southsideirish

QUOTE(T R U @ Apr 25, 2005 -> 10:04 PM) How about Peyton Manning or Donovan McNabb? Culpepper? Carr? Leftwhich? Pennington? Vick? You cant bank your franchise on getting lucky with late round picks.. Im done arguing with your ignorant ass.. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You jsut helped prove my point. It is hit or miss no matter where you pick a QB. Early or late. It doesn't matter. What has Carr, Leftwich, or Pennington proven so far? 17 or 18 NFL teams will have 1st round QBs starting for them. How many of them have proven to be good yet? The others are all QBs taken later in the draft or FAs. It is not a sure thing no matter where you take them. Ignorant? I don't believe you even know what you are arguing about anymore. Fool.

QUOTE(T R U @ Apr 25, 2005 -> 09:55 PM) Your lucky as hell if you get a QB drafted in the later rounds that turns out to be a franchise Quarterback for you.. You think NE was sitting in their war room before their pick in the 6th round laughing their ass off because they knew they were about to steal a Super Bowl MVP? Yeah, I doubt that... The % of succesful late round QB's is NOT something you should be banking your franchise on.. Green Bay made the right choice, you take the safer pick.. There is a reason Orton, Orlovski, and McPherson were late round picks.. If they were = to Rodgers they would have been 1st round or even 2nd round picks as well dont you think?? Not only does your argument for this not make sense, it makes you look like you know nothing about the draft.. There might not ever be another Tom Brady again, you dont sit around hoping to find one.. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Don't attempt to insult me because you yourself are being made to look like a fool. The percentage of a succesful QB taken at anytime is not something anyone should be banking on. It is hit and miss no matter where you take him. There is a reason Favre, Brooks, Hasselbeck, Green, Brees, Delhomme, Warner, and Bulger not 1st round picks correct? Because they were no where near as good as the likes of Dan McGwire and Todd Marinovich? How about Ryan Leaf, Akili Smith or Tim Couch? How are they working out?

QUOTE(AnthraxFan93 @ Apr 25, 2005 -> 09:45 PM) 1. My point was that where ever Turner goes.. Failure follows.. 2. Again, you fail to realize the system that was in place. When it was annoucnce that we were taking on the KC/St louis Offense, I said that going into the 2006 season; if everyone stayed healthy we would have a great team. Take a look at both KC and St louis Numbers the first year Dick Vermil put the system into place, its not the systems fault for not having the proper players in it. 3. See again Agree to disagree, I think GB realized this is the start of the Demiss, and is covering its butt..IMO this is Farves last year. I think Rodgers will excel with a few tweaks in his mechanics, and with farves teaching GB did a wonderful job. Granted those Def guys would help out this year, but if Farve retires.. then where do they go, when a guy like Rodgers falls into your lap you have to grab him.. Much like the bears did with Orton. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> We will have to see. I would have rather had Campbell, Frye, Orton, or McPherson. I would have rather had Marlin Jackson in the first round. JMO.

QUOTE(T R U @ Apr 25, 2005 -> 09:39 PM) So what are you trying to say... its better to pass up better prospects that PAID Scouts who do scouting for a living deem to be better than say a guy who goes in the 5th, your supposed to pass up the first round talent and settle for a 5th because "you never know how they will turn out" <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What are you trying to say that Brett Favre is not as good as Dan McGwire or Todd Marinovich? In the same draft Brett Favre was taekn in the 2nd round those two others were taken in the first. Would you have passed up the talents of Dan McGwire and Todd Marinovich for the likes of Brett Favre? Why would you do that when a scout who does scouting for a living deem to be better than a guy who goes in the 2nd? Your supposed to pass up 1st round talent and settle for Brett Favre? The point is you never know how any of these picks will turn out. It doesn't matter if it is the 1st round or 5th round, you don't know. And by the way Tmar, it is very normal for later round QBs to out perform 1st round QBs. It happens all the time.

QUOTE(T R U @ Apr 25, 2005 -> 09:37 PM) Yeah your right, a first round QB is no better than a guy taken in the 4th or 5th <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Your right. It has never happened before.

