Sperm Edwards Posted October 21, 2012 Author Share Posted October 21, 2012 First, Sanchez sucks. Second, I agree with you on Ryan, but the Falcons were hellbent on getting him after the Vick prison drama. Third, all youve been saying about what Sanchez or Brohm wouldve been had they gome out at a given time is pure conjecture. Fourth, I, on the otherhand, am speaking in facts of where Sanchez was drafted and ranked by teams. I dont care about conjecture four years later and Im certainly not going to engage in it to fit an argument. Sanchez sucks, by was rated highly by teams at the time. It wasnt a Tebow situation where teams gave him 3rd and 4th rpund grades, but McDumbass selected him late in the first.. Brohm was not dropping out of round 1. Matt Ryan didn't wow people with his arm strength at the combine and he went #3 (would have been #2 if we didn't tell StL that the Gholston pick and 2009's #1 wasn't too steep). Brohm's stock had already dropped dramatically before his combine. All I said was that, like Brohm, Sanhez's stock could have plummeted from junior to senior season as well. I fail to see how that is at all controversial. It is no more conjecture than people who like to say, as though it was irrefutable fact, that had Sanchez stayed in school a year longer or gotten drafted under a different offense, that he would have been anything other than terrible. It is totally baseless, other than a desire by some to bash the franchise in order to make their beloved Sanchez look better than he's earned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted October 21, 2012 Author Share Posted October 21, 2012 Nobody gives a sh*t about Brohm and Louisville. The point is, Rutgers, regardless of your personal opinion on Sanchez then or now, do you agree with those disengenuous posters here who want to rewrite history and claim that teams didnt give Sanchez a first round draft grade? Who said that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Nobody gives a sh*t about Brohm and Louisville. The point is, Rutgers, regardless of your personal opinion on Sanchez then or now, do you agree with those disengenuous posters here who want to rewrite history and claim that teams didnt give Sanchez a first round draft grade? I think the point is more that it's silly to assume that teams weren't considering the inherent risk in drafting him and probably more than a few weren't willing to consider him because of it being too high. This was all over the place prior to that draft and it's also one of the main reasons that Carroll practically begged him to stay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 I think the point is more that it's silly to assume that teams weren't considering the inherent risk in drafting him and probably more than a few weren't willing to consider him because of it being too high. This was all over the place prior to that draft and it's also one of the main reasons that Carroll practically begged him to stay. Of course they considered it. As to Carrol, get real. He didnt want Sanchez to stay because of some selfless interest in Sanchez's future. It wasbecause he knew he had one last year to win a national title before NCAA penalties were imposed because of what happened to the program under his watch. Thats why he ended up starting a freshman QB after Sanchez left. Carrol didnt have an adequate replacement for Sanchez. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Of course they considered it. As to Carrol, get real. He didnt want Sanchez to stay because of some selfless interest in Sanchez's future. It wasbecause he knew he had one last year to win a national title before NCAA penalties were imposed because of what happened to the program under his watch. Thats why he ended up starting a freshman QB after Sanchez left. Carrol didnt have an adequate replacement for Sanchez. OOOOOHHHH THE INDUCTIVE INFERRENCE GAME!!! THIS IS ALWAYS A BLAST!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Brohm was not dropping out of round 1. Matt Ryan didn't wow people with his arm strength at the combine and he went #3 (would have been #2 if we didn't tell StL that the Gholston pick and 2009's #1 wasn't too steep). Brohm's stock had already dropped dramatically before his combine. All I said was that, like Brohm, Sanhez's stock could have plummeted from junior to senior season as well. I fail to see how that is at all controversial. It is no more conjecture than people who like to say, as though it was irrefutable fact, that had Sanchez stayed in school a year longer or gotten drafted under a different offense, that he would have been anything other than terrible. It is totally baseless, other than a desire by some to bash the franchise in order to make their beloved Sanchez look better than he's earned. I dont care about hypotheticals, just what actually happened. The only reason I brpught it up is because of ypur hypothetical. Its irrelevent to my statement of what actually happened. Thats my only point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 OOOOOHHHH THE INDUCTIVE INFERRENCE GAME!!! THIS IS ALWAYS A BLAST!!!! Its better than yours because we know that Carroll is an a$$hole and left USC in NCAA hell when he quickly left before the hammer dropped. Instead, we have to believe that out of the goodness of his heart and without an adequate replacement he only wanted Sanchez back because he only cared about Sanchez's future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larz Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 OOOOOHHHH THE INDUCTIVE INFERRENCE GAME!!! THIS IS ALWAYS A BLAST!!!! that's amusing. how much first hand information is being discussed here ? anyone here in the draft room that day ? part of SC's program ? pete carroll post here ? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 that's amusing. how much first hand information is being discussed here ? anyone here in the draft room that day ? part of SC's program ? pete carroll post here ? lol Cool it you. SMC is NOT interested in hypotheticals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Who said that? Ignatius, JF80, T0m and DBate in his own anti BG way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Cool it you. SMC is NOT interested in hypotheticals. HYPOTHETICALS ARE EVIL!