49ers Insider: Options on Brooks being weighed

[ZeroClub]

Originally Posted by silverbear

Without all the off-field issues, most scouts agree that Brooks would likely have been a top 10 pick next year... (snip) I can guarantee you that Brooks will go before the 5th round...

Yup. 1st round talent is too tempting; this player is gone before the 5th round.

There will always be at least one team willing to reach for a controversial player who is thought to have a big upside (Maurice Clarett was drafted in the 3rd round).

[burmafrd]

Brooks is not first rd talent. His measureables are not that great. And his charactor issues drop him down to 5th rd. Now someone will probably be stupid and use maybe a 2nd or 3rd.

[silverbear]

Originally Posted by burmafrd

Silver, you are so much on Brooks jock that I wonder how many are laughing at you.

Seems to me that most folks who have contributed to this thread have been agreeing with me, actually...

How does saying "if the Cowboys get a less than positive review on Brooks from Al Groh, I don't want them to draft him" make me "on his jock"??

To the contrary, YOU'RE the one who comes off sounding asinine, with your constant flip-flopping between "Brooks is the AntiChrist" and "I wouldn't spend more than a 5th (or a 4th, it changes with you) on him"...

He is an ILB, which is not considered that important compared to OLB.

ROTFLMAO... yeah, what does a 3-4 defense need with inside linebackers??

And those EXPERTS you keep talking about- some of them are the ones that say he is not all that.

Most of them are the ones who said that if he had come out after his sophomore year, he would have been a top 10 pick...

Where did the top ILB's go in this draft- people like Hodge? Not in the first rd.

No ILB in this draft were as good as Brooks is...

You have to be really good to go in the 2nd. And with someone with all the baggage Brooks has- a 3rd would be as high as anyone- even those really desperate like the 49rs and others- would go for him.

First, I have clearly said all along that I wouldn't want the Boys to spend more than a 4th on him... so you're basically arguing with yourself here...

Second, you're gonna feel really, really stupid when Brooks goes higher than your prediction here... ever since that workout that you said wasn't all that good, the
"experts" you referred to have said that it looks like some team is likely to go as high as a 2nd for him, and that he might even go in the first...

BTW, did you know that Brooks has dropped 5 MORE pounds since his workout, and says he intends to report to training camp for whatever team selects him at 245??

Wanna bet that he's faster at 245 than he was at 260??

I think he is not worth more then a 5th.

Which brings me back around to the same question I keep asking you, and you keep ducking (for obvious reasons):

You say that Brooks is a lazy, undisciplined druggie who has problems staying in shape, and isn't any better than what we already have on the roster... you spent considerable bandwidth arguing that, in fact... if that's what you really think, why would you spend ANY draft pick on him??

And that looks like what Brooks has got- a 10 cent head.

Once again, you've made your mind up, and haven't bothered to check into the FACTS first... that makes you a fool...

[silverbear]

Originally Posted by RCowboyFan

Oh boy, you are on a cursade again aren't ya

I just enjoy ing the vanity of the Haters...

[silverbear]

Originally Posted by burmafrd

While Brooks probably is TRASH

I'd say trash is somebody who judges people without having all the facts...

By the way, Silver was claiming early on that Brooks was all world- which he never was.

Way to lie right through your teeth, loser... what I said about Brooks talent was entirely FACTUAL-- that he was one of 3 finalists for the Butkus Award as a sophomore... that he's uncommonly fast for a LB, particularly an ILB, fast enough that the Cavs used him as a kickoff returner...

YOU were the one who was actually claiming that he wasn't real good at all, saying he wasn't any better than the linebackers the Cowboys currently had... when challenged on that, you then tried to make the strength of schedule the Cavs played an issue... only problem is, rather than factor ALL the Boys' linebackers into that argument (knowing that some of them played at schools that didn't play NEAR as good a schedule, you carefully picked out two who arguable did play a harder schedule... only problem is, both of them were OUTSIDE linebackers, and so players that Brooks would not be competing with for a roster spot... which is just another lie in a very long series of lies from you on this subject...

He got chopped down after Brooks workout- which was good but certainly not first rd numbers.

Again, show me ONE TIME I've said the Boys should spend a first round pick on him... but as for his workouts, I pointed out at the time that the guy had dropped over 30 pounds in a very short time, which was bound to leave him a bit weaker than he'd normally be... this explains the 19 reps on the bench press; ordinarily, you can expect him to put up a number in the mid-20s... he also worked out on a day that was over 100 degrees, and rather than running on a fast, rubberized track (like most folks do), he ran on the astroturf of the Cavs' stadium, a bit slower track...

[silverbear]

Originally Posted by ZeroClub

Yup. 1st round talent is too tempting; this player is gone before the 5th round.

Be careful about agreeing with me, burma has just told me that everybody's laughing at me in this thread... you don't want folks laughing at you, too...

There will always be at least one team willing to reach for a controversial player who is thought to have a big upside (Maurice Clarett was drafted in the 3rd round).

I was as down on Clarett as burma is on Brooks, actually... the difference is, I researched the subject VERY thoroughly, using Google and Yahoo, and found out quite a lot about his character issues... I KNEW what I was talking about, and of course I was ultimately proven right...