QUOTE(T R U @ Apr 25, 2005 -> 09:31 PM) Marlin Williams.... hmm.... dont think that player exsists I think you mean Marlin Jackson.. The fact that your so blind to see GB needed a QB and a very solid one fell right to them already proves you dont know what your talking about.. no that was prolly out the window when you said Rodgers is no better than Orton :headshake <{POST_SNAPBACK}> We will have to see then wont we? I beleive they could have taken Marlin Jackson in the first, which fills a great need at a cheaper price, and then taken Frye, Orton, or McPherson later in the draft. I don't believe Rodgers is any better than any of those QBs. I may be proven wrong, but I doubt it. You don't know any more than I do that he will be a better QB than any of them. So you want to try to insult me for having a different opinion than yours? Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one.

QUOTE(T R U @ Apr 25, 2005 -> 09:21 PM) I dont get how anyone can knock the Lions pick... Yes, it was mind boggling at first... but now they have possibly the most dangerous line up of WR's in the league.. The fact that they will have Mike Williams, Roy Williams, and Charles Rogers lined up wide with Kevin Jones in the backfield is going to help their offense immensly. If Joey Harrington cant succeed with these weapons he needs to be out of a job.. Detroit is forming one hell of an offense, and their defense should improve too.. Shaun Cody was a solid pick <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Then why sign Pollard in the off season? How many teams play 3 WR sets all game long? Does it creat mismatches? Possibly, but he is not Randy Moss. He does not create the mismatch Randy Moss did when they had him Reed and Carter all out there. Shaun Cody is ok. I have a feeling Peterson helped him look as good as he was. JMO.

QUOTE(AnthraxFan93 @ Apr 25, 2005 -> 09:16 PM) 1- I think you should be the one looking up the stats.. Ronny Shoop Had 1good year as OC in 95.. 93(24/28),94(24/28) and 96(26/30) his offenses ranked near the bottom of the NFL in ponts scored. So a failed OC and Failed College HC, has now come back to fail yet again at the OC postion. As Stated before, The bears are going backwards with offense, they had a great system in place that take more than 1 training camp to learn.. You also need the horses there as well, something that was not there once the line and QB went down. GB..They realized that there was no-one in the draft that could help them out right now, why not take a QB let him sit under one of the best ever to play the game and learn. Only helps them down the line smart move. If you were GB who would you have choosen? DET.. we are just going to have to agree that I am right! J/K.. I agree to disagree, I think they did a good job with MW, You keep mentioning this Rodgers kid.. How much NFL experience does he have?..Either way you look at it, this was a wise pick by DET. You say def, but if you look at the stats they were at the bottom of the NFL in offense 24/32 points scored.. they needed help on both sides of the ball. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> 1 - who care about college head coaching? That means you will be a bad assistant coach? I don't think so. 2 - their offense last year was pathetic. Any direction they go will be a better move. If you think that system was good last year then I think we were watching a different team. It didn't work. 3 - I would have rather had Campbell. I would have rather had a defensive back like Marlin Williams. How about a DT such as Castillo or Patterson. I would have had any of these players instead of Rodgers. All play defensive positions where the Packers need help 4 - I will agree to disagree. This was an awful pick. Rogers has played more than Williams has played. He has been hurt, but the same can happen to Williams. Rogers is a much better talent when healthy than Mike Williams. They didn't score a lot of points becuase their QB is absolutely awful. It has nothing to do with WRs. They already signed Pollard in the off season, good move. They did not need Mike Williams.

QUOTE(T R U @ Apr 25, 2005 -> 09:09 PM) Wrong... there is no way the Packers could pass up Aaron Rodgers and irish... Rodgers has very good mechanics, holding the ball a little high is not something that cant be fixed.. and dude, he has a gun.. I dont get where you can say that he doesnt.. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> His mechanics are one of the things scouts did not like about Rodgers. They even pointed it out in the draft. He was not asked to throw the ball deep while in college all that often and when he did he was not very accurate. How you can say he does have a gun is beyond me. Smith, Orton, Campbell, and McPherson all have better arms than Rodgers. GB could have had any of them but Smith. Since he any of the QBs they were going to take in the draft were going to end up sitting for 2 years they should have passed and grabbed one later. Any of these QBs have the potential to be as good or better than Rodgers. As long as he would be sitting on the bench and learning and will be a project anyway, then why not wait? He also has something else going against him. He is a Tedford coached QB. Besides Carr, has there been a QB that has half way proven himself in the NFL? Scouting report: "There isn't a lot we can say about Rodgers definitively except he throws a nice short pass. But nice short passes are not worth $19 million. His accuracy is a little spotty on those rare occasions when he attempts the difficult throw. Rodgers is a good caretaker quarterback who doesn't often make the Homer Simpson play -- dohhh! He's tough enough, has enough arm strength and enough mobility. But he isn't spectacular in any area. His instincts and ability to gauge pressure and see the field are questionable. Rodgers can be a winning NFL quarterback in the right situation, but there is not enough evidence to proclaim him a franchise player. If he were graded strictly on ability and his position were not a factor, he'd be considered a second-round talent." Stupid pick if you ask me. I would have rather had Campbell, Orton, Frye, or McPherson. Especially since they he will be sitting on the bench learning for the next year or two anyway.

