up on him twice. I was called a true fan, an idiot, whatever else. Point is, we didn't take him. I don't want to take it to the point of "I was right, you were wrong", but I did take a lot of shit for saying what ultimately happened.

I disagreed with you but I never intentionally attack you personally. If you thought I did, I don't what to tell yah. I kept it civil

**The Franchise** · 04-27-2010, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts

Well you nailed that one. Because that's exactly what I think happened.

We should take Clausen at #5.

**The Franchise** · 04-27-2010, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoreLemonPledge

Not once. I made a song as a joke, but I thought all along the pick would be Berry or a trade down.

Hmmm...I guess I got you confused with someone else. My bad...

**Mr. Flopnuts** · 04-27-2010, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pestilence

We should take Clausen at #5.

I'm untouchable bitch!

Amnorix · 04-27-2010, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoreLemonPledge

My argument all along has been that Weis' feelings had absolutely no bearing in how we drafted. Pioli would draft who he wanted. That seems to be the case.

You have zero evidence of that. Zero.

And IMHO it's silly to think that Weis' opinions had "no bearing" on how the Chiefs drafted. I'm sure his opinions were factored in along with everyone else's (scouts, Haley's, etc.)

**OnTheWarpath15** · 04-27-2010, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by penchief

You're taking this stuff way to personal. The way Hamas worded his post read like Weis gave his approval after they drafted him. I can see how it can be interpeted either way (that Mortensen reported it right afterward). I took it the other way.

That said, I'm not saying that it's bullshit that Mortenson reported it or even questioning that it happened. What I'm saying is bullshit is that the Clausen ball washers are trying to make more out of it than what it is. Especially by trying to say that it is evidence that Pioli doesn't listen to Weis. You have absolutely no proof of that.

Just because he told that to Fox doesn't mean he advocated that we take Clausen at five, or even at 36. You are not privvy to those conversations. As I said, this report is in no way an indication of the Pioli/Haley/Weis dynamic. To suggest so is utter bullshit, IMHO.

I'm not taking anything personal.

But feel free to continue to claim you have a clue you know what I'm thinking.

Like I've said before, find some posts of mine complaining we passed on Clausen from the weekend.

I've been over it since the minute we passed. I'm more upset we passed on solid starters at LB for the players we took.

I'm just enjoying the troll do his work.

MoreLemonPledge · 04-27-2010, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

I'd like to you link the post in question. You've made a claim, now back it up.

I don't recall ANYONE expecting us to take Clausen. My guess is that you were given shit for dismissing either the possibility of drafting him, or attempting to claim he's a shitty prospect.

I'll wait for those posts, with links to the threads they came from, so we can establish context.

Let me sift through the thousands of posts made in the last few weeks.

My point all along has been that we wouldn't draft Clausen. Even when it seemed obvious that he'd drop to the end of the first round, people were still clamoring over trading up to draft him. I said that there was no chance we'd draft Clausen (saying nothing about his prospects as a pro, which I'm really not that excited about).

Do you not remember arguing with me over this, or do you argue with so many people that you have a hard time keeping it straight?

**Mr. Flopnuts** · 04-27-2010, 01:59 PM

Pest has the best picture of Cassel. He looks a little helpless, and reeruned. I imagine that's the look on his face for the duration of every game.

**Tribal Warfare** · 04-27-2010, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts

Pest has the best picture of Cassel. He looks a little helpless, and reeruned. I imagine that's the look on his face for the duration of every game.

that's the same face he has during pressers

MoreLemonPledge · 04-27-2010, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amnorix

You have zero evidence of that. Zero.

And IMHO it's silly to think that Weis' opinions had "no bearing" on how the Chiefs drafted. I'm sure his opinions were factored in along with everyone else's (scouts, Haley's, etc.)

Obviously not, since it's being said that Weis insisted that we draft Clausen and we didn't. That in itself is telling.

penchief · 04-27-2010, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

I'm not taking anything personal.

But feel free to continue to claim you have a clue you know what I'm thinking.

Like I've said before, find some posts of mine complaining we passed on Clausen from the weekend.

I've been over it since the minute we passed. I'm more upset we passed on solid starters at LB for the players we took.

I'm just enjoying the troll do his work.

I'm not claiming to know what you're thinking. I'm repeating my initial thoughts which appear to have been misintrepeted by you and others who seem to want to suggest that I'm saying something other than what I am.

Please go back and read my initial post and you will see what I think. Who cares what he told Fox. It's not relevant to our draft and it absolutely doesn't prove anything about Pioli and Weis. Unless something in the way of real proof comes to light those who want to make that claim are trying to paint their own picture.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 04-27-2010, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by penchief

I'm not claiming to know what you're thinking. I'm repeating my initial thoughts which appear to have been misintrepeted by you and others who seem to want to suggest that I'm saying something other than what I am.

Please go back and read my initial post and you will see what I think. Who cares what he told Fox. It's not relevant to our draft and it absolutely doesn't prove anything about Pioli and Weis. Unless something in the way of real proof comes to light those who want to make that claim are trying to paint their own picture.

That's fine, but people need to be consistent.

Your stance is that the comment in question doesn't prove that Pioli overruled Weis.

Fine.

Then you (not personally you, I'm generalizing the board) can't go back and say, "well, we passed on him, Weis must not have wanted him."

You can't have it both ways.

This is a perfect example:

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoreLemonPledge

Obviously not, since it's being said that Weis insisted that we draft Clausen and we didn't. That in itself is telling.

That doesn't shed any conclusive light on the situation.

Weis could have been standing on the table arguing for Clausen and was overruled by the man making the final decison.

We'll never know.

Amnorix · 04-27-2010, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoreLemonPledge

Obviously not, since it's being said that Weis insisted that we draft Clausen and we didn't. That in itself is telling.

Being said where, by whom? I haven't seen that. I don't disbelieve you, but the chatter that goes on here is unreliable.

All I've seen is that Weis recommended the guy to Fox, the coach of ANOTHER team...

04-27-2010, 10:27 AM
Chiefnj2 In Search of a Life Join Date: Mar 2007 Casino cash: $6654388	Weiss told Fox to take Clausen It's water under the bridge, but interesting nonetheless: In doing pre-draft research, not that he thought he'd have a chance to get Clausen, Fox talked to Charlie Weis, his good friend and the former Irish coach. Weis and Fox are close. Fox is sure Weis wouldn't lie to him. "Charlie said he's probably the best he's ever had,'' Fox said. "He said, 'Take this guy. Trust me.' Everyone I talked to, including a couple of people at Notre Dame, said the character issue was b.s. So we picked him.'' Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz0mJoaVIf1 Get a free NFL Team Jacket and Tee with SI Subscription
Posts: 22,541

04-27-2010, 01:59 PM	#175
Mr. Flopnuts FINALLY! The wait is over. Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: The Future Is Now!!! Casino cash: $19947565	Pest has the best picture of Cassel. He looks a little helpless, and reeruned. I imagine that's the look on his face for the duration of every game.
Posts: 56,649