Discussion in 'News Zone' started by tupperware, Apr 27, 2012.
Yeah I don't know how we're a loser for getting more value.
I think that's fair analysis.
Of course you do.
....this is WHY I started the thread yesterday and posed the question to all the SEC fans (which I am NOT) and the answer was unanimous: claiborne is MUCH better than Dre and their isn't a comparison. I'm fine with that. I still think we needed to grab Cox but after reflecting on things: maybe #6 was just too high to take him. Hey, I asked and some VERY knowledgeable and respected posters answered: Mo is the man. Hoping they're right.:starspin
Give me a break, dude. You asked a Cowboys board about a just made Cowboys draft pick. If you want a better idea of the player you have to get out of this world and ask people who have no horse in the race.
I'm not going to a Giants board and asking about David Wilson. Because I already know what the majority will tell me.
I don't have a problem with that reasoning. I just wish he could have gone thru a list of all of the recent move ups and see how they worked out instead of naming a few of the bad ones.
With the rookie wage scale, the old value chart for draft picks goes out the window. A lot of these "analysts" need to re-analyze their metrics.
Claiborne >>>>>>>>> Kirpatrick
How can we be "losers for now" after only one round? What if we get back into 2?
Claiborne is better than Kirpatrick.
Of course you do. Nobody here would think you would think otherwise.
NEWSFLASH: Risen Star has some support.
Because for now, after 1 round, he thinks the Cowboys are losers.
You'd understand it perfectly if he said the Cowboys were winners for now.
And if we would of followed this reasoning......today it would be said.....
Dallas reached on a CB Dre Kirkpatrick who has off field issues....
No, I'd understand perfectly if YOU said the Cowboys were losers. I don't know how the author can say that after one round when we emerged with the best defensive player in the draft, even if he doesn't play the position you wanted.
The whole idea of being a "winner" or "loser" after one round is kind of moot. The game's not even close to being over yet.
Kirkpatrick at #14 would of been a huge mistake. He is not a strong man to man cover guy. Sure they will miss out on a potential good player in round two but it is worth it to land a stud CB.
I'm with you Mash on this I'm in SEC country and watched both players respectively and in the end Claiborne is the better overall DB, than Kirpatrick but he too is a good player.
Whoever this author is needs to get a life because if Kirkpatrick was the pick at 14, if the team stood pat and this clown found out that Dallas actually had an opportunity to trade up with the Rams to draft Morris then he would still call them "losers" because they would've blew it in his eyes whatever.
here was my answer and I'm the biggest Bama homer out there. Claiborne is a much much better prospect than Kirkpatrick on and off the field...