QUOTE(AnthraxFan93 @ Apr 25, 2005 -> 07:32 PM) 1st- I can't wait for the new version of the John Schoop Offense..Run 3 yards fall down Punt.. Again the bears had a chance to become a elite force in the NFL, but they gave up on a good Offense system too soon. Now we are stuck with Benson who is not needed. 2nd- What I was able to read on this kid, he is a project.. Lot of Ups to him but, in that regards not going to help us anything soon. 4th- Value steal, I think we can all agree on this pick 5th- I think I was wrong about this kid, he will make the team and pretty much should take over the Number 2 WR coming out of camp. 6-7th.. Like stated back-ups who could get better... As Far as the rest of the NFC North Getting Stronger.. Funny you failed to Mention Minny, who is now the team to beat in the NFC North GB- They now have a QB who can succed Farve, and will do a nice job in doing so as well.. The draft is more of How players help your team now and in the furture..GB basiclly got a QB to do that. DET.. Yyour telling me that having a good RB and 3 good WR and a TE on the field teams are going to be able to stop that? Hello Indy Offense.. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> 1- John Shoop? Do you remember how good the offense was under Ron Turner when he was here? He made Erik Kramer, Jeff Graham, Curtis Conway, and Rashaan Salaam all look great. Go look up some of the stats of the offenses when he was here. I think you will be eating those words youngster. 2 - then who would? 2nd rounders are not usually starters right away. The Bears could still use him to stretch the field, which is more than Mike Williams would have done for us. I failed to Mention Minny because they are the only team that did get stronger. However, this was based on FAs and the draft. THey did an excellent job. GB- The definately have the QB to succeed Favre, but for 2 years they will be dedicating so much money to the QB position that they will be unable to sign FAs that they desperately need. 1st round QBs command a lot of money. GB did not address anything on the defensive side of the ball, which will hurt them dramatically. The draft is definately about how players help your team now and in the furture, which is why the Bears did a great job in the draft. GB could have waited until the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th round to draft a similar QB. I think Frye or Orton will turn out just as good or better than Rodgers. Campbell was a better pick than Rodgers. DET - filled zero needs. They did not need another young WR. They have Charles Rogers, Roy Williams, and Marcus Pollard. Mike Williams is not as fast and does not as good a route runner as Stokely, Harrison, Wayne, or for that matter Dallas Clark. And he blocks like s*** for a big guy. Huge mistake with this pick. To compare Detroit's offense with Indy's is a joke. It took Wayne 3 years to learn how to run routes correctly. I highly doubt Mike Williams will be anything more than a slot receiver and to spend a first round draft pick on a slot receiver is really ridiculous. Especially when you dont need him. Defense was the way Detroit should have went. Stupid move.

QUOTE(T R U @ Apr 25, 2005 -> 05:27 PM) a 4th round pick wont be burning a hole in the Bears wallet.. Plus now he gets to sit back learn the offense and take snaps in practice, get some valuable NFL experiance.. Orton >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the other crap backing up in Chicago in recent history <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Exactly my point. Thank you T R U!

