- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Is this good for us.
Posted on 2/24/13 at 10:30 am to Hoodoo Man
Posted on 2/24/13 at 10:30 am to Hoodoo Man
If Barkley sucks in the NFL, it is because he sucks, not because he went to USC.
I know that because it's fricking logic.
Does Tebow suck because he went to Florida?
Does JaMarcus Russell suck because he went to LSU?
How do you explain Kyle Orton and Curtis Painter?
I know that because it's fricking logic.
Does Tebow suck because he went to Florida?
Does JaMarcus Russell suck because he went to LSU?
How do you explain Kyle Orton and Curtis Painter?
Posted on 2/24/13 at 10:43 am to Sophandros
quote:
How do you explain Kyle Orton and Curtis Painter?
What does this have to do with anything?
Every school has bad players at certain positions.
Isn't it possible that the future crappiness probability for a position is higher at one school than other schools?
Posted on 2/24/13 at 11:18 am to Sophandros
quote:
If Barkley sucks in the NFL, it is because he sucks, not because he went to USC.
So college coaching has nothing to do with how a player turns out? Gotcha.
quote:
I abhor lazy thinking and faulty logic. Your statement is an example of both.
Posted on 2/24/13 at 11:24 am to SLafourche07
Well considering all of these qbs didn't have the same coaches, your statement doesn't mean anything in this particular discussion.
Posted on 2/24/13 at 11:34 am to Hoodoo Man
Kyle Orton and Curtis Painter went to Purdue. If a school is that important, then why aren't they as good as Drew Bees, Jim Everett, or Lynn Dawson?
I'll tell you why. Because they are individuals who will be as good or as bad based on their individual talents, work ethic, etc, not where they went to school.
Again, Barkley may be great. He may suck. Either way, his going to USC has no bearing on his quality as a QB.
A few years ago, a QB dropped in the draft; many cited the recent list of QBs coached by Jeff Tedford and their lack of success in the NFL.
That QB was Aaron Rodgers.
I'll tell you why. Because they are individuals who will be as good or as bad based on their individual talents, work ethic, etc, not where they went to school.
Again, Barkley may be great. He may suck. Either way, his going to USC has no bearing on his quality as a QB.
A few years ago, a QB dropped in the draft; many cited the recent list of QBs coached by Jeff Tedford and their lack of success in the NFL.
That QB was Aaron Rodgers.
Posted on 2/24/13 at 11:42 am to pellietigersaint
quote:
why would we give a frick who drafts barkley. he suck.
are you implying that we might take him
dont be retarded
or he was saying that another qb will be taken ahead of number 15 thus leaving more high quality players on the board...but go ahead and keep making an arse of yourself
Posted on 2/24/13 at 11:43 am to pellietigersaint
quote:It has nothing to do with barkley! What he's asking is will it affect who might remain in the draft for us to pick. Drink some coffee, man.
why would we give a frick who drafts barkley. he suck
Posted on 2/24/13 at 11:49 am to Patrick O Rly
Patrick o frick off. Can someone be a fan of both?
And I stand by my post. If you dwell on every fricking tweet and psychoanalyze what it could mean to the team and its draft positioning, then you need to get a grip.
Calm down Francis.
And I stand by my post. If you dwell on every fricking tweet and psychoanalyze what it could mean to the team and its draft positioning, then you need to get a grip.
Calm down Francis.
Posted on 2/24/13 at 11:49 am to Swsb44
This. I don't want him just saying if he does go there that would be good for us . I also think Jarvis Jones will fall to us
Posted on 2/24/13 at 1:47 pm to pellietigersaint
quote:
Can someone be a fan of both?
Wut?
quote:
And I stand by my post. If you dwell on every fricking tweet and psychoanalyze what it could mean to the team and its draft positioning, then you need to get a grip.
That's a really lame cover up. Just admit you completely missed what he was talking about and be done with it.
Posted on 2/24/13 at 3:00 pm to pellietigersaint
quote:
And I stand by my post
Posted on 2/24/13 at 3:04 pm to Patrick O Rly
quote:
That's a really lame cover up. Just admit you completely missed what he was talking about and be done with it
The cover up doesn't even make any sense. He specifically asked if the guy thought Saints were drafting Barkley. Complete fail by him, but he stands by his post lmao.
Posted on 2/24/13 at 3:07 pm to landrywasbeast30
I know. It was awful, and he had the nerve to call the OP a retard.
Posted on 2/24/13 at 3:22 pm to Patrick O Rly
quote:
That's a really lame cover up. Just admit you completely missed what he was talking about and be done with it.
This!
Posted on 2/24/13 at 5:39 pm to Jizzamo311
as to the point of the original post- currently I'd give odds as this:
1 QB drafted before #15 90%
a 2nd QB before #15 50%
a 3rd QB before #15 25%
Certainly the more picked at any position we aren't targeting is better. Please take QBs, WRs, and interior OL. Don't be fooled by need though. Whether KC, AZ, Buff, or whoever, if there is a QB they want but not as high their draft spot then trades will happen. Those teams could trade back or trade up from their high 2nd rd spot.
Of course the more draft currency you have (picks) the more leverage you have. Here's the multiple teams with more than their standard picks in the first 3 Rds-
Cincy- two 2nds 37, 53
Miami- two 2nds & 3rds 42, 54, 77, 82
StL- two 1sts 16, 22
SF- two 3rds 74, 93
Likewise teams with less currency-
Carolina & Chicago- NO 3rd
Clev, Indy, Oak, & Saints- NO 2nd
Last year was typical. Out of the 32 draft spots only 14 were to the original owners of that spot. In other words, trades were more frequent than staying pat. 3 draft spots were traded more than once.
1 QB drafted before #15 90%
a 2nd QB before #15 50%
a 3rd QB before #15 25%
Certainly the more picked at any position we aren't targeting is better. Please take QBs, WRs, and interior OL. Don't be fooled by need though. Whether KC, AZ, Buff, or whoever, if there is a QB they want but not as high their draft spot then trades will happen. Those teams could trade back or trade up from their high 2nd rd spot.
Of course the more draft currency you have (picks) the more leverage you have. Here's the multiple teams with more than their standard picks in the first 3 Rds-
Cincy- two 2nds 37, 53
Miami- two 2nds & 3rds 42, 54, 77, 82
StL- two 1sts 16, 22
SF- two 3rds 74, 93
Likewise teams with less currency-
Carolina & Chicago- NO 3rd
Clev, Indy, Oak, & Saints- NO 2nd
Last year was typical. Out of the 32 draft spots only 14 were to the original owners of that spot. In other words, trades were more frequent than staying pat. 3 draft spots were traded more than once.
Posted on 2/24/13 at 6:08 pm to jamal
terrible for us - Barkley would be a great backup for Drew
Popular
Back to top

2