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Its better than yours because we know that Carroll is an a$$hole and left USC in NCAA hell when he quickly left before the hammer dropped. Instead, we have to believe that out of the goodness of his heart and without an adequate replacement he only wanted Sanchez back because he only cared about Sanchez's future. You're right. Numerous cases of failure aren't in a college coach's self-interest whatsoever. My bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Ignatius, JF80, T0m and DBate in his own anti BG way. Not really. I'm saying that as "facts" go, you're offering no less conjecture than the rest of us. I can't produce definitive evidence of team grades, and neither can you. (Bad news: columns by guys who don't work for NFL teams don't count.) But given the ample body of evidence on the risks associated with drafting inexperienced QBs, common sense would indicate that opinions of Sanchez's NFL prospects were nowhere near as unanimous as you're arguing. /semantics FTW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted October 21, 2012 Author Share Posted October 21, 2012 Ignatius, JF80, T0m and DBate in his own anti BG way. Oh. Thought you were referring to me. I don't read anything those douchebags write. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 They tryin' to catch ya ilking dirty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 You're right. Numerous cases of failure aren't in a college coach's self-interest whatsoever. My bad. Yeah, okay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE ILK Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Just say no to ilking! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Not really. I'm saying that as "facts" go, you're offering no less conjecture than the rest of us. I can't produce definitive evidence of team grades, and neither can you. (Bad news: columns by guys who don't work for NFL teams don't count.) But given the ample body of evidence on the risks associated with drafting inexperienced QBs, common sense would indicate that opinions of Sanchez's NFL prospects were nowhere near as unanimous as you're arguing. /semantics FTW I never never argued unanimity. I'd say multiple teams, perhaps even a majority. The problem for ypu is that there were no reports we can recall saying that certain teams had hom ranked in 2nd, 3rd or worse rounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 I never never argued unanimity. I'd say multiple teams, perhaps even a majority. The problem for ypu is that there were no reports we can recall saying that certain teams had hom ranked in 2nd, 3rd or worse rounds. Exactly. Just as the problem for you is that there are no reports you can produce confirming the "multiple teams, perhaps even a majority" theory. See how this works? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Exactly. Just as the problem for you is that there are no reports you can produce confirming the "multiple teams, perhaps even a majority" theory. See how this works? No, it doesnt. It just means I'll have to do some research to pull up 3 yr old articles to silence you historical rewriters. You guys, of course, make no attempt to support your position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 No, it doesnt. It just means I'll have to do some research to pull up 3 yr old articles to silence you historical rewriters. You guys, of course, make no attempt to support your position. Whenever you get ahold of actual NFL draft boards from four years ago, we'll be here waiting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Whenever you get ahold of actual NFL draft boards from four years ago, we'll be here waiting. Wait, articles discussing what teams think arent enough? You want draft boards? LOL Youre like David Chappelle in the jury selection skit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Wait, articles discussing what teams think arent enough? You want draft boards? LOL Youre like David Chappelle in the jury selection skit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 We need a gif of that INT on 2nd and 8. It sums up this entire thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE ILK Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 This freaking guy sucks! Is there anybody who still can't see it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignatius del Sol Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 They all gave him a 1st round grade. I never never argued unanimity. I'd say multiple teams, perhaps even a majority. Anybody not see where this is going? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 We need a gif of that INT on 2nd and 8. It sums up this entire thread. Something about rhythm and timing is to blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 This freaking guy sucks! Is there anybody who still can't see it? If only there was a thread where we could discuss Sanchez sucking... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFtoLong Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Sanchez really, really sucks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE ILK Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 If only there was a thread where we could discuss Sanchez sucking... Title was not epic enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Anybody not see where this is going? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFtoLong Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Sanchez is terrible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Whoops wrong thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeC36 Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 If only there was a thread where we could discuss Sanchez sucking... good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE ILK Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 World saved by jn mod! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.02d5a086ca7ed80fc66faf3bb6f878c7.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.