QUOTE(T R U @ Apr 25, 2005 -> 04:45 PM) Rodgers is way better than Orton.. Rodgers has very sound mechanics and is mobile and has a gun for an arm.. Now he gets to learn behind Brett Favre, there is no way GB could pass that pick up I give the Bears a C because I thought there were better WR's available at their 2nd round pick than Bradley.. Benson was a huge pick up for them and will immediatley help the team.. They had a solid draft, C seems fair to me <{POST_SNAPBACK}> HA HA! That is sooooo funny. You just mentioned the 2 biggest knocks on Rodgers. They were saying that his mechanics were not that great and he holds the ball too high becuase that is how Tedford teaches his QBs. Rodgers does not have a gun for an arm and Orton's is much better.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Apr 25, 2005 -> 03:16 PM) You answered your own "HOW" question. That's all I was saying. The Packers do NEED a QB to train to be BF's replacement. It's not a bad pick because he won't play this year. How many Rothlisbergers (sp?) are there? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> But are they any better? He adds no value to their franchise at the current time. He will cost a lot of money while sitting on the bench doing nothing and he is not even a sure thing to be a good QB. I think they dropped the ball there and could have used defense.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Apr 25, 2005 -> 02:54 PM) Detroit and Green Bay got real value out of their 1st round picks. Two weeks ago, Rodgers was supposed to be the number 1 overall pick, and Williams was at the top of Kiper's board. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Rodgers is no better than Orton in my opinion. Both of them will be sitting on the sidelines learning for at least 2 years. The only difference is the Packers have to pay first round money and take a huge salary cap hit while he is sitting as a back up to Brett Favre. Our first round pick will be running through their swiss cheese defense. Williams is a very strange pick. Why would the sign Pollard in the offseason to go along with Roy Williams and Charles Rogers only to use a high first round pick on a slot receiver? He is not Randy Moss. He is not someone that you will bring in with Chris Carter and Jake Reed and just send him deep for home runs. Silly pick if you ask me. Value? HOW? I understand what you are a saying, that they got value because they fell further than they should have. However, if they don't fit and fill their needs how does it add to THEIR value? Their respective teams are really no better off today as they were before the draft.

QUOTE(soxman352000 @ Apr 25, 2005 -> 01:18 AM) I just don't see how they passed up a big play reciever like Mike Williams and how they don't don't draft s*** on the o-line. I like the Orton pick up though they get a C <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I thought we addressed the OL in free agency. NO?

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Apr 25, 2005 -> 01:15 AM) I probably would gone: 4) Mike Williams, WR, USC 39) JJ Arrington, RB, Cal 106) Elton Brown, OL, Virginia 140) Dante Nicholson, S, Oklahoma 181) Timmy Chang, QB, Hawaii 220) Cornelius Wortham, OLB, Alabama EDIT: FYI, all these guys WERE available when the Bears were on the clock. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Mike Williams does not fit the Bears' needs. JJ Arrington does not fit the Bears offensive system. Elton Brown? WHY?!?! Dante Nicholson?!?!? WHY?!?! Timmy Chang is not very good at all and Orton is MUCH BETTER!!!!! Why sign a OLB when there are guys available to sign right now who are much better suited to start for us? Warrick Holdman and Chad Brown are both available if the Bears need a LB. I would have shot myself if this was our draft.

QUOTE(AnthraxFan93 @ Apr 25, 2005 -> 02:13 PM) I gave them a D 1st- Benson.. WE have a RB.. Wasted Pick. 2nd- Bradley.. Most had him going in the 4th or 5th round.. 4th- Orton.. Only reason I didn't give them an F..Pretty sad the best pick is a 4th rounder 5th-Currie.. WR that IMO will not make the team 6th and7th.. Back up DB.. The Bears had a chance in 04 when they hired Smith to be an elite team in Football, but since week 3 this team is slowing going backwards instead of forward. ANd this draft further proves my point, All other Teams in the NFC North got stronger, we somehow stayed the same. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> 1st - We have an RB that fit the old offensive system, not the new one. Thomas Jones has never had a complete season and is often injured. Cedric Benson is a proven work load RB that is tough to bring down and some scouts say he is the best goal line back that they have ever seen. Definately not a wasted pick 2nd - I have seen him going in the third, but not 4th or 5th round. Bears didn't have a third. 4th - I agree, although it is not their best pick. Best value? Yes, perhaps. 5th - who cares, it is worth the risk, it is a 5th rounder 6th and 7th are guys with speed who will make an immediate impact on special teams and could eventually turn into quality safeties. I don't see how Det or GB got stronger. Det didn't do much of anything if you ask me. Mike Williams doesn't even fit there. They just signed Marcus Pollard and already have Charles Rogers and Roy Williams. They spend a first round pick on a slot receiver? I find that kind of strange and a waste of a pick. He is not Randy Moss.