[silverbear]

Originally Posted by burmafrd

Brooks is not first rd talent. His measureables are not that great. And his charactor issues drop him down to 5th rd. Now someone will probably be stupid and use maybe a 2nd or 3rd.

What is this, the 500th post you've made that said the exact same thing??

Except once again, you're playing the weasel; a few posts ago, you said that 3rd round was the best he could hope for, now you're saying "maybe a 2nd"...

I can see it now, when Brooks IS drafted, you'll rush in here and find a post where you predicted that he'd be drafted in that round, and drag it out to show you were RIGHT... shouldn't be too hard, since you have now predicted he'd be drafted in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th rounds...

[thor_01]

though my abillity to predict the future is somewhat limited, based on all the information posted by burmafrd and associates, i now believe i can safely predict that Brooks will be selcted somewhere between the 1st and 7th round..............

i also believe that it is safe to predict that the "Bear" probably holds burmafrd's opinions in the highest esteem right next to Sugar Pops and his first bicycle lmao..........

hey i am getting pretty good at this predicting thing after all lol

[silverbear]

Originally Posted by thor_01

though my abillity to predict the future is somewhat limited, based on all the information posted by burmafrd and associates, i now believe i can safely predict that Brooks will be selcted somewhere between the 1st and 7th round..............

Sounds about right to me...

i also believe that it is safe to predict that the "Bear" probably holds burmafrd's opinions in the highest esteem right next to Sugar Pops and his first bicycle lmao..........

ROTFLMAO... that one really cracked me up...

hey i am getting pretty good at this predicting thing after all lol

To quote the late Hoyt Axton, "my mouth feel slack and agape in utter awe and amazement"...

You have a real future at this...

[burmafrd]

Have you bothered to count how many posts you have in this thread, Silver? So who is obsessed here? Brooks on strictly measureables is around a 3rd rd pick. With his issues it should be a 5th. BUT someone will probably risk a 3rd, maybe even a second. Does not make it right; reaching is usually a bad thing.

[burmafrd]

Gotta enjoy how rabid Silver is about Brooks. I think he may be in brooks jock more then Kartr is in Q's.

[silverbear]

Originally Posted by burmafrd

Have you bothered to count how many posts you have in this thread, Silver?

I've got 11, you've got 7... and you seem to say the exact same thing in all 7 of them... 3 different times, I've read "silverbear is on Brooks' jock"...

And guess what, so long as you bray this nonsensical garbage, I'm gonna keep right on laughin' at you...

So who is obsessed here?

You are... you say the same thing over and over and over and over again, like some demented parrot...

Brooks on strictly measureables is around a 3rd rd pick. With his issues it should be a 5th. BUT someone will probably risk a 3rd, maybe even a second. Does not make it right; reaching is usually a bad thing.

Ahhh, a CLASSIC example of what I wrote about in the sentence just above... LOL...

[silverbear]

Originally Posted by burmafrd

Gotta enjoy how rabid Silver is about Brooks. I think he may be in brooks jock

Your constant homoerotic references offer us rather a disgusting look into your sexual predilections, Nancy...

And of course, they're no substitute for factual rebuttal... seems you don't HAVE anything of substance to bring, so you repeat the same BS over endlessly... when that fails you, you go straight to the homoerotic references...

[burmafrd]

So just how many more posts are YOU going to have saying the same thing?
You have nothing of substance either. So Brooks was nominated for the Butkus award- big deal. So was Bosworth; so was that big bust out of Ohio State- Katzenmeyer, wasn't it? Means NOTHING. ESPECIALLY since he is a druggie. since the NFL is very much what have you done lately, Brooks hasn't shown much except that he is trouble. By the way- its now 13-8 in posts, right? 13 out of 44. Kind of ridiculous.

[silverbear]

Originally Posted by burmafrd

So just how many more posts are YOU going to have saying the same thing?

Well, my only alternative is to allow your BS to stand uncontradicted...

That ain't gonna happen...

You have nothing of substance either. So Brooks was nominated for the Butkus award- big deal.

That alone is more substance than ANYTHING you've brought to the argument... the ONLY thing you've ever offered is your 'tude...

I've also shared with you the FACT that he's dropped five more pounds since his private workout, and plans on showing up to camp at 245... I'd say that's reasonably substantial...

So was Bosworth; so was that big bust out of Ohio State- Katzenmeyer, wasn't it? Means NOTHING

And which of them was nominated in his sophomore year?? (FWIW, the guy's name was Katzenmoyer)

And both of them were FIRST ROUND picks (Boz in the supplemental)...

My final piece of rebuttal is just because they never worked out in the NFL, it doesn't logically follow that every linebacker who makes the finals for the Butkus Award is gonna be a bust... lots of finalists went on to quite successful careers...

ESPECIALLY since he is a druggie.

You don't know that he's any such thing... you THINK he is, but you have shown repeatedly that you're not really aware of the facts (even those that are available to the public)...

By the way- its now 13-8 in posts, right? 13 out of 44. Kind of ridiculous.

LOL... give up on the reverse psychology ploy, I'm not gettin' out of your face until you slink away... so long as you're in here spewing uniformed garbage, I'll be right here, makin' you look like a fool...