I don't see how this can be anything other than an A. They didn't even havea 3rd round pick, yet addressed many needs and filled 2 of their biggest. First pick they get an RB that can take a full load of carries and has been mentioned by many as the best RB in the draft. He can block and run and fits the Bears system under Ron Turner perfectly. Second pick they get Mark a very good WR in the second round. Mark Bradley is very explosive and can be a great compliment to Mushin Muhammed on the other side. Third pick, in the fourth round they get a QB that was seen by many as the 3rd best QB in the draft. Orton is a huge kid with a canon for an arm. He could take some time to develop, but could be absolutely awesome. This is an absolutely great pick for the fourth round. Right there they addressed the majority of their needs. Then the rest of the way they come away with another burner at WR and 2 safeties that could possibly contribute down the road. Even if these last 3 players don't contribute on offense or defense they will be solid special teamers as all of them have speed. Personally I believe the Bears did a great job and the organization actually had a plan in place and followed it to perfection. I know a lot here are pissed at not getting Mike Williams, but damn get over it. Cedric Benson is a damn good player and Mark Bradley fits what this team needs more. We did not need a Mushin Muhammed clone on the opposite side of him. We needed a burner that could stretch the field and make some big plays opposite Mushin, and I believe Mark Bradley is better suited for this than Mike Williams is. This draft is definately an A!

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Apr 22, 2005 -> 06:30 PM) yeah, but then I might miss a pitch.... in a 3 hour, 9 inning game. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> HA HA! Hysterical! I don't believe anyone here is talking about 1 pitch. I think those that don't like this act are talking about the consistency of it. It is not just one fan for one pitch, but a growing amount of fans who think this is ok. This makes it go from being 1 pitch missed to 90% of the pitches missed. Thank you for adding your wonderful insight though.

QUOTE(sec159row2 @ Apr 22, 2005 -> 05:50 PM) you're probably a blast to hang out with at the southsideirish parade... cause everybody watches the parade and only go to western for the parade.. .. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I didn't know parades and ball games were the same thing. News to me.

QUOTE(Steff @ Apr 22, 2005 -> 05:49 PM) You want edit to put the green where it should be...? If not.. you wana show me where in the hell I'm b****ing in this thread...? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Needle in the haystack? Who found this one? I was referring to the other post where you stated that you are very good at b****ing and that you know that very well. Sorry if I offended you.

QUOTE(marsh @ Apr 22, 2005 -> 05:48 PM) Seriously, if someone keeps getting up in front of you, just taser them. Problem solved. Seriously. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That is allowed? Sounds good to me!!!!!

QUOTE(Steff @ Apr 22, 2005 -> 05:45 PM) One thing is for sure.. if I ever need to find a needle in a haystack... I am so calling you SSI. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Thank you very much Steff, now proceed to your b****ing that you know how to do so well.

QUOTE(Kid Gleason @ Apr 22, 2005 -> 05:43 PM) Good Lord people. Do you think the Cubs have NO knowledgable fans? NO serious fans that just want to watch the game? The Cubs attract a MUCH larger fanbase, and many of those people are fly-by-night non-diehard fans. I hate to tell you this, but if the Cubs popularity begins to fade, and the Sox starts to pick up, you will see more of those types of people at The Cell, and fewer of them at Wrigley. There is no real true difference in our true diehard fanbase. We have a-holes in our stands, they have a-holes in their stands. We have smart baseball fans, they have smart baseball fans. This is the type of thing that keeps me in the edge of being too much of a "diehard". This crazy hatred for fans of other teams just because they are fans of other teams. My best friend is a Cubs fan, but inlaws are Cub fans, my boss is a Cub fan. My boss is pretty good with baseball, my father-in-law knows a lot about the game, my mother-in-law doesn't know crap, my buddy is VERY smart about baseball. My wife is a HUGE Sox fan, so is her sister. Neither one knows s*** about the game. They just like to watch it. It's the same at both parks, just one has more of that annoying "Public" at it, but if we win, more of "them" will come with ticket sales. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That is why it is in quotes buddy. It IS the way they are perceived.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Apr 22, 2005 -> 05:42 PM) seriously, how is this thread still going on, can someone lock it, this is pointless in my eyes. You had a bad time, tough, dont go to anymore games. I have had bad experiences at games as well, that doesnt stop me from going to every game that I can make. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Here we go again.